World shocked Uber driverless car had software errors and did not detect jaywalkers — THIS IS HOW THIS WORKS FOLKS
Of course, there are software errors and they didn’t see the jaywalker. Most of the code is written by machine learning systems that learn by experiencing things over and over. To learn jaywalkers, they need to experience thousands of them. Think about that and all people, objects and accident scenarios.
Yes Uber (and Tesla) are the most egregious. But the rest follow the same basic path. Get ready for thousands more deaths and injuries.
Yes Uber (and Tesla) are the most egregious. But the rest follow the same basic path.
Get ready for thousands more deaths and injuries.
Most of the software in these is written by the machine learning system. NOT by humans directly. That involves that system experiencing millions of scenarios over and over so they neural nets can be corrected. This is necessary to drive down the error rate so the scenarios can be learned. In order for this to be possible “safety drivers” have to avoid disengaging so the whole thread can be experienced, especially where accidents have to be best handled when they cannot be avoided. This requires those drivers to literally sacrifice their lives. To become Kamikaze or suicide drivers in most cases and be willing to harm others. This will lead to thousands of injuries and deaths. Worst of all this is all futile since public shadow and safety driving can never lead to the creation of a legitimate autonomous vehicle. You simply do not have the money or time to stumble and restumble on that many scenarios. How do you think the world will react when the first child or family is killed by this process? When folks realize there will be thousands of them? Of course, this is all resolved through the use of DoD simulation technology. (Not the simulation systems this industry uses now. They have far too may architectural, model and real-time flaws.)
More in my articles
Autonomous Vehicles Need to Have Accidents to Develop this Technology
Proposal for Successfully Creating an Autonomous Ground or Air Vehicle
Without DoD simulation technology Autonomous Vehicles cannot be created or created Legally
Using the Real World is better than Proper Simulation for AV Development — NONSENSE
- https://medium.com/@imispgh/using-the-real world-is-better-than-proper-simulation-for-autonomous-vehicle-development-nonsense-90cde4ccc0ce
Simulation can create a Complete Digital Twin of the Real World if DoD/Aerospace Technology is used
- https://medium.com/@imispgh/simulation-can-create-a-complete-digital-twin-of-the-real world-if-dod-aerospace-technology-is-used-c79a64551647
The Hype of Geofencing for Autonomous Vehicles
SAE Autonomous Vehicle Engineering Magazine — End Public Shadow/Safety Driving
Former system engineer, engineering and program manager for Lockheed Martin. Including aircraft simulation, the software engineering manager for all of NORAD and the Aegis Weapon System.
Key Autonomous Vehicle Industry Participation
- Lead — SAE On-Road Autonomous Driving (ORAD) Simulation Task Force
- Member SAE ORAD Verification and Validation Task Force
- SME — DIN/SAE International Alliance for Mobility Testing & Standardization group to create sensor simulation specs
- Stakeholder for UL4600 — Creating AV Safety Guidelines
- Member of the IEEE Artificial Intelligence & Autonomous Systems Policy Committee
- Presented the IEEE Barus Ethics Award for Post 9/11 DoD/DHS Efforts
My company is Dactle — We are building an aerospace/DoD/FAA level D, full L4/5 simulation-based development and testing system with an end-state scenario matrix to address all of these issues. We can supply all of the scenarios, the scenario matrix tool, the data, the integrated simulation or any part of this system. A true all model type digital twin. If someone would like to see a demo or discuss this further please let me know.