Per recent posts, the past year has been rather
disheartening for those of us who think we need progress on self-driving cars. What has been the problem, and how can they
get moving again?
The best article describing the state of that field so far
came out in the July 17th New York Times. Neal E. Boudette’s “Despite High Hopes,
Self-Driving Cars are ‘Way in the Future’,” started by saying that “a year ago,
Detroit and Silicon Valley had visions of putting thousands of self-driving
taxis on the road in 2019, ushering in an age of driverless cars,” which hasn’t
and won’t happen. The piece’s sources
blamed the lack of progress on being able to deal with “all kinds of crazy
things on the road,” and Boudette also named small related news items, recapped
the fatal accident, quoted evidence of Elon Musk’s delusional hubris, and then
got the article to justify itself by naming the need for “micro maneuvers” such
as understanding other drivers are looking for a parking space so should not be
followed closely and saying that “the technology is available now to create a
car that won’t hit anything,” even if it would “constantly slam on the
brakes.”
From what I have read and not read, I see five reasons why
progress has almost ground to a halt. First,
not only overreaction to that single death, but expected overreaction, as
the firms seemed to pull back soon thereafter without receiving much actual
pushback. Second, companies’ testing
has, thus far, not emphasized creating algorithms mimicking the thoughts of
actual drivers. Third, as I have read
recently about artificial intelligence, massive efforts such as this often go
through slow stretches in research intensity, which author and professor Nick
Bostrom called a “winter,” or “period of retrenchment” – we clearly have
another one here. Fourth, the legal and
regulatory climate, despite the July 31st Yahoo Finance
report that “U.S. Congress seeks to jump start (a) stalled self-driving car
bill” to allow them more, has been intimidating if not actively discouraging,
perhaps to the point where companies have focused excessively on being
stopped. Fifth, there has been
insufficient emphasis on implementation – I saw that when working with
information technology technicians more comfortable keying on the clean and promising
future than on dealing with the grit of making things actually work, and
recognize, or at least strongly suspect, it again.
What, then, are the solutions? Here are six.
One, researchers need to catalog what Boudette called “corner cases,”
where people disobey traffic laws, and concentrate on solving them. Two, it is time for them to quantify how
drivers actually think when faced with these problems. In Kurt Vonnegut’s Player Piano, those
making automated barbers copied the exact movements of people doing that job – let’s
do that here. Three, they should
implement Boudette’s “car that won’t hit anything” and see where it could be
used – the technology could progress from there. Four, we need more driverless shuttle buses
in limited, well-defined settings, which is about the lowest-hanging fruit
actually constructive. Five,
manufacturers and others should push for more freedom and more places to use these
vehicles, which may, given the recent Congress event, be easier than they
think.
Sixth, and finally, those on the side of this technology
need to do interviews, give presentations, write articles, issue news releases,
do radio spots, appear on TV shows, and put in Internet advertising, all emphasizing
the potential for slashing the 30,000 annual driver-caused American deaths
along with other autonomous-vehicle advantages and showing how close we really would
be if we can tolerate a few more accidents.
There were times when it was more acceptable for efforts thought of as
American projects to cause tragedies along the way. Eighteen people have died during space
flights and 96 perished during Hoover Dam’s construction, not to mention such
numbers as over 400,000 United States soldiers killed in World War II. It is time for us to consider driverless
vehicle implementation necessary for the country, and give it the same
status. Then, as we know about our
countrymen and from our history, it will succeed.
No comments:
Post a Comment