Driverless bus gets in accident. LOL!

[Valerie]

sounds like there is a flaw in the program because the driverless bus did not have the option to go in reverse to avoid the accident.

the fault was with another vehicle which the driverless bus sensed and stopped then stayed still like a sitting duck...

So a bus, that is stopped, is hit by a truck. And you blame the bus?

The driver was written up for illegal backing, according to reports.


“The shuttle did what it was supposed to do, in that its sensors registered the truck and the shuttle stopped to avoid the accident,” the City of Las Vegas said in a statement to KSNY. “Had the truck had the same sensing equipment that the shuttle has the accident would have been avoided.”


The city added it will continue operating the buses through Las Vegas’ downtown area over the next year.


Maurice Bell, an executive at Keolis Transit America, which helps operate the smart buses, said the accident is a bellwether as the bus goes through tests.


“That’s probably the positive point of all this,” he told the Review-Journal, “is that we have extensive data to be able to tell us what occurred and what we could do in the future to improve upon.”

 

[Weatherman2020]

The bus, which can carry up to 11 people and communicate with traffic signals, stopped itself when its sensor noticed the truck backing up.


“The shuttle just stayed still and we were like, 'Oh my gosh, it’s going to hit us, it’s going to hit us,'” passenger Jenny Wong told local NBC affiliate KSNV. “And then it hit us.”


The massive tires on the truck left a noticeable dent in the small blue vehicle.


Wong said the truck driver didn’t even see the self-driving bus, which couldn't go in reverse.

Self-driving bus gets into accident on its first day in Las Vegas

"which could not go in reverse"

 

[Weatherman2020]

Can a driverless car tell the difference between a piece of trash blowing across the road and a human crossing the road? What if the sensors are dirty?
Law Suites are what will end driverless cars.

Yes, they can tell the difference between a piece of trash and a pedestrian.

And if the sensors are dirty, the car will notify the driver.

Kind of like a Car tells the Driver that it's time to change the oil? LOL

Actually, yes. Exactly like that. If the driver ignores the oil light coming on, do you blame the car for the engine locking up?

Except the driverless car can be easily programmed to not run if the sensors become dirty. Also, not all the sensors rely on "sight". Ultrasonic sensors can "see" through dirty lenses and even other vehicles.

Oh great. Sensors become dirty and it stops in the middle of the freeway because it does not know where it is at because the sensors are dirty.

Only if you program it to stop immediately. Most lenses to not become totally opaque in an instant. It tends to be a gradual thing. And programming a driverless car to simply stop in the middle of a freeway would be insane. But programming it to not start if the lenses are getting close to dirty enough to be a problem is simple.

Plus, as I have already said, ultrasonic sensors would be less vulnerable to grime buildup, and would still provide good data even in fog or rain.

Oh look, a deer on the side of the road standing still!

 

[WinterBorn]

Yes, they can tell the difference between a piece of trash and a pedestrian.

And if the sensors are dirty, the car will notify the driver.

Kind of like a Car tells the Driver that it's time to change the oil? LOL

Actually, yes. Exactly like that. If the driver ignores the oil light coming on, do you blame the car for the engine locking up?

Except the driverless car can be easily programmed to not run if the sensors become dirty. Also, not all the sensors rely on "sight". Ultrasonic sensors can "see" through dirty lenses and even other vehicles.

Oh great. Sensors become dirty and it stops in the middle of the freeway because it does not know where it is at because the sensors are dirty.

Only if you program it to stop immediately. Most lenses to not become totally opaque in an instant. It tends to be a gradual thing. And programming a driverless car to simply stop in the middle of a freeway would be insane. But programming it to not start if the lenses are getting close to dirty enough to be a problem is simple.

Plus, as I have already said, ultrasonic sensors would be less vulnerable to grime buildup, and would still provide good data even in fog or rain.

Oh look, a deer on the side of the road standing still!
View attachment 159436

Your attachment will not play for me.

If there is a deer or other object on or encroaching on the roadway, the sensors will pick it up. Far more reliably than a human driver who is distracted, exhausted, or under the influence.

 

[Weatherman2020]

Kind of like a Car tells the Driver that it's time to change the oil? LOL

Actually, yes. Exactly like that. If the driver ignores the oil light coming on, do you blame the car for the engine locking up?

Except the driverless car can be easily programmed to not run if the sensors become dirty. Also, not all the sensors rely on "sight". Ultrasonic sensors can "see" through dirty lenses and even other vehicles.

Oh great. Sensors become dirty and it stops in the middle of the freeway because it does not know where it is at because the sensors are dirty.

Only if you program it to stop immediately. Most lenses to not become totally opaque in an instant. It tends to be a gradual thing. And programming a driverless car to simply stop in the middle of a freeway would be insane. But programming it to not start if the lenses are getting close to dirty enough to be a problem is simple.

Plus, as I have already said, ultrasonic sensors would be less vulnerable to grime buildup, and would still provide good data even in fog or rain.

Oh look, a deer on the side of the road standing still!
View attachment 159436

Your attachment will not play for me.

If there is a deer or other object on or encroaching on the roadway, the sensors will pick it up. Far more reliably than a human driver who is distracted, exhausted, or under the influence.

You just can't think, can you? What's it going to do, brake to a stop every time?

 

[TroglocratsRdumb]

There will be carnage from automated cars.
There are just too many variables…
.....drivers taking a nap as their car goes over a cliff…….40 cars trying to change lanes at the same time…..

 

[JOSweetHeart]

Forgive me if this is a dumb question, but if there is no driver in one vehicle, which insurance company takes the hit, the one that the car without a driver is with, or the one that the person driven vehicle is with?

God bless you always!!!

Holly

 

[Weatherman2020]

There will be carnage from automated cars.
There are just too many variables…
.....drivers taking a nap as their car goes over a cliff…….40 cars trying to change lanes at the same time…..

Kid standing on side of road looking like he wants to run across. Or looks like he is not.

 

[fncceo]

Won’t be long until the first driverless bus to get hacked.

That's my plot for my new script ... 'SPEED 3'

 

[ChrisL]

Forgive me if this is a dumb question, but if there is no driver in one vehicle, which insurance company takes the hit, the one that the car without a driver is with, or the one that the person driven vehicle is with?

God bless you always!!!

Holly

It's not a dumb question. I have no clue though. It would probably depend on the situation on who was at fault, like usual. If you have a driverless vehicle, you would probably still need to have insurance.

 

[ChrisL]

These are great though for people who are elderly or young or handicapped. This will be great for those who can't drive for whatever reasons.

 

[ChrisL]

No more need for designated drivers. Drinking and driving accidents wouldn't happen anymore, so that is another pro. It reminds me of the movie Total Recall. Lol!

 

[skookerasbil]

EV's and driverless cars.......will be looked back upon someday as an early 2000's fad. Nobody wants any of this technology.

 

[ChrisL]

EV's and driverless cars.......will be looked back upon someday as an early 2000's fad. Nobody wants any of this technology.

If you couldn't drive you would! Driving can be fun sometimes though (on back roads anyways). There would probably be a lot less road rage incidents during rush hour traffic with the driverless vehicles. It would probably make life a little more relaxing for people who have to do a lot of driving because they have a terrible commute to work or whatnot.

 

[ChrisL]

I was wondering if I would feel okay driving in a driverless vehicle, and then I thought, well I get in the car with my aunt while she is driving. . . a driverless car would probably be less scary than that! She is a TERRIBLE driver. Just terrible.

 

[JOSweetHeart]

Forgive me if this is a dumb question, but if there is no driver in one vehicle, which insurance company takes the hit, the one that the car without a driver is with, or the one that the person driven vehicle is with?

God bless you always!!!

Holly

It's not a dumb question. I have no clue though. It would probably depend on the situation on who was at fault, like usual. If you have a driverless vehicle, you would probably still need to have insurance.

I am guessing that if the vehicle without a driver is the vehicle that is at fault, it will be the insurance company that was stupid enough to have anything to do with the vehicle that takes the hit.

God bless you always!!!

Holly

P.S. I have another question. Who in their right mind would be stupid enough to get into a vehicle that will not have a driver?

 

[ChrisL]

Forgive me if this is a dumb question, but if there is no driver in one vehicle, which insurance company takes the hit, the one that the car without a driver is with, or the one that the person driven vehicle is with?

God bless you always!!!

Holly

It's not a dumb question. I have no clue though. It would probably depend on the situation on who was at fault, like usual. If you have a driverless vehicle, you would probably still need to have insurance.

I am guessing that if the vehicle without a driver is the vehicle that is at fault, it will be the insurance company that was stupid enough to have anything to do with the vehicle that takes the hit.

God bless you always!!!

Holly

P.S. I have another question. Who in their right mind would be stupid enough to get into a vehicle that will not have a driver?

Why do you think a person would be stupid? The chances are that the driverless vehicle would be safer. No human errors. Of course, there is the chance that something could go wrong, but you take that chance every time you leave your driveway in your car, trusting that other drivers will be cautious (when they aren't - lol).

 

[JOSweetHeart]

^^^ Since self driving cars are human made, if they were to malfunction in any way while be used, that wouldn't be considered a human error?

God bless you always!!!

Holly