[SystemSafety] Uber "self-driving" cars run red lights on Day 1
pmrc at adelard.com
Thu Dec 22 12:04:36 CET 2016
Whilst I can’t answer many of these questions, I do wonder if the red light problem is due to differences in regulations between states and the vagaries of the rules surrounding traffic lights. A quick google (http://www.californiadriving.com/law/ <http://www.californiadriving.com/law/> and http://www.drivinglaws.org/resources/traffic-tickets/moving-violations/running-red-lights-and-stop-35# <http://www.drivinglaws.org/resources/traffic-tickets/moving-violations/running-red-lights-and-stop-35#>) tells me that both SF and Pittsburgh will have the same rules for turning right on a red light, but not necessarily for turning left.
I was nearly run over a couple of times in SF before my host pointed out to me that a red light did not mean a car couldn’t turn!
> On 22 Dec 2016, at 10:39, systemsafety-request at lists.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de wrote:
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2016 06:05:55 +0100
> From: Peter Bernard Ladkin <ladkin at causalis.com <mailto:ladkin at causalis.com>>
> To: The System Safety List <systemsafety at techfak.uni-bielefeld.de <mailto:systemsafety at techfak.uni-bielefeld.de>>
> Subject: Re: [SystemSafety] Uber "self-driving" cars run red lights on
> Day 1
> Message-ID: <a4335c2c-bdd4-7507-5ac3-9c405c29e380 at causalis.com <mailto:a4335c2c-bdd4-7507-5ac3-9c405c29e380 at causalis.com>>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> So, the Cal DMV revoked the registrations of Uber's cars and invited the company - again - to apply
> for a permit to test them on public roads. They said that one can be issued in 72 hours.
> https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/dec/21/uber-cancels-self-driving-car-trial-san-francisco-california <https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/dec/21/uber-cancels-self-driving-car-trial-san-francisco-california>
> One can wonder about that. What about the reports of running red lights while pedestrians are
> crossing, and serious questions about interactions with cyclists? How would DMV analyse and manage
> that situation in 72 hours, even supposing they could call on expertise, experience and person-power
> enough to be able to perform a Risk Analysis on an open system with complex technology in that time?
> Suppose the analysis were not to be favorable, what then?
> Another question is why these cars are apparently having problems in SF but not in Pittsburgh?
> A third question is what society is to think about a legal entity putting an unprecedented
> safety-critical technology into public space where it could harm people and ignoring the (mild)
> regulation and regulator. I don't see how it is in anybody's interests to let such a thing happen.
> What if companies running nuclear power plants started putting the finger up to the NRC?
> Which raises the fourth question. Regulating automotive vehicles has been pretty straightforward so
> far. Now that these complex open systems are beginning slowly to populate roads, could it be that we
> need regulatory sophistication comparable to that for nuclear power or airworthiness certification
> for commercial airplanes?
> Prof. Peter Bernard Ladkin, Bielefeld, Germany
> Je suis Charlie
> Tel+msg +49 (0)521 880 7319 www.rvs-bi.de <http://www.rvs-bi.de/>
Dr Philippa Ryan Conmy, Consultant
Adelard LLP, 24 Waterside, 44–48 Wharf Road, London, N1 7UX
Office No: 020 7832 5850
pmrc at adelard.com <mailto:pmrc at adelard.com> http://www.adelard.com
Registered office: Stourside Place, Station Road, Ashford, Kent TN12 1PP
Registered in England & Wales no. OC 304551. VAT no. GB 454 4898 08
This e-mail, and any attachments, is confidential and for the use of the addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, please telephone 020 7832 5850. We do not accept legal responsibility for this e-mail or any viruses.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the systemsafety