industryterm:autonomous car

  • Is there an #uber #ipo conspiracy?
    https://hackernoon.com/is-there-an-uber-ipo-conspiracy-86ee9182d078?source=rss----3a8144eabfe3-

    I ask this question, because there are rumours floating around that suggest the US government and General Motors (GM) are in cahoots to suppress Uber’s $120 billion IPO and promote Lyft.I first came across the idea via a CCN article by Nicole Grinstead. She has provided an excellent infographic explaining the race between Uber and Lyft, or should I call it a battle, that has been ongoing since Lyft launched in 2012. It shows that in 2015, Lyft got a major influx of investment from China, and in the following year it entered into a partnership with GM. This was intended to improve their share of the ride-sharing market, and advance GM in the autonomous car sector. However, in August 2016, Lyft’s former Chines partner bought Uber China, ending the relationship. In December 2018, Lyft filed (...)

  • Is the World Ready for #self-driving cars?
    https://hackernoon.com/is-the-world-ready-for-self-driving-cars-bf41523f993a?source=rss----3a81

    The self-driving Audi R8 is a car model produced by Audi and owned by Tony Stark. It first appeared in Avengers: Age of UltronSelf-driving cars are prowling the streets of California, Paris, London, Singapore and Beijing. Intel says, that the driverless tech will add $7 trillion to the global economy and save hundreds of thousands of lives in the next few decades. Also, it will devastate the car industry and its associated gas stations, drive-thrus, taxi drivers, and truckers.Some people will benefit. Many will damage.This article takes a look at the #future of self-driving cars. But first, let’s look at exactly what a driverless car is.What is a Self-driving Car? And How Does It Work?A self-driving car, also known as a robot car, autonomous car, or driverless car, is a vehicle that is (...)

    #self-driving-cars #automotive-industry #automotive

  • Uber halts self-driving car tests after death - BBC News
    http://www.bbc.com/news/business-43459156

    Uber said it is suspending self-driving car tests in all North American cities after a fatal accident.

    A 49-year-old woman was hit by a car and killed as she crossed the street in Tempe, Arizona.

    While self-driving cars have been involved in multiple accidents, it is thought to be the first time an autonomous car has been involved in a fatal collision.

    Uber chief Dara Khosrowshahi said the death was “incredibly sad news”.

    #voiture_auto_pilotée ça commence pas bien
    “We’re thinking of the victim’s family as we work with local law enforcement to understand what happened,” he said in a tweet.

  • Before Self-Driving Cars Become Real, They Face These Challenges | WIRED
    https://www.wired.com/story/self-driving-cars-challenges

    OH, THE UNTAINTED optimism of 2014. In the spring of that year, the good Swedes at Volvo introduced Drive Me, a program to get regular Josefs, Frejas, Joeys, and Fayes into autonomous vehicles. By 2017, Volvo executives promised, the company would distribute 100 self-driving SUVs to families in Gothenburg, Sweden. The cars would be able to ferry their passengers through at least 30 miles of local roads, in everyday driving conditions—all on their own. “The technology, which will be called Autopilot, enables the driver to hand over the driving to the vehicle, which takes care of all driving functions,” said Erik Coelingh, a technical lead at Volvo.

    Now, in the waning weeks of 2017, Volvo has pushed back its plans. By four years. Automotive News reports the company now plans to put 100 people in self-driving cars by 2021, and “self-driving” might be a stretch. The guinea pigs will start off testing the sort of semi-autonomous features available to anyone willing to pony up for a new Volvo (or Tesla, Cadillac, Nissan, or Mercedes).

    “On the journey, some of the questions that we thought were really difficult to answer have been answered much faster than we expected,” Marcus Rothoff, the carmaker’s autonomous driving program director, told the publication. “And in some areas, we are finding that there were more issues to dig into and solve than we expected.” Namely, price. Rothoff said the company was loath to nail down the cost of its sensor set before it knew how it would work, so Volvo couldn’t quite determine what people would pay for the privilege in riding in or owning one. CEO Hakan Samuelsson has said self-driving functionality could add about $10,000 to the sticker price.

    Volvo’s retreat is just the latest example of a company cooling on optimistic self-driving car predictions. In 2012, Google CEO Sergey Brin said even normies would have access to autonomous vehicles in fewer than five years—nope. Those who shelled out an extra $3,000 for Tesla’s Enhanced Autopilot are no doubt disappointed by its non-appearance, nearly six months after its due date. New Ford CEO Jim Hackett recently moderated expectations for the automaker’s self-driving service, which his predecessor said in 2016 would be deployed at scale by 2021. “We are going to be in the market with products in that time frame,” he told the San Francisco Chronicle. “But the nature of the romanticism by everybody in the media about how this robot works is overextended right now.”

    The scale-backs haven’t dampened the enthusiasm for money-throwing. Venture capital firm CB Insights estimates self-driving car startups—ones building autonomous driving software, driver safety tools, and vehicle-to-vehicle communications, and stockpiling and crunching data while doing it—have sucked in more than $3 billion in funding this year.

    To track the evolution of any major technology, research firm Gartner’s “hype cycle” methodology is a handy guide. You start with an “innovation trigger,” the breakthrough, and soon hit the “peak of inflated expectations,” when the money flows and headlines blare.

    And then there’s the trough of disillusionment, when things start failing, falling short of expectations, and hoovering up less money than before. This is where the practical challenges and hard realities separate the vaporware from the world-changers. Self-driving, it seems, is entering the trough. Welcome to the hard part.

    Technical Difficulties
    “Autonomous technology is where computing was in the 60s, meaning that the technology is nascent, it’s not modular, and it is yet to be determined how the different parts will fit together,” says Shahin Farshchi, a partner at the venture capital firm Lux Capital, who once built hybrid electric vehicles for General Motors, and has invested in self-driving startup Zoox, as well as sensor-builder Aeva.)

    Turns out building a self-driving car takes more than strapping sensors and software onto a set of wheels. In an almost startlingly frank Medium post, Bryan Salesky, who heads up Ford-backed autonomous vehicle outfit Argo AI, laid out the hurdles facing his team.

    First, he says, came the sensor snags. Self-driving cars need at least three kinds to function—lidar, which can see clearly in 3-D; cameras, for color and detail; and radar, with can detect objects and their velocities at long distances. Lidar, in particular, doesn’t come cheap: A setup for one car can cost $75,000. Then the vehicles need to take the info from those pricey sensors and fuse it together, extracting what they need to operate in the world and discarding what they doesn’t.

    “Developing a system that can be manufactured and deployed at scale with cost-effective, maintainable hardware is… challenging,” Salesky writes. (Argo AI bought a lidar company called Princeton Lightwave in October.)

    Salesky cites other problems, minor technological quandaries that could prove disastrous once these cars are actually moving through 3-D space. Vehicles need to be able to see, interpret, and predict the behavior of human drivers, human cyclists, and human pedestrians—perhaps even communicate with them. The cars must understand when they’re in another vehicle’s blind spot and drive extra carefully. They have to know (and see, and hear) when a zooming ambulance needs more room.

    “Those who think fully self-driving vehicles will be ubiquitous on city streets months from now or even in a few years are not well connected to the state of the art or committed to the safe deployment of the technology,” Salesky writes.

    He’s not the only killjoy. “Technology developers are coming to appreciate that the last 1 percent is harder than the first 99 percent,” says Karl Iagnemma, CEO of Nutonomy, a Boston-based self-driving car company acquired by automotive supplier Delphi this fall. “Compared to last 1 percent, the first 99 percent is a walk in the park.”

    The smart companies, Iagnemma says, are coming up with comprehensive ways to deal with tricky edge cases, not patching them over with the software equivalent of tape and chewing gum. But that takes time.

    Money Worries
    Intel estimates self-driving cars could add $7 trillion to the economy by 2050, $2 trillion in the US alone—and that’s not counting the impact the tech could have on trucking or other fields. So it’s curious that no one seems quite sure how to make money off this stuff yet. “The emphasis has shifted as much to the product and the business model as pure technology development,” says Iagnemma.

    Those building the things have long insisted you’ll first interact with a self-driving car through a taxi-like service. The tech is too expensive, and will at first be too dependent on weather conditions, topography, and high-quality mapping, to sell straight to consumers. But they haven’t sorted out the user experience part of this equation. Waymo is set to launch a limited, actually driver-free service in Phoenix, Arizona, next year, and says it has come up with a way for passengers to communicate they want to pull over. But the company didn’t let reporters test the functionality during a test drive at its test facility this fall, so you’ll have to take its word for it.

    Other questions loom: How do you find your vehicle? Ensure that you’re in the right one? Tell it that you’re having an emergency, or that you’ve had a little accident inside and need a cleanup ASAP? Bigger picture: How does a company even start to recoup its huge research and development budget? How much does it charge per ride? What happens when there’s a crash? Who’s liable, and how much do they have to pay in insurance?

    One path forward, money-wise, seems to be shaking hands with enemies. Companies including Waymo, GM, Lyft, Uber, and Intel, and even seemingly extinction-bound players like the car rental firm Avis, have formed partnerships with potential rivals, sharing data and services in the quest to build a real autonomous vehicle, and the infrastructure that will support it.

    Still, if you ask an autonomous car developer whether it should be going at it alone—trying to build out sensors, mapping, perception, testing capabilities, plus the car itself—expect a shrug. While a few big carmakers like General Motors clearly seem to think vertical integration is the path to a win (it bought the self-driving outfit Cruise Automation last year, and lidar company Strobe in October), startups providing à la carte services continue to believe they are part of the future. “There are plenty of people quietly making money supplying to automakers,” says Forrest Iandola, the CEO of the perception company DeepScale, citing the success of more traditional automotive suppliers like Bridgestone.

    Other companies seize upon niche markets in the self-driving space, betting specific demographics will help them make cash. The self-driving shuttle company Voyage has targeted retirement communities. Optimus Ride, an MIT spinoff, recently announced a pilot project in a new developed community just outside of Boston, and says it’s focused on building software with riders with disabilities in mind.

    “We think that kind off approach, providing mobility to those who are not able-bodied, is actually going to create a product that’s much more robust in the end,” says CEO Ryan Chin. Those companies are raising money. (Optimus Ride just came off an $18 million Series A funding round, bringing its cash pull to $23.25 million.) But are theirs viable strategies to survive in the increasingly crowded self-driving space?

    The Climb
    OK, so you won’t get a fully autonomous car in your driveway anytime soon. Here’s what you can expect, in the next decade or so: Self-driving cars probably won’t operate where you live, unless you’re the denizen of a very particular neighborhood in a big city like San Francisco, New York, or Phoenix. These cars will stick to specific, meticulously mapped areas. If, by luck, you stumble on an autonomous taxi, it will probably force you to meet it somewhere it can safely and legally pull over, instead of working to track you down and assuming hazard lights grant it immunity wherever it stops. You might share that ride with another person or three, à la UberPool.

    The cars will be impressive, but not infallible. They won’t know how to deal with all road situations and weather conditions. And you might get some human help. Nissan, for example, is among the companies working on a stopgap called teleoperations, using remote human operators to guide AVs when they get stuck or stumped.

    And if you’re not lucky enough to catch a ride, you may well forget about self-driving cars for a few years. You might joke with your friends about how silly you were to believe the hype. But the work will go on quietly, in the background. The news will quiet down as developers dedicate themselves to precise problems, tackling the demons in the details.

    The good news is that there seems to be enough momentum to carry this new industry out of the trough and onto what Gartner calls the plateau of productivity. Not everyone who started the journey will make the climb. But those who do, battered and a bit bloody, may just find the cash up there is green, the robots good, and the view stupendous.

    #Uber #disruption

  • Why driverless cars will be the next battlefield in the culture war
    http://theweek.com/articles/736081/why-driverless-cars-next-battlefield-culture-war

    Investors and companies globally have sunk nearly $100 billion into developing self-driving vehicles over the past few years. And with good reason: Self-driving cars are real, they’re going to be spectacular, and they’re going to happen a lot sooner than you think. Just last week, Waymo, the driverless car subsidiary of Google-parent Alphabet, announced it would begin a robo-taxi service in Phoenix. The city has been a hotbed of autonomous vehicle testing due to its regulatory friendliness and predictably pleasant weather. Of course this doesn’t mean highways will soon be filled with swarming packs of autonomous vehicles zooming along at 80 miles per hour, just inches from each other’s bumper. It’s one thing to be able to purchase a fully autonomous car (maybe within a few years) that (...)

  • Who will own the data from your autonomous car?

    https://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2017/08/16/who-will-own-the-data-from-your-autonomous-car

    [...]

    The bill does have an entire section on privacy, even though that didn’t make it into the title. But, as privacy advocates note, while it requires manufacturers to develop a privacy plan that spells out to consumers what is collected, used, shared and stored, and also tells them what choices they have regarding those practices, there is nothing in the bill that says who owns the data, and how owners can access or delete it.

    In response, the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) issued a statement arguing that, as they had recommended in testimony while the bill was being drafted, “consumers (should) control the personal information that is created and stored by the vehicles they operate, rent, and own”.

    Based on support for the bill, EPIC and other advocates have an uphill climb. It was reported out of committee on a unanimous (54-0) vote.

    The major focus of the bill is to create “a regulatory structure that allows for industry to safely innovate with significant government oversight,” according to committee chairman Greg Walden (R-Ore.).

    It also includes a section on cybersecurity, but the language is not terribly reassuring there either, when it comes to vehicles moving at 65mph (105kph) miles per hour or more. It requires only that manufacturers have cybersecurity practices that will guard against “reasonably foreseeable” risks. Try getting agreement on that in a courtroom.

    Besides the lack of anything explicit about who owns the data generated by the vehicle, EPIC also objected, in a letter to the committee in June, to a provision that forbids states, “from issuing any rule, regulation, or law that is not identical to a previously issued Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) issued by NHTSA (National Highway Transportation Safety Administration), including in the areas of software and communications systems”.

    [...]

    #autonomous #autonomousvehicles #car #carsecurity #data #privacy #selfdriveact

    via https://diasp.eu/posts/5916897

  • Uber president Jeff Jones quits, deepening turmoil
    https://www.yahoo.com/tech/uber-president-jeff-jones-quits-deepening-turmoil-003436110--sector.html
    Zunächst bekam man den Eindruck, ein Anführer der Uber-Bande hätte ein schlechtes Gewissen bekommen.

    “It is now clear, however, that the beliefs and approach to leadership that have guided my career are inconsistent with what I saw and experienced at Uber, and I can no longer continue as president of the ride sharing business,” he added. Jones wished the “thousands of amazing people at the company” well.

    Aber dann ging es wohl doch mehr um Differenzen bei der Frage, welche Ausbeutungsmethoden am besten funktionieren.

    The Independent Drivers Guild, an organization that advocates for Uber drivers, on Sunday was critical that Jones “has left the company without making a single improvement to help drivers struggling to make a living,” said Ryan Price, executive director of the guild.

    Das liest sich dann so:

    “I joined Uber because of its mission, and the challenge to build global capabilities that would help the company mature and thrive long term,” Jones said.

    Und das hat sich dann nicht so entwickelt wie der Herr es sich vorstellte. Man hört auch, dass der Big Boss ein ganz schöner Kotzbrocken sein soll.

    Bloomberg released a video that showed Kalanick berating an Uber driver who had complained about cuts to rates paid to drivers, resulting in Kalanick making a public apology.

    Oder will der Mann einfach nicht riskieren, wegen Bildung einer kriminellen vereinigung im Knast zulanden?

    And earlier this month Uber confirmed it had used a secret technology program dubbed “Greyball,” which effectively changes the app view for specific riders, to evade authorities in cities where the service has been banned. Uber has since prohibited the use of Greyball to target local regulators.

    Noch mehr kriminelle Machenschaften bei Uber?

    Uber is also facing a lawsuit from Alphabet Inc’s self-driving car division that accuses it of stealing designs for autonomous car technology known as Lidar. Uber has said the claims are false.

    Jeff Jones ist nicht der einzige Abgang aus der Chefetage von Uber. Der Chefkartograph will lieber in der Politik etwas werden, ein Wochenendpicknick im Vergleich zum Überlebenskampf in der Konzernzentrale des weltgrößten selbsterklärten Gesetzesbrechers.

    Uber’s vice president of maps and business platform, Brian McClendon, said separately he plans to leave the company at the end of the month to explore politics.

    “I’ll be staying on as an adviser,” McClendon said in a statement to Reuters. “This fall’s election and the current fiscal crisis in Kansas is driving me to more fully participate in our democracy.”

    Könnte es sein, dass die Ratten das sinkende Schiff verlassen?

    Jones and McClendon are the latest in a string of high-level executives to leave the company.

    Last month, engineering executive Amit Singhal was asked to resign due to a sexual harassment allegation stemming from his previous job at Alphabet Inc’s Google. Earlier this month, Ed Baker, Uber’s vice president of product and growth, and Charlie Miller, Uber’s famed security researcher, departed.

    Lokaler Widerstand gegen die Plattformkapitalisten lohnt sich, und zwar besonders dann wenn sie sich intern selbst zerlegen.

    #Taxi #Uber #disruption

  • Intel’s $15 Billion Mobileye Buyout Puts It in the Autonomous Car Driver’s Seat - MIT Technology Review
    https://www.technologyreview.com/s/603850/intels-15-billion-mobileye-buyout-puts-it-in-the-autonomous-car-drivers-seat/?set=603851
    https://d267cvn3rvuq91.cloudfront.net/i/images/mobileye.jpg?cx=196&cy=53&cw=1600&ch=900&sw=1200

    Many car manufacturers already use Mobileye’s hardware to power their autonomous systems, giving the company a position of power throughout the industry. Intel will now hope to combine that with its own chip-making chops to capture a sizable chunk of the autonomous car market just as it takes off. If it can do that, it will become a formidable competitor to chip makers like Nvidia and Qualcomm, who are already in the robotic car space.

    #automobile #économie_numérique

  • A Lawsuit Against Uber Highlights the Rush to Conquer Driverless Cars - The New York Times
    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/24/technology/anthony-levandowski-waymo-uber-google-lawsuit.html

    SAN FRANCISCO — Late last year, Uber, in defiance of California state regulators, went ahead with a self-driving car experiment on the streets of San Francisco under the leadership of Anthony Levandowski, a new company executive.

    The experiment quickly ran into problems. In one case, an autonomous Volvo zoomed through a red light on a busy street in front of the city’s Museum of Modern Art.

    Uber, a ride-hailing service, said the incident was because of human error. “This is why we believe so much in making the roads safer by building self-driving Ubers,” Chelsea Kohler, a company spokeswoman, said in December.

    But even though Uber said it had suspended an employee riding in the Volvo, the self-driving car was, in fact, driving itself when it barreled through the red light, according to two Uber employees, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they signed nondisclosure agreements with the company, and internal Uber documents viewed by The New York Times. All told, the mapping programs used by Uber’s cars failed to recognize six traffic lights in the San Francisco area. “In this case, the car went through a red light,” the documents said.

    The legal battle also provides a rare glimpse into the high-stakes world of top technology talent, where star engineers like Mr. Levandowski, who played a central role in Google’s pioneering autonomous car project, command huge sums of money to try to help define a company’s technological future.

    After leaving Google in January 2016, Mr. Levandowski formed the self-driving truck company Otto. About six months later, Uber bought Otto for $680 million, and Mr. Levandowski became Uber’s vice president in charge of its self-driving car project.

    Waymo filed a lawsuit on Thursday in federal court against Uber and Otto, accusing Mr. Levandowski and Uber of planning to steal trade secrets.

    Engineers like Mr. Levandowski are part of a limited pool of people with the experience and capability to lead efforts on self-driving cars. They are wooed by traditional automakers looking to acquire new technical talent and tech companies, both established firms and start-ups, who see the opportunity to use artificial intelligence and sensors to disrupt another industry.

    “What’s in these people’s heads is hugely in demand,” because the talent pool “just doesn’t have enough miles under the wheels,” said Martha Josephson, a partner in the Palo Alto, Calif., office of Egon Zehnder, an executive recruiting firm.

    In fact, Sebastian Thrun, who founded Google’s self-driving car project and is now the chief executive of the online teaching start-up Udacity, said last year that the going rate for driverless car engineering talent was about $10 million a person.

    Current and former co-workers of Mr. Levandowski, who asked for anonymity because they did not have permission to speak to reporters, said he was aggressive and determined with an entrepreneurial streak.

    Since leaving Google, Mr. Levandowski, 36, has embodied the Silicon Valley ethos that it is better to ask for forgiveness rather than permission.

    Mr. Levandowski gained some notoriety within Google for selling start-ups, which he had done as side projects, to his employer. In his biography for a real estate firm, for which he is a board member, Mr. Levandowski said he sold three automation and robotics start-ups to Google, including 510 Systems and Anthony’s Robots, for nearly $500 million. After this story was published, the real estate firm updated its website erasing Mr. Levandowski’s biography and said that it had “erroneously reported certain facts incorrectly without Mr. Levandowski’s knowledge.”

    #idéologie_californienne #automobile

  • Nissan is using Mars Rover tech from NASA to control autonomous car fleets
    http://www.theverge.com/2017/1/5/14184356/nissan-nasa-mars-rover-autonomous-control-ces-2017

    #Nissan has taken #NASA technology built for the Mars Rover to help control fleets of autonomous vehicles. It’s called Seamless Autonomous Mobility (SAM), and Nissan believes it’s a solution for when vehicles don’t know how to handle the unexpected.

    [...] SAM allows a [human] “mobility manager” to examine vehicle images and sensor data when the car encounters something it can’t handle and decide on the appropriate course of action.

    [...] SAM is adapted from NASA’s Visual Environment for Remote Virtual Exploration (VERVE), which is used to supervise interplanetary robots like the Mars rovers.

    #autopilote

  • How #Tesla #Autopilot drove a man with a blood clot to the hospital, and expanded the autonomous car debate - TechRepublic
    http://www.techrepublic.com/article/how-tesla-autopilot-drove-a-man-with-a-blood-clot-to-the-hospital-and-

    Neally, who reportedly pays close attention while driving Autopilot, following Tesla’s guidelines for use, may have expected the advanced driving feature to kick in, braking if a vehicle crossed its path or alerting him if a nearby car slid too close into his lane.

    But, when Neally began experiencing tightness in his chest and, after calling his wife, realized he needed to get to the hospital, he used Autopilot in a way he probably never expected: To rush him straight to the hospital.

    The tightness in his chest turned out to be caused by a pulmonary embolism, and Neally was able to make a full recovery.

    I don’t really think I could have [made the drive without Autopilot],” Neally told CBS.

    #belle_histoire

  • American Cities Are Nowhere Near Ready for Self-Driving Cars | WIRED
    http://www.wired.com/2016/04/american-cities-nowhere-near-ready-self-driving-cars

    vehicle ownership and usage patterns will change, once we’re able to summon an autonomous car through an app and then shoo it away once it delivers us at our destination. Who’s going to own and operate those cars, and what will they do when not serving their owners? Park in the ‘burbs? Infinite-Uber-loop?

    It’s not an easy task, particularly because the technology is unprecedented and developing quickly. Researchers don’t even know yet, for instance, what autonomous cars will do to traffic volume. Marshall says that can swing either way.

    #urbanisme #autopilote #effet_rebond

  • Google computers qualify as drivers in automated cars, US government says
    http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/feb/09/google-computers-self-driving-cars-human

    In a significant precedent for #Google and other companies developing autonomous car technology, the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (NHTSA) has ruled that the software behind some automated cars should be considered the driver.

    [...] For automakers, the agency’s ruling is a key step in being able to mass-produce self-driving vehicles and sell them to consumers. And on a philosophical level, it’s the most high-profile instance in which a federal agency has said a computer fits the legal definition of a human.

    [...] The US Department of Transportation so far has supported Silicon Valley’s push to take humans out of the driver’s seat, viewing it as a way to minimize traffic deaths. The White House budget, released this week, includes $4bn over the next decade to promote the development of self-driving cars.

    #voitures #autopilote

  • Here’s a Terrible Idea: Robot Cars With Adjustable Ethics Settings | Autopia | WIRED
    http://www.wired.com/2014/08/heres-a-terrible-idea-robot-cars-with-adjustable-ethics-settings?mbid=social_

    Do you remember that day when you lost your mind? You aimed your car at five random people down the road. By the time you realized what you were doing, it was too late to brake.

    Thankfully, your autonomous car saved their lives by grabbing the wheel from you and swerving to the right. Too bad for the one unlucky person standing on that path, struck and killed by your car.

    Did your robot car make the right decision? This scene, of course, is based on the infamous “trolley problem” that many folks are now talking about in AI ethics. It’s a plausible scene, since even cars today have crash-avoidance features: some can brake by themselves to avoid collisions, and others can change lanes too.

    The thought-experiment is a moral dilemma, because there’s no clearly right way to go. It’s generally better to harm fewer people than more, to have one person die instead of five. But the car manufacturer creates liability for itself in following that rule, sensible as it may be. Swerving the car directly results in that one person’s death: this is an act of killing. Had it done nothing, the five people would have died, but you would have killed them, not the car manufacturer which in that case would merely have let them die......

    #Autonomous_Cars
    #ethics
    #robot_cars