SF To Feds: Cruise Driverless Cars Keep Blocking Our Roads (sfexaminer.com) 70
After years of lobbying the state to increase regulations on autonomous vehicles, San Francisco officials are taking their case to the feds. San Francisco Examiner reports: The directors of The City's two main transportation agencies outlined their concerns about Cruise's driverless cars in a letter to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration regarding Cruise's application to deploy a custom-built autonomous vehicle. In it, San Francisco Metropolitan Transportation Authority Director Jeffrey Tumlin and San Francisco County Transportation Authority Director Tilly Chang provide a comprehensive overview of disruptive and unsafe incidents that they say Cruise cars precipitated. The letter, sent on Sept. 21, comes as Cruise's driverless cars continue to stop in the middle of San Francisco's streets for extended periods of time, often in groups, blocking traffic until they can be remotely restarted or manually retrieved by Cruise staff. Over the past week, there were at least four such incidents, including one that delayed a couple of KRON4 reporters.
The City's letter to NHTSA provides specific data on these incidents. Between May 29 and Sept. 5 of this year, 28 incidents of stopped Cruise cars blocking traffic were reported to 911. The City identified an additional 20 such incidents reported on social media over that time period, which does not include the events of the past week. The City estimates that these figures represent "a fraction of actual travel lane road failures," since most of these events take place late at night, when Cruise offers its driverless ride-hailing service, and when few other people are on the streets. In light of these concerns, The City requests several new regulations on autonomous vehicles from NHTSA.
San Francisco's letter is in response to a petition by General Motors, Cruise's parent company, to manufacture and commercially deploy a custom-built autonomous vehicle called the Cruise Origin. It would be roughly the size of an SUV, but with no obvious front and back and no driver's seat or steering wheel. In their letter on behalf of the entire city government, Tumlin and Chang stress that they "neither support nor oppose the Petition, but document safety hazards and street capacity issues raised by the operation of the Cruise AV on San Francisco streets." They go on to call for several specific regulations they would like to see imposed on Cruise and Ford's Argo AI, another company seeking to build and deploy a fully autonomous vehicle. Those recommendations include stringent data reporting requirements and incident reports, limiting the geographic area and the number of vehicles that can be deployed in San Francisco, and enabling first responders to manually turn off the vehicles. "Safety is the guiding principle of everything we do," Cruise said in a statement regarding these incidents. "That means if our cars encounter a situation where they aren't able to safely proceed they turn on their hazard lights and we either get them operating again or pick them up as quickly as possible. This could be because of a mechanical issue like a flat tire, a road condition, or a technical problem. We're working to minimize how often this happens, and apologize to any other impacted drivers."
The City's letter to NHTSA provides specific data on these incidents. Between May 29 and Sept. 5 of this year, 28 incidents of stopped Cruise cars blocking traffic were reported to 911. The City identified an additional 20 such incidents reported on social media over that time period, which does not include the events of the past week. The City estimates that these figures represent "a fraction of actual travel lane road failures," since most of these events take place late at night, when Cruise offers its driverless ride-hailing service, and when few other people are on the streets. In light of these concerns, The City requests several new regulations on autonomous vehicles from NHTSA.
San Francisco's letter is in response to a petition by General Motors, Cruise's parent company, to manufacture and commercially deploy a custom-built autonomous vehicle called the Cruise Origin. It would be roughly the size of an SUV, but with no obvious front and back and no driver's seat or steering wheel. In their letter on behalf of the entire city government, Tumlin and Chang stress that they "neither support nor oppose the Petition, but document safety hazards and street capacity issues raised by the operation of the Cruise AV on San Francisco streets." They go on to call for several specific regulations they would like to see imposed on Cruise and Ford's Argo AI, another company seeking to build and deploy a fully autonomous vehicle. Those recommendations include stringent data reporting requirements and incident reports, limiting the geographic area and the number of vehicles that can be deployed in San Francisco, and enabling first responders to manually turn off the vehicles. "Safety is the guiding principle of everything we do," Cruise said in a statement regarding these incidents. "That means if our cars encounter a situation where they aren't able to safely proceed they turn on their hazard lights and we either get them operating again or pick them up as quickly as possible. This could be because of a mechanical issue like a flat tire, a road condition, or a technical problem. We're working to minimize how often this happens, and apologize to any other impacted drivers."
Tow the damn things (Score:5, Interesting)
Stopping your car in the middle of traffic is very much against the law in every part of the United States, so far as I'm aware. In fact you'd be breaking multiple laws. Why don't they just impound the things and charge Cruise to get them out of the lot?
Re:Tow the damn things (Score:5, Funny)
GM cleverly thwarted it by not having a driver. The cop's training script is stuck on boot.
Re: (Score:2)
It's called a tow truck.
Tow truck drivers have ALL those things
Re:Tow the damn things (Score:5, Insightful)
Cops deal with abandoned vehicles all the time. The cleverest thing done here is convincing them to not treat these clearly broken down vehicles with no driver about like every other broken down vehicle with no driver about.
Re: Tow the damn things (Score:3)
Dude, they tow cars all the time without ever talking to the owner. Leave your car on the side of the road it will get towed. Leave your car in a private parking lot and the owner of that lot can get it towed without any input or knowledge of law enforcement. If these are blocking the road the city can and should tow them. If they are not picked up and fines paid in a certain amount of time they get auctioned off or crushed.
Re:Tow the damn things (Score:4, Funny)
They're probably confused about who they will be able to shoot if the car doesn't comply with conflicting statements.
Re: (Score:2)
They're probably confused about who they will be able to shoot if the car doesn't comply with conflicting statements.
Cars don't start to panic when you scream at them while threatening to murder them so it's much less fun.
Re: (Score:2)
They made sure and painted all of the cars white.
Re:Tow the damn things (Score:5, Insightful)
Then there's the dilemma for the police officers: Is the car really off?
With an abandoned vehicle without a driver, you'll know the car wouldn't start at any minute.
With a malfunctioning autonomous vehicle, how would you know that the car couldn't start at any minute, being a safety hazard for the towers?
Re: (Score:3)
With an abandoned vehicle without a driver, you'll know the car wouldn't start at any minute. With a malfunctioning autonomous vehicle, how would you know that the car couldn't start at any minute, being a safety hazard for the towers?
That’s why you pump it full of lead, then wait for the fire to die down, sometimes even evacuating the passengers first if it’s not too hard or threatening. Then you can be sure it’s not going to move.
Re:Tow the damn things (Score:4, Insightful)
Why don't they just impound the things and charge Cruise to get them out of the lot?
Because that would be a local solution to a local issue.
SF believes most problems should have a one-size-fits-all solution at the federal level, hence their petition to the Federal DOT, rather than using their mayor and city council.
Re: (Score:2)
The Mayor and city council are so dysfunctional...
Oh never mind.
I'm too tired for that joke
Re: (Score:2)
The goal is never a small government the goal is government small enough to seiz
Re: Tow the damn things (Score:2)
So let me get this straight... Silicon valley, which is in San Francisco, bought out the state government, and they haven't done the same with the SF government?
Seems legit.
All I know about this state is I've been living here for two weeks and, basically everywhere you go, it smells like a skunk's butthole. Outside of El Segundo, there's trash and graffiti everywhere. The way the roads are laid out makes no fucking sense at all. The freeways aren't free. It cost me more to park at my doctor's office than th
Re: Tow the damn things (Score:4, Informative)
Silicon valley, which is in San Francisco
Silicon Valley is not in SF.
Silicon Valley, which is really Santa Clara Valley, is about 40 miles south of SF.
The biggest city in Silicon Valley is San Jose, a bigger city, by both population and area, than San Francisco.
Re: Tow the damn things (Score:2)
General area
Re: Tow the damn things (Score:2)
What the hell are you talking about? That's like saying that El Segundo isn't in LA. Yeah, technically it's not, but people still refer to everything in this area as LA.
Besides, I don't have anything to do with republicans.
Re: (Score:2)
What part of California are you talking about?
El Segundo is nowhere near Silicon Valley.
Silicon Valley has public transit. Freeways are free (although you can choose to pay).
Or are you simply trolling from another state or country? I put my money on another country, because people outside America can't comprehend how much medical care costs: the idea that parking would cost more than the doctor visit is laughable.
Re: Tow the damn things (Score:3)
I live in El Segundo, and I'm talking about the whole state. When I say freeways aren't free, I mean that in two senses of the word:
In Arizona, where I'm from, there are no toll roads to be found anywhere in the state. Period. Obviously the money California gets for those tolls doesn't do them any favors because even the worst highways in Arizona are better planned and better maintained than anything you find in California.
And basically all fucking day long, and even throughout most of the weekend, the free
Re: (Score:2)
Or maybe San Francisco's town council is dysfunctional.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
In most of the country a breakdown on the road isn't handled as a legal matter.
Re: (Score:2)
Depends. If a certain model of car, or cars owned by a particular company, or other group of cars repeatedly break down in traffic, it starts to sound like a legal matter to me. Self-driving cars don't need to be perfect, but they need to be better than this or those cars should be off the road and large fines levied.
Re: (Score:2)
If you voluntarily stop your car in the middle of the road and insist on staying there while people from your company convince you to resume driving the vehicle, you damn well better believe it will be handled as a legal matter.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Stopping your car in the middle of traffic is very much against the law in every part of the United States, so far as I'm aware.
The funny part about this law is that it nearly always applies without reason. If you crash, you stopped your car in the middle of traffic. If your vehicle breaks down suddenly you've stopped your car in the middle of traffic. Hitting the emergency break because grandma is crossing traffic in front of you?...
It's one of those laws that is designed to deal with the insanely stupid arrogant arseholes, not with matters of safety. I don't think anyone here thinks that these cars should just blindly keep driving
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know how it is where you live, but around here you will not be treated the same if your car breaks down as if you stop your car in the middle of a busy street voluntarily. Mostly the latter case is punished more-harshly since it introduces hazards that have no legitimate reason to exist. Recently I got stuck behind an elderly woman who clearly took the wrong turn and was stopped in traffic desperately trying to pull a u-turn. The woman probably needed to have her license revoked. She's lucky nob
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know how it is where you live, but around here you will not be treated the same if your car breaks down as if you stop your car in the middle of a busy street voluntarily.
Exactly my point. The key word there is voluntarily. The question is: are the Cruises stopping voluntarily, or are they stopping to avoid causing a crash / injury or due to equipment problems.
Welcome to the world of self driving cars, there's no difference between a computer getting confused and locking up as for e.g. the wheel axel snapping. The unsafe car stops.
Recently I got stuck behind an elderly woman who clearly took the wrong turn and was stopped in traffic desperately trying to pull a u-turn. The woman probably needed to have her license revoked.
Unless she was doing a u-turn across a double line there's nothing wrong with stopping and turning around. And if she was then she would have been
Re: (Score:2)
Destroy the fucking things.
Re: Tow the damn things (Score:2)
Don't tow them right away.
Make an nearest bathroom app that shows where the nearest stalled/ abandoned car is.
There's a great shortage of public restrooms there.
Re: (Score:1)
While I agree they should be impounded as that is the normal procedure for an "abandoned" vehicle, these do pose a very real threat to tow truck drivers, in that they could just start driving while it is being hooked up, I don't know if they have an "mechanical" disable on the exterior, but they certainly need one.
Re: (Score:2)
Because interstates don't have cabs/uber/lyft to disrupt
Re: (Score:2)
Why didn't they perfect driverless/autonomous cars on the interstates first
Because that's a solved problem. Autonomous cars work fine on Interstates. I know because I have one.
The remaining issues are dealing with pedestrians, skateboarders, bicycles, cross traffic, blind entrances, delivery vans, etc. None of that can be done on an Interstate.
How is it people thought a congested city was the ideal place to test things out?
Because it is.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh really? So, 5,6,7,8 hours of continuous driving with no intervention whatsoever?
No, because I have to recharge.
But hundreds of hours of 20-minute commutes with no intervention? Yes, I have done that. So have millions of other drivers.
You appear to be out of touch with the state of autonomous driving. You should test drive a Tesla. It will be an eye-opening experience.
Re: (Score:2)
Regardless...it's not hard to for a person to imagine what a self-driving experience is...you could sit in a chair and stare at a wall, and experience what not having to intervene with a piece of machinery is like.
Huh? I'd love to be able to sit back in my car and look out at the scenery instead of focusing on the grey strip in front of me for hours on end.
It's so annoying to be driving through the countryside and the passengers are all, "Look, a squirrel!" but I have to keep my eyes firmly on the road the whole time.
THAT^ is the "self-driving experience".
Re: (Score:2)
Just stop already, you're a dumbass.
Re: (Score:2)
So you have to drive a Tesla to experience the self driving experience, which is pretty indistinguishable from being a.....passenger. What a stretch of the imagination!!!
Um, the point is you can choose. There's a button for it.
Do you really feel like you're "driving" when you're 100 cars down in traffic and waiting for the lights to let the next 20 through? Press the button, let the car take care of that.
Going through a twisty mountain track where you really want to control a car with a ton of power and razor-sharp reflexes? Push the other button.
Re: (Score:2)
Because that's a solved problem. Autonomous cars work fine on Interstates. I know because I have one. The remaining issues are dealing with pedestrians, skateboarders, bicycles, cross traffic, blind entrances, delivery vans, etc. None of that can be done on an Interstate.
I hope you still watch out for all those things on the interstates and don't just leave it to your car.
Re: (Score:2)
I hope you still watch out for all those things on the interstates and don't just leave it to your car.
I do. Thanks for your concern.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, at least until they're plowed over by the speeding human drivers who aren't paying attention even without any car features looking out for them as well. You shouldn't be sleeping on any road, much less interstates.
Keep in mind that interstates are actually the one type of road that pedestrians, cyclists, skateboarders and everybody else not in a powered vehicle are supposed to stay off of, not even to cross.
Re: (Score:2)
So...not really a "solved problem" then, if you still have to babysit.
It's more like house-sitting than babysitting.
You can mostly sit back and relax even if some things require attention every now and again.
Re: (Score:2)
So...not really a "solved problem" then, if you still have to babysit.
The "babysitting" is a legal requirement, not a technical necessity.
Re: (Score:2)
It's not technically necessary to not slam your car into stopped vehicles on the high way, but it is beneficial to your health.
Re: (Score:2)
It's just waiting for the right fire truck to take its fancy.
Re: (Score:2)
I would guess because they can't grift nearly as much money out of investors that way.
Re: (Score:2)
Hell...why haven't they done this with freight trains?
Re: (Score:2)
Because unions.
Re: (Score:3)
Why didn't they perfect driverless/autonomous cars on the interstates first...where it's "easier", and you're covering more distance?
Interstate highway driving has been a largely solved problem for several years now. Interstates are a completely uninteresting problem, because you basically just have to keep the car between the lines, handle exits, and occasionally change lanes to pass slow drivers.
Are they perfect? No. But they're pretty darn good.
How is it people thought a congested city was the ideal place to test things out?
Because:
Autonomy in the city is going to worsen traffic (as demonstrated) because you are now going to clutter the streets with the most obnoxiously safe "drivers" that struggle with things like making a left turn in traffic...where a degree of "boldness" is sometimes needed.
The thing is
Re: Backwards approach... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I would say if the person who can't do a certain intersection is able to adapt to avoid it, then it is not a problem. The question is whether an automated driver knows it's limits as well. Testing in a complicated environment is only reasonable if test failures don't harm or incompetence anyone.
One big difference is that the human can also decide that it isn't worth going to certain places because of how hard it is to get there. An autonomous vehicle doesn't generally have that choice.
I know what comes next... (Score:3)
! stoppage is 1 too many (Score:2)
Forget traffic. Emergencies are far worse. (Score:2)
Remember those pictures of fire hose lines being routed through the broken windows of cars parked illegally near fire hydrants? Exactly.
Message to vendors should be simple; get your autonomous shit working, or face the consequences (forget towing, I'm talking PIT maneuvers) of impeding law enforcement or emergency services.
Don't agree? Next time it might be your loved one in the back of an ambulance needing to get the fuck through to the hospital to save a life. Sadly, this may have happened already. O
All completely predictable (Score:2)
But when they're on the public road with so many random external factors they ARE going to do something dumb, e.g. crash into something or someone, or stop because they don't know what to do, or stop because someone is griefing them. This is so blindingly obvio
Slow ride, take it easy... (Score:2)
*If you don't believe this, record abnormal road conditions during your commute; I'll bet you see one every other month and don't even think twice about dealing with it.
Good! (Score:2)
The more the roads are blocked, the more people in SF will stop using their cars. This can be nothing other than good, according to the prevailing religious beliefs in SF.
Don't stop. (Score:2)
robots and our future (Score:2)
Welcome to the new dystopia where robots that are supposed to help humans and even replace human jobs breakdown and go unattended and actually inhibit human activity. The next step is robots to fix the robots, and soon its robots all the way down. Corporations that profit from robots will obviously not take responsibility and you'll have no recourse when there is a problem.
Beat on the brat! (Score:2)
"Beat on the brat, beat on the brat, beat on the brat with a baseball bat! Whoa-oh!"
Sue Them (Score:1)
Sue them.
They block the intersection and keep you from getting to work, sue them.
They block the intersection and keep your business from meeting delivery targets or making appointments with customers, sue them.
I'm sure there are plenty of law firms in the SF area that can setup a streamlined process for this. So, just sue them. Make the snotty, self-absorbed, entitled brats feel the pain they are inflicting on the world in