Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> because the time to get the situation and react is too short

The time is up to the manufacturer, isn't it?

Mercedes uses 10 seconds right now and that seems pretty good to me. At that point I know it can't be too dire or the car would have already emergency stopped.



> The time is up to the manufacturer, isn't it?

The time depends on how quickly an event unfolds in traffic. You can't guarantee 10s notice for an event that is imminent in 2s and the system might not be able to handle or can't detect.

The car could become temporarily "blind" for some reason with just 4-5s to brake before a collision. It's enough for a human driver even considering reaction time. But it's impossible to guarantee a minimum time without the ability to predict every issue that will happen on the road.


If there isn't a guaranteed minimum time, then it's not level 3, it's advanced level 2. Level 3 needs to be able to handle very rapid events by itself.

If it becomes "blind" because of an unexpected total system failure, that's an exception to the guarantee just like your transmission suddenly exploding is an exception. It had better be extremely rare. If it happens regularly then it needs a recall.


> If there isn't a guaranteed minimum time

When dealing with unpredictable real life events there are no guarantees, unless we're considering the many carveouts to that definition from a legal perspective. A blind car (fluke weather, blown fuse, SW glitch, trolley problem) can no longer guarantee anything. Giving the driver 10s, or assuming the worst and braking hard could equally cause a crash.

> your transmission suddenly exploding is an exception

As long as the brakes or steering work a driver could still avoid a crash. The driver having a stroke is closer to a blind car.


> When dealing with unpredictable real life events there are no guarantees

The guarantee here is that the human isn't obligated to intervene for a moment.

If you call that guarantee impossible, then what about level 4 cars? They guarantee that the human isn't obligated to intervene ever. Are level 4 cars impossible?

Is this a wording issue? What would you say level 4 cars promise/provide? Level 3 cars need to promise/provide the same thing for a limited time. And that time has to be long enough to do a proper transfer of attention.


> The guarantee here is that the human isn't obligated to intervene for a moment.

Ah, understood. So the guarantee is that the driver is not legally responsible for anything that happens in those 10s. I always took that as a guarantee of safety rather than from legal consequences.


It's more about safety than legality. But with the understanding that nothing is perfect.

The guarantee is that you will be very safe and you can go ahead and look away from the road and pay attention to other things. But at most this is as good as a level 4 or 5 car, not an impossibly perfect car.


> The time is up to the manufacturer, isn't it?

Yes but there is a minimum time (if a bit under-specified)

> "At Level 3, an ADS is capable of continuing to perform the DDT (Dynamic Driving Task) for at least several seconds after providing the fallback-ready user with a request to intervene."

J3016 Section 3.12, Note 3: https://wiki.unece.org/download/attachments/128418539/SAE%20...


I feel like that lack of standardization is part of the problem. Some manufacturers may pick different times to avoid nuisance braking, but that translates to higher risk to the driver. I’d like to see some core parameters like this standardized (whether by an industry body or regulator).




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: