Slashdot Mirror
Waymo Self-Driving Cars Can Now Obey Police Hand Signals
In the event that a traffic light is not working, Waymo's self-driving cars will now be able to use AI to detect and respond to the arm movements of a traffic cop as they wave traffic through an intersection. You can watch a demo of it on YouTube. Futurism reports: Waymo first claimed that its autonomous vehicles could respond to hand signals from nearby cyclists back in 2016. That particular research treated cyclists, from the vehicle's perspective, as obstacles to track and avoid. A new video published by Waymo on Wednesday is the first that shows its vehicles responding to gesture commands -- especially in the absence of the traffic lights on which it would normally rely -- and obeying police orders. The video, which runs at three times normal speed, shows a picture-in-picture display of the car's digital perspective and a video camera as it goes through an intersection.
The video shows the car approach the intersection where a virtual red wall blocks off the road, suggesting that the computer's software responds to the absence of a green light at an intersection the same way as it might to an illuminated red light. The cop in the video, represented by a small prism, teeters across the virtual representation of the intersection before finally waving the Waymo vehicle's vehicle through the intersection and along its way.
The video shows the car approach the intersection where a virtual red wall blocks off the road, suggesting that the computer's software responds to the absence of a green light at an intersection the same way as it might to an illuminated red light. The cop in the video, represented by a small prism, teeters across the virtual representation of the intersection before finally waving the Waymo vehicle's vehicle through the intersection and along its way.
and clear environment, Driver less works perfect in a sanitized controlled environments with known setup pre setup tests.
;)
We are at least 5 years away, go ahead push them out there. Going to be interesting how the failures and collateral damage are handled.
Just my 2 cents
Sweet, this is going to fuck up SO GOOD.
Why doesn't anyone answer this question?
Of course it WILL happen.
Seems like the risk would make it cost prohibitive.
And how does it determine if the person in the road is a police officer and not just a drunk who is going to guide you and your car into a deserted ally, well, almost deserted as his friends are their to relieve you of your burdensome cash?
As these wonderful devices won't even know what a robbery is this is going to be funnier than watching a millennial try to figure out how to make change at the ball park.
Technomancers can now add somatic components to their spells to control these beasts. What a time to be one with the bitstreams.
Since the cops don't give proper hand signals to begin with (or at least not the ones around here).
I would love to know how AI handle that situation. In New Hampshire many roads don't have stop signs at intersections. It is obvious to a human driver that they need to stop, say where the cars on the other intersecting street clearly do not stop (also have no traffic signal or stop sign). How does the AI know that it should stop despite there being no indicator?
Brilliant. I made this same argument before but you said it better.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
That means that I can control other people’s cars via simple hand signals.
I can’t wait for that to become mainstream.
Or will it follow the directions of anyone in a safety vest making arm gestures?
CAPTCHA: lawsuit
Sounds fun to hack. I'm now imagining mischievous jumping into the middle of intersections & waving at cars.
I expect it'd need to be quite advanced to reliably tell legitimate traffic cops from pedestrians.
What about construction workers (in areas with no or overlapping lane marks?) / parking attendants (mainly at events in unmarked parking or even off road parking)
Hoping Waymo doesn't put the hand signals higher priority than obstacles. Last time I drove through an intersection with a traffic cop, the officer waved me through. I started to go, then a jogger with earbuds on jogged right in front of me. The officer shrieked 'stop!' and I stopped as the jogger kept going, oblivious.
Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
the eula says waymo not at fault renter or owner can't get logs / source code. Better hope it's an cop and it goes to criminal court where your rights are better then in civil court and you have the right to an attorney + an higher standard of evidence.
Hitting an worker in a private parking lot can leave you on your own with no right under law to by pass NDA's / eula / dmca to get logs or even the source code to say that the software in case X can miss class an person as safe to run over.
I want an criminal case with an hard ass judge that will jail people on contempt of court when they to pull an NDA says we can't talk about code or try to hide under a big list of subcontractors
and criminal responsibility is a thing as well!
Brilliant. I made this same argument before but you said it better.
The truth is almost never comfortable or politically correct. As much as it is widely practiced, if political correctness was the best solution to our problems we'd be living in Utopia by now. It isn't and it's not going to be.
Muslims especially are a really very obvious case. They do not share Western values, they actively reject Western values, they have no intention to assimilate, they are taught that it's OK to subjugate anyone not sharing their beliefs (a duty in fact), unlike the Christians they actually intend to practice what their Book says, they show zero sign of changing, their majority takes no meaningful action to reign in their most extreme elements, but they sure do love the stable prosperous nations the non-Muslims have created.
It just doesn't get more obvious than that. You want to invite them in to settle down? How do you suppose that's going to work out? How is it working out now in much of Europe? You think you will be a special case?? Political correctness is simply a nice sugar-coated way to sell to white culture its own destruction.
Muslims especially are a really very obvious case. They do not share Western values
They probably share your values to the same extent you share theirs. Do you think there is any common ground upon which to build better understanding?
This implies that they lacked this ability before. The further suggestion is that other "autonomous" vehicles still lack this ability.
Pardon me while I say "poppycock" to all you loonies here who keep parroting that self-driving cars have been usable over the past two years.
"Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
I'm all for Google bashing, my god I could do it for hours on some topics, but when it comes to deploying a truly autonomous vehicle, on the road with all the variables of real life, frankly the project is astoundingly complex.
Even designing an autonomous car that can only work in a single city (example one which works within 150 miles of San Francisco ONLY or within 50 miles of Vegas ONLY) would still be immensly complicated factoring in weather, emergencies, unpredictable animals, people, cyclists, scooters, garbage men, mailmen, idiots, bad drivers, random rubbish on your roads, ambulances, etc.
It's astronomical. Utterly. I'd be surprised if there's anything still launched within 5 years.
I did see a theory about long haul trucking from point A to B being replaced . Almost like a train, local trucks deliver to a point, which swaps to much larger, long haul autonomous trucks. They run a long long route, drop off goods at another depot point and return.
That being said, they still need, I think at least a man remotely able to control the vehicle in emergencies (see also the autonomous mining trucks deployed in Western Australia)
How does one refuel a long haul truck that runs on gasoline for example?
We have a long long long way to go.
Muslims especially are a really very obvious case. They do not share Western values
They probably share your values to the same extent you share theirs. Do you think there is any common ground upon which to build better understanding?
As you (intentionally?) suggest, the values are mutually exclusive. The status quo for the longest time? They live in their lands, while we live in theirs. Historically, this has worked every time it has been tried.
What's (relatively) new (but not unprecedented, c.f. Crusades era) is wave after wave of Muslim immigrants/refugees wanting to relocate to Western-value societies. Now you have a situation where in places like France, there are entire areas that even the police are afraid to enter. There is the very real expectation that these Islamic people will out-breed and displace the current population, the people who built that nation. Imagine if white nations did the same to Islamic territories. It would be called neo-colonialism and would be soundly criticized by the rest of the world!
Political correctness says this is OK when it happens in one direction, because melanin! because religion! But terrible and despicable when done the other way around. I suggest it's a bad idea no matter who is doing it to whom. This is the only way to be fair and impartial while respecting both cultures as much as possible. Which is very much more than can be said for "political correct" views, ironically enough.
They live in their lands, while we live in theirs.
Late at night and drunk. Typo. Meant to read, "while we live in ours." Sorry. I believe you can infer this from the general context but I just wanted to clarify anyway. Not intending to provide fodder for the trolls and hostile morons who get all upset at what is said but can't point out anything solidly wrong with it*.
*Because entertaining such thoughts would call into question their cherished/conformist beliefs (that they were taught, rather than arrived at) and that is extremely uncomfortable for emotional narrow-minded people who just want the comfort of following an orthodoxy and receiving the approval of the like-minded, or the sick pleasure of hating those who disagree without ever understanding what they believe and why. It's the disease afflicting all rational political discourse and the reason for all the hypocrisy surrounding notions of "free speech": the government may not censor you, but we'll try to silence you or get you fired for having the "wrong" beliefs.
Someone with a gun who isn't a cop uses cop-like hand signals to make your SDC stop, so they can hijack you.
Meanwhile someone NOT in a SDC encounters the same situation, thinks "that's not a cop!" and FLOORS IT, getting away without being hijacked.
Which car would you rather be in? The one piloted by an idiot machine that can't actually THINK, or the car YOU are piloting, and you CAN think?
The answer should be obvious.
"How does one refuel a long haul truck that runs on gasoline for example?" http://rotec-engineering.nl/en/automation/automated-gas-stations/ -- one example?
If the Pacifica even acknowledges the cop it is doing better than 90% of the drivers on the roads that those vehicles regularly traverse (California drivers are nothing if not oblivious to their surroundings).
What if some yahoo in a beret and bland clothing sticks white gum on their shirt, jumps in front, and makes hand motions?
Table-ized A.I.
direct it to drive off a cliff?
[($)]
You sound drunk.
never ever ever (40 years driving) seen a human direct traffic, even at the most critical infrastructure, bringing miles of roads to a standstill. directing traffic is way way way below what our police think they are responsible for.
unlike Dublin, when I was there they would have Gaurds on all the critical junctions morning and evening and if there was nobody coming in the opposite direction would wave you through the red traffic lights.
the eula says waymo not at fault renter or owner can't get logs / source code.
What the EULA says is irrelevant.
This isn't a dispute between Waymo and the passenger. It is a dispute between the victim (who haven't signed any EULA) and Waymo.
It might also be a criminal case and the the EULA means jack shit and trying to withhold logs and source code from prosecution will just means that they will take it with force.
The EULA or any other agreement between Waymo and the passenger means jack shit.
It might come into play if the passengers gets bruised because the car stopped too quickly or something.
I think the worst case scenario is that any jackass with two arms can hack and take control of your car. Just by waving at it.
Just like the Waymo software, I always obey the hand signals of police prisms!
E Proelio Veritas.
I mean, it's not like random pranksters are going to start waving at Waymo cars to make them do something, right?
You can already dress up as a police officer and start directing traffic; it works on humans too. That's why there's already a law against it.
Does it go into road rage, and honk the horn. Blink the lights. violently get close to the car/person that did the gesture?
Anonymous comments are as pathetic as the anonymous "sources" that contaminate gutless journalism from the New York Time
"the eula says waymo not at fault renter or owner can't get logs / source code."
The law says that contracts can't trump law. The user might not be able to get the source, but the user's legal representation can subpoena it. Remember Toyota, and sudden acceleration? That code wound up being reviewed by independent agents, and reports on the same published, which is how we found out that Toyota's programmers couldn't code their way out of a nutsack.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
But please stop acting like the introduction and saturation of autonomous vehicles is imminent. I swear if I hear another grad student or middle-aged planner with a subscription to Wired exclaim how we need to be ready to change our entire road system because driverless cars are going to change EVERYTHING in the next 6 months, I'm going to scream.
If they're going to succeed, they're going to have to be nearly perfect on the roads that currently exist and be sufficiently affordable to compete with the likes of Uber/Lyft and private vehicle ownership. Anyone saying anything is either looking for investors, website clicks, or book sales.
They're just not there yet. They're not all that close. The closest (Waymo, Cruze) operate in extremely limited areas and are successful thus far by rote memorization, not adaptability.
Automobiles are an operational and infrastructural component. They're not quick to develop. They're not cheap to produce. And they're fraught with massive liability and risk.
Now make them understand what I mean when I flip them off!
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
Recently construction of a shopping plaza was being completed near me. For a couple hours they moved some equipment onto the 2 lane road that went past it to install something in the very front. So the police directed traffic through the parking lot. And while the police waved you into the lot, they figured you were smart enough to drive across it to the exit on the other side.
Also, I can recall having to drive by minor accidents and being directed by police to go past the obstacle in the breakdown lane.
These are just a couple examples of unpredictable events that might be really hard to navigate without human intervention.
Simple, if the car finds itself in New Hampshire, it stops at every intersection to be safe.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
It must depend where and when you drive. I drove in the UK for twenty years and saw cops directing traffic on numerous occasions.