SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
An Anonymous Coward writes:
As predicted by many (including posts here on SN), extensive testing now shows that if the driver's workload is reduced to near zero they are in no position to intervene should the autonomous system get in trouble.
The Detroit-based company has tried many ways to keep its engineers alert during autonomous car test runs, employing everything from alarm bells and lights to even putting a second engineer in the vehicle to monitor their counterpart. "No matter — the smooth ride was just too lulling and engineers struggled to maintain 'situational awareness,'" said Ford product development chief, Raj Nair.
Ford's strategy of eventually removing the steering wheel and pedals from self-driving cars has ignited a debate between automakers on how to approach the development of Level 3 self-driving vehicles, or if Level 3 should even exist at all.
BMW, Mercedes-Benz, and Audi will introduce semi-autonomous Level 3 vehicles next year that require human intervention within 10 seconds or the vehicle will slow to a stop in its lane. However, other automakers like Nissan and Honda have upcoming systems that give the driver 30 seconds to prepare and re-engage the vehicle or it will pull to the side of the road.
The article continues with quotes from other manufacturers and US DOT. As a reminder, levels from 0 (no automation) through 5 have been defined by SAE. Level 3 is "conditional automation" and it's starting to look like this level is not such a good idea.
(Score: 4, Informative) by meustrus on Tuesday February 21 2017, @07:39PM
See the actual policy which defines levels 0-5 [sae.org].
More commentary on the differences between each level. [techrepublic.com]
Hyperlinks were not invented to drive traffic back to your own web site, MotorTrend. They were invented to streamline citations so that we can all see the same primary sources that you saw. Of course that would make you a glorified aggregation engine instead of a news site, wouldn't it? Not that aggregation engines are unsuccessful - says the commenter on the SoylentNews aggregation engine.
If there isn't at least one reference or primary source, it's not +1 Informative. Maybe the underused +1 Interesting?
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 21 2017, @08:23PM
drive traffic
I see what you did there.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 21 2017, @09:20PM
For the record, I submitted the article as AC, and I don't work for Motor Trend. There is a source link in the M/T article but it was to a paywalled site, http://www.autonews.com/article/20170217/MOBILITY/170219851/fords-dozing-engineers-side-with-google-in-full-autonomy-push [autonews.com]
(Score: 3, Interesting) by meustrus on Tuesday February 21 2017, @11:49PM
I have no issue with the summary. I just found it really annoying that all 10 links in the article (6 of which are for specific makes rather than actual information) point straight back to MotorTrend, even when they are clearly referencing actions that third parties made. Third parties which clearly make press releases. The articles themselves don't link to any concrete information either, even going so far as to describe their source as "NHTSA" with no link or even any identifying citation.
The paywalled article is even worse, having no links whatsoever. And after closing and reopening the tab a couple of times, it also has no content. Not sure that's much of a change from before since I don't give 2 shits what some e-zine I've never heard of has to say about a a source that it is deliberately withholding.
If there isn't at least one reference or primary source, it's not +1 Informative. Maybe the underused +1 Interesting?