
On the road to fully self-driving – Waymo Safety Report [pdf] - astigsen
https://storage.googleapis.com/sdc-prod/v1/safety-report/waymo-safety-report-2017-10.pdf
======
bertil
For all its flaws (and I haven’t seen many: I really like that report) that is
a dramatic change in how we understand road safety: private actors now feel
the responsibility to publish their understanding of all-encompassing safety.

Compared to historical car manufacturers who consider that they responsibility
stops at the paint layer, this is a welcome change. I’m always concerned
browsing through reports that reads, paraphrased “Our cars are f-cking tanks,
we will mow through any obstacle and you’ll barely even notice.”

I’m always hesitant to give more reporting power to private actors (they tend
to get their PR team spin it hard) but in that case, that report informs
effective internal decision: Do we put more aggressive thresholds to break
when a cyclist appears nearby to our radars? Do we use a more accusing beeping
sound when driving too close to the curb, tailgating?

Distributed actors have proven they have very little concern for human lives.
Centralised systems, when they are ubiquitous, will have to take that
terrifying number of 1.2 million as their own key performance indicator and
act differently.

------
speedplane
This report is not enough to convince me their cars are safe, but it's a good
start. Haven't seen anything like this from their competitors.

At it's best, the article suggests google is being methodical and responsible
with its rollout. At it's worst, it's a PR blitz to give the appearance of
safety, but even that is a good start as it acknowledges that people care
about autonomous vehicle safety.

------
kristoffer
What are the views on ISO 26262 functional safety compliance in the US self
driving companies? This report is very light on details and only mentions ISO
26262 in the passing.

Here in Europe it seems to me that functional safety is high on the self
driving agenda ... (maybe too high?)

