
During Google’s early self-driving tests, there were over “a dozen accidents” - AndrewDucker
https://arstechnica.com/cars/2018/10/during-googles-early-self-driving-tests-there-were-over-a-dozen-accidents/
======
masonic

      Prior to 2014, AV companies' collisions were not required to be reported under California state law.
    

This is false. A collision resulting in _any injury_ or total damage over
$1000 ($750 before 2017) has to be reported on SR-1 forms regardless of
whether there was a police report; this requirement goes back to at least
1982.

------
DeonPenny
Duh, this was 7 year ago. Who thought it started off perfect. How does that
affect their performance now after thousands of rides and way better
equipment?

~~~
oldgradstudent
If these incidents were covered up, why would you trust anything else they
say?

They often claim after a crash that the vehicle was in manual mode. Do you
trust that?

They need to come clean, they need to become more transparent, and most
importantly, they need to be regulated with an iron fist.

~~~
DeonPenny
They weren't covered up though. They weren't required to disclose them because
there were no regulations. There is no proof that they have frequent crashes
now that the technology mature and their no proof that thats not true.

Also, why would they be so heavily regulated for no reason? Would you also do
that with the internet, phones, or new technology? You provide regulation
based on a problem that occurs that's unfair and bad practice to just make
rules to perceived problems.

~~~
oldgradstudent
There was no autonomous mode reporting requirement, but as I understand The
New Yorker report, they probably should have contacted the authorities because
they were involved in a crash.

Their main claim to fame is driving 10M miles in autonomous mode without any
serious incidents. The crash, as described by The New Yorker, was a serious
incident that was at least partially caused by their software behaving
recklessly.

[https://www.pe.com/2011/01/03/who-has-right-of-way-when-
merg...](https://www.pe.com/2011/01/03/who-has-right-of-way-when-merging-onto-
freeway/)

The New Yorker also mentions other incidents that were never reported to the
public.

Why iron fisted regulation?

Their software may soon control thousands of two-ton SUVs on public roads.
They've shown no intention of being transparent. They've shown that safety is
not their number of priority.

I am not necessarily saying they should be prevented from operating, but
strict regulation is required to protect the public.

------
t0mas88
As a non native speaker... What does it mean to box in a car? I can imagine a
few scenarios but none really seem to match with the left/right veering action
story from the article. Does it just mean not allowing them to merge onto the
highway? And if so, why didn't the affected car stop or merge behind the Waymo
car?

~~~
brainfish
You are correct; as far as I understand the term it means the Waymo car kept
pace with (stayed next to) the other car (Camry) such that the Camry could not
merge. I am also confused why the Camry could not just slow down and merge
behind, but we don't have enough information to make any kind of
determination.

