logoalt Hacker News

dghlsakjgyesterday at 5:32 PM5 repliesview on HN

Is there a standard that these cars have to meet?

Really there should be an obstacle course of some kind based on the most common anomalies leading to accidents. Partially obscured road signs, worn paint markings, obscured sight lines caused by dense parking, driving on a snowed over surface, etc.


Replies

arjieyesterday at 11:04 PM

Such a standard for motor vehicles would result in the loss of licensing for a large majority of Americans. Most people would fight against such testing standards as a condition for driving on public roads. It might not be a bad idea. I just don’t think it’s feasible.

AlotOfReadingyesterday at 5:50 PM

There's no legislated standard in the US, nor pre-sale verification that a vehicle has met most of the other automotive standards. That's just not how the US regulatory environment works.

There's the beginnings of a standard for L2/L3 vehicles in Europe, and ongoing discussions about what L4 standards could look like, but neither addresses "adversarial" situations.

show 1 reply
iknowstuffyesterday at 5:45 PM

Real world data results are so much more important than an obstacle course to overfit for.

margalabargalayesterday at 5:34 PM

While I would like to see that just for the data, from a regulatory standpoint all we really need are the manufacturers being liable in a crash if their cars were driving. The insurance savings of their cars being safer will create the incentive they need.

throwup238yesterday at 5:34 PM

If it’s anything like my San Francisco DMV driving test, they did a loop around Fell and Oak St (both one way streets with no opposing traffic).

I passed because I didn’t kill anyone in the span of eight blocks.