Google driverless car has a prang!

[#1]

Quote

In a filing with the California Department of Motor Vehicles, Google said its car had been trying to pull out into slow-moving traffic on Valentine’s Day when a bus driver did not slow to leave room, causing a minor collision. In a blog post on Monday, it blamed the accident on a “tricky set of circumstances” caused partly by an adjustment it had made to the car’s algorithms weeks earlier to help it drive more like a human.

Didn't quite do the trick did it?
Edit: I'm with Clarkson on this one. What is the point? People need jobs and people come equipped with a very sophisticated neural network called a brain (generally!) so why not give people jobs and let them drive the damn things? Even if you're not driving for a living it has an element of fun, and we all need fun don't we!

[#2]

It's one incident in millions of miles driven that was the autonomous systems fault. And the human onboard got it wrong too!
The future will be autonomous, and ultimately car ownership will go away

[#3]

I'm personally not sure that the accident rate for driverless cars will be any less than human driven cars. They both depend on "code" of some sort, and with human drivers there is a degree of indirect interaction between drivers, such as judging facial expressions, which way the eyes are looking etc., all of which give clues to the other driver's intentions. I don't see autonomous vehicles being able to perfect this.

[#4]

if every car is autonomous then the collision possibility should be pretty close to zero, as they will all know where each car is and have in-built anti-collision systems.
the problem is where there is a mix of autonomous and human driven cars.
no code can ever account for every idiotic human decision.

[#5]

Typical it was actually the bus that hit the car.
My last accident decades ago involved a bus, swinging around the road across the front of me, with the back end pealing the rubber off the bumper of my Fiat 124.
Despite the bad tempered bus drivers rantings the bus company apologised and paid for the repairs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maybe it was an insurance scam with the bus flashing the robot and fooling it into pulling out.

[#6]

Quote from: nozzer

Quote In a filing with the California Department of Motor Vehicles, Google said its car had been trying to pull out into slow-moving traffic on Valentine’s Day when a bus driver did not slow to leave room, causing a minor collision. In a blog post on Monday, it blamed the accident on a “tricky set of circumstances” caused partly by an adjustment it had made to the car’s algorithms weeks earlier to help it drive more like a human. Didn't quite do the trick did it?

Or maybe it did

[#7]

Quote

Google said that while safety is paramount some accidents can be expected, given that its cars have gone "the equivalent of over 15 years of typical human driving," or approximately 140,000 miles. Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2015-05-self-driving-cars-dinged-california.html#jCp

I haven't had any accidents in the last 15 years.

[#8]

others have though

[#9]

So the title of the story should be corrected to "Careless human not paying attention to the road prangs into Google driverless car", given it was human error at fault...

[#10]

Quote from: twocvbloke

given it was human error at fault...

Shirley you mean "...human actions at fault.."  to describe human error at fault is some king of tautological double negative?

[#11]

Maybe we should revert back

[#12]

Nooooooooooooo don't start that again!!! 

[#13]