Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by ndsipa_pomu 361 days ago
> Obviously a kid running out from behind a car this late is fairly difficult for any human or self driving system to avoid

Not really - it's a case of slowing down and anticipating a potential hazard. It's a fairly common situation with any kind of bus, or similarly if you're overtaking a stationary high-sided vehicle as pedestrians may be looking to cross the road (in non-jay-walking jurisdictions).
1 comments
burnt-resistor 361 days ago
Yes. And given the latency of cameras (or even humans) not being able to see around objects and that dogs and kids and move fast from hidden areas into the path, driving really slow next to large obstacles until able to see behind them becomes more important.

One of the prime directives of driving for humans and FAD systems must be "never drive faster than brakes can stop in visible areas". This must account for such scenarios as obstacles stopped or possible coming the wrong way around a mountain turn.

link
ndsipa_pomu 361 days ago
> never drive faster than brakes can stop in visible areas

Here in the UK, that's phrased in the Highway Code as "Drive at a speed that will allow you to stop well within the distance you can see to be clear". It's such a basic tenet of safety as you never know if there's a fallen tree just round the next blind corner etc. However, it doesn't strictly apply to peds running out from behind an obstruction as your way ahead can be clear, until suddenly it isn't - sometimes you have to slow just for a possible hazard.

link
BobaFloutist 361 days ago
And that should be a case where automated systems can easily beat people. It's "just" math, there's no interpretation, no reasoning, no reading signs, no predicting other drivers, just crunching the numbers based on stopping distance and field of view. If they can't even do this, what are they for?
link