Tuesday, March 1, 2016
Tech Musing #2: Google's self-driving car at fault in accident
Article Link: http://money.cnn.com/2016/02/29/autos/google-self-driving-car-accident/index.html
Summary:
The article describes about the Google’s fault in their self driving car accident that happened last week in California. Google said that they already had 17 minor accidents involving its self-driving car but so far non of them were cars’ or technical fault. This accident was the first time in their history of testing google self-driving car with technical failure because they have already accumulated more than 1 million miles of autonomous driving vehicles. Both the vehicle was in low speed, there were no report of major injuries. Later google made a statement, ‘this type of misunderstanding happens between human drivers on the road every day. This is a classic example of the negotiation that’s a normal part of driving—we are trying to predict each other’s movements’. It was in the residence area and the speed was very low, what if this accident was in the high way where the autonomous vehicle was in 65 miles per hour. In my opinion, this type of mistake should not have considered normal because this could cause or take number of lives and it is more proof that robot car technology is not ready for auto pilot. In this case, google bear the responsibility of the accident, because if their car hadn’t moved, there wouldn’t have been a collision.
Relevance:
I picked this article because this testing of self driving car is relevant to our course because this analysis, design, algorithm, testing, coding, and implementation is a part of system development life cycle. If there is some error in one phase, the outcome will be not successful as we thought. Google said it has reviewed this incident and from now on, their cars will more deeply understand that buses (and other large vehicles) are less likely to yield to us than other types of vehicles, and we hope to handle situations like this more gracefully in the future. It is clearly stated that they had problem with software and already refined it very well. This accident has helped google to improve an important skills and patch their loophole in their system.
Importance to MIS student:
In the field of management information system, it is important to get involve with the new technology emerging around the world. It might take some time to get familiar with the autonomous vehicle for the people but it is true that it is coming in future. For MIS student it necessary to move with along with technological revolution. I always read tech news and gather information from the company they had corrected that helps us to fix the problem for our project in the future. The companies that plan ahead, and imagine the biggest will survive and thrive. Finally, this article grasps the attention of growing technology of self driving car and for security and privacy concern, all the data transmitted to, from, and within the vehicle are safe because autonomous vehicle need to rely on its data and the source of that data to make quick, accurate decisions and to prevent, identify, and isolate malicious threats.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I also read up on this article and although I have been impressed by many of the innovated techniques and strategies that Google has made in the past years, however, I, myself, am not a huge fan of a self-driving car. This article demonstrates my bias towards why I do not completely agree to letting self-driving cars be on the road. This car's are man made and are programmed to respond to layers and layers of code, but what happens when that code is unable to predict human behavior? My theory is that since people, themselves, are unable to predict the behaviors of others, there is no possible way that a programmable self-driving vehicle will be able to predict what humans cannot.
ReplyDeleteThis article definitely does take into account the SDLC. However, I also believe it touches on the subject of innovation and agile methodology. Google has had to play it trial by error when developing the self-driving car. Their designs have had to be flexible because each time they find a new way to make the self-driving car efficient, a new issue or technical error arises. The article mentions that Google states that they will program the self-driving car to be more responsive to larger vehicles, such as buses, because they are unlikely to yield to cars of that size. I believe that Google should program the self-driving car to be responsive to cars of all sizes to better improve the efficiency of the car's ability to be safe.
I definitely agree that staying updated with technology is very important to MIS students, but, additionally I think it is important for MIS students to realize that technology is manipulated by man and it will always be as efficient and effective as the man or woman that programs the technology. It is also important for MIS students to realize that most apps or technology-based innovations require many stages of trial and error and we need to be able to understand the fundamentals of good code programming in order to make profitable and sustainable applications or technological products.
I'm not so sure tech is "manipulated by man" as much as it is coded by humans. As you pointed it, there is still a lot of testing and debugging, but these are algorithms, like most everything we interact with these days, so updating the algorithm to consider large vehicles will not move out of the way is how these cars "machine learn" to do it better.
DeleteGood points made by Ryan and Vicky. I think you are not alone about the concerns of many regarding a self-driving car. I just think calling an Uber/Lyft will probably be cheaper in the long run, so you can drink, text, work, or talk to friends while someone else drives. I'm sure that experiments will continue and the Feds have not yet figured out the rules of the road.
ReplyDelete