Actuarial Outpost
 
Go Back   Actuarial Outpost > Actuarial Discussion Forum > Property - Casualty / General Insurance
FlashChat Actuarial Discussion Preliminary Exams CAS/SOA Exams Cyberchat Around the World Suggestions



View Poll Results: Will self driving autos kill car insurance?
Of course 42 16.34%
Maybe but not for a long time 186 72.37%
I'm a luddite... 29 11.28%
Voters: 257. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #2071  
Old 07-12-2018, 05:00 PM
Sredni Vashtar's Avatar
Sredni Vashtar Sredni Vashtar is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Favorite beer: pilseners
Posts: 6,763
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by twig93 View Post
I think a guy with an emergency stop button counts as an "emergency human backup driver". I certainly meant no Uber/Waymo employee in the car at all.
Sure. I wouldn't say you lost the bet-- just that I didn't accept it.

Quote:
If you think that's going to happen by the end of 2018 (you said one more year than 2017, right?) then again, I will take the "over".
It's on!


Some more details:
IMO:
By the end of 2018 there will be cars that have no employees in them at all. They will operate in a couple suburbs on a limited set of roads in places like Arizona. And maybe some highways. They will be barely useful-- eg. some people will sign up for daily commutes.

By the end of 2019 there will be thousands of driver-less taxis. They will operate on more roads, and more cities, but not in every city or on every road in a given city. When paired with a ride-sharing App, they will be actually useful.

By the end of 2021 there will be a driverless car, that you Twig can buy, that will automatically take you to the mall, the park, the beach, to work, and to home. But still might not take you every single place. Either it will have a steering wheel, or some remote operation option for the places it can't go.
__________________
Sredni Vashtar went forth,
His thoughts were red thoughts and his teeth were white.
His enemies called for peace, but he brought them death.
Sredni Vashtar the Beautiful.

Last edited by Sredni Vashtar; 07-12-2018 at 05:20 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #2072  
Old 07-12-2018, 05:22 PM
twig93's Avatar
twig93 twig93 is offline
Member
SOA
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 30,109
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sredni Vashtar View Post
Sure. I wouldn't say you lost the bet-- just that I didn't accept it.


It's on!


Some more details:
IMO:
By the end of 2018 there will be cars that have no employees in them at all. They will operate in a couple suburbs on a limited set of roads in places like Arizona. And maybe some highways. They will be barely useful-- eg. some people will sign up for daily commutes.
I did say a medium to large city that most of us have heard of. Something that is limited to a suburb or three of a medium to large city doesn't count IMO.

Quote:
By the end of 2019 there will be thousands of driver-less taxis. They will operate on more roads, and more cities, but not in every city or on every road in a given city. When paired with a ride-sharing App, they will be actually useful.
I'll take/reiterate that I still take the over.

Quote:
By the end of 2021 there will be a driverless car, that you Twig can buy, that will automatically take you to the mall, the park, the beach, to work, and to home. But still might not take you every single place. Either it will have a steering wheel, or some remote operation option for the places it can't go.
I'll take/reiterate that I still take the over.
__________________
Originally Posted by Gandalf
The thing that is clearest is twig's advice
Reply With Quote
  #2073  
Old 07-12-2018, 05:30 PM
Gonzo's Avatar
Gonzo Gonzo is offline
Member
SOA
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: gonzo.
Studying for gonzo?
Favorite beer: gonzo!
Posts: 8,680
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sredni Vashtar View Post
Perhaps I should have said, "if we can agree to a definition of success".
simple definition: level 5 autonomy is achieved
Reply With Quote
  #2074  
Old 07-12-2018, 05:41 PM
Sredni Vashtar's Avatar
Sredni Vashtar Sredni Vashtar is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Favorite beer: pilseners
Posts: 6,763
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by twig93 View Post
I did say a medium to large city that most of us have heard of. Something that is limited to a suburb or three of a medium to large city doesn't count IMO.
Fair enough. I can't say. Even if they have the tech, they may not want to drive around a city this year.
__________________
Sredni Vashtar went forth,
His thoughts were red thoughts and his teeth were white.
His enemies called for peace, but he brought them death.
Sredni Vashtar the Beautiful.
Reply With Quote
  #2075  
Old 07-12-2018, 09:39 PM
JMO's Avatar
JMO JMO is offline
Carol Marler
Non-Actuary
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Back home again in Indiana
Studying for Nothing actuarial.
Posts: 37,620
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sredni Vashtar View Post
PFWIW, Tesla absolutely does not have the technology, and neither does Uber.

However at the end of 2017 Waymo had cars on public streets with non-employee passengers, and a safety guy sitting in the backseat, with nothing but an "emergency stop-button." That would fit my own less dramatic definition of a success.
You call that a success? I don't.
And how long until the next news headlines about Waymo accidents, possibly fatal?
__________________
Carol Marler, "Just My Opinion"

Pluto is no longer a planet and I am no longer an actuary. Please take my opinions as non-actuarial.


My latest favorite quotes, updated Nov. 20, 2018.

Spoiler:
I should keep these four permanently.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rekrap View Post
JMO is right
Quote:
Originally Posted by campbell View Post
I agree with JMO.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Westley View Post
And def agree w/ JMO.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MG View Post
This. And everything else JMO wrote.
And this all purpose permanent quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr T Non-Fan View Post
Yup, it is always someone else's fault.
MORE:
All purpose response for careers forum:
Quote:
Originally Posted by DoctorNo View Post
Depends upon the employer and the situation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by El Actuario View Post
Therapists should ask the right questions, not give the right answers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sredni Vashtar View Post
I feel like ERM is 90% buzzwords, and that the underlying agenda is to make sure at least one of your Corporate Officers is not dumb.
Reply With Quote
  #2076  
Old 07-16-2018, 02:11 PM
Sredni Vashtar's Avatar
Sredni Vashtar Sredni Vashtar is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Favorite beer: pilseners
Posts: 6,763
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JMO View Post
You call that a success? I don't.
Sure. It implies a high degree of confidence in the technology. Waymo is not Uber/Tesla. They can't afford mistakes.

Quote:
And how long until the next news headlines about Waymo accidents, possibly fatal?
These days, Waymo logs about a million miles a month, so probably someone is crashing into a Waymo car every week.

In the near future, they plan to scale up their operation exponentially. I agree it's going to be hard to keep a perfect record, when you're driving millions and millions of miles. I suppose it's really a dice-roll (exponential distribution) when the first major incident occurs.

I think some regulators and some customers will forgive mistakes, which is all that matters in the short-run.
__________________
Sredni Vashtar went forth,
His thoughts were red thoughts and his teeth were white.
His enemies called for peace, but he brought them death.
Sredni Vashtar the Beautiful.

Last edited by Sredni Vashtar; 07-30-2018 at 02:27 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #2077  
Old 10-16-2018, 04:33 PM
Sredni Vashtar's Avatar
Sredni Vashtar Sredni Vashtar is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Favorite beer: pilseners
Posts: 6,763
Blog Entries: 1
Default


3 months and basically no news.

Waymo is still logging a million miles a month. Judging by their silence they must be having problems (besides just having trouble turning left). I gotta wonder if there are 10 engineers remote steering every car they own.

Tesla is finally maybe making progress with new GPUs and new NNs. It's really funny to think that self-driving cars are dependent on essentially the same technology I want to play VR Skyrim AND the same type of code I might use to improve our Claims models.
__________________
Sredni Vashtar went forth,
His thoughts were red thoughts and his teeth were white.
His enemies called for peace, but he brought them death.
Sredni Vashtar the Beautiful.
Reply With Quote
  #2078  
Old 10-16-2018, 04:37 PM
ElDucky's Avatar
ElDucky ElDucky is offline
Free Mason
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: In a van, down by the river
Studying for Let me worry about blank
Favorite beer: Trappistes Rochefort 8
Posts: 42,062
Default

There will be seemingly no progress for at least a year, but probably a great working product in 10 years. No clue on the rate in between.
__________________
I live near the cows.
Reply With Quote
  #2079  
Old 10-19-2018, 04:47 PM
campbell's Avatar
campbell campbell is offline
Mary Pat Campbell
SOA AAA
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: NY
Studying for duolingo and coursera
Favorite beer: Murphy's Irish Stout
Posts: 84,683
Blog Entries: 6
Default

https://www.wired.com/story/self-dri...m_medium=email

Quote:
WHY PEOPLE KEEP REAR-ENDING SELF-DRIVING CARS
Spoiler:
The self-driving-car crashes that usually make the news are, unsurprisingly, either big and smashy or new and curious. The Apple that got bumped while merging into traffic. The Waymo van that got T-boned. And of course, the Uber that hit and killed a woman crossing the street in Tempe, Arizona, in March.

Look at every robocar crash report filed in California, though, and you get a more mundane picture—but one that reveals a striking pattern. In September of this year, for example, three self-driving cars were sideswiped. Another three were rear-ended—one of them by a bicycle. And that’s not even the strangest one: In June, an AV operated by General Motors’ self-driving arm, Cruise, got bumped in the back—by a human driving another Cruise.

The people developing self-driving cars pitch them as a tool for drastically reducing the nearly 40,000 fatalities that hit US roads every year. Getting there will take years at least, decades probably, and that means a lot more time spent testing on public roads. And so these sorts crashes raise a few questions: What’s the best way to handle what could become a nationwide experiment in robotics and AI, where the public participants haven’t willingly signed on and the worst-case scenario is death?

We don’t have the answers. But chipping away at these questions starts with understanding the problem. And that means looking at the data.

Unfortunately, the publicly available data is quite limited. These are companies in a competitive field, and they don’t voluntarily share much in the way of details. They invite the press or public officials into their vehicles only in tightly controlled situations where they perform well. And anecdotal evidence of weaknesses—like The Information’s report that Waymo cars have trouble with left turns into traffic and frustrate human drivers—is well, anecdotal.

Of the states where most AV developers do their on-road testing—Arizona, California, Michigan, Nevada, and Pennsylvania—only the Golden State requires companies to report details about their programs. Once a year, they must submit a report to the DMV explaining how many miles they’ve driven and how often the human sitting in the car took the wheel. Anytime one of their cars is in any sort of collision, no matter how minor, the developer must submit a collision report within 10 business days explaining what happened.

Since these regulations took effect in 2014, the California DMV has received (and published) 104 autonomous-vehicle collision reports, including 49 so far in 2018, as more and more cars hit the streets. Most crashes are minor; few are newsworthy. But taken together, they present a picture of how these tests are progressing and how well robots are sharing the road. And they hint at a conclusion similar to what anecdotal evidence suggests—that these vehicles drive in ways humans might not expect, and might not want them to.


As this chart shows, GM’s Cruise has filed by far the most reports in 2018, but don’t read too much into that. If the pattern holds from 2016 to 2017 (we won’t have full 2018 numbers until early next year), Waymo has been dialing down its testing in California in favor of Arizona. Cruise has been ramping it up and does its driving in the chaos of San Francisco. Waymo has the second-most collisions, followed by Zoox, a startup that also tests in the city.

These reports, written and filed by the companies running the cars, consist mostly of check boxes, with a line or two explaining what happened. Some detail thankfully freaky, presumably rare incidents: “The Cruise AV was struck by a golf ball from a nearby golf course.” Some reveal what we’ll call exasperation on the part of other road users: “The driver of the taxi exited his vehicle, approached the Cruise AV, and slapped the front passenger window, causing a scratch.”

Other sorts of crashes happen more frequently.


Drilling down into the data shows that autonomous vehicles being rear-ended accounts for 28 of the 49 filed reports, nearly two-thirds. Next is sideswipe collisions, with pedestrians, hitting objects, and “other” all trailing behind. (These categories are provided in check boxes on the DMV report form. The two pedestrian impacts reported are people approaching and hitting the cars.)

So let’s look at those rear-end crashes. Under state law, if someone hits you from behind, it’s their fault. And yes, today’s drivers are dangerously distracted, and no, it doesn’t take much of a mistake to knock into somebody in stop-and-go traffic.


But combine that with the fact that the computer was in charge in 22 of those 28 rear-end crashes, and you have reason to believe that the AVs are doing something that makes cars behind them more likely to hit them. Maybe that’s driving herkily-jerkily (as we experienced in a Cruise car in San Francisco in November 2017), or stopping for no clear reason (as we experienced in an Uber car in Pittsburgh last year). That’s not necessarily a bad thing. It indicates a conservative focus on safety: Better to stop for a fire hydrant than run down a preschooler. But part of being a good driver is behaving in a way others expect, which doesn’t include constantly stamping on the brakes.

The runner-up in terms of crash types is sideswipes, many of which appear to involve human drivers frustrated at getting stuck behind a slow or stopped AV, trying to overtake it, and not quite making it.


It’s not possible to say definitively that the AVs are driving like jerks, because the reports don’t ask the companies what percentage of miles the cars have covered in each mode. It could be there are fewer crashes in manual mode because the cars are hardly ever in that mode. “They’re autonomous vehicles, they spend most of their time being autonomous,” says Kyle Vogt, cofounder and CEO at Cruise. But Cruise declined a request to give exact numbers.

Cruise is highly represented in these reports because of the size of its fleet in San Francisco. That city is tough even for an experienced human driver to navigate, a land of knotty intersections, trolleys, cyclists, pedestrians, road work, steep hills, and aggressive drivers. Cruise says that helps it learn much faster than it does on the relatively simple, boring streets of Arizona, where it also tests. It says its cars encounter emergency vehicles 46 times more frequently in SF than in the Phoenix suburbs, and construction 39 times more often.

Researchers agree that AVs won’t get to a point where they can make driving safer without testing on public roads. But that brings up other questions, says Matthew Johnson-Roberson, who codirects the Ford Center for Autonomous Vehicles at the University of Michigan. “Should they all be allowed to be on public roads before passing some level of baseline performance?” he says. California requires companies to apply for the right to test AVs in public, but that doesn’t involve any kind of exam. “My personal advice is to treat the vehicles incredibly cautiously.”

LEARN MORE

THE WIRED GUIDE TO SELF-DRIVING CARS
Vogt says the California crash reports make clear that humans expect other humans to bend or break traffic rules, rolling through four-way intersections, accelerating to make a yellow light, or cruising over the speed limit. But his robots won’t follow suit.

“We’re not going to make vehicles that break laws just to do things like a human would,” he says. “If drivers are aware of fact that AVs are being lawful, and that’s fundamentally a good thing because it’s going to lead to safer roads, then I think there may be a better interaction between humans and AVs.”

So maybe the key there is awareness. The public would benefit from knowing more about these vehicles, how they work, how they’re tested, and how they’re likely to behave. That takes companies communicating openly and honestly about how development is going and how capable their cars are, rather than releasing their usual fare: glossy, edited videos or PR documents showing their tech at its best.

Short of requiring some sort of test, one easy change could be basic standards for how these vehicles are marked, alerting other road users to how they usually drive. Think of the stickers many countries require newer drivers to display in their vehicles, like the L for learners in the UK, or something like the signs on vans and trucks that say “This vehicle makes frequent stops,” “This vehicle stops at all railroad crossings,” or “Does not turn right on red.” The big tech companies might not like this kind of messaging, but it could help the other folks on the road adapt to their new robotic friends.

Self-driving cars aren’t necessarily going to be worse than your standard teenager, but they will certainly do things that humans wouldn’t. So if you do encounter one, don’t get distracted by your phone when you’re behind it. Give it a lot of stopping distance. Expect to see something weird. And hope to get a ride someday.


__________________
It's STUMP

LinkedIn Profile
Reply With Quote
  #2080  
Old 10-19-2018, 04:57 PM
twig93's Avatar
twig93 twig93 is offline
Member
SOA
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 30,109
Default

Quote:
Getting there will take years at least, decades probably,


Quote:
28 of the 49 filed reports, nearly two-thirds


Quote:
“Should they all be allowed to be on public roads before passing some level of baseline performance?” he says. California requires companies to apply for the right to test AVs in public, but that doesn’t involve any kind of exam.
I like that idea. The AV should have to pass a test at least as rigorous as a regular old driving test that 16 year-olds have to pass.

And ideally it should be tailored to AVs, and test things like "stopping for no reason" rather than ability to parallel park, which it presumably kicks ass at.

Quote:
humans expect other humans to bend or break traffic rules, rolling through four-way intersections, accelerating to make a yellow light, or cruising over the speed limit. But his robots won’t follow suit.

“We’re not going to make vehicles that break laws just to do things like a human would,” he says. “If drivers are aware of fact that AVs are being lawful, and that’s fundamentally a good thing because it’s going to lead to safer roads, then I think there may be a better interaction between humans and AVs.”
Disagree. As I understand it, one of the more dangerous situations on roads is when the variance in speed is high. If you're on an interstate with an unreasonably low speed limit of 55 mph but everyone around you is going 75 mph, it's actually more dangerous to drive 55 than it is to go 75. AVs need to realize this too and not stubbornly refuse to go even one mph above the speed limit.
__________________
Originally Posted by Gandalf
The thing that is clearest is twig's advice

Last edited by twig93; 10-19-2018 at 05:01 PM..
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:07 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
*PLEASE NOTE: Posts are not checked for accuracy, and do not
represent the views of the Actuarial Outpost or its sponsors.
Page generated in 0.36882 seconds with 13 queries