There's a fine legal distinction between a trunk and a rear/5th door. Only the former is required to have the latch. The ipace has the latter.
I haven't crawled around in the trunk of one looking for the release latch, but there probably isn't a latch given that Jag doesn't even put them into the European models of their sedans.
Some of my vehicles have only had a glow in the dark plastic handle on a wire. It didn't even really glow. I'm not even convinced it wouldn't have broken off if ever pulled on.
I don't know if there are newer standards to this, though.
Because this scenario is supposed to be taken care of at the vehicle design stage. The rules in the US are that sedans (i.e. anything with an enclosed trunk) are required to have interior emergency trunk release latches as an anti kidnapping measure. Vehicles with a 5th door (i.e. SUVs and hatchbacks) aren't, because the hypothetical kidnapping victim would be visible through the window.
The Jaguar I-Pace Waymo is using here has a 5th door, so it's not legally required to have an interior latch.
That said, it's impossible to anticipate everything that will happen out in the real world. Most of those stories, especially the fun ones, don't make it to news.
> because the hypothetical kidnapping victim would be visible through the window.
My 2018 Subaru Crosstrek came with an attachable screen to cover items in the trunk so they cannot be seen from the window. But apparently you can open that door from the inside if you remove a plastic panel or something like that.
If this interior handle is not required for 5th door vehicles it should be.
They did think of this, because Waymos warn you when you leave luggage in the car. It seems like it didn't work though.
I personally caused a traffic jam at Valley Fair recently because I got in the car at the same time the previous people left, so it thought the previous trip had never ended and just sat there forever until I got out again.
They must have thought about this and ignored for now. Same for somebody leaving trash behind or let’s say even a bomb. Stuff like this will happen. Not sure how we will deal with this
> These and other kinds of, "I didn't think about it" scenarios are not being thought of, today, by Googlers.
Thinking, at Google, is a lost skill. Just look at Android: Wanna send a text message and disabled microphone access for Messages ? The damn thing still defaults to recording messages.
that would be way mo' scary to encounter than those passengers were expecting!
there are plenty of incidents of people getting in fights with their Uber driver, cab driver, etc (remember Anjali Ramkissoon the med student who had a little too much to drink?) but it seems like the "driverless automaton" world late at night might present a new set of weird expectations for awhile till practices and safeguards get ironed out.
This is a fundamental problem with AI: humans will treat it differently because it's AI. So you might come up with the perfect AI driving hardware and software that would mimic the best of human drivers but it's not a human and that changes the outcomes.
We've seen examples of this where in SF people put traffic cones on the hoods of Waymos to stop them, sometimes for good reasons (eg going through a road closed to construction) and sometimes probably not.
I can also imagine human drivers treating self-driving cars on the road very differently essentially through lack of fear. Cut one off? it has no driver who might in a fit of range run you off the road or pull a gun on you.
You see a similar sort of thing with apartment buildings in NYC. Many have doormen. Will a doorman prevent someone stealing something or seeking unauthorized entry? Probably not but most people aren't that determined. The presence of a human adds a whole bunch of risk factors that an AI won't.
We see it with alarms on houses. People are often way more afraid of dogs than alarms. Or even the potential of someone with a gun.
So if this car had a driver, this wouldn't have happened. I'm sure software can be written to deal with this particular situation but you will be fighting a neverending series of human behaviors that will only happen because there's no driver.
There is a 1369 Stevenson street problem in San Francisco for Waymo, and Waymo does not handle it well. There's a skate park there. It's ostensibly a two way road, but with parking, it's really not. So you have to drive into the sidewalk to let the other car pass. Until the Waymos can deal with that well, they're going to gridlock London.
I love that he got in because the trunk was left open, and then couldn’t get out.
Failure mode they hadn’t thought of yet
Trunks are supposed to have light-up safety releases for that exact scenario. Something tells me he's lying
There'a a video, it's not really a trunk. He's behind the seats of a hatchback/minivan/SUV
Afaik, there's no requirement to allow those doors to be opened from the inside, like there is for trunks.
There's a fine legal distinction between a trunk and a rear/5th door. Only the former is required to have the latch. The ipace has the latter.
I haven't crawled around in the trunk of one looking for the release latch, but there probably isn't a latch given that Jag doesn't even put them into the European models of their sedans.
Some of my vehicles have only had a glow in the dark plastic handle on a wire. It didn't even really glow. I'm not even convinced it wouldn't have broken off if ever pulled on.
I don't know if there are newer standards to this, though.
These and other kinds of, "I didn't think about it" scenarios are not being thought of, today, by Googlers.
Obvious but worth considering.
Because this scenario is supposed to be taken care of at the vehicle design stage. The rules in the US are that sedans (i.e. anything with an enclosed trunk) are required to have interior emergency trunk release latches as an anti kidnapping measure. Vehicles with a 5th door (i.e. SUVs and hatchbacks) aren't, because the hypothetical kidnapping victim would be visible through the window.
The Jaguar I-Pace Waymo is using here has a 5th door, so it's not legally required to have an interior latch.
That said, it's impossible to anticipate everything that will happen out in the real world. Most of those stories, especially the fun ones, don't make it to news.
> because the hypothetical kidnapping victim would be visible through the window.
My 2018 Subaru Crosstrek came with an attachable screen to cover items in the trunk so they cannot be seen from the window. But apparently you can open that door from the inside if you remove a plastic panel or something like that.
If this interior handle is not required for 5th door vehicles it should be.
SUVs and hatchbacks have a truck accessible latch to fold the rear seats, so you can get into the front.
They did think of this, because Waymos warn you when you leave luggage in the car. It seems like it didn't work though.
I personally caused a traffic jam at Valley Fair recently because I got in the car at the same time the previous people left, so it thought the previous trip had never ended and just sat there forever until I got out again.
They must have thought about this and ignored for now. Same for somebody leaving trash behind or let’s say even a bomb. Stuff like this will happen. Not sure how we will deal with this
> These and other kinds of, "I didn't think about it" scenarios are not being thought of, today, by Googlers.
Thinking, at Google, is a lost skill. Just look at Android: Wanna send a text message and disabled microphone access for Messages ? The damn thing still defaults to recording messages.
that would be way mo' scary to encounter than those passengers were expecting!
there are plenty of incidents of people getting in fights with their Uber driver, cab driver, etc (remember Anjali Ramkissoon the med student who had a little too much to drink?) but it seems like the "driverless automaton" world late at night might present a new set of weird expectations for awhile till practices and safeguards get ironed out.
here's the video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gsX8hNpaAOE
This is a fundamental problem with AI: humans will treat it differently because it's AI. So you might come up with the perfect AI driving hardware and software that would mimic the best of human drivers but it's not a human and that changes the outcomes.
We've seen examples of this where in SF people put traffic cones on the hoods of Waymos to stop them, sometimes for good reasons (eg going through a road closed to construction) and sometimes probably not.
I can also imagine human drivers treating self-driving cars on the road very differently essentially through lack of fear. Cut one off? it has no driver who might in a fit of range run you off the road or pull a gun on you.
You see a similar sort of thing with apartment buildings in NYC. Many have doormen. Will a doorman prevent someone stealing something or seeking unauthorized entry? Probably not but most people aren't that determined. The presence of a human adds a whole bunch of risk factors that an AI won't.
We see it with alarms on houses. People are often way more afraid of dogs than alarms. Or even the potential of someone with a gun.
So if this car had a driver, this wouldn't have happened. I'm sure software can be written to deal with this particular situation but you will be fighting a neverending series of human behaviors that will only happen because there's no driver.
For those that didn't watch the video, it's a hatchback not a sedan. So the "trunk" is a part of the passenger compartment.
The video is pretty funny, I recommend watching it.
There is a 1369 Stevenson street problem in San Francisco for Waymo, and Waymo does not handle it well. There's a skate park there. It's ostensibly a two way road, but with parking, it's really not. So you have to drive into the sidewalk to let the other car pass. Until the Waymos can deal with that well, they're going to gridlock London.
Fleet Response can “guide” the vehicle onto the sidewalk.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=elpQPbJXpfY
Well, yea. Why else would you hire an ai taxi?
Look, we’re all trying to figure this out!