[SystemSafety] Open safety standards for driverless cars

[Les Chambers]

Hi all

We are engineers - right? It's time for some calcs.

Can mathematics reveal to us the truth beyond reason?

 

The philosopher Nietzsche reflected on the concept of the eternal return. 

>From the Wikipedia: "[eternal return] is a theory that the universe and all existence and energy has been recurring, and will continue to recur ... "

 

This has application to UK Department for Transport's resistance to regulating AVs.

 

Quite apart from it being an ill-advised policy which will, with 100 percent probability, end in the death of unfortunate citizens, it provides us with a case study to put a number on the frequency of the eternal return. A lose/win situation.

 

UK transport regulators had a similar attitude just prior to the Armagh rail disaster, where regulations were just suggestions, really. They were blinded by the light of innovation (sound familiar?). "How cool is this. A vehicle that can travel faster than a horse."

 

Let's drill down:

Date of Armagh rail disaster = 1889

Elapsed time since the disaster (T) = 129 years = 1.29 centuries (a better unit)

 

Given:

f (frequency) = 1 / T (period)

 

Frequency of UK hazardous transport policy promulgation = 1/1.29 = .775193798 returns per century

 

One could say that this is not a bad number given the imperfect nature of the blunt instrument we call government.

 

But personally, I find their position appalling. What are these people thinking?

 

Cheers

Les

 

From: systemsafety [mailto:systemsafety-bounces at lists.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de] On Behalf Of Andrew Banks
Sent: Thursday, August 9, 2018 4:43 PM
To: 'Martin, BJ'; 'Matthew Squair'; systemsafety at lists.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de
Subject: Re: [SystemSafety] Open safety standards for driverless cars

 

Prof Phil Koopman made the point in Plenary (for those listening) that the automotive industry is working towards what are essentially transport solutions, yet bizarrely are successfully holding out on being regulated in the same manner as all other forms of public transport. 

 

I can’t comment on the general, but in the UK it if the Department for Transport who are against regulation.  Their argument being  it “will stifle innovation”

 

As an active participant in Standardisation, I would rather see these standards enforced (with this as a driver for further enhancement/improvement)

 

 

Regards

Andrew

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de/mailman/private/systemsafety/attachments/20180810/afe3e124/attachment.html>