Robohub.org
 

Why Google’s crash is a good thing


by
04 March 2016



share this:

google-buggy_car_autonomous_robocarReports released reveal that one of Google’s Gen-2 vehicles (the Lexus) has a fender-bender (with a bus) with some responsibility assigned to the system. This is the first crash of this type — all other impacts have been reported as fairly clearly the fault of the other driver.

This crash ties into an upcoming article I will be writing about driving in places where everyone violates the rules. I recently landed from a trip to India, which has a chaotic road system (far more chaotic than California) and it got me thinking a bit about problems.

Traffic in Gwalior, India. Source: Wikimedia Commons

Traffic in Gwalior, India. Source: Wikimedia Commons

Google is thinking about them, too. Google reports it just recently started experimenting with new behaviours; in this case, making a right turn on a red light off a major street where the right lane is extra wide. In that situation it has become common behaviour for cars to effectively create two lanes out of one, with a straight through group on the left, and right turners hugging the curb. The vehicle code would have there be only one lane, and the first person not turning would block everybody turning right, who would find it quite annoying. In India, the lane markers are barely suggestions, and drivers — which consist of every width of vehicle you can imagine dynamically form their own patterns.

As such, Google wanted their car to be a good citizen and hug the right curb when conducting a right turn. So they did, but found the way blocked by sandbags on a storm drain. So they had to “merge” back with the traffic in the left side of the lane. They did this when a bus was coming up on the left and they made the assumption, as many would make, that the bus would yield and slow a bit to let them in. The bus did not, and the Google car hit it at very low speed. The Google car could have probably solved this with faster reflexes and a better read of the bus’ intent, and probably will in time, but more interesting is the question of what you expect of other drivers. The law doesn’t imagine this split lane or this “merge.” And of course the law doesn’t require people to slow down to let you in.

But driving in so many cities can mean expecting the other guy to slow down and let you in. (In places like Indonesia, the rules actually give the right-of-way to the guy who cuts you off, because you can see him and he can’t easily see you, so it’s your job to slow. Of course, robocars see in 360 degrees, so no car has a better view of the situation.)

While some people like to imagine that important ethical questions for robocars revolve around choosing who to kill in an accident, that’s actually an extremely rare event. The real ethical issues revolve around this issue of how to drive when driving involves routinely breaking the law — not once in a 100 lifetimes, but once every minute. Or once every second, as is the case in India. To solve this problem, we must come up with a resolution and we must eventually get the law to accept it the same what it accepts it for all the humans out there, who are almost never ticketed for these infractions.

So, why is this a good thing? Google is starting to work on these issues, and you need to solve these problems to drive even in orderly places like California. And yes, you are going to have some mistakes, and some dings on the way there and that’s a good thing, not a bad thing. Mistakes in negotiating who yields to who are very unlikely to involve injury, as long as you don’t involve things smaller than cars (such as pedestrians.) Robocars will need to not always yield in a game of chicken or they cannot survive on the roads.

In this case, Google says it learned that big vehicles are much less likely to yield. In addition, it sounds like the vehicle’s confusion over the sandbags probably made the bus driver decide the vehicle was stuck. It’s still unclear to me why the car wasn’t able to abort its merge when it saw the bus was not going to yield, since the description has the car sideswiping the bus, not the other way around.

Nobody wants accidents — and some will play this accident as more than it is — but neither do we want so much caution that we never learn these lessons.

It’s also a good reminder that even Google, though it is the clear leader in the space, still has lots of work to do. A lot of people I talk to imagine that the tech problems have all been solved and all that’s left is getting legal and public acceptance. There is great progress being made, but nobody should expect these cars to be perfect today. That’s why they run with safety drivers, even before the law demanded it. This time the safety driver also decided the bus would yield and so let the car try its merge. Expect more of this as time goes forward.

This post originally appeared on robocars.com.



tags: , , , ,


Brad Templeton, Robocars.com is an EFF board member, Singularity U faculty, a self-driving car consultant, and entrepreneur.
Brad Templeton, Robocars.com is an EFF board member, Singularity U faculty, a self-driving car consultant, and entrepreneur.


Subscribe to Robohub newsletter on substack



Related posts :

Humanoid home robots are on the market – but do we really want them?

  03 Mar 2026
Last year, Norwegian-US tech company 1X announced “the world’s first consumer-ready humanoid robot designed to transform life at home”.

Robot Talk Episode 146 – Embodied AI on the ISS, with Jamie Palmer

  27 Feb 2026
In the latest episode of the Robot Talk podcast, Claire chatted to Jamie Palmer from Icarus Robotics about building a robotic labour force to perform routine and risky tasks in orbit.

I developed an app that uses drone footage to track plastic litter on beaches

  26 Feb 2026
Plastic pollution is one of those problems everyone can see, yet few know how to tackle it effectively.

Translating music into light and motion with robots

  25 Feb 2026
Robots the size of a soccer ball create new visual art by trailing light that represents the “emotional essence” of music

Robot Talk Episode 145 – Robotics and automation in manufacturing, with Agata Suwala

  20 Feb 2026
In the latest episode of the Robot Talk podcast, Claire chatted to Agata Suwala from the Manufacturing Technology Centre about leveraging robotics to make manufacturing systems more sustainable.

Reversible, detachable robotic hand redefines dexterity

  19 Feb 2026
A robotic hand developed at EPFL has dual-thumbed, reversible-palm design that can detach from its robotic ‘arm’ to reach and grasp multiple objects.

“Robot, make me a chair”

  17 Feb 2026
An AI-driven system lets users design and build simple, multicomponent objects by describing them with words.

Robot Talk Episode 144 – Robot trust in humans, with Samuele Vinanzi

  13 Feb 2026
In the latest episode of the Robot Talk podcast, Claire chatted to Samuele Vinanzi from Sheffield Hallam University about how robots can tell whether to trust or distrust people.



Robohub is supported by:


Subscribe to Robohub newsletter on substack




 















©2026.02 - Association for the Understanding of Artificial Intelligence