Update no.848

Update from the Sunland

No.848

26.3.18 – 1.4.18

Blog version:  http://heartlandupdate.blogspot.com/

            To all,

            The follow-up news items:

-- After the attempted assassination of Skirpal and his daughter [846], the tit-for-tat expulsion of intelligence and diplomatic assets was initiated by the United Kingdom.  The United States and European countries joined in and the Russians made comparable expulsions.  Now, we have a Russian official threatening a return to the Cold War as tension between Russia and Western nations increases, again.  Putin must be seeking conflict and confrontation with the West; surely he cannot be thinking he can intimidate the West into compliance with expansionist wishes.

-- Governor Douglas Anthony ‘Doug’ Ducey ordered Uber Technologies to indefinitely suspend evaluating automated vehicles on public roadways in Arizona, after striking and killing a pedestrian in Tempe [847].  The woman was struck around 22:00 MST (10 PM) [well after sunset and evening twilight], crossing Mill Avenue, just south of Curry Avenue.  Mill Avenue has three traffic lanes in each direction plus a center left turn lane—seven (7) traffic lanes; the woman was jaywalking, across seven traffic lanes at night while walking her bicycle and texting on her smartphone.  Mill Avenue is a major north-south road; it was not some quiet residential street.  I would not even contemplate crossing such a street outside designated crosswalks in daylight, set aside nighttime.  I am still haunted by the dashboard video that showed the woman just at the moment of impact and no sign she saw the automobile with its headlights on.  In such accidents, I perpetually ask, what’s wrong with this picture?  The woman’s actions that night look far more like a death wish than complacency.

            Forty years ago, commercial pilots and to some extent military pilots railed against the incorporation of integrated technology in aircraft cockpits.  The argument generally took the lines of wanting to see the raw performance data (airspeed, altitude, oil pressure and such) not some processed representation of the aircraft state.  The automation in the Uber car that night clearly failed.  We need to learn what failed and fix it, and improve the system(s).  The bottom line: even if the woman sought suicide by car, the vehicle’s automation should have detected the constant bearing, decreasing range, intercept physics, and either alerted the driver, or slowed or altered the path to avoid the intercept / impact.  They system clearly failed to do that basic task.

            The governor offered insufficient rationale for such a drastic action without reconciliation of the conflicting facts of this rather odd case.  I would hate to see the technology condemned in its adolescence, especially after such a bizarre accident.  That’s my opinion and I’m sticking to it . . .until we learn more.

-- Tesla, Inc., acknowledged its driver-assist, automation system installed in a Model X SUV was involved in a fatal accident on 23.March.2018, on Highway 101, near Mountain View, California—five days after the Uber automated vehicle accident [847].  The system rendered several warnings and a driver alert before the vehicle veered into a concrete median barrier, killing the driver.  The NTSB is investigating the Tesla accident as well as the Uber accident.  We need to learn what went wrong with both vehicles.

            Another footnote: every pilot will acknowledge that no matter how good the automation is, it does not absolve the pilot (driver) from monitoring the performance of the system; and, the closer the vehicle gets to the ground or another aircraft, the closer it must be monitored.  Drivers who fail to monitor the performance of driver-assist systems or ignore alerts from the system are risking their safety and others—no different from a pilot who fails to monitor the performance of his aircraft’s autopilot.

            Let us not condemn or abandon technology advancement because of the poor performance or insufficient training of a few operators.

-- And then there were two!  The Vermont legislature passed a firearm control bill—An act relating to the disposition of unlawful and abandoned firearms [VT S.55; Senate: 17-13; House: 89-54].  Governor Philip Brian ‘Phil’ Scott signed the bill into law.  The official text of the new law is not yet available for public scrutiny.  However, various Press reports indicate the bill:

• ·      expands background checks,
• ·      bans bump stocks,
• ·      raises the age to buy a gun to 21 (with several exemptions), and
• ·      sets limits on the size of magazines—15 rounds for handguns and 10 for long guns.

The initial draft law (currently available on-line), as the title indicates, dealt with the definition and disposition of several specific categories of firearms.  It did include the raising of the age to purchase a firearm of any type.  During the negotiations to reconcile the two versions from each chamber and after the Parkland incident [842] and the Florida law [845], the law was expanded to the additional items noted above.

            As a footnote, both the Florida and now Vermont laws include a prohibition against bump stocks—the device used in the Las Vegas massacre [822].  Such laws are precisely why I do not trust legislators at any level.  Such prohibitions are emotional reactions, not well thought out and carefully crafted laws.  Bump stocks are simply one of many means to make a semi-automatic (one trigger pull = one shot) rifle able to fire in automatic mode (one trigger pull = many shots).  Such prohibitions leave me with the impression that legislators in at least two states do not know what they are doing.  Automatic firearms have been illegal since 1934, and any adaptation or modification of any existing or future firearm that enables automatic fire should remain illegal.

            Comments and contributions from Update no.847:

Comment to the Blog:

“I have seen the dash cam video of the Uber versus pedestrian incident.  From my non-expert viewpoint, that could not have been avoided by the vehicle.  I am a frequent pedestrian and cyclist, but I don't support recklessness.  Your ‘what was she thinking’ question is best answered by dropping the ‘what.’  The pedestrian was not thinking about traffic at all.  I don't know what sensors or software might be involved.  My idea of the next investigation process is to compare incidents per 100,000 miles driven if we have enough autonomous-car miles recorded.  I suspect autonomous cars already have a better record than drivers.

“Even if I could, I would not consult fiction (Homeland, on a network not available via antenna) to understand reality.  There are sound reasons why no such comparison can be valid.

“Himmler, et al. didn't desert Hitler until the ship was obviously sinking.  Think about that.

“We are in agreement on the new Federal ‘sex trafficking’ law.  Sex trafficking has been deliberately and profitably conflated with sex work.  Follow the money to private prisons, ‘rescue’ organizations, and others.”

My response to the Blog:

            There were a lot of things wrong with that accident.  Your point is probably valid, although I have not yet seen the applicable data; I suspect you are correct.  As I understand the technology, the rotating can on the top of the car is an invisible, safe, LASER scanner that surveys the surroundings many times a second.  The system should have alerted the driver of a calculated potential hazard; and when the track of the closing object and the vehicle’s track would intersect in time, automatic braking should have taken place to sufficiently alter the potential collision physics.  While the woman was unnaturally oblivious to her surroundings, the vehicle should never have been in that state.  While I seriously fault the woman, that does not change the failure of the car to perform properly.  I want to see the NTSB report.

            My suggestion was an attempt at visualization, not a reflection of reality in any form.

            Re: Himmler.  By the time they deserted Hitler, it was well past the point of no return for the regime.  Most of the professional military recognized reality once the Normandy counter-attack failed (Aug’44).

            You are precisely correct.  The social conservatives among us are adamantly against any form of sex beyond purposeful procreation within an adult, heterosexual, bilateral, monogamous marriage.  They will resort to and use any means they can find to enforce their beliefs on everyone . . . presumably to validate their beliefs.  Human trafficking for sexual purposes does exist and is a serious issue, but it is an infinitesimal fraction of sexual relations outside the very narrow acceptable band as defined by the social conservatives.  This new law will join many others to bludgeon everyone into compliance with their morality, their beliefs.  This new law is wrong.  Congress was wrong to pass such a broad, indiscriminate law.  Nonetheless, I remain guardedly optimistic that one day we shall mature as a society to respect the privacy and freedom of choice of every citizen.  I do not fault and I full support the right of every citizen to make choices important to him or her.  One day, we will learn to respect the choices of others, even when we disagree with those choices.  Let us respect freedom of choice for everyone.

  . . . follow-up comment:

“I agree with your ideas about sex in general and sex work in particular.  However, my point is about following the money.  The general public only affects these issues by providing votes at the election.  The people loudly advocating for ‘victims of sex trafficking’ mostly do so for the nice salaries, professional prestige, and business incomes that come from the ‘rescue’ business.  Most of the rescue operations find few actual victims and damage those they do find.  Law enforcement works with the rescuers to inflate and distort the numbers and results for their own career and agency-budget reasons.  Plenty of law enforcement officers also abuse those victims for free sex. Many of those ‘rescued’ people wind up in prisons, which are a for-profit business these days. Yes, this is a social policy issue, but it's also a way the greedy bring in money while getting politicians' cooperation for the votes candidates can wring out of the morally blind.  The people taking the actions are not carrying out moral beliefs.  They're making money or getting votes (power).”

. . . my follow-up response:

            Interesting perspective . . . that I cannot dispute.  I certainly believe there are other than moral reasons these laws come into existence and are zealously enforced.  The reasons you cite are quite plausible, or perhaps a confluence of moral and corrupt reasons.  Regardless, these morality laws are wrong for a host of reasons.

            The method of protecting people including children from abuse, human trafficking, and such is to get the sex business into the light and regulate it properly.  I have absolutely no problem with anyone rejecting the sex business.  Some people do not like bananas.  If someone does not like bananas, just do not buy them or eat them.  It is wrong and not consistent with freedom of choice that is the basis of this Grand Republic.

Another contribution:

"My goodness you coped well with that one!  She seemed to know you personally.  Of course you can’t please everyone!  But surely debate is a vital part of our democracies so she should stay with your update even if she disagrees with what you and the rest of us say.”

My reply:

            Yes, she does know me beyond the Blog.  I tried to engage and understand, since she represents and reflects a significant fraction of the citizenry of this Grand Republic.  I wanted to understand.  Unfortunately, I was wholly unsuccessful and it did not end well.  I did not include the final message from her husband, as the profanity was not worthy—a regrettable loss.  That’s life; we move on.

            Regrettably, far too many citizens are not interested in a vigorous public debate; they wish you to submit to their reality.  They appear to have no interest in seeing other points of view.  That is their right and their choice entirely.

 . . . Round two:

“I was on the verge of replying to the malefactor communicator but as she or both wish to be removed from the blog sadly I’d be wasting my time.

“Still, we take all sorts in our stride don’t we-as former servicemen we’ve both come across some oddballs have we not. And then the memory of these miscreants fades as we encounter genuine and non- pretentious individuals which fortunately vastly outnumber the melancholies  of such characters.”

 . . . my reply to round two:

I would urge you to reply as you wish . . . these exchanges are for everyone . . . not just the sender and me.

Indeed . . . more than a few oddballs, I'm afraid.  After all, the military is just a reflection of the society it serves.

Quite so . . . life goes on regardless of the kerfuffles.  

 . . . Round three:

“I’m disappointed in the comments of one of your contributors in your update No.847.

“I will commence by saying I’m not of your land but of a land that produced the democratic system that now governs or should govern yours and my country.

“I have to admit that I know of very few people who have taken to your current President.  But he is yours, not ours, and as I said to Cap when the election was confirmed ‘we shall see’. Because he is your President I wouldn’t dream of criticising or praising him.

“Why do I say this?  Social equality is the key word here.  We all have freedom to speak our minds, this right we have is thanks to those who fought and died for us in wars.  But there are some in the community who would rather we didn’t benefit in this way and I fear the correspondent to whom I am referring is possible one of those.  The Blog is an expression of many views, some of which we may not agree with but they are none the less the democratic views of others who are sharing our way of life. To preserve that way of life can I suggest to those more cantankerous amongst us that they learn to accept the other point of view regardless of how much we may disagree with it.”

 . . . my reply to round three:

            In this forum, none of the social factors matter to me, and should not matter to anyone else . . . thus, your nation of origin does not matter, since that is one of the social factors.  I encourage you to speak as if you owned the place.

            A substantial portion of the citizens of this Grand Republic are supporters of and believers in the BIC . . . AKA the current fellow in the Oval Office.  I have tried mightily to understand the reasons why people believe in him?  What is it that I do not see?  What am I missing?  Why is it that I cannot see what they see?  What is it that makes them believe in his snake-oil?

            We certainly agree on the importance of all those have stood the line and given their last full measure in defense of the very freedoms we enjoy today.  As Benjamin Franklin so eloquently and succinctly observed, “Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.”  There are variations of Franklin’s words.  I think you may have hit the nail on the head.  Far too many people are not interested in social equality; they are only interested in the domination and imposition of their beliefs, their moral values, their political priorities on everyone because they are correct.  They reject social equality because their values are the only acceptable values; everyone else is simply wrong.  Unfortunately, tolerance, compromise, acceptance have become cuss words and thus contemptible.  Intransigence has become the hallmark of this society . . . very sad to me.

A different contribution:

“I understand that Uber safety driver (for the autonomous test Volvo) in Tempe, had some kind of interesting criminal record, and perhaps warrants.  He appeared to be using his ‘smartphone’ when the crash occurred.

“Tesla's stock took a beating this week, as NTSB and California Highway Patrol's Multidisciplinary Accident Investigation Team are investigating a crash in Northern California where the autopilot apparently drove the vehicle into a center type barrier. That driver died the following day.

“Cap, I've not watched HOMELAND but have heard fairly good reviews too, on that programming from HBO.

“Thank you for sharing the phrase by Admiral Grace Hopper—‘Manage things, Lead people.’  That is very good.  One phrase or leadership that I often have thought is one of the best I've seen, was of all things, coined by the former leader of Scandinavian Airlines Systems (SAS), Jan Carlzon, where he said ‘drive fear out of the workplace, is the leader's job.’   I have seen purported accounts of what it is like working for the West Wing, and it has been described as much F.U.D. (Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt), if not chaos.”

My reply:

            Automobile automation is no different from aircraft automation; it must be monitored.  I am not certain the driver’s full attention could have avoided that accident given the woman’s mindless disregard for anything around her . . . or her willful effort to use that car for her suicide (it could have been any car).  I’m not sure the driver’s record or history was contributory to that accident; however if true, they should have vetted their drivers better—huge investment in their hands.  Those automobiles were in operational but experimental evaluation work.  The driver’s skill should not have been a factor; yet, in this instance, his skill was definitely a factor.

            Yeah, the Tesla accident was another curious event.  We need to see the accident reports.  I sure hope it was not a flaw in the programming.

            I realize HBO is a subscription service, but I highly recommend the whole series and especially the current season (Season 7)—very timely, appropriate and thought provoking.

            I like the Carlzon quote; I’d not heard that one before.  Grace Hopper was a helluva person—enormous accomplishments.  She coined the term “debugging” a computer.

            The current West Wing . . . the single most descriptive word—chaos.  I’ve worked for men like the BIC.  No desire to ever do it again.

            My very best wishes to all.  Take care of yourselves and each other.

Cheers,

Cap                        :-)