For example, make a robotic dummy walk in front of the car without notice. Does the car break and avoid a collision?
Such basic things can be formulated into a test and have the cars pass them before allowing them (even with a driver) on the roads..
It amazes me that people just stand by and allow these "tests" to happen within an unsuspecting population...
>“We’ve staged people jumping out of canvas bags or porta-potties on the side of the road, skateboarders lying on their boards, and thrown stacks of paper in front of our sensors,” Waymo said in its report.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/trafficandcommuting/way...
>For media day, they put on three of them. In one, a Honda convertible abruptly cut off one of the Pacificas just past an intersection, and the Pacifica braked to avoid it. In another, a car obscured by two parked vehicles suddenly backed out of a driveway. Again, the Pacifica came to a halt. The third was a faux moving-day scene, with a couch in the street and boxes tumbling into the lane, just as another car approached from the opposite direction. The Pacifica knew better than to swerve into the car. It braked until the coast was clear.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/trafficandcommuting/a-g...
People should not care what Waymo does.
There should be an independent body to frame these tests (with enough random stuff thrown in), and have the cars pass them.
It is quite meaning less to make the cars pass tests created by the company itself.
And if you see the videos, none of the people were ever in real danger. Say, where is the test when someone crosses when the car is going to 45mph? I am not asking to put real people in real danger. But just make some robotic dummy (even something on wheels will do), and make it cross without notice infront of the car when it is doing 50+mph.