https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/w...y-uber-self-driving-car/ar-BBKqSzV?li=BBnb7Kz

 

Be interesting to know whether the car made any attempt to stop before hitting her.

 

Not surprising. Our infrastructure is not designed for self driving cars. You can do a lot with sophisticated sensors and processors, but until the infrastructure is redesigned to accommodate self driving cars, we are going to have accidents like this.

 

This car had a human on board as backup -- for all that was worth.

 

This car had a human on board as backup -- for all that was worth.

Likely texting at the time.

 

I just don't see these things happening in the real world, not just yet. While self driving cars react much faster than humans and hopefully (lol @crutschow) don't get distracted, they lack intuition that humans posses. No way to tell if this woman would have been hit by a human driver too and we yet don't know all of the details but something tells me human intuition could have helped avoid the accident.

 

I just can't make myself warm up to these things.

they lack intuition that humans posses.

That being what it always comes down to with me. I just distrust their judgement ability.

Ron

 

I just can't make myself warm up to these things.

That being what it always comes down to with me. I just distrust their judgement ability.

Ron

Perfectly normal people become and indent when coupled to a cell phone, might as well have five shots in a row comparatively.

kv

 

Something else for the hackers to have fun with.

 

I just can't make myself warm up to these things.

That being what it always comes down to with me. I just distrust their judgement ability.

Ron

Wait till one is challenged with killing the occupants or killing pedestrians.

Or challenged with a problem like this.

 

The "Vitality" (miles traveled between hazardous failures) must be a well proven statistic before self driving cars can be permitted on public streets and highways.

As a bench mark, the vitality of an automatic train control system (such as those used in rail mass transit) or elevator controls should be the standard for self driving cars.

Until that standard is met, self driving cars are just science fiction.

 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/w...y-uber-self-driving-car/ar-BBKqSzV?li=BBnb7Kz

The autonomous car folks have been cramming down our throats how much safer their cars are because of how many miles they've driven without a fatal accident that was their car's fault. Okay. So Uber points out that this is the first such fatal accident in two million miles of driving. That's 50 fatalities per 100 million miles. The national average is 1.25. And they are still operating in cherry-picked conditions.

 

https://www.sfgate.com/business/art...ef-says-early-probe-12765481.php?t=11286f4b07

Am I surprised? No.. Just like the bus a few months ago the media is beating this as it is a hot topic. Would like to see the video of this one just before the impact for myself.
How many people died today because of humans behind a car, or gun? Why are they not been reported?

I, for one, can't wait until drivers are taken off the roads. Don't know about the US, but it would take way 97% of the accidents in Australia.

 

Doesn't look like it even tried to stop or avoid. Not sure what the rules are in Arizona for unmarked crosswalks. Did the person on the bike not see headlights?
https://techcrunch.com/2018/03/19/h...ving-cars-are-supposed-to-detect-pedestrians/

 

How's come those sensors didn't see her before I did?

 

I learned to drive in SoCal. Pedestrians have the right-away always. That does not excuse them from being charged for jaywalking or other traffic violation. It simply recognizes the fact that fenders made of flesh are no competition for ones made of steel. There has to be an obligation for a driver to stop if he possible can. I cannot imagine that is not the law in all states.

 

How's come those sensors didn't see her before I did?

Look at the car in the background It was the brightest objects. The computer was likely focused on that. This might be a case of puppy vs muffin that nsaspook posted. Easy for a person to see a person in this situation but not so easy for a human.

You have to wonder what the hell was that woman thinking crossing the street at night like that. It looks like her head was down. I would bet anything that she was looking at her cell phone. and how slowly she was moving? I sometimes cross a busy road with my bicycle on foot. But the purpose is so I can have a better view of traffic. And I bolt across the road. I don't saunter like that woman.

 

Looked up the law there.

https://azbikelaw.org/jaywalking-in-arizona/

Jaywalking in Tempe
This is all kindof interesting due to the Ersula Ore incident near ASU (which occured not in the Tempe’s CBD). So here are Tempe’s codes, see Chapter 19:

Sec. 19-1(2) Central business district means all streets and portions of streets within the area described as follows. All that area bounded by the salt river on the north, to 10th Street on the south and from Myrtle Avenue on the east to Maple Avenue on the west. [note: the ASU campus is, mostly, not in the central business district. Rather it is east of the CBD.]

Sec. 19-151. Crossing a roadway.
(a) No pedestrian shall cross the roadway within the central business district other than within a marked or unmarked crosswalk.
(b) Every pedestrian crossing a roadway outside of the central business district at any point other than within a marked or unmarked crosswalk shall yield the right-of-way to all vehicles upon the roadway.
(c) No pedestrian shall cross a roadway where signs or traffic control signals prohibit such crossing.

 

The view of the driver shows just what I said in another thread -- it is unreasonable to rely on a driver that is just sitting there being able to take over instantly when something happens. This driver clearly was not paying attention to the road in any meaningful way -- someone texting and driving would probably have had their eyes on the road better. And I'm not even criticizing the driver, here. You can't expect someone that isn't driving to pay the same kind of attention to what is going on as someone that is. They are not going to maintain the kind of situational awareness that is needed to react quickly enough.

It also appeared, to me, that the bike did not "jump out" from the side all of a sudden out of nowhere. She looked like she was firmly established in the lane well before she was struck. I think a human that was driving would have had a reasonable chance to see the person and avoid her -- just like when you come up on a deer standing in the middle of the road at night. It's not guaranteed that you are going to be able to react in time to avoid it, but I think a human can see quite a bit further down the road than that captured video implies -- as it often the case. I would have hoped that the car's sensors could have seen her out at least as far as a human could have seen.

 

Now that is scary. Only visual sensors? I was under the impression that AV used radar and could see thru fog and such. And detect not just shapes, but plot moving shapes.