Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

OT and nicely controversial....Uber fatal self driving car crash

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • OT and nicely controversial....Uber fatal self driving car crash

    info here:

    http://www.stltoday.com/news/nationa...13ebad128.html
    CNC machines only go through the motions

  • #2
    Yes, that was a very controversial link. It required you to defeat your adblocker and allow javascript to see their content. Personally, I find it is disingenuous for a newspaper site to add their content to the search engines and then require you to drop your defenses in order to see the content. I'm not sure if that was debated in this forum before.

    As for the uber fatality, it's old news (last week). I've looked at the video and it shows a person crossing the road in the path of a moving car. That usually has a bad outcome. If I can't avoid hitting someone in that circumstance I don't expect a machine to do better.
    At the end of the project, there is a profound difference between spare parts and left over parts.

    Location: SF East Bay.

    Comment


    • #3
      If that had happened during full daylight at an intersection where the pedestrian had the right of way, the car would still have struck her. That's what the problem is.
      Location: Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by danlb View Post

        As for the uber fatality, it's old news (last week). I've looked at the video and it shows a person crossing the road in the path of a moving car. That usually has a bad outcome. If I can't avoid hitting someone in that circumstance I don't expect a machine to do better.

        But you do expect a machine to do better in fact you've stated that in the past,,, what's troublesome is the driver might have caught it, but was leaving it up to the car ---- whooops... bad decision that did indeed lead to a bad outcome...

        Comment


        • #5
          LOL. That site is as bad as photobucket with the ads. Horrible
          "Answer a survey question to continue reading this content"
          No thanks..

          The uber thing? Somebody was gonna hit that Ped at some point. Who walks in front of a vehicle like that! And at night, in the middle of the road.

          And yes, the driver has some responsibility for this death. For my investigation just from what the news showed the driver would be listed as party #2. JR

          Comment


          • #6
            Another lawyer field day!
            Bill
            I cut it off twice and it's still too short!

            Comment


            • #7
              Stupid people like that get killed every day. It's only because the car was self driving that it made the news. Whether the car was self driving or not, I see the fault going to the bicycle rider. Even a human driver couldn't have responded favorably to that circumstance.

              Clumsy Bastard.

              Comment


              • #8
                What a horrible........ link above.

                Here is the video

                Comment


                • #9
                  Self driving vehicles are coming. There will be 'bumps in the road'. Show me a mode of transport that didn't kill people on it's way to having the kinks worked out.
                  I am no fan of them, but the evolution will be no different in that respect than what history has shown.

                  Having said that, it's terrible someone died.. I'd like to think that in this day of age we could develop new tech without deaths, but it's not likely. Hopefully hard lessons will be learned and the technology will be safer.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    IMO, it's not a problem with the technology, it's a problem with the laws. IMO, cars should have the right of way, but unfortunately the laws state that people have the right of way. The person walked into the car, the car didn't drive into the person. It's very unfortunate this happened, but it should be more of a lesson for people that don't pay proper attention when crossing streets, or the many other ways one can injure or kill themselves.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Arcane View Post
                      If that had happened during full daylight at an intersection where the pedestrian had the right of way, the car would still have struck her. That's what the problem is.
                      That is an unfounded assumption. The car depends on lidar as well as visible light. The pedestrian was not lit until just before the car hit her. So what do you base this assertion on?
                      At the end of the project, there is a profound difference between spare parts and left over parts.

                      Location: SF East Bay.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by A.K. Boomer View Post
                        But you do expect a machine to do better in fact you've stated that in the past,,, what's troublesome is the driver might have caught it, but was leaving it up to the car ---- whooops... bad decision that did indeed lead to a bad outcome...
                        Two things there; 1) I expect the mature systems to do better. Uber's version is still fairly new in comparison to the google effort. As far as I recall, Google has logged a lot more miles and never at fault for injury to a pedestrian.

                        2) The driver MIGHT have caught it. I doubt it. The person chose to cross the road just outside the illuminated area from the street light. The car was more visible to the pedestrian than the person was to the driver.

                        As said elsewhere, it's only news because it's a self driving car. The train from San Francisco to silicon valley kills a dozen or more people every year.
                        At the end of the project, there is a profound difference between spare parts and left over parts.

                        Location: SF East Bay.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Look at this cadillac super cruise it does the same thing. My new toyota pruis has it almost it will park its self and does a lot more. I look at the vid and see it was both car and pedestrian at falt. And I see this as the future of cars.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            I suspect there's a fault with the Uber's version in this crash. Looking at the video from the onboard dash cam the person was walking fairly slowly and moved across the other lane before entering the vehicle lane. Granted they were wearing dark clothing but the car systems still should have spotted the moving object and braked. The pedestrian wasn't running and there were no parked cars that they dashed out from.

                            Yeah the videos of the accident are VERY POORLY lit. But that's the dash cam as the source. Not the car cameras. I would hope that the car systems would be using some form of near infra red or similar to see in the dark better than us regular folk. Otherwise what's the point?


                            I still don't see self driving cars being fully viable until ALL cars are self driving and people are not allowed to touch the controls. Otherwise the self driving systems need to be set up for idiots that cut them off or run red lights or any number of the woes that they do. And pedestrians will either need to be educated to not jump out in front of the cars. Basically that cars should have the right of way other than at controlled points.
                            Chilliwack BC, Canada

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by danlb View Post
                              That is an unfounded assumption. The car depends on lidar as well as visible light. The pedestrian was not lit until just before the car hit her. So what do you base this assertion on?
                              As far as YOU know from the dash cam.

                              Point being that the self-driving system FAILED MISERABLY to identify an ELEMENTARY driving hazard. Do not get distracted by details that are not part of the actual issue.

                              The actual issue is NOT the driver, or a what-if.... The issue is a self driving car utterly failed to detect a combination of a person and a metal bicycle entering the street from the side, and ran over that person. The person did not "jump out in front of" the car.

                              We DO NOT NEED to know more than that.

                              THE. SYSTEM. FAILED.

                              If it cannot do better than that, ban it from the roads until it is PROVED to be able to do that every time. DO NOT use comparisons to human drivers, or statistics. They are only brought into the argument to bamboozle the participants.
                              CNC machines only go through the motions

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X