Driverless car kills pedestrian

[Clocker]

Originally Posted by JerryBoyle

there are an overwhelming number of scientists who are publishing study after studying pointing to the fact that humans are contributing meaningfully to warmer temps.

Science is not settled by majority rule.

[Clocker]

Originally Posted by jocko699

There is an entire thread on climate change if you feel the need to comment on that.

There is also a very long two-part thread on religion, which might be more appropriate for some concepts expressed here.

[JerryBoyle]

I'll leave climate change alone to not derail your driverless car kills one person in months article, apologies.

[Inner Dirt]

Originally Posted by JerryBoyle

1 slow speed accident in 5 years (~50k miles) doesn't seem that outrageous to me. I certainly know people who get in small accidents in close to that rate

You find getting in a wreck every 50,000 miles acceptable? That is nuts. I just added it up the last 4 new cars I owned racked up approximately 700,000 miles. No idea how many miles I put on secondary vehicles. I was in two wrecks in that period, rear ended in traffic jams in So Cal. With your standards crashing 12 more times would have been ok.

Once again a crash every 50,000 miles when these cars are getting much better treatment then they will receive if they are common place and mass produced. That and I honestly think there will be deviates out there trying trying to cause them to crash just for kicks. The same type of people that spread computer viruses just for fun.

[JerryBoyle]

Originally Posted by Inner Dirt

You find getting in a wreck every 50,000 miles acceptable? That is nuts. I just added it up the last 4 new cars I owned racked up approximately 700,000 miles. No idea how many miles I put on secondary vehicles. I was in two wrecks in that period, rear ended in traffic jams in So Cal. With your standards crashing 12 more times would have been ok.

Once again a crash every 50,000 miles when these cars are getting much better treatment then they will receive if they are common place and mass produced. That and I honestly think there will be deviates out there trying trying to cause them to crash just for kicks. The same type of people that spread computer viruses just for fun.

The crashes are small fender benders at slow speeds though. I don't think 1 fender bender every 5 years is acceptable, though I don't know how many fender benders the average driver gets in. Also, if it leads to fewer serious accidents, I'm willing to accept more fender benders.

Agreed that they will be targets for hacking or manipulation, and that serious time needs to be spent on securing the software/hardware

[JustRalph]

The plot thickens

https://hotair.com/archives/2018/03/...crash-arizona/

[Tom]

As do some brains here......

[Clocker]

Originally Posted by JustRalph

The plot thickens

https://hotair.com/archives/2018/03/...crash-arizona/

Uber was struggling to meet its target of 13 miles per “intervention” in Arizona

That is not self-driving.

But as I noted Wednesday, the driver was looking down at some sort of device for about 5 seconds immediately before the crash.

Wow, I wonder what that could be.

[baconswitchfarm]

Originally Posted by JerryBoyle

Agreed that they will be targets for hacking or manipulation, and that serious time needs to be spent on securing the software/hardware

Just wait till you can load your self driver with explosives in North Carolina and send it to an address several states away. What a nice world its gonna be.

[NJ Stinks]

From The Guardian website tonight:
______________________________

Arizona suspends Uber’s self-driving car testing after fatality

Governor Doug Ducey tells Uber crash raises concerns about its ability to safely test technology

Associated Press

Tue 27 Mar 2018 03.33 BST

Arizona governor Doug Ducey suspended Uber’s self-driving vehicle testing on Monday following a pedestrian fatality in a Phoenix suburb last week.

Ducey told Uber’s chief executive Dara Khosrowshahi that video footage of the crash raised concerns about the company’s ability to safely test its technology in Arizona.

He said he expects public safety to be the top priority for those who operate self-driving cars. “The incident that took place on 18 March is an unquestionable failure to comply with this expectation,” Ducey said.

The move by the Republican governor marks a major step back from his embrace of self-driving vehicles. He previously welcomed Uber and other autonomous vehicle companies to use Arizona as a place for testing under few, if any, regulations.

More at the link: https://www.theguardian.com/technolo...after-fatality

[incoming]

Originally Posted by baconswitchfarm

Just wait till you can load your self driver with explosives in North Carolina and send it to an address several states away. What a nice world its gonna be.

Great Point!!! Maybe, it will hit a two or three foot pothole filled with water in route and detonate prematurely.

[JustRalph]

Settled already?

https://www.theverge.com/2018/3/29/1...ving-car-crash

[Inner Dirt]

Originally Posted by JustRalph

Settled already?

https://www.theverge.com/2018/3/29/1...ving-car-crash

Kind of shows how flawed they are. I would also venture an educated guess they paid a huge amount compared to what settlements in similar cases would be. They don't want all the flaws in the systems and their rush to get them out in public without proper testing exposed.

[_______]

Originally Posted by Inner Dirt

Kind of shows how flawed they are. I would also venture an educated guess they paid a huge amount compared to what settlements in similar cases would be. They don't want all the flaws in the systems and their rush to get them out in public without proper testing exposed.

I’m not sure if the “they” in your indictment is Uber specifically or self driving systems in general.

If the former, I’m all in with you. Uber stole much of their tech from Waymo
(Google) and dumbed it down. The car that killed the pedestrian in Arizona had 1 LIDAR mounted on the roof. It was a high profile vehicle (Volvo SUV) which meant a whole lot more blind spots. Uber’s prior test vehicle was a Ford Fusion with 7 LIDAR units. I guarantee it would have seen the dumb ass ped walking in front of a car and avoided them.

The Fusion looked clunky with all the boxy add ons. The Volvo SUV still looked clunky. But it was sweet next to the Fusion. So they pushed and found the edge.

The idea that human decisions are inevitably superior to algorithms will die a slow but also inevitable death. If you cripple a self driving algo enough, it will kill. But that isn’t the algo’s fault. It followed the inputs provided.

The death occurred because Uber limited it’s vision. Try driving with blinder’s and see how many ped’s walking in front of your car you avoid.

[johnhannibalsmith]

If we can't see or drive well enough not to hit things then we are held accountable for the decision to drive. Are we going to see engineers and programmers and supervisors or whoever indicted for the kind of negligence you describe?