![]() 03/19/2018 at 14:15 • Filed to: Uber death | ![]() | ![]() |
(Link Kinja’d, see comments)
Self-driving Uber kills Arizona woman in first fatal autonomous car crash
!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!
UPDATE: Looks like the victim was a jaywalker (or exercising)
!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!
![]() 03/19/2018 at 13:27 |
|
Self-driving Uber kills Arizona woman in first fatal autonomous car crash
![]() 03/19/2018 at 13:30 |
|
Get outta my Waymo!
![]() 03/19/2018 at 13:32 |
|
I drive arpund Tempe a lot and I always found it insane that they allow testing of autonomous cars there. For those that don’t know, Tempe is filled with college students walking and ridong bikes while looking at their phones.
![]() 03/19/2018 at 13:37 |
|
shame on you
![]() 03/19/2018 at 13:42 |
|
This article is useless without any details regarding the event. Did this woman jump out in front of the vehicle while on a phone? Or was she just normally crossing the street and got run over by a speeding vehicle? There is a huge difference since the car would have responded the same way whether being piloted by a human or a robot. Having self driving cars will never totally eliminate crashes. It only has to slightly lower the death toll to be successful. But I am very curious if it is a software/hardware fault or just stupid people.
![]() 03/19/2018 at 13:43 |
|
That happened faster than I expected. I’m guessing the first of many.
![]() 03/19/2018 at 13:47 |
|
It’s ASU we’re talking about. You can major in DarwinAwardism there. Plus it has the best fraternity ever: Beta Gamma Zeta!
http://americandad.wikia.com/wiki/Beta_Gamma_Zeta_()
![]() 03/19/2018 at 13:51 |
|
If I was an investigator, I would start with Stupid People then work backwards.
![]() 03/19/2018 at 13:53 |
|
It would have happened sooner if Uber used Mustangs.
![]() 03/19/2018 at 13:56 |
|
I’ll make one fairly broad assumption that leads to an inevitable conclusion. This will be a bellwether case, assuming the person was acting within reasonable limits. When the family sues - they will because there will be lawyers lining up to take the case - this will be appealed and will eventually end up on the docket of the supreme court because it’s too big not to be.
![]() 03/19/2018 at 13:57 |
|
!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!
While I agree, I don’t believe public sentiment will only allow for a slight reduction.
![]() 03/19/2018 at 13:57 |
|
...ok, I snickered a little.
![]() 03/19/2018 at 14:00 |
|
It’s tragic, but the humor won’t bring them back or make them any more dead.
![]() 03/19/2018 at 14:05 |
|
They’re being allowed to test these things on public streets without any input from the public. I think that’s more of the issue especially when said member of the public dies during testing.
![]() 03/19/2018 at 14:07 |
|
Too soon
![]() 03/19/2018 at 14:08 |
|
True
![]() 03/19/2018 at 14:09 |
|
Looks like the victim was jaywalking
![]() 03/19/2018 at 14:11 |
|
This is very sad it won’t probably be the last. I am skeptical if any AI can account 100% for all irational unpredictable human behavior.
Also,I would wait till all the facts come out before we start picking up the pitchforks and torches. However the media vultures are going to be all over this and sensationalize it and so will the lawyers. I hope it doesn’t dent the progress of autonomous cars even if I don’t like Uber.
![]() 03/19/2018 at 14:15 |
|
I’d be terrified if AI could account for 100% of irrational unpredictable human behavior.
![]() 03/19/2018 at 14:19 |
|
So it sounds like it’s a good place to test the cars. It’s a worst case scenario.
![]() 03/19/2018 at 14:24 |
|
It only has to slightly lower the death toll to be successful.
Nope, it has to significantly lower the death toll to be successful.
![]() 03/19/2018 at 14:28 |
|
![]() 03/19/2018 at 14:30 |
|
So uber is testing Mustangs now?
![]() 03/19/2018 at 14:31 |
|
I see a bike on the ground with many bags(?) near the handlebars. NO ONE is reporting this
Its too soon to pass judgement yet, but... wobbly rider at night with dark clothes and no lights in the road perhaps?
![]() 03/19/2018 at 14:39 |
|
Just saw the update about the pedestrian/cyclist jaywalking instead of using the crosswalk. Interesting. That’s going to place a LOT of blame on the deceased.
Still need to know how/why the car didn’t avoid hitting her, though...
![]() 03/19/2018 at 14:42 |
|
possibly homeless?
![]() 03/19/2018 at 14:43 |
|
Those could certainly be relevant factors. I hope there’s video footage from the Uber to help answer all of our questions.
![]() 03/19/2018 at 14:45 |
|
How many pedestrians have been killed by human piloted cars in the last month? More than 1 I bet.
I haven’t read the details, so I don’t know anything about this accident. But I often wonder why my city spends so much money on crosswalks that nobody uses. People have too much trust in each other. I’ve had several close calls with jay walkers, where had I been looking at my phone, or at my son in the backseat for just half a second, they would of been killed. Sometimes the pedestrian IS looking at their phone, and never even looks at traffic. Sorry, but if I can’t make it across the street assuming the drivers don’t see me, I don’t cross. Even if you think the driver is looking at you, never assume they are, or are going to brake for you.
![]() 03/19/2018 at 14:47 |
|
I’m sure there is. If ANYONE has a ‘dashcam’ its an autonomous Uber.
![]() 03/19/2018 at 15:11 |
|
I was going to make a shit comment.
![]() 03/19/2018 at 15:16 |
|
But unless the autonomous driving software differentiates between a pedestrian legally crossing the street at an official crosswalk and a pedestrian crossing the street illegally by jaywalking, why would that matter?
![]() 03/19/2018 at 15:37 |
|
Well now we know why you’re not an investigator anymore!!!
/jk
![]() 03/19/2018 at 15:54 |
|
Acting within reasonable limits? Huge assumption I think.
![]() 03/19/2018 at 16:04 |
|
Also if its a bike, in Ohio and I think most if not all the US consider that as a vehicle. So it will be interesting to see how this plays out, just sad there had to be victim
![]() 03/19/2018 at 16:18 |
|
Yeah, when testing a new technology, you should always make sure failure could result in the death of a bystander...
![]() 03/19/2018 at 16:19 |
|
Because if the person was jaywalking there may have been an obstruction that prevented the vehicle from seeing them until it was too late. Crosswalks usually have no parking areas around them and lack large objects that could hide a person until it was too late to stop.
![]() 03/19/2018 at 17:50 |
|
Well I meant in order to be “technically successful”. Of course for actual success, self driving vehicles unfortunately have to perform with damn near 100% success rate. And in reality that will be the only way these things get off the ground. Which is certainly why it will take so much longer than some people seem to think. If we accepted “some but minimal chaos will ensue” then we would get to that final stage much faster and fewer people would die. But such is the case with major technological advancement, the luddites will keep progress from advancing much.
![]() 03/19/2018 at 17:58 |
|
Why though? I run into the same logical problem when talking about the value of nuclear power. Sure it pollutes the environment with that whole radioactive waste problem. But the actual exhaust is significantly cleaner than coal or natural gas being converted into electrical energy. If we fully converted all fossil fuels to nuclear, we would then have an abundance of time to figure out how to go 100% renewable before the planet is destroyed.
Even simpler and more direct comparison would be talking about going from horses to cars. Yeah your horse couldnt break down really. As long as you fed the thing it would do just fine. Whereas early cars certainly broke often and required constant input to keep it on the road. If we just said NO CARS UNTIL THEY NEVER BREAK, we would still be traveling by horse everywhere. Although that might be kind of hilarious, thinking about The Fast n Furious series being filmed on horseback. Gotta have some custom hooves and neon glowing horse hair.
![]() 03/19/2018 at 18:04 |
|
Either way, its not like the car is an enforcer of rules lol. It should have an abundance of caution at all times. Sure a normal person should really only focus on the crosswalk scenarios since too many distractions would overload a human brain and lead to higher likelihood of hitting other shit. But a computer running a car is not going to get distracted or overwhelmed. That computer should be looking for all pedestrians 100% of the time and react instantly to any and all relevant data. This computer is at fault for sure if it was designed to stop and was within the possibilities of physics to stop in time. Regardless of legality, the computer is responsible to recognize a human, stop safely or avoid the target person, and be able to report that if it did hit something that it was actually impossible to avoid them. Sure the computer could be programmed to lie but that’s where some sort of code inspection needs to be done during an accident investigation.
![]() 03/19/2018 at 18:08 |
|
Same goes for the Tesla Autopilot stuff. I have no idea how they get away with this honestly. I figured self driving cars would be stuck on closed courses for decades until the software was matured enough to have greater than 99.999% or so reliability. Then just go driving millions of miles in less populated areas but more real world conditions until you take incredibly monitored and controlled tests in busier areas. Maybe even employ people to act like dumb pedestrians instead of just wait until you run over a real one.
![]() 03/20/2018 at 03:50 |
|
not good either way you look at it though.