Self-driving Uber kills Arizona woman in first fatal crash involving pedestrian - Page 2 - Politics | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Anything from household gadgets to the Large Hadron Collider (note: political science topics belong in the Environment & Science forum).

Moderator: PoFo The Lounge Mods

Suntzu wrote:The woman was illegally crossing the street at a busy intersection at night.

Is it Darwin Award worthy?

SolarCross wrote:Humans glitch out and have accidents too, some people even have "accidents" on purpose (whilst yelling "Alu Snackbar!").

Hmmm... A muslim self-driving car. Never thought of that...

Crantag wrote:It seems like they are saying the cars can only detect people in crosswalks?

Maybe it doesn't think that heat signature/lidar return is a person.

Crantag wrote:That's pretty fucked if they actually rely on crosswalks to detect people in the road.

It doesn't bode well for a certain segment of society that likes to walk in the middle of the street.

AFAIK wrote:I think we should hold self-driving cars to a higher standard than "slightly less deadly than a human".

Why? Is that just to protect jobs? Better is the enemy of good.
I have no doubt that the Liberal corporations that are going to run our cars, will want to have the occasional "accident". I mean who but another Nazi would care if Richard Spencer died in an AI "accident". And of course any Nazis who did start talking conspiracy theories could be punished by having their driving privileges taken away.
I watched a video of Uber killing that woman and the car cannot even see 5 meters down a road with streetlights. Uber should be charged with causing death by dangerous driving for using a blind car.
Last edited by AFAIK on 27 Mar 2018 04:32, edited 1 time in total.
I'm really glad that the person who was walking in the dark, with no lights, has no responsibility to watch out for cars. :roll: What about the responsibility of the pedestrians to not walk in front of cars? It was not at an intersection or a crosswalk.
This story is about a self-driving car killing someone because the company is too cheap or impatient to test it properly before exposing the public to a new danger. You think a pedestrian being killed by a car is worthy of international attention?
With a field of view of 5 meters this was an accident waiting to happen. Uber could have just as easily crashed into a parked car, a car that had broken down, a vehicle moving 5mph slower than it, a cow or 101 other things.

If the vehicle is unable to see pedestrians on a 3 lane wide, well lit road then it will never work outside the USA and even within the US fleets of Ubers will kill multiple people each day.
Godstud wrote:I never said that.

I said that this could have just as easily happened with a human driver. The pedestrian was exceptionally hard to see. The blame was as much on the pedestrian, as the "driver".

You mean the driver who was staring at his phone? Or the 'driver' meaning the technology which failed to act as it is suppose to act?

I'm just curious what the motivation is to whitenight Uber here. I guess it is the fetishising of the technology.
What we saw in the video clip was what humans could see. I think the automation of the car could see much further but that cannot be concluded from the video.
I concur with Godstud that the pedestrian must be assigned some responsibility.
Some pedestrians act like complete morons when crossing roads.

I stopped driving after sunset because here in Bangladesh the street lighting is either completely absent or very poor and sporadic, there are plenty of vehicles without lights including brake lights; rickshaws, cyclists and cows have no reflectors and people dressed in dark clothes cross the road in front of your vehicle. I just won't risk it any more.
Godstud wrote:So was the pedestrian just plain stupid, to be jaywalking in the dark and not looking for on-coming cars?

The comparison video showed pretty clearly that a person would have stopped.

I've had deer jump in front of me and had to make split second stops, numerous times. (I've also hit a couple of them, but this situation doesn't compare to a dear bolting in front of you on an unlit country road at night.)

Are you mad because you have stock in some of the car companies working on the technology or something?
Crantag wrote:The comparison video showed pretty clearly that a person would have stopped.
That does not mean that the pedestrian was in the right. That was jaywalking, and at night that's just stupid. I can tamper with video to make it look like all daylight, but that doesn't mean much, in the end.

I am merely assigning half the blame with the pedestrian. I am sure you don't like that, but personal responsibility has to count for something. I did not see the pedestrian even so much as glance in the direction of the car.

Crantag wrote:Are you mad because you have stock in some of the car companies working on the technology or something?
That's a very emotional thing to say, but I'll ignore it from you, since you are normally quite civil, and rational.
The killer car has struck again. Obviously, Tesla is blaming the driver. But what's the point of driving on autopilot when the driver has only seconds to correct a failure of the autopilot? Driver Assistance Systems have great potential; however, self-driving cars are an illusion.

Tesla car that crashed and killed driver was running on Autopilot, firm says
Trump and Russiagate

Deutsche Bank is Mr. Trump’s primary lender after […]

Capital Punishment

I wonder why you felt the need to inject race in[…]

The Next UK PM everybody...

What a crock of liberal minority appeasing left wi[…]

Most people learn basic psychology by experience,[…]