Self-Driving Uber Car Kills Arizona Pedestrian

We'll have to wait for the investigation to run its course...but this is an unfortunate incident no matter the cause...

When I first heard the story I didn't know that a human Uber driver was in the car but obviously not operating the controls. I thought the human was supposed to intervene to prevent accidents.

Maybe he was texting somebody...?

And then the police questioned him about the marking he had on the side of the car.....

Affirmative.

"SkyNet" has self-activated and the war has begun:

Robots: 1

Humans: 0

The article quotes 1.18 fatalities per 100 million miles driven on America's roads vs Ubers 1 fatality per 3 million miles.

Looks like there is a long way to go yet before autonomous vehicles are safer when they are driven in a human dominated environment.

I had a similar thought. We notice this because it's the first autonomous vehicle-pedestrian accident. What if this is the *only* one for the next five years? Unlikely, yes, but the sample size is too small to support inferences.

The sample size is only too small to support deductive inferences. Inductive inferences and abductive inferences are not precluded by a sample size of a few million miles yielding an occurance which should be seen once or twice per 100 million miles.

How would, " they " know if there was 1.8 deaths per 100 million miles,,,, if,,,

They have never driven 100 million,,?

Typical marketing double talk,,feel good bull caca.

Considering there was a human "driver" behind the wheel I am a bit confused as to why we are blaming the car. Isn't the whole idea that the human is there to take control if the car misses something?

A vehicle travels 88 feet per second at 60 mph.

Now add in observation time of 2 seconds

Now add in reaction time of 2 seconds

Now add in time + distance to stop

What do you got ?

A blur in the rear view mirror long afterwards.

Exactly. It would have made no difference if a human was driving, the fool who walked out in front of a moving car will be road hash and is the person responsible for the collision. Computers have never been able to make up for human stupidity and I doubt they ever will. We are just too damn good at being dumb.

UBER would really be the last company I would trust to develop a self driving car.

The car, in this case, did not brake at all.

I have some questions.

Does the autonomous car slow down if there is a pedestrian near the roadway that is likely to step out?

How about cars on side streets? Does it look at the driver to see if he or she is looking back, and if not, anticipate that the car may still pull out?

A good driver learns to anticipate situations even before they happen, long before there is an obstacle in the road. I don't have any first-hand knowledge, but I don't think AI is at that point yet.

It is widely claimed that autonomous cars will save thousands of lives a year, but there is no data to back this up. It is assumed that AI is perfect in recognizing situations, that it won't make mistakes.

Here is an example showing that recognizing a scene, simple for a human, is not so easy for a computer.

From WIRED:

AI HAS A HALLUCINATION PROBLEM THAT'S PROVING TOUGH TO FIX

Two skiers recognized most likely as a dog.

https://www.wired.com/story/ai-has-a-hallucination-problem-thats-proving-tough-to-fix/

You can't see the dog?

Seems like braking would be warranted if almost any of the items on the list suddenly appeared in the road ahead of a vehicle. The exception could be 'winter' though that would be location specific as well as specific to exactly what form 'winter' had chosen to take.

Hitting objects in the road carries risks to passengers and should be avoided whether or not we assign much value to the damage caused to the object. Hitting a hard packed snowman at 70 mph probably holds a similar risk for passengers as hitting a side of beef at 70 mph. Either way, avoiding the risk would be best.

This is going to depend on the final cause. If it turns out to be the pedestrian's fault, then it will depend on the local social and political climate.

I'm in the Portland, Oregon metro area and we have a program launched by the City of Portland called Vision Zero. The object of the program is to have zero pedestrian and bicyclist traffic accident fatalities. This is the second year of the program and last year we had 56 fatalities. The city and county have taken to reducing street widths by one lane and traffic coned off the curb lane for pedestrians and bicyclists and reduced the speed limit in residential areas from 35 to 25 with discussions of going to 20mph city wide. The stated objective of the Metro transportation plan is to get people out of cars and on to either bicycles or public transportation. We've had several high density apartment complexes built near light rail stations with no parking provided as a result in building code requirement variances or outright changes. The local politicos are also pushing for "congestion pricing" on the freeways that have already been paid for and from which maintenance funds have been diverted for light rail. The last bridge built in the area doesn't carry cars. I has pedestrian walkways, a bicycle lane and light rail tracks.

Several pedestrians have been biffed by the light rail system. Typical scenario for the last three of three fatalities is the pedestrian has ear buds in with music going and wearing a hoodie while walking along or across rail tracks without looking. Result: one more pedestrian fatality.

We also have problems with bicyclists blowing through stop signs or challenging the right of way of city busses, or in three cases last year, cement trucks. I see it as Darwinian, but the city sees it as another reason to close streets and reduce speed limits.

I'll wait until the investigation is over to make up my mind on the technology and I'm quite open to accepting a result that a technology enhancement is needed. I also won't be surprised if it's something beyond a technological solution.

Crowd: "LYNCH HIM, LYNCH HIM!!" Lone voice: "Anybody got any lynch?"

Is Portland anywhere near Pottersville ?

Where they are working hard to reduce the, " surplus population " .

No, it's in another state of mind, as in "out of".

They need to outlaw earbuds and bring back boomboxes.

The way I heard the story on the news, the woman stepped out in the middle of the street, not at a crosswalk. It didn't sound as if she looked before walking out, although there's no way to know. Maybe she didn't hear the car coming and thought the street was clear. The "driver" said it happened instantly. If he had actually been driving the car, he may not have been able to stop in time either. That said, the public needs to be educated and informed that driverless vehicles are out there and may not respond the same as vehicles with human drivers. This is tragic, of course, but given the number of injuries and fatalities caused by human drivers, I hope the industry continues to push forward to make all driving safer.

It also doesn't state whether the car was electric. There is concern out here that people don't hear electric cars, so they are considering adding noisemakers. Probably clothespins and playing cards to rub against the front wheel spokes.

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=vroom+vroom+noise&view=detail&mid=25D71E4228F78E7DF1BA25D71E4228F78E7DF1BA&FORM=VIRE

Uber crash called 'unavoidable' for any dri

Been out of state. I should add some context. I am very familiar with this area, it is a desert island in an urban area bordering Tempe and Phoenix. There is a lake/riparian area, mostly dry Salt River bed, a park, a golf course and the Phoenix Zoo all in this general area. It is a place where the homeless (as this lady was reported to be) commonly gather and camp.

Mill Ave is very busy here and Curry Road ends here dumping its traffic onto Mill Ave.

It probably was unavoidable given the situation.

I know locally, there are any number of pedestrian deaths, usually involving a 50 mph (80 kmph) divided surface road (Ritchie Highway in Anne Arundel County) usually at night, usually a pedestrian in dark clothing, usually crossing somewhere other than an intersection, and usually the pedestrian was impaired in some fashion.

I think we hope that driverless cars will be BETTER than us.

Here is footage of the accident.

Watching the video I was expecting to see a woman emerge from some hidden spot like bushes or between two cars and simply be a reaction time issue. To my untrained eye however it seems like a person driving would have seen this woman and stopped or at least swerved or slowed. It appears that the car made no attempt to stop. This sounds like the system failed to recognize that the woman was there until it hit her. Even with the dark the car would have likely had sensors that could have seen in complete darkness.

Obviously the human driver wasn't paying attention although that is a different issue. My understanding is this vehicle was designed to be self driving.

So now the question is, "What sensors were on board and functioning and what modifications will be proposed?"

It didn't look like the pedestrian was looking either.

After reading the latest police statement the headline should have read

Pedestrian commits suicide by car.

The other thing I just noticed, the police say the car was traveling 40+ mph but the speed limit in that area was 35.

I say again, by all reports Uber has repeatedly demonstrated it is NOT a responsible company and they should definitely not be doing this kind of R&D work.

I've fallen dead asleep behind the wheel twice and I don't have a self driving car. But you'd think there'd be a sensor inside a self-driving car that screams, "Wake the f up!"

There is, in your case. That would be the windshield or steering wheel when you hit the guardrail or bridge abutment.