I know that this is a case of rush to market to get ahead of the competitors. Some companies are unethical in that they consider a minimal number of human casualties to be acceptable collateral damage on their way to a profit. Some of the larger companies unofficially write the litigation costs into the equation. I am not knocking capitalism or corporations in general, believe me, but there are some bad actors in every sector.
Honestly, the more I review the video and think about other possible scenarios, the madder it makes me that that car with that useless human backup was put on a city street. I am not like some others who have posted here that are remaining fixated on the blame aspect of the likely drug addled victim who was jay walking with no natural light visibility. Move to another situation and imagine the car on a highway that runs along the edge of a downward slope. Replace the bag lady with a cow or sheep and imagine the car hitting it, spinning off the edge of the cliff and killing everyone inside and possibly people below. An unexpected object in the road is the real issue that needs attention, not what the object is or how it got there. Human drivers deal with it all the time by making split second judgment calls and maneuvers and most are able to avoid death. They could never do that, though, by plowing full speed into the object as though they didn’t even see it. Most attentive, video game playing 5 year olds behind the wheel could have done better than that car did. And, if we’d seen what the car was supposed to be seeing with night vision, it would have looked like an intentional hit.
We are trusting these companies with our safety and they are treating that trust in far too cavalier a manner. Putting this obviously less than fully tested prototype in this real life situation was not an acceptable risk. Either that night vision camera is faulty or the program algorithm is shockingly inadequate. When it comes to human safety, redundancy is an absolute necessity and so is a means of testing that doesn’t feel like Russian roulette.
I watched the video. No wa gh I would have hit that woman. The left lane was free of traffic. Too easy to swerve
Per one source, allegedly divorced two weeks prior to the accident. Was staying with a friend who lived not far from the scene of the incident. Reportedly some analysis indicates she was toting the bicycle under the left arm, possibly due to problem with the bicycle.
Friends and family are pursuing legal action. They are harshly criticizing local law enforcement’s characterization of Elaine Herzberg as a homeless bag lady.
Interesting narrative initially released to the press with many inaccuracies subsequently coming to light.