Posted on 03/22/2018 9:31:12 AM PDT by Former Proud Canadian
I disagree. A radar system would have picked her up a thousand feet away. Someone posted earlier that the LIDAR system on the car would have seen her within 20 yards.
There is no reason whatsoever that a computer controlled car should have hit any object in the road, let alone a person. If they can't detect objects in the road, their design isn't ready to be on the road.
Exactly. We should just eliminate procreation and eventually there be 0 dead annually. Brilliant.
If that object in the road had been a Cow, or perhaps a girder dropped off a truck, it would have possibly killed everyone riding in the driverless car.
A system that cannot detect objects in the road should not be permitted on the road.
She was an idiot, and probably drunk. Main road, darkness, high speed limit, no crosswalks (obviously), and the woman did not once even turn to glance at oncoming headlights.
........................................................
Pretty heartless. I would guess she was homeless and not all there mentally.
What sort of object in the road would it have been okay for the car to run into?
That it was a person is irrelevant. Why would anyone tolerate a car that runs into anything? What if that had been a Cow, or a Moose or something?
Cars should not run into anything in the road. Had that been a concrete block, it would have likely wrecked the car.
A car that cannot detect objects in the road (regardless of what they are) should not be on the road.
I think the low beams were about right. But I agree that high beams would have saved her life.
But these are all mistakes a human can make while driving. I had a real epiphany when it was pointed out to me that self driving cars don’t have to be perfect. They just have to be as safe as human drivers. And that’s not really that hard. :)
A win win
There are 254 million registered cars in the US. Assuming those cars drive umpteen billion miles per year, what is their ratio of miles driven per accident to the self driving cars miles driven per accident?
According to this webpage, it appears that vehicles striking Pedestrians account for about 548 deaths per year.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_fatality_rate_in_U.S._by_year
I'm not certain, but I'll bet self driving cars have more accidents per mile driven than do the rest of all the cars in the US.
Let us assume she was just a stack of bricks that had fallen off of a truck. Should the car have ran into it?
Her dumbness has nothing to do with it. The dumbness that matters here is the dumbness that thinks it's okay for a car to hit stuff that is in the road.
If there was not a system failure on it's obstacle detection system, than whoever let this thing onto the road is an imbecile.
Point 1: I would not have been asleep like the fat chick driving the car. Point 2, I would have swerved. Even then I would probably have hit the pedestrian. But there's good chance the algorithms didn't include pedestrian with bicycle. And a sleeping safety driver is a negligent safety driver.
“1. The “safety backup” driver was not paying attention.”
This shouldn’t matter - the problem with all these “semi self driving” systems is shortly after having some confidence in the system, the “human backup” will cease paying attention just about every time.
“2. All the reports I’ve seen indicate the brakes were never applied. This is a huge problem for Uber and the designer of the self-driving system. Even if the vehicle could not have stopped in time to avoid striking the pedestrian, the brakes should have been applied.”
Right. In fact, the car probably should have been able to avoid the woman (who bears a lot of fault for obviously not paying attention to traffic at all) since its LIDAR should have seen her even in the dark. I’m waiting to hear the explanation for the LIDAR not functioning as designed.
The woman crossing didn't expect the self-driving car to come up at speed. She probably assumed the car would slow down, which is why she didn't walk any faster. My guess the car algorithm was faulty and fooled by the bike, much like the Tesla that thought a white truck was "sky".
I agree completely. The self-driving car did not slow at all. The victim assumed there was an actual driver, not crappy SW.
Reminds me of my arrogant x (number 2). She assumed that the car had to yield to her as she was jaywalking one day. Problem was, the driver didn't see her and struck her, breaking her leg.
I had an awful time......trying not to laugh
These cars are equipped with Radar and night vision supported by A.I..
They love to tout as features that make their autonomous vehicle safer than a human driver, as the computers systems can see further ahead than a human driver.
How do you differentiate actual objects from shadows in a visual recognition system. You have to approach the problem without the built-in knowledge we all have of objects. A computer system processing a light sensor array only sees various colors at each of the sensor locations. There is no inherent image. The actual objects need to be differentiated from artifacts like shadows, glare.
Systems need to not only differentiate actual objects from artifacts, they need to discount objects that it should not stop for. You don't want the car stopping because some leaves fall in front of the car, or a trash bag blows across its path. What if it starts snowing or raining? So yes, there are real objects that are ok to run into. It's determining what is actually present in the path of the car that is a non-trivial task, but ultimately doable.
Indeed! I still contend that lawyers will doom the driverless car fantasy!
People make a poor RADAR target and night vision is helped by appropriate illumination. Insulating clothing makes peeps more difficult to ID and track.
Proceeding slowly greatly reduces the area of danger to monitor.
Eventually pedestrians will be able to intimidate autonomous vehicles to make them drive at slower speeds.
Oh, wait...here’s the problem...
You had the car on “Population Control” setting.
Deathwish2018
“The Uber car was equipped with LIDAR that has a 20 meter range”
I would doubt that they would invest in that technology if it only had a range of 20 meters.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.