Driverless Cars

[zzvyb6]

Well, from my long years of life experiences, it comes down to this: Like CB radio, cell phones, tractors, guns, Internet, Facebook, pensions, and NFL football, All good things come to and end because there are so many morons out there who misuse the technology, tools, features and services, not because they are stupid, but because it's 'fun', because they like being disruptive, because it can be political, and because they have no life (and of course, because they really are stupid). Just a few idiots is all it takes. And we know Nature likes them because there are now so many.

 

[4570Man]

From earlier reporting, I was expecting to see someone stepping off the median immediately into the path of the car. An average driver with high beams on never would have made that mistake.

Rgds, D.

Maybe visibility was better in real life but I never saw her,until she was right in front of the vehicle. Why the heck was she walking a bike across the highway anyway? And didn't she notice a car coming at her at a good rate of speed? I didn't see any lights or reflectors on the woman or the bicycle either. From my point of view she set herself up for what happened.

 

[Oaktree]

Maybe visibility was better in real life but I never saw her,until she was right in front of the vehicle. Why the heck was she walking a bike across the highway anyway? And didn't she notice a car coming at her at a good rate of speed? I didn't see any lights or reflectors on the woman or the bicycle either. From my point of view she set herself up for what happened.

I don't think anyone disputes that she was in the wrong here. Does that make it OK to hit her?

As others have noted, things like this happen all the time...people step out from between 2 parked cars, people open a car door without looking to see if any traffic is coming, pets run out into the road, etc. A good driver (key word here) should be aware of this possibility.

Again, they're hyping these as being safer than a vehicle with a human operator. Clearly, they have a long way to go.

 

[Gary Fowler]

From earlier reporting, I was expecting to see someone stepping off the median immediately into the path of the car. An average driver with high beams on never would have made that mistake.

Rgds, D.

The problem with this scenario is that while driving in the city, it is impossible to drive with your hi-beams on (at least legally) since you are constantly meeting on-coming traffic. There are sensors that can detect and stop a car when side crossing objects are detected, whether this car had those or not, we don't know. I do think that computer sensors will stop a car faster than a human can in just about all situations and with proper sensors can see in the dark when a human cannot.

I can see anything stopping a car doing 30-45 MPH if someone steps out from between a parked vehicle or stepping out in front of a car from just feet in front of it. It takes many feet to stop a car even if the pavement is dry. This kind of accident is not ever going to be stopped as long as pedestrians have full access to the road and can cross at any point. Having a crosswalk doesn't mean humans will walk to it to use it.

 

[3930dave]

Maybe visibility was better in real life but I never saw her,until she was right in front of the vehicle. Why the heck was she walking a bike across the highway anyway? And didn't she notice a car coming at her at a good rate of speed? I didn't see any lights or reflectors on the woman or the bicycle either. From my point of view she set herself up for what happened.

I'm a big fan of people taking responsibility for themselves, don't get me wrong..... Plenty of people around where I live (ie. have more disposable income than the homeless) routinely walk around at night wearing dark clothes, no reflectors, lights......... there are plenty of "thought challenged" pedestrians around, even b4 cell phones became stuck to people's faces......

I used to spend time in Tempe, and thought I knew that area. Had a look at Google streetview the other day.... that's an urban parkway. Streetview shows it daytime of course, with some large (for AZ) trees in the median - part of why I was guessing this lady had stepped out from behind something obstructing view. Turned out not to be the case.

The street near where I live is reasonably well lit - still, I drive down it at night with high beams on, w/o opposing traffic of course - makes a big difference seeing pedestrians, animals, or parked vehicles.... Even hitting just something like a racoon or medium sized dog can mess up a small vehicle..... I have enough things to fix on my old vehicles already

Rgds, D.

 

[4570Man]

I don't think anyone disputes that she was in the wrong here. Does that make it OK to hit her?

As others have noted, things like this happen all the time...people step out from between 2 parked cars, people open a car door without looking to see if any traffic is coming, pets run out into the road, etc. A good driver (key word here) should be aware of this possibility.

Again, they're hyping these as being safer than a vehicle with a human operator. Clearly, they have a long way to go.

I don't think it would be ok to purposely hit her, but I think she got what she had coming rather it be driverless car or human operated. You can't go walking across a dark highway with no lights or reflectors, make no effort to dodge traffic and be dumbfounded with the results. I think maybe the driverless cars loose in safety to an alert human operator, but when about a drunk one or a texting driver?

 

[3930dave]

Scientific American article:

Uber Self-Driving Car Fatality Reveals the Technology's Blind Spots - Scientific American

Note to AZ residents - Waymo has had completely driverless vehicles in testing since October.

Table 1 in the next link sums it up well.

/www.azosensors.com/article.aspx?ArticleID=862

W/O a Thermal sensor in use, you are kinda hooped at night, relying on just LIDAR.....

Last link has some good pictures......... highlights how Thermal is useful, not just at night. Good point (human vision) about driving into the setting sun.....

Rgds, D.

 

[3930dave]

....... drunk one or a texting driver?

KISS, Occam's Razor...... we're back to zzv's point...... Why not just get all the idiots (or at least most of 'em) off the Road, permanently ?

Same reason Uber hasn't added Thermal Imaging....... money.....

Some govt's may have actually run the #'s :

Scenario - tighten up driving regs - What happens to revenue when just 10% of the drivers are taken off the road ?

A big part of govt revenue depends on new vehicles being sold, old ones repaired, and fuel burned.

So, rather than deal with that root of the preventable accident problem..... We get Uber et al experimenting on public roads.....

In the big picture, I get it - this Tempe incident is just collateral damage, at a corporate level. Still, I'd like to see any surviving family (can be many reasons someone is on the street) compensated by Uber, and Uber should also be making a sizable donation to Homeless Shelters, IMO.

Rgds, D.

 

[4570Man]

I don't know how you take stupid people off the road. I would be in favor of a more thorough driving test. Locally you have to drive around the block without crashing. Aside from the morons a lot of people just flat out can't drive. There's a lot of elderly drivers who's sight has long since left.

 

[3930dave]

Autopilot was on, in that Mountain View crash.

Tesla: Autopilot was engaged in fatal Model X crash

That the exact problem had been noticed before, and the owner still engaged autopilot later is a good example of why I started this thread........ even people who should know better put too much faith in technology.....

Rgds, D.