BStowers023 Posted March 22, 2018 Report Share Posted March 22, 2018 I suck at embedding vids on here so if someone wants to, they can. A couple things I thought were off... The pedestrian on the bike is wearing a black hoodie and not even looking at oncoming traffic while crossing illegally at night. Darwin award candidate. Obviously the person behind the wheel should be paying attention. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unfunnyryan Posted March 22, 2018 Report Share Posted March 22, 2018 When I lived in Athens it wasn't if but when I'd hit some stupid fucker (not even drunk half the time) that decides to just suddenly sprint across court street from behind a parked car. Yep. Darwin Award. I do not blame the self driving car one bit. Human could have easily done the same. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mallard Posted March 22, 2018 Report Share Posted March 22, 2018 Lots of fail in the video, from the driver, the vehicle, and the pedestrian. Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TTQ B4U Posted March 22, 2018 Report Share Posted March 22, 2018 completely the pedestrian/riders fail on many levels. sad event but honestly doing stupid shit can get you killed. at least fucking look for traffic when you're crossing regardless of where you are. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RC K9 Posted March 22, 2018 Report Share Posted March 22, 2018 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RC K9 Posted March 22, 2018 Report Share Posted March 22, 2018 Was that a dude or a chic driving? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geeto67 Posted March 22, 2018 Report Share Posted March 22, 2018 Most state and local laws in this country give the pedestrian the right of way for a reason, so that drivers take extra care in operating their motor vehicles. Let's not play the blame game, regardless of the contributing factors the car is at fault for the purposes of insurance and restitution. The only thing I think this demonstrates is that autonomous car technology is not far enough along to be testing in a live environment, and that when you rely on humans as your system redundancy you are just going to get the same human errors that you had without the technology. Maybe the autonomous tech will reduce accidents in time, who knows, but right now I think the technology needs to slow down on it's push toward adoption, maybe go back to controlled environment testing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
10phone2 Posted March 22, 2018 Report Share Posted March 22, 2018 Well since they were touching a bicycle they are automatically not to blame. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mallard Posted March 22, 2018 Report Share Posted March 22, 2018 The only thing I think this demonstrates is that autonomous car technology is not far enough along to be testing in a live environment, and that when you rely on humans as your system redundancy you are just going to get the same human errors that you had without the technology. Maybe the autonomous tech will reduce accidents in time, who knows, but right now I think the technology needs to slow down on it's push toward adoption, maybe go back to controlled environment testing. Incorrect. There are companies out there doing it the right way, and, even in your own words, it's no more unsafe than a "normal" human-driven vehicle when the safety driver is doing their job. Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coltboostin Posted March 22, 2018 Report Share Posted March 22, 2018 I'm not sure that would be the drivers fault even if they were driving. Black coat- NO lights, not in a crosswalk. More importantly, is that a dude with tits or a chic with a sole patch? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geeto67 Posted March 22, 2018 Report Share Posted March 22, 2018 Incorrect. There are companies out there doing it the right way, and, even in your own words, it's no more unsafe than a "normal" human-driven vehicle when the safety driver is doing their job. It's no more "unsafe" than a usual distracted driver with an increased reaction time, which is a higher risk than the average driver. Most autonomous chaperones are required to monitor certain things so they are being asked to split their attention - so maybe some procedures need to change here. yeah yeah all the cynics will come out and bitch that everyone is a distracted driver on their cell phone these days, but that's actually not true, no matter how bad columbus drivers seem to be. Still, it's on the car companies now to prove to the public that testing in a live environment is still prudent and safe. Let's see how they do. I'm not sure that would be the drivers fault even if they were driving. Black coat- NO lights, not in a crosswalk. Those would be a factor in a contributory negligence determination, but it's exceedingly, extremely rare, you will ever find a pedestrian to have contributed 50% let alone more than that in the fault realm. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mallard Posted March 22, 2018 Report Share Posted March 22, 2018 I'm not sure that would be the drivers fault even if they were driving. Black coat- NO lights, not in a crosswalk. More importantly, is that a dude with tits or a chic with a sole patch? It's a chick with a felony and a piercing that looks like a soul patch. Keep in mind that dashcam camera images are deceptive at night. Your eyes have much better dynamic range... It's no more "unsafe" than a usual distracted driver with an increased reaction time, which is a higher risk than the average driver. Most autonomous chaperones are required to monitor certain things so they are being asked to split their attention - so maybe some procedures need to change here. yeah yeah all the cynics will come out and bitch that everyone is a distracted driver on their cell phone these days, but that's actually not true, no matter how bad columbus drivers seem to be. Still, it's on the car companies now to prove to the public that testing in a live environment is still prudent and safe. Let's see how they do. Those would be a factor in a contributory negligence determination, but it's exceedingly, extremely rare, you will ever find a pedestrian to have contributed 50% let alone more than that in the fault realm. Most autonomous testing is done with 2 people in the vehicle, so the "driver" just has to focus on driving. All driving laws still apply to the safety driver (You could argue more so since they are being paid to do this type of driving), and there are additional restrictions on the "driver" when testing in CA, but AZ doesn't have explicit rules for testing AV's like CA does. Also keep in mind that AZ, specifically the Phoenix area, is the deadliest place for pedestrians. There were 10 killed in a week at the beginning of March. Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mallard Posted March 22, 2018 Report Share Posted March 22, 2018 One view.... http://www.thedrive.com/opinion/19504/disgraceful-dashcam-video-proves-uber-is-the-theranos-of-self-driving Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iwashmycar Posted March 22, 2018 Report Share Posted March 22, 2018 Yikes Alex. Sounds like one of Jimmy Kimmels fucking tirades. I certainly believe the car should have "saw" her. Something seems wrong there, but like others said, not a good place to cross no matter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geeto67 Posted March 22, 2018 Report Share Posted March 22, 2018 Most autonomous testing is done with 2 people in the vehicle, so the "driver" just has to focus on driving. All driving laws still apply to the safety driver (You could argue more so since they are being paid to do this type of driving), and there are additional restrictions on the "driver" when testing in CA, but AZ doesn't have explicit rules for testing AV's like CA does. Also keep in mind that AZ, specifically the Phoenix area, is the deadliest place for pedestrians. There were 10 killed in a week at the beginning of March. All good points, but they bring up the questions: Was Uber deviating from the industry standard? And is there a clear industry standard? This is something the auto manufacturers understand really well, which is why you don't really hear much about their autonomous programs despite the fact nearly everyone in the auto industry has an autonomous program. It's only the "Tech" companies like Tesla and Uber that are playing fast and loose, and as a result we hear about their accidents all the time. If this tech is to have a chance, it needs to sell that it is safer than human drivers. Pedestrians don't sign up to be part of the R&D of a big company, so those big companies have to be more careful than what is generally expected of them in testing this equipment, and that is something I don't think Uber understands or even cares about. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mallard Posted March 22, 2018 Report Share Posted March 22, 2018 Yikes Alex. Sounds like one of Jimmy Kimmels fucking tirades. I certainly believe the car should have "saw" her. Something seems wrong there, but like others said, not a good place to cross no matter. Look at the sat image of the accident scene. It may not be a legal crosswalk, but the city put a brick paver walkway across the median...not exactly discouraging crossing... Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
l36tols1 Posted March 22, 2018 Report Share Posted March 22, 2018 I've driven down that same road plenty of times day and night. I know exactly where it happened. The driver could have easily prevented it if he/she was paying attention. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mallard Posted March 22, 2018 Report Share Posted March 22, 2018 All good points, but they bring up the questions: Was Uber deviating from the industry standard? And is there a clear industry standard? This is something the auto manufacturers understand really well, which is why you don't really hear much about their autonomous programs despite the fact nearly everyone in the auto industry has an autonomous program. It's only the "Tech" companies like Tesla and Uber that are playing fast and loose, and as a result we hear about their accidents all the time. If this tech is to have a chance, it needs to sell that it is safer than human drivers. Pedestrians don't sign up to be part of the R&D of a big company, so those big companies have to be more careful than what is generally expected of them in testing this equipment, and that is something I don't think Uber understands or even cares about.More... https://jalopnik.com/just-about-everyone-uses-two-safety-drivers-when-testin-1823984330 Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furloaf Posted March 22, 2018 Report Share Posted March 22, 2018 Jaywalker lost to Darwin first off. Uber's autonomous car/software appears uber shitty as well. LiDAR/RADAR should have seen it. Hard to tell but doesn't seem to brake, if anything it's turning into the pedestrian. Likely unavoidable strike regardless, that jaywalker walked right into it. No comment on the driver. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coltboostin Posted March 23, 2018 Report Share Posted March 23, 2018 Keep in mind that dashcam camera images are deceptive at night. Your eyes have much better dynamic range... I agree 100% I blacked out for a sec, porb because I rarley UBER. So the person behind the wheel IS the driver. For some reason, I though they were a passenger, a person who called an UBER. Well, this is a pretty open and shit case. She gon'. Guilty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xlr8tn Posted March 23, 2018 Report Share Posted March 23, 2018 The "who's wrong" argument means nothing to the bicyclist....they're still dead. If you ride a bike on the road filled with cars it's not if but when you either get hit or almost get hit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RCode04 Posted March 23, 2018 Report Share Posted March 23, 2018 An autonomous driving car can't overcome the laws of physics. If an object enters its path before it physically has time to stop, it will get hit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mallard Posted March 23, 2018 Report Share Posted March 23, 2018 An autonomous driving car can't overcome the laws of physics. If an object enters its path before it physically has time to stop, it will get hit.But it does have better senses and a faster reaction time... Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BStowers023 Posted March 23, 2018 Author Report Share Posted March 23, 2018 I think if self driving cars have this much error, they are more dangerous than a regular car. People will become to reliant on the self-driving features and wonder off like this woman/man/wildebeast did. Part of the reason I like driving a manual. Keeps me engaged with driving. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mallard Posted March 23, 2018 Report Share Posted March 23, 2018 I think if self driving cars have this much error, they are more dangerous than a regular car. Full self driving cars (Level 4) do not. The only ones on the road doing true Level 4 driving are Waymo. Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.