Self Driving Uber Kills Pedestrian

Alan B said:

Do they have a driving test for autonomous vehicle control systems? Seems like there should be standardized testing under development by the government or some independent testing lab franchised by the government that autonomous vehicles would have to pass before being allowed on the road.

Click to expand...

I'd bet that in order to convince governments to allow these cars on the road that the companies would have had to demonstrate some sort of ability in preset scenarios like that. As much as I'm cynical about politics and politicians, these folks dearly crave re-election and higher offices. So I'd be surprised if they don't cover their butts pretty well before signing off on something self-driving cars. That said, I'm betting the governments have set no standards at this time and are relying on the proponents to do the initial exploration and discovery in this area. But I have a hard time thinking that pedestrian avoidance wouldn't be a fundamental part of any of these systems. That they are all equipped with Lidar and Radar would seem to confirm that.

http://www.ncsl.org/research/transportation/autonomous-vehicles-self-driving-vehicles-enacted-legislation.aspx

https://azgovernor.gov/sites/default/files/related-docs/eo2018-04_1.pdf

I vote for no more private vehicles driving around with one and more empty seats. Large and heavy, requiring lots of energy to accelerate and go against gravity ("up hills")... and should be easy to pedal (warmth and exercise, but also to shave off peak power outs to extend ranges per charge and also so the cells ("bettery") last longer before inevitable recycling and replacement). Was this self driving giant thingee vehicle bettery-electric powered? At least when animals (including pedestrians and cyclists, etc) are hit/injured/killed it should be done in a more "Eco-Friendly" way. Yes?

Seems to have put a damper on Toyota's program

Toyota halted the testing of its autonomous vehicles on public roads in the US in the wake of a deadly crash involving a self-driving Uber in Arizona Sunday night. According to Bloomberg, the Japanese auto giant said it would temporarily cease testing its “Chauffeur” program out of respect for its test drivers.

“Toyota Research Institute does not have firsthand information on the tragic traffic fatality in Tempe, Arizona on Sunday, March 18,” a Toyota spokesperson said “Our thoughts are first and foremost with the victim’s family.”
"Toyota has also been in talks with Uber"

He added, “We cannot speculate on the cause of the incident or what it may mean to the automated driving industry going forward. Because we feel the incident may have an emotional effect on our test drivers, we have decided to temporarily pause our Chauffeur mode testing on public roads.”

Click to expand...

LockH said:

I vote for no more private vehicles driving around with one and more empty seats. ...

Click to expand...

Sure. And I vote for no more fat people. Food is expensive to make in terms of energy and resources to produce, store and deliver. Besides, there are people starving in other places in the world. It just looks bad. And that's not even taking into account the resources spent on health care problems that are hugely contributed to by over eating and sloth. Speaking of sloth, we'll all have to register and be monitored for just the right balance between physical activity needed for health versus excess activity that would cause a person to need too much food. Most Olympic games and most professional and amateur sports will have to go due to excess exercise. Either that, or we'll have really skinny athuletes. I think curling may survive relatively unchanged - at least in those areas that have climates so that naturally occurring ice can be used. Once we all slim down and get used to that, we should start limiting the foods we'll allow to be produced. Coffee is out. No nutritional value and quite expensive. Starbucks gets outlawed first just because they charge $5 for a cup of coffee. Ice cream? Gimmee a break. Horrible on so many levels. That's gone fo' sure!! The outlawed food list will be long. If I have my way, we'll be eating lots-o-beans-n-rice and drinking plenty of water. Booze, a silly waste - will be done away with.

Then down the road we can implement a process analogous to filing taxes - only it will operate in reverse. Each year you will file a planned energy and resource usage budget that you will be held to once approved. You will incur fines if you exceed your pre-approved budget plan by any significant amount. With children representing one of the greatest uses of resources (They consume resources for an entire lifetime for gawdsake!!), it will become mandatory that you get approval to have children and you will face severe penalties if things spring off of you without you getting permission first.

That budgeting process will be eventually lead to the elimination of large dwellings (Except for the politically privileged for whom exceptions will always exist. I will shift careers and become a politician.) and further down the road separate dwellings will become very rare. After all, aren't shared wall dwellings more energy efficient in most areas? Once we have VR, we won't need much space. We'll just plug into our machines and behave nicely in our little hive pods with toilet, "kitchen" and VR connections all in one space. Gotta shrink the cities and build upwards so we stop encroaching so much on nature. With smaller pods as living quarters, it will be easier to move us to those areas that have the most mild climates and therefore require the least amount of heating and cooling. Of course, a huge study will have to be done to balance the energy costs of moving versus the savings. One way to accomplish that would be to assign cities of residence to dictate to young adults where they must move their pod once they become of legal age. Where you live won't really matter much. We'll visit each other and pursue higher learning through our VR interfaces. We'll have pod lotteries to determine where are pods are located and we'll save the planet!!

Yes, let's get super-involved in everybody's personal lives and what they do. Let's dictate what resources they can and cannot use and how they can or cannot use those resources. Surely that's what we need to do. Step right up folks. I'll make the plans.

I recall reading an article about pedestrian deaths due to a car strike. Cars with tall / flat noses (1969 Continental, 2018 Charger, 1970's pick-up truck, etc) would fling the victim a long distance (aside from the broken legs), often ending with a head injury when the pedestrian finally landed, sometimes landing in traffic for an additional runover (ouch).

The cars that seems to have to most survivable strikes against pedestrians had a low bumper with a sloping hood that would "sweep you off your feet". Cars mentioned were the 1970's Triumph Spitfire and 1980's Porsche 911. Don't read this wrong, the pedestrians legs were still both broken, and most still had some type of torso / head injury, but...there was a much higher survival rate, and head injuries were less severe.

Interestingly, the Transport Research Laboratory in the UK analysed vehicle-pedestrian collisions and found the opposite: that the larger & more flat fronted the vehicle the greater the survivability for the pedestrian. Motorcycles were the worst, buses and heavy goods vehicles were the best, cars somewhere in the middle.

This fitted with an account by a coroner I read that asserted that a typical pedestrian-car strike involved the initial impact breaking the pedestrian's legs, their head would then hit the windscreen, resulting in a non-fatal head injury. The unfortunate 'ped would then be flung up and over the car and often suffer a fatal head injury when landing on the road.

In the case of the Uber car crash I find it interesting that the day after the crash, the dashcam footage, which is vital evidence, is all over the internet. The cynic in me says Uber rushed this out deliberately to try and give the impression of an unavoidable "came out of nowhere impact", with the interior footage in particular to scapegoat the driver, who was clearly not paying attention.

I was hit while crossing the street in a crosswalk in Las Vegas. I was in a rush to get to my table tennis match and entered as soon as I had a green light and a walk sign. I know better than to do that given that I was entering from the driver's right hand side. Most aren't looking there. Most look to the left for oncoming cars. Anyway, the driver of this truck (who had been stopped at the intersection) accelerated into the crosswalk as I was entering it. I saw him in my periphery and leaned upward toward the hood while getting my feet off of the ground. He ended up pushing me a couple feet through the crosswalk before he stopped from hitting his brakes. My onlyy damage was skinned knuckles, but it could have been much worse if I hand't left my feet. Maybe he wouldn't have even seen me?!? Anyway, he got a nasty look from me and I got some skinned knuckles from his grill. We were both idiots, though I was an idiot who was obeying traffic laws.

Of course, with my New World Order there would be no such truck with one driver and (unless I had achieved my political aspirations) I would, perhaps, have been playing my table tennis match virtually back wherever I had my pod docked - while sucking down some tasty beans and rice paste. I think you can do that when playing virtual table tennis.

Punx0r said:

In the case of the Uber car crash I find it interesting that the day after the crash, the dashcam footage, which is vital evidence, is all over the internet. The cynic in me says Uber rushed this out deliberately to try and give the impression of an unavoidable "came out of nowhere impact", with the interior footage in particular to scapegoat the driver, who was clearly not paying attention.

Click to expand...

It was released by the City of Tempe, not Uber and it was released about three days after the accident, not the day after. The accident occurred on Sunday night the footage was released sometime on Wednesday.

Read the UN Agenda 21 docs, or Rosa Koire's book, Behind the Green Mark: UN Agenda 21.

Punx0r said:

In the case of the Uber car crash I find it interesting that the day after the crash, the dashcam footage, which is vital evidence, is all over the internet. The cynic in me says Uber rushed this out deliberately to try and give the impression of an unavoidable "came out of nowhere impact", with the interior footage in particular to scapegoat the driver, who was clearly not paying attention.

Click to expand...

I've paid attention to the media coverage online regarding the killing. Every story I've read has been heavy on diminishing the reputation of the victim and competence of the "driver". They've all steered away (pun intended) from placing the blame on Uber and been protective of the autonomous vehicle agenda.

I'd say these media outfits are open to being paid by the corporation (pretty vulnerable now) on the one hand, and their editors are by in large committed to the "Smart City" agenda and thus protective and promotive of all its components, on the other.

RemoteRoad said:

I've paid attention to the media coverage online regarding the killing. Every story I've read has been heavy on diminishing the reputation of the victim and competence of the "driver". They've all steered away (pun intended) from placing the blame on Uber and been protective of the autonomous vehicle agenda. I'd say these media outfits are open to being paid by the corporation . . .

Click to expand...

So your claim is that the media are paid shills who are deflecting the blame away from Uber and their technology. I took a quick survey to see if that's accurate. Searched on "uber accident" and the first hits were:
=======================
Human Driver Could Have Avoided Fatal Uber Crash, Experts Say
Bloomberg
March 22, 2018, 10:04 AM PDT Updated on March 22, 2018, 12:27 PM PDT
From
Human driver may have avoided impact: forensic crash analysts
Self-driving sensors should have detected victim, experts say
=======================
Experts say crash video shows Uber's failure to protect pedestrian
by Matt McFarland and Sara O'Brien @CNNMoney
March 22, 2018: 3:06 PM ET

New video of the fatal crash involving a self-driving Uber vehicle in Tempe, Arizona, shows a failure of the expected performance of the autonomous vehicle's technology, according to experts.
========================
Dashcam video of deadly self-driving Uber crash released
By Stephen Sorace | Fox News

Dashcam video was released Wednesday night showing the dramatic and deadly crash of a self-driving Uber SUV in Arizona — as the woman operating the vehicle had her head down.

Two angles — interior and exterior camera footage — were released by the Tempe Police Department.

Officials did not release the moment the pedestrian, identified as 49-year-old Elaine Herzberg, was hit, "due to the graphic nature of the impact." . . .

Experts who viewed the video said the vehicle’s Lidar (laser) and radar, which can see in the dark better than humans or cameras, should have detected Herzberg.

"It absolutely should have been able to pick her up," said Sam Abuelsmaid, an analyst for Navigant Research who follows autonomous vehicles. "From what I see in the video it sure looks like the car is at fault, not the pedestrian."
====================

So myth - "media refuses to blame Uber technology and UAV's" - BUSTED!

billvon said:

"It absolutely should have been able to pick her up," said Sam Abuelsmaid, an analyst for Navigant Research who follows autonomous vehicles. "From what I see in the video it sure looks like the car is at fault, not the pedestrian."
====================

So myth - "media refuses to blame Uber technology and UAV's" - BUSTED!

Click to expand...

Right. In fact some of the coverage is decidedly slanted against Uber - as is the quote (which may notabove. Not the pedestrian's fault. Are you kidding me? She was crossing in the dark, wearing dark clothes, no reflectors or lights, and not looking toward oncoming traffic. It is pretty clearly mostly her fault. Of course, that's no reason to ignore what is becoming increasingly clear, which is that the systems onboard the Uber did not perform as they should have. They should have performed better than a typical human driver in this situation, but they did not. If they had, then the unfortunate woman would have been the woman fortunate enough to have stepped out in front of an self-driving car rather than one driven by a human bean.

If you want to be cynical about the media but closer to the truth, stop thinking of the media as an information source as much as you think of it as an entertainment source. People tend to be entertained by hyperbole. So the media is generally less concerned about which side it takes and more concerned about hyping the news up as much as possible.

Strawman, Bill. You listed three stories of tens of thousands on the incident. Furthermore, business papers are exceptional in the media biz. They tend to be far more objective.

Further, headlines and a few quotes don't reveal the sum effect. I've seen unnecessary and less than fully relevant character attacks on the pedestrian and now the "monitor-driver" in nearly every article I've read.

wturber said:

If you want to be cynical about the media but closer to the truth, stop thinking of the media as an information source as much as you think of it as an entertainment source. People tend to be entertained by hyperbole. So the media is generally less concerned about which side it takes and more concerned about hyping the news up as much as possible.

Click to expand...

Frank Wisner's Mighty Wulitzer is still in full swing, in fact moreso than ever. Have no doubt about that.

https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/csi-publications/csi-studies/studies/vol52no2/intelligence-in-recent-public-literature-1.html

How can this be said? Well, firstly due to its being so damned effective. Secondly, because Obama specifically lifted the restriction on the intel agencies being able to use these techniques domestically. CIA, and the US security state more broadly, have always been champions of US transnationals. Official doctrine is that there's essentially no difference between US national interest and US transnational corps.

Uber is already flailing under several recent scandals and legation (sexual harassment, underpayment, CEO shameful resignation, earlier autonomous vehicle incidences, baseline public skepticism of autonomous vehicles, cab drivers unions, etc...). It's not stretch to think they are pulling out every strategy possible to preserve their "innovative" new business which just so happens to perfectly match up and embody some of the prime medium and longer term goals of US leadership (smart cities, less energy usage, less free movement, more monitoring of movement, etc...)

I'd further suggest reading up on propaganda. The father of civilian peacetime use of propaganda, and reforming it to be directed at the subconscious rather than the conscious, Edward Bernays is worth reading if you've not have much exposure to this area.

So now the CIA is to blame? I'm not sure I get your point.

If your point is that the media can be played, well of course it can be. They are suckers for hype. Easy peasy. And the public is generally a sucker for the sensational and the simple answer. So it goes.

And of course Uber is going to be defensive and protect itself. Pretty much every person and organization tends to do that. Nothing new here. Do you think any Tempe officials are going to come out and comment on the "sidewalks" that have been built in a median where pedestrians do not belong? While possible, it seems unlikely to me. But rather than speculate, it is best to simply look at the facts as they come out and judge them and their implications based on their merit. Resist the hype and look for information of substance.

Just saw a still picture of the woman, walking with her bicycle across the road. Looks to me as though there is a bike lane on the right. She was wearing dark clothing and no reflectors. I wonder if she was homeless or normal type. Would it have happened if there was a crosswalk there, you know how some roads have a cross walk with no intersection. What if it was just a through lane with the uber, and two T intersections on either side, then she'd have complete legal right to cross, no matter what she was wearing. Halfway across the road, the car is to blame everytime. Unless the ped is running I guess.

wturber said:

So now the CIA is to blame? I'm not sure I get your point.

Click to expand...

They are a far better target for paranoia than Uber.

wturber said:

I was hit while crossing the street in a crosswalk in Las Vegas.

Click to expand...

I almost got taken down tonight. This is a good scenario for the theoretical driverless car.

I had a walk signal and started into the crosswalk. An SUV was going a bit too fast even if it wasn't wet and rainy, so when he tries to turn right with me in the crosswalk he straightens out and comes to a stop in the intersection. Then as I continue and haven't reached the #1 lane yet he still punches it and turns wide and cuts through the left turn lane that was luckily empty. So with him out of the way this left turner decides to just punch it and come right at me. Couldn't see me with the SUV there, right? Interesting enough right there, I'm trying to guess which lane he'll turn into because I'll only have a second once he picks one.

But here comes a bicycle that may or may not have been an electric, HE was sure moving and no light. A motorcycle wouldn't have gotten a speeding ticket. Lucky for him the driver saw him and straightened out to skid. The guy was riding like an idiot but he may well have saved me right there.

So I doubt a self driving car can really be programmed for all that. If it was the first car I suppose it would have waited for me to clear the crosswalk. But if it was the second car what would have happened once the SUV was gone? And the crazy cyclist, probably popping out from behind a slower moving car in the view of the driverless car. Would he have stood a chance?

But beyond that, there's much that begins after the discussion of how safe a properly working driverless car can be. What about when it stops working properly? It could turn into a mass murder just by no longer knowing when to stop. Think of the driver fleeing an accident who drove down the Santa Monica Promenade, or the guy who decided to mow people down on the Venice Boardwalk, killing a newlywed and I don't remember how many others. What indeed about the car just 'Forgetting' as though it had Alzheimer's?

Can't say I'm in favor of them.

A lot of people (dumb people) step on the road and just assume cars will see them and slow down for them and most of the time, of course, the cars do.
Now that self-driving cars are here this is going to be extremely dangerous as it seems by the general view of people here that those people are now just legitimate kills for self-driving cars.



To me this is not acceptable, the whole idea of why we should accept self-driving cars is because of the belief they will outdo human drivers 100% of the time, especially when its a dead easy situation like this one should have been, the only failures I expect to see a self-driving cars is when someone quite literally jumps infront of a car from behind a large bin without barely anytime for even a computer to respond in time.

People are going to catch on if this is how self-driving cars are going to be, the reason why folks suicide on train lines is because there is no way a train can stop in time due to its huge weight and size.
https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/metro-puts-millions-into-fencing-off-melbournes-rail-suicide-hot-spots-20140605-39lxk.html
Millions of dollars is being spent fencing off open sections of Melbourne's railways where people are regularly taking their own lives.
Suicide by train has become so common Metro plans to build a dedicated train wash, called a ''biopit'', to clean train exteriors after a person is hit. The bio-pit will cost an estimated $5.4 million to build.

If self-driving cars are going to far more convenient and passing by everyone's home every day then these people now have an incredibly convenient new option waiting for them.

For LIDAR and other self-driving sensors that do not use the visual spectrum of the human eye, this person crossing the road should of been super easy to see, this self-driving car failed where it should of exceeded.
I am wondering if the car was using Tesla radar mode instead, as this non-LIDAR sensor uses a more cheaper system of seeing in the dark, apparently, Tesla radar will see an aluminum coke can on the road as big as a garbage bin and is programmed to ignore such obstacles.

LIDAR self-driving car videos.
https://youtu.be/tiwVMrTLUWg?t=11m5s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nXlqv_k4P8Q
https://youtu.be/ibIzthKKZWY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RW5ONf7DtyY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ii1w9HtmQXA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MtpVeP0u0M
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E2TicfQSuKo

wturber said:

LockH said:

I vote for no more private vehicles driving around with one and more empty seats. ...

Click to expand...

Sure. And I vote for no more fat people.

Click to expand...

... and:

Yes, let's get super-involved in everybody's personal lives and what they do.

Click to expand...

Hehe... Just suggesting that some 21st-Century folks may not like seeing large and heavy weapons of mass destruction consuming a LOT of energy to move one fat butt across urban spaces, and spending most of the time parked and taking up a huge space of real estate and collectively requiring massive infrastructure spending and doing billions of property damage and injuring and killing millions of animals every day (some human...) and "infrastructure" includes hospitals and exercise clubs/"fitness studios"... :wink:

[youtube]jg047oJf1B4[/youtube]

[youtube]fk2YRpLnmdU[/youtube]

[youtube]1kj080QCjOg[/youtube]
Notice any pattern?

markz said:

Just saw a still picture of the woman, walking with her bicycle across the road. Looks to me as though there is a bike lane on the right. She was wearing dark clothing and no reflectors. I wonder if she was homeless or normal type. Would it have happened if there was a crosswalk there, you know how some roads have a cross walk with no intersection. What if it was just a through lane with the uber, and two T intersections on either side, then she'd have complete legal right to cross, no matter what she was wearing. Halfway across the road, the car is to blame everytime. Unless the ped is running I guess.

Click to expand...

I posted a link earlier that you can click on and look around at the area on Google Maps. A crosswalk doesn't make much sense IMO. If you put one in, it would probably have to have a light and it would be hard to justify that kind of expense for that location. A better plan, IMO, would be to tear out those "pathways" and fill in the median with plants. Failing that, create some kind of barrier so it isn't so inviting for pedestrians.

The woman was homeless but reportedly partially by choice. What I read was that she helped many of the other homeless in the area but she was planning on transitioning off of the streets and back to a more conventional life.

LockH said:

Hehe... Just suggesting that some 21st-Century folks may not like seeing large and heavy weapons of mass destruction consuming a LOT of energy to move one fat butt across urban spaces, and spending most of the time parked and taking up a huge space of real estate and collectively requiring massive infrastructure spending and doing billions of property damage and injuring and killing millions of animals every day (some human...) and "infrastructure" includes hospitals and exercise clubs/"fitness studios"... :wink:

Click to expand...

I laid out a very nice plan that will take care of all of this.

My (probably unpopular) opinion is that the state of Arizona has no business allowing self driving vehicles on our streets until they are proven beyond a doubt to be capablle of evaluating every possible situation. In my opinion they are not yet ready. I have 50 years of accident free driving experience and I'm sure I would have avoided killing this woman.
I think the state should reevaluate the permitting and stop using us as crash test dummy's. Governor give the money back.

Hehe... "Self Driving"... One of the last breaths of a dying 20th-century automotive industry. :wink:

How straight is the road on the approach to the collision? I'm wondering if the car was in sight when the woman started crossing. It's a wide road and there's a chance it wasn't.

She certainly did herself no favours wearing dark clothing and if she failed to properly judge the speed of traffic, but the car driver carries the greater responsibility to avoid such a collision. If you follow the driving maxim that you should drive at a speed where you can safely stop in the distance you know to be clear, then the car is 100% at fault. The woman didn't unexpectedly step off a kerb as the car was passing.

wturber said:

It was released by the City of Tempe, not Uber and it was released about three days after the accident, not the day after. The accident occurred on Sunday night the footage was released sometime on Wednesday.

Click to expand...

My mistake. I heard the news Monday and thought I'd seen the vid Tuesday. Thanks for the correction, not something I'd have expected the City to have done, but maybe there is a political angle in defending their decision to allow this car onto their roads.

Unfortunately, impossible to plan/prevent "accidents" due to SHT... In a world where about half are "average"... watt really isn't that "bright". And half the world is... dimmer... Only cure? Cut the force of energy contained in any heavy "object" moving "at speed". (Like, the energy of a "tiny" bullet watt moves very fast, vehicles just a lot heavier while much slower... same kinetic energy...)