View Full Version : Self-Driving Uber SUV Kills Woman In Tempe
Shooter45
03-19-2018, 13:14
Attack of the electronics.....
"A self-driving Uber SUV killed a bicyclist in the early hours of Monday morning.
Tempe, AZ – A woman was struck and killed by a self-driving Uber SUV in the early hours of Monday morning.
The New York Times (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/19/technology/uber-driverless-fatality.html) reported that Uber had suspended testing of its self-driving cars in Tempe, Pittsburgh, San Francisco, and Toronto, in the wake of the accident.
An Uber spokeswoman said the company was “fully cooperating” with the local authorities.
The autonomous Uber had a safety driver at the wheel, as was required for Uber’s autonomous test vehicles operating on public roads, Tech Crunch (https://techcrunch.com/2018/03/19/uber-self-driving-test-car-involved-in-accident-resulting-in-pedestrian-death/) reported.
Police said that the Uber was driving northbound near Mill Avenue and Curry Road when a woman attempted to cross the street with her bicycle in front of the vehicle outside, of a crosswalk, KNXV (https://www.abc15.com/news/region-southeast-valley/tempe/tempe-police-investigating-self-driving-uber-car-involved-in-crash-overnight) reported.
The pedestrian was hit by the Uber, and transported to a nearby hospital where she died, police said.
There were no passengers in the self-driving Uber at the time of the crash, according to KNXV.
"Our hearts go out to the victim’s family. We are fully cooperating with local authorities in their investigation of this incident," Uber said in a statement the company released.
Uber CEO Dara Khosrowshahi tweeted his condolences about the tragic death.
Police have not yet released the name of the victim.
The New York Times reported that the collision was the first time anyone was known to have been killed by a self-driving vehicle on public roads.
There are huge implications for self-driving vehicles in the future as a result of this first crash, Tech Crunch reported.
It’s not known if the safety driver who was in the Uber and supposed to be watching out for this sort of problem could be held legally responsible.
Tech Crunch said that results of the investigation and the outcomes from this incident will shape the future of autonomous vehicle regulation in the United States."
https://www.themaven.net/bluelivesmatter/news/self-driving-uber-suv-kills-woman-in-tempe-jZKotksT30mwiHAB_adrRw?full=1
Grant H.
03-19-2018, 13:23
RIP to the bicyclist.
Hopefully the truth of this will come out, and not just cause people to fear new tech.
This is what I expect. We'll see a big hurrah for self-driving tech and there will be some horrible accidents. Much larger in scale than this case.
The human brain is an amazing piece of technology, as long as it's engaged in the task at hand.
BushMasterBoy
03-19-2018, 13:44
CEO Dara Khosrowshahi...Iranian Muslim. I know I'm not PC.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dara_Khosrowshahi
The human brain is an amazing piece of technology, as long as it's engaged in the task at hand.
Like the task of being a "safety driver" in an autonomous vehicle?
Like the task of being a "safety driver" in an autonomous vehicle?
Nope. The car is doing the driving, so the "safety driver" isn't actively engaged. If people feel they have the opportunity to focus their attention elsewhere, they will.
Could have happened with a human driver. Random crossing outside expected areas. Same for a child darting out into traffic. I don't expect a driver to see everything, and why I always make eye contact before attempting5o cross even at cross walks.
thedave1164
03-19-2018, 16:45
so the uber car has already killed more people than all my guns combined.
Outlaw Uber, if it saves just one life
A lot of people assume a vehicle is going to slow down if they step out into traffic. Sometimes the person trying to cross doesn't see a vehicle coming and steps out when it's too late for anyone to do anything. I watched a lady making a right turn run over the front tire of the bike of a lady waiting to cross the street. Neither of them were paying attention to the other and the entire thing was avoidable. And by that, I don't mean by repealing the women's sufferage movement.
Zundfolge
03-19-2018, 16:59
If her name is Sarah Connor I will shit my pants.
The Norseman
03-19-2018, 16:59
Like the task of being a "safety driver" in an autonomous vehicle?
Maybe the safety driver was participating in a "safety meeting" prior to the crash...
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
StagLefty
03-19-2018, 17:54
Why aren't they testing these in Washington D.C. where innocent people wouldn't be at risk ?[Sarcasm2]
so the uber car has already killed more people than all my guns combined.
Outlaw Uber, if it saves just one life
^ Perspective
Grant H.
03-19-2018, 18:39
Could have happened with a human driver. Random crossing outside expected areas. Same for a child darting out into traffic. I don't expect a driver to see everything, and why I always make eye contact before attempting5o cross even at cross walks.
I wouldn't say "could have".
I would say "Happens with human drivers too..."
A total of 835 bicyclists were killed in crashes with motor vehicles in 2016.
http://www.iihs.org/iihs/topics/t/pedestrians-and-bicyclists/fatalityfacts/bicycles
There are stupid drivers. There are stupid pedestrians. There are stupid cyclists.
We all have been, at one or more moment in time, in one of these groups.
Occasionally there will be an intersection of stupid drivers and stupid pedestrians or stupid cyclists.
The laws of physics will determine the outcome.
CEO Dara Khosrowshahi...Iranian Muslim. I know I'm not PC.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dara_Khosrowshahi
Uber investors ousted Kalanick and put Khosrowshahi as a ceo. I don't know what Iranian or Muslim gotta do with CEO, but by his track record at Expedia, Uber investors love him.
As for me (as non-Uber investor), I usually favor FOUNDER of the company Kalanick. I actually favor majority of founders over hired CEO.
CEO Dara Khosrowshahi...Iranian Muslim. I know I'm not PC.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dara_Khosrowshahi
What does that have to do with anything? Was this some evil secret plot to get one over on the west by killing a cyclist?
From an article I read today, an injury attorney said that human drivers are almost never charged in accidents like this. Since it was autonomous driving, the liability for Uber will be interesting to see how this plays out.
It was also pointed out that with the talk about how the sensors are so amazing, this will make people wonder why the car couldn't identify a pedestrian not in a crosswalk.
What I do know is that my 2016 Mercedes has all kinds of sensors and "driver aids", and it amazes me how frequently they misinterpret the driving environment.
Sent from my SM-T700 using Tapatalk
BushMasterBoy
03-19-2018, 21:30
What does that have to do with anything? Was this some evil secret plot to get one over on the west by killing a cyclist?
I know, I'm not politically correct.
I know, I'm not politically correct.
Right, I get that you don't consider yourself "politically correct". What is the relevance of the religion/nationality of the CEO of a large company that had an autonomous car kill a cyclist? Are you trying to suggest that this one some sort of Islamic or Iranian attack, or is there another reason for it?
OtterbatHellcat
03-19-2018, 21:38
I'm not PC either.
I don't think it's worth pressing something that probably isn't there unless you're looking for it. Might not be a bad idea to let it be.
Do we have any idea the distance between the pedestrian and vehicle when she stepped into the street? Best sensor in the world can't overcome physics.
OtterbatHellcat
03-19-2018, 22:23
There are stupid drivers. There are stupid pedestrians. There are stupid cyclists.
We all have been, at one or more moment in time, in one of these groups.
Occasionally there will be an intersection of stupid drivers and stupid pedestrians or stupid cyclists.
The laws of physics will determine the outcome.
I thought this was a comprehensive possibility of explanation for most accidents.
buffalobo
03-20-2018, 00:25
Right, I get that you don't consider yourself "politically correct". What is the relevance of the religion/nationality of the CEO of a large company that had an autonomous car kill a cyclist? Are you trying to suggest that this one some sort of Islamic or Iranian attack, or is there another reason for it?
Primarily to troll you, since you took the bait.[facepalm]
Jeffrey Lebowski
03-20-2018, 05:51
From an article I read today, an injury attorney said that human drivers are almost never charged in accidents like this. Since it was autonomous driving, the liability for Uber will be interesting to see how this plays out.
Not that I’m disagreeing, but how many other “accidents like this” have there been?
Or, was it referring to crossing mid-road and between cars, that sort of thing?
BTW, I agree on the sensors.
Not that I’m disagreeing, but how many other “accidents like this” have there been?
He was referring to human drivers hitting pedestrians. Since the car was driving, this is new territory.
Sent from my electronic leash using Tapatalk
Jeffrey Lebowski
03-20-2018, 06:01
That’s what I thought you were getting at, but wanted to check.
Primarily to troll you, since you took the bait.[facepalm]
Whatever you say, I don't see those comments as trolling (especially on a site that's going to lean pretty far right where islam isn't always exactly super popular), but I guess throwing up the trolling excuse is the thing to do now on stuff like this.
Sounds like nothing out of the ordinary. Some idiot jumps out in front of a vehicle and whether it’s self driving or not there might not be enough time or distance to stop. Did the cyclist have on a helmet? Just knocking her off her bike at a really slow speed and she hits her head causing trauma or swelling/bleeding in the brain and that’s all it takes.
Doesn’t sound like this uber car was out of control and just smashed this lady as she was following the laws. It sounds to me like it’s her fault.
There were no signs that the Uber vehicle attempted to slow down. The investigation has to determine if the sensors could have identified her and how soon.
I'm under the impression that the lady was actually walking her bike across the street, but that doesn't change much because being knocked onto your head from standing is about the same as coming off of a bike.
This will be interesting as it will have similarities but a lot of new stuff to deal with, as already mentioned. It it were a person driver, the first thing an investigation is going to look at is vehicle speed and what the driver was actually doing at the time. It's unlikely the Uber was speeding, so like Gman pointed out, a lot of attention will be on sensors. The other thing is that I really can't believe that a vehicle like this is not equipped with cameras. Even if the vehicles doesn't use cameras to operate, I have to imagine that all this early stage testing stuff is jam packed with cameras to review scenarios just like this one.
I was reading this article to try and find more information: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/19/technology/uber-driverless-fatality.html
When I came across this
The accident was a reminder that self-driving technology is still in the experimental stage, and governments are still trying to figure out how to regulate it.
I couldn't help but think that we'll know that self-driving tech has fully arrived when vehicle start fleeing the scene of accidents.
Anyway, through all the fluff, there is decent info in the article, as well as a photo of the vehicle on the side of the road where you can see the impact point on the vehicle. Assuming that the vehicle wasn't moved, you can see which lane it was in as well. Investigators say that the Volvo was traveling at about 40 mph, but there is no indication that it attempted to slow down, but they didn't say why they thought that.
I have seen my fair share of ignorant bike riders doing stupid shit while riding on public roads. I have also seen bike riders intentionally put themselves in harms way because they feel they have the "Right of Way" regardless of the potential consequences. Go to Boulder and you will see that crap at just about every intersection.
If you are navigating public roads without a continual "Who is doing stupid shit around me?" mindset then you are more likely to meet your maker.
Uber Self-Driving SUV Kills Pedestrian Crossing Street (https://www.consumerreports.org/car-safety/uber-self-driving-suv-kills-pedestrian/)
“The technology that can assess and react to the driving environment continues to evolve, but it’s not foolproof,” says Jake Fisher, director of auto testing at Consumer Reports. Even advanced safety and object-detection systems, found in many cars today, have not yet been perfected, he said. “We see all sorts of driver-assist systems fail from time to time in the cars that CR evaluates. That includes forward-collision systems that issue false alerts and lane-keeping systems that don’t recognize lane markings as they should.”
That's been my experience as well.
There are times when a human driver can anticipate changes to the driving environment whereas sensors are creating snapshots of what it currently detects. You can pick up on subtleties of how another driver is interfacing with their car. I can regularly detect when a driver wants to be in another lane well before they actually make a lane change. Many times they'll keep hedging to one side of their lane, almost subconsciously.
California has increased the regulation on self-driving vehicles requiring them to prove the safety of the vehicle while Arizona relaxed rules allowing autonomous vehicles to not require a 'safety driver' behind the wheel. Most of the testing in the area of autonomous vehicles appears to be in AZ.
From what I can tell, the deceased was walking their bike across the street and were moving from the median toward the sidewalk. My bet is that the sensors couldn't make a distinction between the pedestrian and other objects found in medians.
I was reading this article to try and find more information: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/19/technology/uber-driverless-fatality.html
When I came across this
I couldn't help but think that we'll know that self-driving tech has fully arrived when vehicle start fleeing the scene of accidents.
Anyway, through all the fluff, there is decent info in the article, as well as a photo of the vehicle on the side of the road where you can see the impact point on the vehicle. Assuming that the vehicle wasn't moved, you can see which lane it was in as well. Investigators say that the Volvo was traveling at about 40 mph, but there is no indication that it attempted to slow down, but they didn't say why they thought that.
Technology is very good at dealing with known and repeatable scenarios but very bad and unknown ones and truly automated learning (AI). In meatspace a machine isn't dealing with a set of defined scenarios but all scenarios including those previously unknown.
"Machine learning" really still is in its infancy even though you find in white papers all over the data space. Could be a missing censor input or interpretation.
When I'm driving and see a ball heading towards the street I slow down and get ready to slam on the brakes. Can't count the number of times a child or a dog has run out chasing it. I bet most of us here do the same without realizing it! The ball may not be in the field of a censor. The interpretation that a child/dog could follow may not be in the code. And if so, the automation can't slam on the brakes anytime there is a nearby object that is moving or it would needlessly cause accidents. There is an element of judgment and evaluation of risks.
There is a lot going on between a human's ears. And some of that isn't just mechanics but morals/ethics. I don't just drive save because it saves me on my insurance but because I don't want to hurt anyone.
So we automate a critical (life/death) function while paying people not to work? I think this is being done wrong.
If the automated bugger-flipper does it wrong, my order gets jacked up. If the automated car gets it wrong, people die. Why not get the bugger-flipping automation right first?
Yep. The use of the term Artificial Intelligence is also overused. It simply doesn't yet exist. There are some functions being used that may be part of an AI 'toolkit', like sensors, but figuring out what to do with that data is still programmed.
I'm growing a bit concerned at this push to test technology "in the real world" before it's actually ready. I would think that self-driving vehicles would be run through some sort of field test facility where they can shove random objects suddenly into the test streets, see how it does with massive potholes or precipitation, etc without the danger of killing actual people that are unaware they are in what is essentially a giant video game.
So the question is......... If you are walking across the street why wouldn't you be looking out for oncoming cars? The magical street crossing fairy isn't going to keep you safe when someone or something blasts through the crosswalk.
I seen a similar zero sense of situational awareness situation happen yesterday. I was driving to work though my neighborhood and a guy was walking across the street in front of me. He was also cutting across the middle of the street in a diagonal fashion towards my car. He had ear phones in and his head was buried in his phone texting. I was driving about 25mph and slowed to a stop just as he was walking in front of my car. He didn't even see me even though my front bumper was less than 6 feet from him. I honked my horn as he was bout to walk right into my car and he about shit his pants when he looked up to see what was going on.
I'm growing a bit concerned at this push to test technology "in the real world" before it's actually ready. I would think that self-driving vehicles would be run through some sort of field test facility where they can shove random objects suddenly into the test streets, see how it does with massive potholes or precipitation, etc without the danger of killing actual people that are unaware they are in what is essentially a giant video game.
Frogger: The real life version
I seen a similar zero sense of situational awareness situation happen yesterday. I was driving to work though my neighborhood and a guy was walking across the street in front of me. He was also cutting across the middle of the street in a diagonal fashion towards my car. He had ear phones in and his head was buried in his phone texting. I was driving about 25mph and slowed to a stop just as he was walking in front of my car. He didn't even see me even though my front bumper was less than 6 feet from him. I honked my horn as he was bout to walk right into my car and he about shit his pants when he looked up to see what was going on.
I used to work up around 20th in downtown Denver in a past life over 20 years ago. There's an area where the light rail would loop back from north to south and ran the opposite direction to traffic. There was signage to warn pedestrians that trains approached from the other direction. As I'm waiting on the sidewalk for an oncoming train to pass, a guy reading a newspaper shows up in my peripheral vision walking past me and gets ready to step off the curb. I reflexively grabbed his shoulder and pulled him back. The train almost knocked the newspaper out of his hand. He was very thankful.
It's human. It happens. It always has and always will.
Once people rely on automation, they get to where they require it. This has been seen in aviation where so many commercial pilots are used to having systems do everything for them, that they lack the skills to manually fly the aircraft when those systems fail. And guess what, systems fail even in ways that were never anticipated. What I find really interesting is when systems fail and humans find ways to manipulate the vehicle in ways that were never anticipated to a happy outcome.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ywydalBYhic
Well, no reflectors that I can see. Wonder if she was intoxicated or otherwise impaired. Timed it perfect to get hit and it didn't even look like she was looking. Not implying she did it on purpose, but I feel like she shares some culpability here. There are many wild animals that wouldn't have attempted that crossing.
Dark area with a lack of street lighting. "Safety Driver" had their attention elsewhere, which I totally expected. They seemed to be dinking with their cell phone. Pedestrian was in the road and didn't just jump in front of the vehicle. They're showing us the visible light version, but these self-driving cars have sensors that can see in the dark, including LiDAR. Hell, my car has RADAR for Collision Avoidance.
The Self-Driving Uber in Fatal Crash Didn't Have a Vision Problem (https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-03-21/for-self-driving-cars-seeing-everything-isn-t-always-enough)
Experts say that the sophisticated sensors on the autonomous vehicle almost certainly detected the woman pushing her bicycle laden with bags along the median, close to the road. But it’s possible the car’s lidar and radar sensors, which scan the surroundings for objects, may not have realized it was detecting a person. (Uber declined to comment.)
“The real challenge is you need to distinguish the difference between people and cars and bushes and paper bags and anything else that could be out in the road environment,” said Matthew Johnson-Roberson, an engineering professor at the University of Michigan who works with Ford Motor Co. on autonomous vehicle research. “The detection algorithms may have failed to detect the person or distinguish her from a bush.”
Driverless cars “see” the world around them using data from cameras as well as radar and lidar sensors that bounce laser light off objects to assess shape and location. High-speed processors crunch the data to provide a 360-degree view of lanes, traffic, pedestrians, signs, stoplights and anything else in the vehicle’s path. That’s supposed to enable the vehicle to know, in real time, where to go and when to stop. But pedestrian identification remains a major challenge for self-driving systems.
How was that dash-cam footage released so quickly?
It should have been sequestered until the legal situation was figured out.
I'm surprised she crossed the entire street first. I assumed it more likely to have occurred if she were coming from the sidewalk. Pay attention kids!
BushMasterBoy
03-21-2018, 20:35
I think there was a question of the legality of the driver in this case because of a felony conviction. Some Arizona law requires a clean record. Not trolling. Just the facts. Form your own opinion.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5524031/PICTURED-Felon-wheel-killer-self-driving-Uber-car.html
Oh, a transgender driver. The wife and I disagreed. She said woman. I said dude with long hair and tits. I think I won that one.
Sent from my SM-T700 using Tapatalk
The video shows the negligence of the lady walking the bike. It’s dark as shit and you choose to mosey across the street with zero situational awareness? Looks like she paid the ultimate price for those bad decisions. I would challenge any human driver to successfully avoid that accident.
I agree and am not in the least bit bothered by this accident as far as relates to the danger of testing unmanned vehicles. Autonomous vehicles could kill 50 people a day for a year and still be less dangerous than people drivers. If it were to happen with kids crossing at a cross walk with a crossing guard present in a school zone, that'd be one thing. This accident is closer to if a plane landing on autopilot hit a guy driving across a runway.
The recent Facebook thing doesn't bother me one bit either. Perhaps I'm just becoming jaded.
GilpinGuy
03-22-2018, 00:10
This doesn't bother me either. It's "the first one", so it makes headlines. Not that the loss of the woman's life is trivial, but in the grand scheme of things I mean. It will be interesting to see how insurance issues will be handled with these.
It's hard to tell, but maybe the woman was looking at her phone while crossing the road?
thedave1164
03-22-2018, 05:53
So the homeless woman was killed by a nearly self-aware driverless car co-piloted by a self-unaware dickless transgender felon?
Does not sound like a country song, does sound like the plot to Terminator X
I deal with technology all day long, and have helped develop it through out the years, but not a fan of self driving planes, trains and automobiles.
Singlestack
03-22-2018, 11:18
Me and my sister-in law were discussing driverless cars this past weekend. I told her I expected there would be some terrible accidents and deaths during the years they were testing it. As long as there wasn't a public backlash preventing deployment, at some point they will get the tech working very reliably and a lot of accidents will be avoided. After that time, you will hear quite a few nanny staters demanding an end to regular cars and pushing for legislation to outlaw them by a particular date - cause thats what nanny staters do. She didn't agree with that assessment, and felt that nanny staters are way overblown (since she is a self-described progressive).
As long as vehicles are free-moving in 2 dimensions and subject to weather conditions, there will always be accidents. The tech may be able to control a vehicle well, within its capabilities. But some situations are highly complex and include many conditions and moving objects outside of a single vehicle's control. Now if you put cars on tracks like the autopia at Disneyland....
The video shows the negligence of the lady walking the bike. It’s dark as shit and you choose to mosey across the street with zero situational awareness? Looks like she paid the ultimate price for those bad decisions. I would challenge any human driver to successfully avoid that accident.
Her lack of situational awareness is no accident, it was nurtured in a society where other humans are accountable for the bad choices of the few and blamed. Because of this, a human driver would have taken note of her on the sidewalk, her movements, and likely taken action because a person with a family, job, house, etc... doesn't want the blame/consequences.
Enough to avoid the accident? I don't know. I can say I have avoided hitting people who have done the same many times who are used to a world where they have nothing to lose and I have everything to lose. Had a bum do exactly this on Quebec by 450 a couple of weeks ago jay walking from the Shell station to the bus stop by Kohl's. Traffic light with crossing was just 20-30 feet away but he jumped out in traffic for whatever reason entered his brain.
There is no concept of shared responsibility with machines. Machines aren't afraid of lawsuits. They offer almost perfect boolean results to real world problems with no shades of gray, subjectivism, no EQ (emotional intelligence) and thus no means to manipulate. Talk to machinists (have you seen the vids!!?!) and they will explain how unforgiving machines can be.
That lady didn't know she would encounter such a machine that night.
There were no signs that the Uber vehicle attempted to slow down. The investigation has to determine if the sensors could have identified her and how soon.
^This
Wonder if the CEO got the call from the techys saying the car should have avoided this collision, or at least attempted to. Therefore, he immediatly suspended all testing.
I believe the pedestrian is ultimatly at fault in this case, but it seems the smart car should have been able to sense and avoid this accident.
Particularly in cases like this, the car should be better than a human behind the wheel - human's are distracted by any number of things going on around them, but the car's sensors are 100% working to avoid a collision.
Not a fan of self driving anything - DIA trains make me nervous.
I have to dispute the quality of the forward looking video. It makes the headlights appear to only cast light for about 40 feet in front of the vehicle. Those would be some really crappy headlights. Even then, she made it from the center line almost all the way across the lane in that short time. I'm willing to bet that the human eye could have detected something in the roadway much sooner and reacted accordingly (unless you have night vision issues).
The vehicle was doing 38 in a 35 mph zone. Not sure if 3 mph would have made much of a difference, but it certainly won't help Uber.
I've read that the vehicle was doing 38 in a 45.
I've read that the vehicle was doing 38 in a 45.
Police In Arizona Release Dashcam Video Of Fatal Crash Involving Self-Driving Car (https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2018/03/21/595941015/police-in-arizona-release-dashcam-video-of-fatal-crash-involving-self-driving-ca)
The vehicle was traveling at 38 mph at the time of the impact on a stretch of road that police say is a 35-mph zone.
NPR wouldn't lie, would they? [Coffee]
Bitter Clinger
03-23-2018, 15:34
Self driving cars have been around a long time. 74003
The headlights on the car appear to be dim, but I think part of that is the street lights interacting with the camera.
IIRC, the white lines are approximately 10' long, with the 30' spacing between.*
At 38-mph, the car is travelling about 56-feet per second (call it 60-fps).
With a reaction time, of say 0.5 seconds, that leaves about 30-feet to observe and react, then the stopping distance of the vehicle (another 75' ??) So a total of about 100' ish from detection to full stop.
Looking at the video, the first pixel of her tennis shoe (my eyes) occurs at the point where the video time changes from 0:02 to 0:03. The collision occurs at almost the start of timer 0:04.
However, when you hire a monkey, you're mileage may vary.
-and-/-or-
The car swerves into the open lane on the left by a few feet and the woman survives.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-5535969/Uber-self-driving-car-death-avoided.html
Speaking to CNET, Cortica's CEO Igal Raichelgauz said the firm's self-driving AI system detected Ms Herzberg 0.9 seconds before impact.
At this point the car was around 50 feet (15 metres) away.
He said the autonomous car's cameras and radar system should have had enough time to pick up the pedestrian and react to the situation.
-and-/-or-
The car swerves into the open lane on the left by a few feet and the woman survives.
Exactly.
What she was used to.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-5535969/Uber-self-driving-car-death-avoided.html
Well, the numbers line up as far as timing. So the sensors detected the pedestrian at about the same time the first tennis-shoe-pixel is seen in the headlights.....
Well, the numbers line up as far as timing. So the sensors detected the pedestrian at about the same time the first tennis-shoe-pixel is seen in the headlights.....
Speculation by the experts in that article - I do not believe it is based on actual data from the car.
The sensors on the car should have been able to "see" her long before 50 feet.
OtterbatHellcat
03-23-2018, 22:08
All of this self driving car horseshit is only worth it, if it saves even ONE life.
GM can't even make an ignition switch properly, and we think they're going to develop self driving car ?!? HA !!
Fatal driverless crash: Radar-maker says Uber disabled safety systems (https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/03/27/uber_crash_safety_systems_disabled_aptiv/)
Uber reportedly disabled safety systems on the autonomous Volvo XC90 that killed a pedestrian Stateside last week, according to the makers of the car's sensors.
"We don't want people to be confused or think it was a failure of the technology that we supply for Volvo, because that's not the case," Zach Peterson, a spokesman for Aptiv, told Bloomberg.
Uber declined to comment to The Register, though it did confirm that it wrote the software the car was running. Aptiv, a UK-based maker of car parts including radars and cameras, did not respond to our enquiries. The company was formerly known as Delphi Automotive. In 2015 Delphi stated, and later denied, that a vehicle it was using for self-driving technology trials was involved in a near-miss with a rival car operated by Google.
Volvo told Bloomberg it was waiting for the accident report to be published by American authorities before it would comment.
Uber's modified XC90s are fitted with front, side and rear-facing cameras "watching for braking vehicles, crossing pedestrians, traffic lights, and signage," according to a document produced by the controversial taxi app firm's Advanced Technologies Group. The cars are also fitted with a top-mounted LIDAR sensor with all-round coverage.
Video footage of the moments leading up to the crash released online by police show Herzberg appearing out of the gloom and becoming visible to the car's front-facing camera just seconds before impact. The cabin-facing camera fitted to the Volvo also showed the driver appearing to allow her attention to wander in the moments before Herzberg became visible.
Crash investigators are expected to be focusing on why the XC90's sensor suite appeared to have failed to detect Herzberg crossing the road with her bike, particular the LIDAR as it uses lasers to see through the dark.
The relatively low-resolution camera footage released by police is unlikely to represent what the car's LIDAR and radar packages should have picked up. Whether the Uber developers who wrote the car's software suite had programmed it to slow the car down on detection of an unknown, unclassified object moving into the car's path is something El Reg expects the investigation to uncover.
Although Uber voluntarily announced it was suspending all further testing, Arizona governor Doug Ducey later suspended the company from continuing with tests on the US state's roads.
Uber gives up autonomous vehicle testing rights in Calif. (https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/uber-gives-up-autonomous-vehicle-testing-rights-in-calif/ar-BBKMLpK)
Uber will not renew its permit to test autonomous vehicles on California public roads when it expires Saturday. And the company will have some explaining to do if it wants to get a new permit.
California's Department of Motor Vehicles told the ride-hailing service in a letter Tuesday that it will lose testing privileges after Saturday. If Uber wants to return, it will need a new permit and has to address investigations into a fatal crash in Arizona last week.
Well I called it. The real fault is with the woman crossing the street on her bike. Self driving or not, how many deer do people hit each year because they dart out in front of cars.
I feel bad for the babysitter of the self driving car for having to live through that and now remember crushing some bicyclist due to their own stupid decisions.
I can go on and on about bikes anyway, they need serious regulation to be on the roads as it is.
Oh....and who really buys a Volvo any more? I can’t believe they are in business
Oh....and who really buys a Volvo any more? I can’t believe they are in business
http://youtu.be/M7FIvfx5J10
Volvo has been working on autonomous vehicle functions for a very long time...yet they have yet to come out with an autonomous vehicle. Coincidence? No way.
Well I called it.
Pretty easy to be right if you never read any of the info posted.
Not saying I disagree, but it's not like she darted across the road like a deer. According to the advertised technology, this should have been avoidable.
The Volvos used by Uber had a native collision avoidance system on the vehicle. It would have been interesting to see what would have happened if Uber hadn't disabled it.
Every time I hear about self driving cars, I think of this:
http://youtu.be/eWgrvNHjKkY
Article about the fatal crash in the Tesla Model X. Not directly related, but close enough to not start a new thread.
http://www.businessinsider.com/tesla-drivers-reveal-major-autopilot-flaw-after-model-x-accident-2018-4
...and another Tesla Autopilot winner...
Tesla's Autopilot engaged during Utah crash (https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/teslas-autopilot-engaged-during-utah-crash/ar-AAxh9VQ)
SALT LAKE CITY — The driver of a Tesla electric car had the vehicle's semi-autonomous Autopilot mode engaged when she slammed into the back of a Utah fire truck over the weekend, in the latest crash involving a car with self-driving features.
The 28-year-old driver of the car told police in suburban Salt Lake City that the system was switched on and that she had been looking at her phone before the Friday evening crash.
Tesla's Autopilot system uses radar, cameras with 360-degree visibility and sensors to detect nearby cars and objects. It's built so cars can automatically change lanes, steer, park and brake to help avoid collisions.
The auto company markets the system as the "future of driving" but warns drivers to remain alert while using Autopilot and not to rely on it to entirely avoid accidents. Police reiterated that warning Monday.
A Tesla spokesperson did not comment following the disclosure about the use of the feature.
On Twitter, co-founder Elon Musk said it was "super messed up" that the incident was garnering public attention, while thousands of accidents involving traditional automobiles "get almost no coverage."
South Jordan police said the Tesla Model S was going 60 mph (97 kph) when it slammed into the back of a fire truck stopped at a red light. The car appeared not to brake before impact, police said.
The driver, whom police have not named, was taken to a hospital with a broken foot. The driver of the fire truck suffered whiplash and was not taken to a hospital.
"What's actually amazing about this accident is that a Model S hit a fire truck at 60 mph and the driver only broke an ankle," Musk tweeted. "An impact at that speed usually results in severe injury or death."
The National Transportation Safety Board has not opened an investigation into the crash, spokesman Keith Holloway said, though it could decide to do so.
Over the past two months, federal officials have opened investigations into at least two other crashes involving Tesla vehicles.
Last week, the NTSB opened a probe into an incident in which a Model S caught fire after crashing into a wall in Florida.
Two 18-year-olds were trapped in the vehicle and killed in the flames. The agency has said it does not expect the semi-autonomous system to be a focus of that investigation.
The NTSB and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration are also looking into the performance of the company's Autopilot system in the March crash of a Tesla Model X on a California highway. The driver in that incident died.
In March, an Arizona pedestrian was killed by a self-driving Uber car, in the first death of its kind. A driver was behind the wheel of the test vehicle in that case but failed to halt in time.
The investigation into the crash in Utah is ongoing, police said.
The driver of the Tesla may face charges for failing to maintain the safety of her vehicle, which would be a traffic infraction, according to police spokesman Sgt. Samuel Winkler.
Nice try at deflection, Mr. Musk. When people disengage from the primary task of driving the car, bad things will usually happen.
I saw this article the other day and had the same thought of, "Holy crap, 60mph into a stopped fire truck and isn't dead or in a coma?"
Nice try at deflection, Mr. Musk. When people disengage from the primary task of driving the car, bad things will usually happen.
Actually atonomous cars have the same PR problem us gunowners have. Any problem gets national attention while the non-problems get zero coverage.
Heck, your local news won't cover a fatal human-operated car crash in the next town much less another state. But a semi-atonomous vehicle anywhere in the country will make headlines.
The rarer the problem, the more it's reported. Just look at airplane crashes; given the reporting you'd think they were constantly dropping out of the sky.
O2
Yep, better not get caught being outraged by the number of people killed by autonomous vehicle that you can count on one hand while at the same time complaining about the relatively low percentage of school shootings.
They have autopilots in airplanes, but pilots are still not allowed to play with their electronic gizmos in the cockpit. I wonder why?
https://www.cnet.com/news/faa-bans-pilots-personal-use-of-electronic-devices-in-cockpit/
...and what are the chances of some deer running out in front of the plane at 32,000 feet? A truck stopped at a red light...and the car+driver combo couldn't figure that out?
If it only kills the drivers & their passengers, it should be a self-correcting problem. [Sarcasm2]
What if you keep your eyes on the road 100% of the time, but are on opioids?
Tesla in Autopilot mode crashes into California police car (https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/tesla-in-autopilot-mode-crashes-into-california-police-car/ar-AAxZYLB)
LAGUNA BEACH, Calif. — Authorities say a Tesla sedan in Autopilot mode has crashed into a parked police cruiser in Southern California.
Police Sgt. Jim Cota says the officer was not in the cruiser during the crash Tuesday in Laguna Beach. He says the Tesla driver suffered minor injuries.
The police SUV ended up with its two passenger-side wheels on a sidewalk.
CoGirl303
05-30-2018, 10:44
Tesla in Autopilot mode crashes into California police car (https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/tesla-in-autopilot-mode-crashes-into-california-police-car/ar-AAxZYLB)
shoulda had both his hands on the wheel.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
NTSB's Tesla fatal crash report: Autopilot sped up, no braking in final seconds (https://www.zdnet.com/article/ntsbs-tesla-fatal-crash-report-autopilot-sped-up-no-braking-in-final-seconds/)
The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) has released its preliminary report of its investigation into the Tesla Model X crash in Autopilot that killed an Apple engineer.
The NTSB's preliminary findings of the investigation from which it excluded Tesla don't look good for Elon Musk's electric-vehicle company. However, the report also notes that key external factors may have contributed to the fatality.
The agency found no evidence that the vehicle's crash-avoidance systems kicked in before the horrific crash, which sheared off the front-end of the Model X and killed its 38-year-old driver, Apple engineer Wei 'Walter' Huang.
"At three seconds prior to the crash and up to the time of impact with the crash attenuator, the Tesla's speed increased from 62 to 70.8mph, with no precrash braking or evasive steering movement detected," the report notes.
At eight seconds before the crash, the Tesla was following a lead vehicle and traveling at the 65mph speed limit. A second later the Tesla began veering left though it was still trailing the lead vehicle.
However, at four seconds before the crash, the Tesla stopped following the vehicle, began accelerating and was headed towards the barrier that it smashed into at 71mph.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.