I think driving 10-20% slower than the posted speed limit at night is completely sane. In Colorado we have some rural highways that are double posted with lower speed limits at night. If AI cannot make identical collision avoidance guarantees at night and during the day, then it should be law that they self limit their speed below the posted speed limit until there is separation parity.
Police Say Uber Is Likely Not at Fault for Self-Driving Car Fatality in Arizona
161–170 of 459 posts
Re: Police Say Uber Is Likely Not at Fault for Self-Driving Car Fatality in Arizona
#162There's going to be a bunch of these "OMG a robot car hit someone!!!" stories that then morph into "the robot actually had nothing to do with it." Perhaps it will finally cue people in to how intrinsically dangerous cars are. I mean, even if autonomous cars are x100 times safer to be around than human-driven cars, they're still orders of magnitude more of a risk factor for ordinary (U.S.) citizens than say, terrorist…
> Perhaps it will finally cue people in to how intrinsically dangerous cars are. Until you consider the _billions_ of miles that cars in the US drive every month. Cars are exceptionally safe, and they're getting better every year.. because we keep driving _more_ miles year after year, yet fatalities continue to drop. Also, how do you interpret facts like: California has 30% more people living in it than Texas, yet TX…
Cars are a leading cause of death in the US, especially among young people. That's a fact worth taking notice of, regardless of how many miles are driven or whatever else.
Yes, it's great that fatalaties are trending downwards.
Re: Police Say Uber Is Likely Not at Fault for Self-Driving Car Fatality in Arizona
#163This is just police standard operating procedure. In any kind of manslaughter where a vehicle is involved, save on paperwork and blame whichever party ended up dead before the driver has even spoken the words "she came from nowhere". Here is the police chief spelling it out for Uber: she came from the shadows I wonder what that LIDAR thinks about the shadows . I mean, this system is in place because everybody drives…
You aren't kidding about it being standard operating procedure. Almost every time a pedestrian or cyclist is killed in New York City, the police come out and blame anyone but the driver. And then video will turn up afterwards showing that the driver was driving unsafely, and that the fatal accident could have been avoided. Still, no charges are filed. It's like they have an allergy to paperwork. I want to see video o…
It's standard operating procedure in SF, and not only will the police not bother to look at surveillance, but they will lie and claim they it doesn't exist [1].
[1] https://sf.streetsblog.org/2013/08/23/sfbc-finds-what-sfpd-d...
Re: Police Say Uber Is Likely Not at Fault for Self-Driving Car Fatality in Arizona
#164There's going to be a bunch of these "OMG a robot car hit someone!!!" stories that then morph into "the robot actually had nothing to do with it." Perhaps it will finally cue people in to how intrinsically dangerous cars are. I mean, even if autonomous cars are x100 times safer to be around than human-driven cars, they're still orders of magnitude more of a risk factor for ordinary (U.S.) citizens than say, terrorist…
[deleted]
Re: Police Say Uber Is Likely Not at Fault for Self-Driving Car Fatality in Arizona
#165> According to the Chronicle, the preliminary investigation found the Uber car was driving at 38 mph in a 35 mph zone and did not attempt to brake. Herzberg is said to have abruptly walked from a center median into a lane with traffic. Police believe she may have been homeless. I know this isn't the most pertinent issue here, but I'm surprised the self-driving AI is allowed to speed , though with further research, th…
There can be several ways to explain this but generally speaking you are right. It shouldn’t go over the speed limit, and under no circumstances should it take the liberty drivers usually take of being within 10% above the limit. I hope no one wrote it that way.
Why not? The range between 1-10 MPH over the speed limit is statistically the safest. (Yes, I know, good luck finding a citation for a study I read 20 years ago...) It's hard to argue against the notion that you're safest when you keep up with prevailing traffic. That means that self-driving cars shouldn't be programmed to go slower.
Speed limits are usually too low. Often they have nothing to do with engineering or safety considerations, but are primarily revenue-oriented. If the advent of autonomous vehicles forces regulators to listen to the engineers for a change, that will be an unalloyed Good Thing.
Re: Police Say Uber Is Likely Not at Fault for Self-Driving Car Fatality in Arizona
#166There's going to be a bunch of these "OMG a robot car hit someone!!!" stories that then morph into "the robot actually had nothing to do with it." Perhaps it will finally cue people in to how intrinsically dangerous cars are. I mean, even if autonomous cars are x100 times safer to be around than human-driven cars, they're still orders of magnitude more of a risk factor for ordinary (U.S.) citizens than say, terrorist…
> Perhaps it will finally cue people in to how intrinsically dangerous cars are. Until you consider the _billions_ of miles that cars in the US drive every month. Cars are exceptionally safe, and they're getting better every year.. because we keep driving _more_ miles year after year, yet fatalities continue to drop. Also, how do you interpret facts like: California has 30% more people living in it than Texas, yet TX…
Cars are not anything close to exceptionally safe. Indeed, they are the exact opposite: They are the most dangeorus thing that most people encounter on a daily basis.
There are many age and other cohorts of the population for which the leading cause of death is vehicles.
And compare against commercial aviation, which has a per-mile death rate three orders of magnitude less than driving.
Re: Police Say Uber Is Likely Not at Fault for Self-Driving Car Fatality in Arizona
#167There's going to be a bunch of these "OMG a robot car hit someone!!!" stories that then morph into "the robot actually had nothing to do with it." Perhaps it will finally cue people in to how intrinsically dangerous cars are. I mean, even if autonomous cars are x100 times safer to be around than human-driven cars, they're still orders of magnitude more of a risk factor for ordinary (U.S.) citizens than say, terrorist…
> Perhaps it will finally cue people in to how intrinsically dangerous cars are. Until you consider the _billions_ of miles that cars in the US drive every month. Cars are exceptionally safe, and they're getting better every year.. because we keep driving _more_ miles year after year, yet fatalities continue to drop. Also, how do you interpret facts like: California has 30% more people living in it than Texas, yet TX…
> Until you consider the _billions_ of miles that cars in the US drive every month. Cars are exceptionally safe, and they're getting better every year.. because we keep driving _more_ miles year after year, yet fatalities continue to drop.
How many people do pedestrians kill per mile? Or bicycle? Or subway?
And either way, cars are still the number one killer if you look at miles per death.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transportation_safety_in_the_U...
It is disgusting we allow this to encroach on society and kill so many people.
Re: Police Say Uber Is Likely Not at Fault for Self-Driving Car Fatality in Arizona
#168> According to the Chronicle, the preliminary investigation found the Uber car was driving at 38 mph in a 35 mph zone and did not attempt to brake. Herzberg is said to have abruptly walked from a center median into a lane with traffic. Police believe she may have been homeless. I know this isn't the most pertinent issue here, but I'm surprised the self-driving AI is allowed to speed , though with further research, th…
It may not be programmed to speed per se, but if you’ve ever had cruise control turned on you’ll know it doesn’t keep you exactly at 55mpg. It might be 54 with the throttle applied to speed up, or it might be 57 which doesn’t trigger the brakes yet but is coasting to a slower speed. Imagine the car in front of you cycling rapidly between the gas and brake pedal to keep the speed exactly at 55mph. One, that’s complete…
There is no brake involved with cruise control. What you are describing is bad drivers who do not use cruise control. It's actually extremely pleasant and predictable to be following a driver who is using cruise control. Following a well-regulated self-driving car would be similar.
Re: Police Say Uber Is Likely Not at Fault for Self-Driving Car Fatality in Arizona
#169> According to the Chronicle, the preliminary investigation found the Uber car was driving at 38 mph in a 35 mph zone and did not attempt to brake. Herzberg is said to have abruptly walked from a center median into a lane with traffic. Police believe she may have been homeless. I know this isn't the most pertinent issue here, but I'm surprised the self-driving AI is allowed to speed , though with further research, th…
I remember early reports about self-driving experiments saying that some of the issues where because the cars were driving at the speed limit, which is usually not the case in the US with the human drivers. Maybe they decided to change it.
If they just track human driver habits then we're no more safer! What's the point left about self-driving cars then? Free up drivers of even more responsibility when they kill people?
Re: Police Say Uber Is Likely Not at Fault for Self-Driving Car Fatality in Arizona
#170Earlier quoted context omitted.
And yet the speeding vehicle didn’t even attempt to stop. https://www.theverge.com/2018/3/19/17140936/uber-self-drivin...
Can we please stop calling 38 in a 35 speeding? In many places that speed would be inpeding traffic.
So? That is because the traffic is speeding. What sort of twisted logic do you have that someone has just been killed, and the point you want to make is that 3miles over is not really speeding?