Tempe Police Release Video of Uber Accident • Hacker News Board

Re: Tempe Police Release Video of Uber Accident

#211

Post by pdonis » Thu, Mar 22, 2018, 12:26 AM UTC

jcranmer wrote: post #199

pdonis wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The gap between street lights (and hence the person) was in the field of view of the camera the entire time But the gap between street lights is going to be very hard to see into. > I'm confident my eyes are good enough that I would have been able to see this person at night in these lighting conditions. I think you're overconfident. Human low light vision is very good if there is low light everywhere. But it is no…

> But the gap between street lights is going to be very hard to see into. Looking, right now, at a parking lot between two lights from a well-lit room. I can make out most of the outline of the black car in the middle of the "darkness" without any trouble. This isn't even the low light vision kicking in (which I agree isn't going to kick in if you're driving). Human vision should be able to make out the pedestrian ea…

How long does it take you to make out the black car and determine that it's a car? What if the car were coming straight at you out of darkness and you were standing in the light of a street lamp?

Also, are you looking straight at the car? Or are you looking elsewhere so that the car is in your peripheral vision, the way it would be if it were on the side of a road you were driving on?

Re: Tempe Police Release Video of Uber Accident

#212

Post by brokenmachine » Thu, Mar 22, 2018, 12:26 AM UTC

ashelmire wrote: post #159

jonathanyc wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don’t need to stop. Slowing from 40 to 30mph decreases the fatality rate by an order of magnitude. Maybe the car shouldn’t have been going above the speed limit if the conditions were so poor that it couldn’t plausibly see humans walking right in front of it.

Was it going above the speed limit?

It was reported to be going 38mph in a 35mph zone.

Re: Tempe Police Release Video of Uber Accident

#213

Post by hcknwscommenter » Thu, Mar 22, 2018, 12:26 AM UTC

XR0CSWV3h3kZWg wrote: post #52

atonse wrote: post #25

How did LIDAR and IR not catch that? That seems like a pretty serious problem. It's clear from the video that a human driver actually would've had more trouble since the pedestrian showed up in the field of view right before the collision, yet that's in the visible spectrum. When I argue for automated driving (as a casual observer), I tell people about exactly this sort of stuff (a computer can look in 20 places at t…

Yeah releasing the sensory data beyond human visible spectrum would be way more informative about if a better designed AV would have dealt with this better. I'm glad it was not me driving down that road that night, I don't think I could have prevented it.

I think you sell your driving skills very short here. Assuming you have normal eyesight, you would have likely a 10-fold higher dynamic range than the visible camera footage shown. The gap between streetlights would have been easily discernible with your eyes, unlike in the camera footage.

Re: Tempe Police Release Video of Uber Accident

#214

Post by chrsstrm » Thu, Mar 22, 2018, 12:26 AM UTC

soperj wrote: post #76

chrsstrm wrote: post #16

The description given before the video was released painted a picture in my mind that the woman was on the median and "suddenly" entered the roadway in front of the vehicle. I pictured someone darting across the road directly in front of the car, with no way to stop in time. This video shows a completely different scenario. The woman started on the median, but the vehicle was in the #2 lane. She wasn't visible to the…

Not to the naked eye.. this is a video. No way does it appear that dark to your eye.

Sure, if we were actually sitting in the front seat we would have a different perspective. Want to convince me it was unavoidable? Release the IR footage too.

Re: Tempe Police Release Video of Uber Accident

#215

Post by zrb05293 » Thu, Mar 22, 2018, 12:26 AM UTC

XR0CSWV3h3kZWg wrote: post #52

atonse wrote: post #25

How did LIDAR and IR not catch that? That seems like a pretty serious problem. It's clear from the video that a human driver actually would've had more trouble since the pedestrian showed up in the field of view right before the collision, yet that's in the visible spectrum. When I argue for automated driving (as a casual observer), I tell people about exactly this sort of stuff (a computer can look in 20 places at t…

Yeah releasing the sensory data beyond human visible spectrum would be way more informative about if a better designed AV would have dealt with this better. I'm glad it was not me driving down that road that night, I don't think I could have prevented it.

See I wonder about that. In compromises conditions (many) drivers will drive slower and be more cautious. Perhaps computers need to be given a sense of fallibility? Computer can sense low light conditions and drive even more cautiously as a result.

Re: Tempe Police Release Video of Uber Accident

#216

Post by mattigames » Thu, Mar 22, 2018, 12:27 AM UTC

ashelmire wrote: post #49

She crossed at a spot that was pitch black. Sneakers come into view maybe 40 feet away. Clearly visible at 20. Is that enough time to stop at that speed? Not sure I would have stopped in time.

a human would have attempted to at least move to the left to avoid a collision; specially since she had a very visible bike with her.

Re: Tempe Police Release Video of Uber Accident

#217

Post by kuon » Thu, Mar 22, 2018, 12:27 AM UTC

I'm surprised the footage looks so bad, I wonder if it was altered to look darker to help lessen Uber responsibility.

Is there a technical way to check if some video filters were applied?

Re: Tempe Police Release Video of Uber Accident

#218

Post by jonknee » Thu, Mar 22, 2018, 12:27 AM UTC

brokenmachine wrote: post #63

Wow, that self driving car is total crap if it can't pick up that obstacle. Doesn't get much more obvious than that. Slowly walking from the left lane into your lane on a fairly straight road. I bet it was more visible to the human eye than on that video as well. You'd have to see someone crossing the road like that. Of course the pedestrian wasn't doing the smartest thing but I believe a human driver would have at l…

> You'd have to see someone crossing the road like that.

You could say the same thing about a car with headlights on coming towards you... From the little evidence we have it seems like the pedestrian, driver/monitor and the car all should have done better.

Re: Tempe Police Release Video of Uber Accident

#219

Post by cmpolis » Thu, Mar 22, 2018, 12:27 AM UTC

It isn't obvious from the video if the human driver would have had time to react, but they certainly did not help their chances by being unalert. What is the point of having a human driver if they are not going to be watching the road or able to react.

If they aren't a passenger, are they merely there to get around regulation that requires a human in test autonomous driving vehicles?

Re: Tempe Police Release Video of Uber Accident

#220

Post by erobbins » Thu, Mar 22, 2018, 12:27 AM UTC

A straight road, in dry conditions, obstructed by an entire person and a bicycle with REFLECTORS on it, and the car doesn't see her?

I think whoever wrote this code should be in prison, quite honestly, along with their entire management chain. I suspect many people will feel the same way. This is a really really bad look for automated vehicles in general. It also backs up my contention that anything less than full 100% automation is worse than no automation at all, as the driver was complacent and had less than zero chance of taking over.