Tempe Police Release Video of Uber Accident

Post by lutorm » Thu, Mar 22, 2018, 1:29 AM UTC

dmix wrote: post #324

51Cards wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is exactly it. I see people mentioning seeing the victim at the last second but these vehicles are supposed to be better. They scan in non visible spectrums with LIDAR. Lack of safety vest, lack of headlights, none of it is supposed to matter... or at least it shouldn't completely compromise the vehicle's systems. Camera's may not work as well but an obstacle directly in the path should still be detected. Especi…

I watched the video a bunch of times and I'm not 100% sure how the vehicle could have reacted at the upper maximum of time where she would have been visible to LIDAR, and maybe for Radar, to make a significant difference. At least given the two options where it could have slowed maybe 10km/hr at most (from the 40mph aka 64km/hr speed limit) but that's still an if and I'm not sure it would have ensure the survivabilit…

Post by CydeWeys » Thu, Mar 22, 2018, 1:29 AM UTC

JustSomeNobody wrote: post #271

vkou wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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. This was taken by a video camera - which has a much lower range of detectable brightness then the human eye. The pitch-black spots in the video are almost certainly not pitch-black if you were to look at them.

This car should have slowed down below the speed limit if it cannot safely stop or maneuver upon seeing something enter its field of view.

Post by itronitron » Thu, Mar 22, 2018, 1:29 AM UTC

confiscate wrote: post #185

Wow, the pedestrian just walked onto the road without so much of a glance at the direction of incoming cars. Sure, it's the car's responsibility to stop. But still--it's almost like the pedestrian didn't care at all. She never saw the car throughout the entire incident. She never saw it coming. She didn't cared to.

Post by JepZ » Thu, Mar 22, 2018, 1:30 AM UTC

jackpirate wrote: post #78

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…

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. That's not at all clear to me. I don't know too much about cameras, but it looks to me like the camera is making the scene appear much darker than it actually is. In the video, you can see many street lights projecting down…

Post by madez » Thu, Mar 22, 2018, 1:31 AM UTC

nanis wrote: post #278

This is pure speculation, but it is my working theory: The car's so called "AI" thought the thing in front of it was a four legged animal (e.g., see " rel="nofollow">https://goo.gl/images/3qAmiM> ). In most states, braking for animals in a way that might endanger others on the road is illegal. So, it decided to go ahead and hit the thing in front of it on purpose. I am not sure if the people who program the firmware…