Why was the car speeding? Doing 38 mph in a 35 mph zone. Are these things programmed to systematically speed?
It was a 45 mph zone. The poice statement was wrong.
Tempe Police Release Video of Uber Accident
501–510 of 1001 posts
Re: Tempe Police Release Video of Uber Accident
#502A 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 10…
It certainly does look bad for self driving vehicles, and I definitely feel terrible that a life was lost from this.
However, how does one develop a self driving vehicle that’s 100% automated without the ability to test in real driving conditions? Despite this accident, self-driving vehicles have a fairly safe driving record for the number of miles and time they have been active.
Details on California accident rates for self driving vehicles, for example, show mostly minor fender benders despite more frequent accidents: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal....
Re: Tempe Police Release Video of Uber Accident
#503The 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…
Bikes are mainly curved, small pieces of metal, and absorptive pieces of rubber. Their reflectors are designed for viewing them from the front or rear, not the sides. I wonder whether lidar can even differentiate a sideways bike from noise.
You can see the side reflectors on the bicycle in this video.
Re: Tempe Police Release Video of Uber Accident
#504I do wonder if perhaps Uber made the video darker before releasing. Or used a camera that is not the main sensing camera. Because I would hope the cars are smart enough to increase ISO to get more detail at night time.
> I do wonder if perhaps Uber made the video darker before releasing This video was released by the police department. Are you suggesting someone from Uber drove down to the scene at 10pm, somehow managed to grab the SD card from the dashcam with all the police there, ran back to their car, uploaded it to their laptop, fired up Premiere, edited the brightness, downloaded the modified video back into the SD, ran back…
A couple years ago we had the ability to remotely access and modify the recorded video on this platform. Dunno about now.
Re: Tempe Police Release Video of Uber Accident
#505Re: Tempe Police Release Video of Uber Accident
#506[deleted]
Re: Tempe Police Release Video of Uber Accident
#507Why is the resolution so low? Why is the FPS so low? Why don't we see the IR/LIDAR footage? Was the brightness adjusted after the fact to look favourably? Why didn't the vehicle issue a full stop once the woman was clearly visible? I feel PR handled.
My guess would be that this is an off-the-shelf dashcam, completely independent from the self-driving cameras and sensors. Being an off-the-shelf dashcam means extracting and publishing the video from it is easy, which is why it came out first. It also explains why it has video from inside the car; many off-the-shelf dashcam models have both a forward-facing and a backwards-facing camera. Personally, I'm more annoyed…
Some data is probably stored for diagnostics, but Uber is the one company you'd most expect to have a "delete in case of incident" procedure.
Re: Tempe Police Release Video of Uber Accident
#508Based on the video, it took about 1.5 seconds from when the pedestrian came into view till the vehicle collided with them. At 38 mph, a car is traveling about 56 feet/second. That means that the car traveled about 84 feet in that timeframe. VOL (Visual Aim on Left) headlamps are supposed to be aimed 2.1 inches below headlamp level at a distance of 25 feet [1]. If the headlamps on the vehicle were about 2 feet off the…
> they should have been able to light up the roadway about 286 feet ahead
But when that person was 286 feet away from the vehicle - she was also way off to its left. Headlights mostly light up what’s ahead of you, not what’s on your side. Unless I am missing something.
Re: Tempe Police Release Video of Uber Accident
#509Watching someone die, and then watching someone else watch the same person die is really hallowing.
Re: Tempe Police Release Video of Uber Accident
#510Earlier 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. 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…
I believe that a human would be able to see in those conditions. It's a lit street with a car with functioning headlamps. It wasn't foggy or rainy. I've personally driven down country roads without any lighting except my headlights and saw deer poking their head out of the woods a ways away for which I slowed down in case they darted across the street. Someone slowly walking their bike would be trivial. Reminds me of…
> It's a lit street with a car with functioning headlamps.
The headlamps may have been functioning, but they appeared to be aimed way too low. You can see that the car is able to traverse the distance lit up by the headlamp in about a second at 38 mph. If the headlamps were aimed properly, it should light up the road about 5 seconds ahead of the car.