511–520 of 1001 posts
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…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have to agree. Just like a normal camera has issues in low-light, it is clear that this camera is diminishing exactly how light the road ahead was. While I can't say confidently that I would have been able to stop to prevent hitting them, watching the video in full screen does lead me to believe that I would have seen them and been able to apply the brakes at least enough to reduce the impact. Also, watching the vi…
> clear the driver was looking at his phone or doing something ... Seriously, what else can you expect. These companies who do put these things on the road with the justification that "There is a human behind the wheel" should be taken out back and shot in the head...Just pull the plug. No more self driving cars for them. Those are just the kind of tech companies we don't want around... See, it is not a mistake that…
I 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.
1) It does NOT show what the LIDAR sees. 2) They should be using a dark adapted / night vision camera and probably are, the video feed presented is just that, the best one that "presents". 3) They should be using thermal infrared to spot living things 4) They were severely over driving their headlights if what we are seeing is "reality" as seen by the onboard computer. I want to know how much access to the hardware U…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Yet this crash proves that all the equipment in the world didn't catch a very obvious obstruction. It's a bit too early to make that conclusion. For all we know, the equipment was malfunctioning. Which I guess technically leads to your point, but we'll have to wait for the investigation to actually know what failed vs. what met expectations (I worry that expectations and tolerances, as set by the car companies, wil…
It was also a bit too early for the police to release a statement less than 24 hours after the incident saying that it appears that Uber/the car/observer was not at fault.
On the subject: this lady I used to know hit someone who ran out in front of her and started freaking out (thinking they were in some serious trouble) until the police told her "you're fine, they were jaywalking".
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.
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.
If you replayed the exact scenario the chance of the same outcome is likely absurdly high with the robocar. If you replayed it with the same human it would likely be much better. If you replayed it but varied the human driver, maybe even better than that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'll bite! According to https://ec.europa.eu/transport/road_safety/sites/roadsafety/... , there are 6000-6500 pedestrian deaths per year in the EU (the data is only in graph form). EDIT: here is the raw data: https://ec.europa.eu/transport/road_safety/sites/roadsafety/... As someone who has spent a fair amount of time in both places, I can say that the US pedestrian feels more entitled due to an almost universal pede…
There is also a pedestrian right of way in Europe, at least in the countries I know of. I think that European drivers are convicted when they hurt a pedestrian. I don't think that Americans get convicted as often or as long. That could explain why they don't drive as carefully.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think it could have stopped safely. Assuming it has quicker reactions than a human, stopping distance should be around 18 meters. I think it just completely missed her. Edit: critical typo
8m ?! That sounds completely unreasonable to me. The first google hit says it is more like 33m.. http://www.brakingdistances.com/38Mph
The road was empty, I'd bet most drivers would steer away from a pedestrian on the road if only by sheer reflex.
Something that's worth pointing out as well is what happens to low-light contrast sensitivity as we age. I believe there's something like a 50% loss in night vision between the ages of 20 and 50. Having watched the video, I seriously doubt I'd have seen the pedestrian in time to stop for her. I don't know that I would even feel that sorry for her, frankly -- there is only so much we can (and should) do to protect dru…
The headlamps, to me, appear to be aimed way too low. They should be lighting up the roadway at least 280 feet ahead of the vehicle.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
1) It does NOT show what the LIDAR sees. 2) They should be using a dark adapted / night vision camera and probably are, the video feed presented is just that, the best one that "presents". 3) They should be using thermal infrared to spot living things 4) They were severely over driving their headlights if what we are seeing is "reality" as seen by the onboard computer. I want to know how much access to the hardware U…
It's Arizona. I just checked. The high today was 92F. Pavement would almost certainly be warmer than that. How's a thermal camera supposed to detect 98F on a background that is proably +/- 5 degrees of that?
Probably not relevant to conditions at 10pm on Monday, when it was between 70F and 57F (the range for 6pm Monday to 12am Tuesday.)
> Pavement would almost certainly be warmer than that.
Sure, when it was 92F the pavement would probably be 140+F.
> How's a thermal camera supposed to detect 98F on a background that is proably +/- 5 degrees of that?
At night, the pavement would be much cooler than a human; at the high temperature you report, it would probably be much hotter; there's a place in between where the problem you have would be occur, sure, but it's neither at the high nor, more to the point, in the conditions when the accident occurred.