Earlier quoted context omitted.
A fatal accident at 50x the rate of a sober human driver with a study size where N = 1.
No. 3 million miles of observation. You can get a pretty exact and conservative estimate with a bayesian poisson process model. I don't have the time to run the numbers right now, but my guess is the posterior estimate that Uber's fatal accident rate is higher than a human's is >90%, even if taking the human accident rate as a starting prior.
Arizona Government Suspends Uber's Self Driving Cars from Roads
71–80 of 334 posts
Re: Arizona Government Suspends Uber's Self Driving Cars from Roads
#72Good riddance. But I think this is not enough to send a strong message to all those who want to put half baked tech out there in hopes of "disrupting" something.. Also, I really hope all self driving testing is suspended until there is sufficient legal and testing ground work before these things are allowed on roads...
It might surprise you that we were testing (selectively) autonomous cars on the autobahn in Germany in 1991 as part of the Prometheus project. Our tech was nowhere near as good as what's available now and so we compensated by having attentive drivers hovering over the E-stop button. I don't think that stopping testing over a single crash is warranted. Maybe suspend it for a short time while you look into it, but if w…
Just device proper tests that deem a self driving vehicle to be worthy/competent enough to be on the road with a normal average human being behind the wheel.
And then have every single self driving vehicle to pass before it can be put on the road. Is that too much to ask?
I am just asking for a driving test for self driving tech. Humans undergo driving tests. Why give machines a free pass? As we have seen here, having a human on stand by just won't cut it..
Re: Arizona Government Suspends Uber's Self Driving Cars from Roads
#73Saying nothing about Google/Waymo, it appears they're allowed to continue? Their self-driving technology seems far more advanced, I think it would be unfair to punish all the players for the bad actions of a few. In particular, Uber seems to have been operating self-driving cars recklessly and in an attempt to "move fast and break things". When those things are people's lives, that's unacceptable. I'm all for interes…
> bad actions of a few What bad actions? If you mean an AI car killing a person - that's hardly "an action", that's an accident. Classic human-driven cars kill people every day yet are allowed to continue operation. Do people really expect self-driving cars to be not just more safe than classic but actually 100% safe? By the way I myself don't drive at all and only use public transport (and a bicycle to ride the coun…
Uber disabled the safety systems included with the car that was involved in the incident. They relied solely on their own, half-baked tech when these systems could have saved the life of person who was killed:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-03-26/uber-disa...
Re: Arizona Government Suspends Uber's Self Driving Cars from Roads
#74Earlier quoted context omitted.
Based on what came out of the last few days I don’t think it’s clear at all, I think a human would not have hit the woman. The footage we saw was from a terrible dashcam and did not represent how dark the street actually was. Other people who have driven down the street with cameras show it to be perfectly reasonably lit, with streetlights and everything. Second, the woman was crossing across two lanes, so any driver…
The pedestrian also has a significant contribution of negligence to this collision, IMO.
In this situation, there is no evidence that the pedestrian did anything dangerous. She was crossing in what amounts to an unmarked crosswalk. When struck, she was well advanced in her crossing motion, and there's no sign that she stopped or otherwise dallied in the middle of traffic. The dashcam footage indicates a car some distance ahead: it is not unreasonable that she waited for the car to pass, checked that the traffic was clear, and started crossing.
If you object to the idea that it's an unmarked crosswalk: the median has a paved surface that has no other apparent purpose than as pedestrian walkways, and is otherwise inaccessible to pedestrians except by crossing the street at that point. I would not be surprised to find out that the crossing time at the light is insufficient for anyone other than a fit adult walking briskly. For someone walking at a much slower gait, it is actually safer to cross at a place with a very ample pedestrian refuge. Indeed, the presence of the no pedestrian signs actually suggests that the crossing point is more useful than the "legal" route, and quite possibly safer too (given the tendency of many DOTs to consider road improvements only on the basis of vehicle efficiency, even to the point of active hostility against pedestrians). If that crossing point is fundamentally dangerous for a pedestrian, it's not the pedestrian that is to be blamed, it's the traffic engineer who built a deathtrap.
Re: Arizona Government Suspends Uber's Self Driving Cars from Roads
#75Earlier quoted context omitted.
> bad actions of a few What bad actions? If you mean an AI car killing a person - that's hardly "an action", that's an accident. Classic human-driven cars kill people every day yet are allowed to continue operation. Do people really expect self-driving cars to be not just more safe than classic but actually 100% safe? By the way I myself don't drive at all and only use public transport (and a bicycle to ride the coun…
>What bad actions? Uber disabled the safety systems included with the car that was involved in the incident. They relied solely on their own, half-baked tech when these systems could have saved the life of person who was killed: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-03-26/uber-disa...
Re: Arizona Government Suspends Uber's Self Driving Cars from Roads
#76Saying nothing about Google/Waymo, it appears they're allowed to continue? Their self-driving technology seems far more advanced, I think it would be unfair to punish all the players for the bad actions of a few. In particular, Uber seems to have been operating self-driving cars recklessly and in an attempt to "move fast and break things". When those things are people's lives, that's unacceptable. I'm all for interes…
I think the public will probably feel the same way, but if this happens again with another company, I think there will be sustained backlash. Hopefully Waymo is as advanced as they’re advertising, and given what a terrible company Uber is by comparison, that doesn’t seem to be an unreasonable assumption. You know what they say though, once is a mistake, twice is a habit.
This line of thinking might end up with more people dead by delaying the advancement of SDC's.
Re: Arizona Government Suspends Uber's Self Driving Cars from Roads
#77Earlier quoted context omitted.
The pedestrian also has a significant contribution of negligence to this collision, IMO.
This is an example of the strong tendency to blame pedestrians for most to all pedestrian-vehicle collisions. In reality, pedestrians are generally at the bottom of the list for blame, behind even the engineers who designed the roads in the first place. In this situation, there is no evidence that the pedestrian did anything dangerous. She was crossing in what amounts to an unmarked crosswalk. When struck, she was we…
I do. I've never seen another crosswalk with a "no pedestrians" sign.
Re: Arizona Government Suspends Uber's Self Driving Cars from Roads
#78Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the public will probably feel the same way, but if this happens again with another company, I think there will be sustained backlash. Hopefully Waymo is as advanced as they’re advertising, and given what a terrible company Uber is by comparison, that doesn’t seem to be an unreasonable assumption. You know what they say though, once is a mistake, twice is a habit.
Hopefully Waymo has test drivers that actually pay attention.
If this is not obvious to you, you have never tried doing such a task. Try it and you will change your mind immediately.
Re: Arizona Government Suspends Uber's Self Driving Cars from Roads
#79Earlier quoted context omitted.
No. 3 million miles of observation. You can get a pretty exact and conservative estimate with a bayesian poisson process model. I don't have the time to run the numbers right now, but my guess is the posterior estimate that Uber's fatal accident rate is higher than a human's is >90%, even if taking the human accident rate as a starting prior.
I'd be very interested in seeing the math if you have the time later.
Re: Arizona Government Suspends Uber's Self Driving Cars from Roads
#80For all of the theoretical moral questions that have been brought up around self driving cars (the proverbial lever that lets you kill one person instead of a handful, for example), it's interesting/inevitable that this one came up first. I'm sure lots of people will argue that self-driving cars will, in the long run, save a lot of lives, and therefore we can justify some loss of life in the process. They are probabl…
The footage was artificially darkened, or it was extremely crappy dash cam or both. I suspect Uber just tampered with it (to get some sympathy) Someone posted a footage from that place few days later and that is very well lit road. On Uber footage you can see lamps on the sky, yet it is very dark.
Also note this dashcam is not what the car uses, and the car is also equipped with LIDAR so it should be able to spot pedestrian even in pitch black.
> As self-driving cars become more prevalent, things like this will happen and it will be tough to walk the line between over-reacting to every incident and killing progress in this area and designing safe cars that don't make the problem worse. I think it is prudent to have Uber stop testing on public roads until they can explain how this happened and how they can keep it from happening again.
Your are missing the point here. Preventing accidents like this should be thing that AI would excel at, even today.
The fact that this failed means that there is something seriously wrong with how Uber is doing it.