Arizona Government Suspends Uber's Self Driving Cars from Roads
chicagotribune.com
Arizona Government Suspends Uber's Self Driving Cars from Roads
1–10 of 334 posts
Re: Arizona Government Suspends Uber's Self Driving Cars from Roads
#2Let’s suspend human driving too, since it kills over 100 people per day.
Re: Arizona Government Suspends Uber's Self Driving Cars from Roads
#3Amen. Uber's fatal accident rate is now 50x that of sober human driver's. At their current rate of driving, they can't have a _lower_ rate until 2028! Inexcusable failure of their technology to prevent a human death in the most basic collision avoidance scenario.
Re: Arizona Government Suspends Uber's Self Driving Cars from Roads
#4Let’s suspend human driving too, since it kills over 100 people per day.
Humans kill 1 person every ~100m miles.
Uber has killed 1 person after ~3m miles.
Yes, I would absolutely suspend a system that kills 3,000 people/day in favor of a system that kills 100 people/day.
Re: Arizona Government Suspends Uber's Self Driving Cars from Roads
#5Good 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...
Re: Arizona Government Suspends Uber's Self Driving Cars from Roads
#6Let’s suspend human driving too, since it kills over 100 people per day.
Humans kill 1 person every ~100m miles. Uber has killed 1 person after ~3m miles. Yes, I would absolutely suspend a system that kills 3,000 people/day in favor of a system that kills 100 people/day.
This is lying with statistics. To beat a dead statistician, everyone that's ever come in contact with air has died or will die.
Re: Arizona Government Suspends Uber's Self Driving Cars from Roads
#7Earlier quoted context omitted.
Humans kill 1 person every ~100m miles. Uber has killed 1 person after ~3m miles. Yes, I would absolutely suspend a system that kills 3,000 people/day in favor of a system that kills 100 people/day.
This is lying with statistics. To beat a dead statistician, everyone that's ever come in contact with air has died or will die.
If you're going to claim it's a lie, citing evidence and why it's flawed would probably be a good start...
Re: Arizona Government Suspends Uber's Self Driving Cars from Roads
#8This is interesting, but can we avoid posting links to articles behind paywalls?
Here's one on the subject that isn't: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/ct-arizona-ub...
Re: Arizona Government Suspends Uber's Self Driving Cars from Roads
#9Saying 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 interesting technology, but sometimes existing rules are there for a reason.
I particularly hope this doesn't dissuade individual states from making leaps to embrace a particular technology. I think that's one benefit of the US: individual states have a lot of power to allow a new technology or permit testing that's illegal or in a gray area in the rest of the country. Arizona made a bet on self-driving technology. I applaud Arizona, even if the bet in this case might have turned out badly.
Re: Arizona Government Suspends Uber's Self Driving Cars from Roads
#10Let’s suspend human driving too, since it kills over 100 people per day.
Humans kill 1 person every ~100m miles. Uber has killed 1 person after ~3m miles. Yes, I would absolutely suspend a system that kills 3,000 people/day in favor of a system that kills 100 people/day.
n=1 (To reduce the number of email notifications I'm getting I'd best put this message in parentheses right next to this statement. NOTE: I'm not a statistician and don't believe statistics are all that important here! All I meant to say here is that this is a single incident. That's it. Nothing more.)
Edit: I'm getting the impression some people think I am suggesting there aren't grounds to suspend Uber's driving based on my 3 character comment above, so I'll paste my comment to a child comment here. Also, I'm not a statistician and I don't really care about the statistics here all that much when there's video evidence showing this was poor driving.
"Same reason clinical trials stop early if someone dies. It might just be bad luck. Unfortunately we'll never know and that drug might never be tested again. It might have been an amazing drug. In this case, based on how it played out, I personally wouldn't want Uber's self-driving cars near me."