Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Police Say Uber Is Likely Not at Fault for Self-Driving Car Fatality in Arizona

fortune.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 459 posts

Re: Police Say Uber Is Likely Not at Fault for Self-Driving Car Fatality in Arizona

#141

Post by vadimberman »

danso wrote: post #52

> According to the Chronicle, the preliminary investigation found the Uber car was driving at 38 mph in a 35 mph zone and did not attempt to brake. Herzberg is said to have abruptly walked from a center median into a lane with traffic. Police believe she may have been homeless. I know this isn't the most pertinent issue here, but I'm surprised the self-driving AI is allowed to speed , though with further research, th…

I remember early reports about self-driving experiments saying that some of the issues where because the cars were driving at the speed limit, which is usually not the case in the US with the human drivers.

Maybe they decided to change it.

Re: Police Say Uber Is Likely Not at Fault for Self-Driving Car Fatality in Arizona

#143

Post by monkpit »

portofcall wrote: post #92
goshx wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If she was behind another parked car and stepped in front of the car that hit her, she could have been at a normal walking pace. The police stated that the car did not show signs of slowing down before the accident. I doubt the police had the records from the car’s system.

I doubt the police had the records from the car’s system. With all due respect, then why are they using their bully pulpit to blame this woman for her death at this early stage? The vehicle made no attempt to stop, which seems worrying if the sensors and algorithms were working as intended, so maybe it would be worth looking at those systems.

I think you are confusing the legal term “at fault” with the subjective term of “blame”.

Re: Police Say Uber Is Likely Not at Fault for Self-Driving Car Fatality in Arizona

#144

Post by goshx »

portofcall wrote: post #92
goshx wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If she was behind another parked car and stepped in front of the car that hit her, she could have been at a normal walking pace. The police stated that the car did not show signs of slowing down before the accident. I doubt the police had the records from the car’s system.

I doubt the police had the records from the car’s system. With all due respect, then why are they using their bully pulpit to blame this woman for her death at this early stage? The vehicle made no attempt to stop, which seems worrying if the sensors and algorithms were working as intended, so maybe it would be worth looking at those systems.

How does the police determine that a vehicle "made no attempt to stop" today, without video and sensor data?

Re: Police Say Uber Is Likely Not at Fault for Self-Driving Car Fatality in Arizona

#145

Post by dsfyu404ed »

maxander wrote: post #85

There's going to be a bunch of these "OMG a robot car hit someone!!!" stories that then morph into "the robot actually had nothing to do with it." Perhaps it will finally cue people in to how intrinsically dangerous cars are. I mean, even if autonomous cars are x100 times safer to be around than human-driven cars, they're still orders of magnitude more of a risk factor for ordinary (U.S.) citizens than say, terrorist…

More like cue them into how dangerous walking out into traffic is.

Cars don't stop on a dime. Everyone knows that. If there's ok visibility there's no excuse for getting hit by one that isn't going absurdly fast (assuming you don't use a circular definition for "absurdly fast")

Sure, the car isn't supposed hit the pedestrian but the pedestrian also has an equal obligation not to just dart out into the road.

And before you ask, I don't drive to work.

Re: Police Say Uber Is Likely Not at Fault for Self-Driving Car Fatality in Arizona

#146

Post by disconnected »

friedman23 wrote: post #21
benwilber0 wrote: post #14

> According to the Chronicle, the preliminary investigation found the Uber car was driving at 38 mph in a 35 mph zone and did not attempt to brake. Herzberg is said to have abruptly walked from a center median into a lane with traffic. The autonomous vehicle was speeding and made no attempt to decelerate given the sudden presence of an obstruction in its path? I would expect some kind of reaction from the car within…

3mph above the speed limit

That is immaterial.

The promise of autonomous cars is that they will be better drivers than human drivers.

That autonomous car, by going 3mph above the speed limit, already failed at the most fundamental level: following the rules.

And it was not even an obscure or ambiguous rule at that, as I assume that there are signs prominently displaying the legal speed limit. But even if there aren't, the rule book covers those situations in an unambiguous way (or at least it does in my country).

Accidents are excusable. Shit happens.

But deliberately failing to follow the rules? That cannot be tolerated.

Re: Police Say Uber Is Likely Not at Fault for Self-Driving Car Fatality in Arizona

#147

Post by cmurf »

dexterdog wrote: post #56
portofcall wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And yet the speeding vehicle didn’t even attempt to stop. https://www.theverge.com/2018/3/19/17140936/uber-self-drivin...

Can we please stop calling 38 in a 35 speeding? In many places that speed would be inpeding traffic.

Request denied. The sign says speed limit. What about a plain language sign are you not groking? Legally it is speeding, and it's an opinion to call it impeding traffic. And as a result of speeding, there's certainly civil liability attached because the car would not have been where it was, when it was, had it been driving at or below the speed limit.

Re: Police Say Uber Is Likely Not at Fault for Self-Driving Car Fatality in Arizona

#148

Post by akira2501 »

maxander wrote: post #85

There's going to be a bunch of these "OMG a robot car hit someone!!!" stories that then morph into "the robot actually had nothing to do with it." Perhaps it will finally cue people in to how intrinsically dangerous cars are. I mean, even if autonomous cars are x100 times safer to be around than human-driven cars, they're still orders of magnitude more of a risk factor for ordinary (U.S.) citizens than say, terrorist…

> Perhaps it will finally cue people in to how intrinsically dangerous cars are.

Until you consider the _billions_ of miles that cars in the US drive every month. Cars are exceptionally safe, and they're getting better every year.. because we keep driving _more_ miles year after year, yet fatalities continue to drop.

Also, how do you interpret facts like: California has 30% more people living in it than Texas, yet TX has a _greater_ number of roadway fatalities than CA?

> they're still orders of magnitude more of a risk factor for ordinary

The problem is: you absolutely cannot view vehicles as a _single_ risk factor. Thus, any comparison between human drivers and AI drivers on these terms is flawed from the outset.

Re: Police Say Uber Is Likely Not at Fault for Self-Driving Car Fatality in Arizona

#149

Post by portofcall »

goshx wrote: post #144
portofcall wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I doubt the police had the records from the car’s system. With all due respect, then why are they using their bully pulpit to blame this woman for her death at this early stage? The vehicle made no attempt to stop, which seems worrying if the sensors and algorithms were working as intended, so maybe it would be worth looking at those systems.

How does the police determine that a vehicle "made no attempt to stop" today, without video and sensor data?

I don’t know, but made no attempt to stop is according to the police.

Uber’s self-driving car was traveling at a speed of 40 mph when it struck a 49-year-old woman in Arizona Sunday night, and did not show significant signs of slowing down, police said today.

https://www.theverge.com/2018/3/19/17140936/uber-self-drivin...

If you’re saying that the whole “blame it on the homeless lady” routine is premature the im with you though.

Re: Police Say Uber Is Likely Not at Fault for Self-Driving Car Fatality in Arizona

#150

Post by mrhappyunhappy »

astro_robot wrote: post #139
jcranmer wrote: post #110

I've been trying to find video evidence of the crash, and have been unable to do so. The closest I've found is a myriad of news reports showing the stopped car and police scene. On reviewing this evidence however, there is one thing that sticks out: the damage to the car appears to be entirely on the passenger side. If the woman "darted out from the median," then she managed to clear at least half of the traffic lane…

Yea, there just seems to be so many things that aren't adding up yet. The news footage also showed a damaged bicycle but there is not mention of a cyclist in the article. I hope they release footage soon.

There was mention of her walking her bike.
Post reply on HN