Uber’s Self-Driving Cars Were Struggling Before Arizona Crash • Hacker News Board

Re: Uber’s Self-Driving Cars Were Struggling Before Arizona Crash

#241

Post by dbt00 » Sun, Mar 25, 2018, 1:27 AM UTC

dbt00 wrote: post #188

AdrianB1 wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. If you jump in front of a train, is the train driver's fault? Where is the pedestrian's responsibility?

In Arizona it is the driver's responsibility to yield to all pedestrians on the same side of the road. She somehow crossed 3 and a half lanes of traffic without the Uber SDV ever perceiving her. Their fault.

Coming back to this, I was wrong about the details of Arizona law. They require pedestrians to yield to drivers outside of crosswalks, marked or unmarked.

https://www.azleg.gov/ars/28/00793.htm

However, I still think Uber violated 28-794.1 and .3.

  Notwithstanding the provisions of this chapter every driver of a vehicle shall:
 
  1. Exercise due care to avoid colliding with any pedestrian on any roadway.
  2. Give warning by sounding the horn when necessary.
  3. Exercise proper precaution on observing a child or a confused or incapacitated person on a roadway.

https://www.azleg.gov/ars/28/00794.htm

Re: Uber’s Self-Driving Cars Were Struggling Before Arizona Crash

#242

Post by galdosdi » Sun, Mar 25, 2018, 2:03 AM UTC

joncrane wrote: post #221

galdosdi wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm about to get my hack license (taxicab operator) in NYC. I learned in taxi school yesterday that in NY, any fatality or serious injury involving a taxi (including ubers etc) triggers an instant suspension of the driver's hack license until an investigation is complete (and if the investigation finds the driver was at fault, the suspension becomes a permanent revocation) I don't see why an experimental self driving…

Why are you getting a hack license?

Why go from hacker to hack? I'm taking a break from the corporate software job world and thinking about what to do next, but I need something interesting to keep me busy.

Many people would travel in a time of their lives like that, and I see this as much like that. Its just that this is depth over breadth, that is, exploring my beloved NYC in very fine detail excites me more than exploring the world in almost pointlessly coarse detail...

Making a few extra bucks and making myself useful rather than purely self indulgent (unlike traditional tourism) is a plus also. It's also something that comes with zero schedule commitment and no boss. It also dovetails with a longtime obsession with transportation.

That wasn't the point of my comment of course, just stating where I got this info, but I guess I piqued your curiosity.

Re: Uber’s Self-Driving Cars Were Struggling Before Arizona Crash

#243

Post by imh » Sun, Mar 25, 2018, 5:46 AM UTC

dlp211 wrote: post #203

imh wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But regulations cost jobs! Uber could just move to another state! >The Phoenix area was added a year ago, and quickly became the company’s main testing ground, with 400 employees and more than 150 autonomous cars driving local roads because of "favorable regulatory environment, favorable weather conditions,” according to a company document. The sorts of regulations you're suggesting cost California the privilege of h…

And no one in California is dead because of that.

Exactly. I may need to be a bit more explicit with a /s tag next time.

Re: Uber’s Self-Driving Cars Were Struggling Before Arizona Crash

#244

Post by acranox » Wed, Mar 28, 2018, 7:40 PM UTC

chrismcb wrote: post #228

acranox wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The slow driver isn’t creating the danger though. It’s all the drivers going over that actually create the danger you describe. If everyone just followed the laws, the danger you describe would no longer exist. Normalization if traffic violations is compounding the problem of the danger we face on the roads. So many problems could be solved and so many lives saved if people just followed the laws. The fact that every…

In Arizona, it is not against the law to drive over the speed limit. But it is against the law to speed, or drive too fast for the given conditions. Driving over the limit is evidence that you might be speeding. If everyone else is driving above the limit, and you aren't, you are the one causing the danger.

Your description does not seem to be consistent with my reading of the laws that are referenced from this page: http://azbikelaw.org/speed-limit/

Re: Uber’s Self-Driving Cars Were Struggling Before Arizona Crash

#245

Post by hunter23 » Wed, Mar 28, 2018, 9:21 PM UTC

dlp211 wrote: post #203

imh wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But regulations cost jobs! Uber could just move to another state! >The Phoenix area was added a year ago, and quickly became the company’s main testing ground, with 400 employees and more than 150 autonomous cars driving local roads because of "favorable regulatory environment, favorable weather conditions,” according to a company document. The sorts of regulations you're suggesting cost California the privilege of h…

And no one in California is dead because of that.

Yes, and I love that California requires that the operator report on dis-engagements. It gives us some measure of how good the cars are performing (obviously not a great measure). The fact that the industry leader (Waymo) is fine with California's regulations show that they aren't onerous.