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

31–40 of 459 posts

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

#31

Post by pishpash »

stefan_ wrote: post #10

This is just police standard operating procedure. In any kind of manslaughter where a vehicle is involved, save on paperwork and blame whichever party ended up dead before the driver has even spoken the words "she came from nowhere". Here is the police chief spelling it out for Uber: she came from the shadows I wonder what that LIDAR thinks about the shadows . I mean, this system is in place because everybody drives…

Arizona is in bed with Uber on this, they were enthusiastic about getting this on the road, so political cover is much needed. I read this like a joint press release by the Governor and Uber.

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

#32

Post by [deleted] »

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

[deleted]

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

#33

Post by benwilber0 »

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 speeding and also the car was inattentive to potential hazards outside of its vision. Normal human drivers slow down when they see a wild lady on the median looking like she might dart into the road. Normal people slow down when there are kids playing with a ball on the sidewalk. Do these cars do that? Do they even drive the speed limit?

edit: Also accidentally killing someone with your car because of minor speeding or inattentiveness usually results in a misdemeanor vehicular manslaughter charge. Who is getting that charge here?

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

#34

Post by laretluval »

blakesterz wrote: post #17
stefan_ wrote: post #10

This is just police standard operating procedure. In any kind of manslaughter where a vehicle is involved, save on paperwork and blame whichever party ended up dead before the driver has even spoken the words "she came from nowhere". Here is the police chief spelling it out for Uber: she came from the shadows I wonder what that LIDAR thinks about the shadows . I mean, this system is in place because everybody drives…

> I wonder what that LIDAR thinks about the shadows. I honestly don't follow these systems very close, but I thought that was one of the big selling points, LIDAR can see into tough situations and things like "the shadows" and help avoid situations where people would fail.

I think he is saying that she probably would have died even if a human were driving.

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

#35

Post by dang »

Alex3917 wrote: post #6
omegaworks wrote: post #3

>Police believe she may have been homeless. Police: "don't worry, she was an undesirable." Next, let's watch them publicly leak her criminal background.

They already did, she was in prison for a year on charges relating to the 'dangerous' drug marijuana. I called almost verbatim what the chief of police actually said in the other thread and had my comment downvoted and flagged for it.

If you mean https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16620402, it's unclear what it means and how you meant it. I'm sure many readers took it literally.

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

#36

Post by brian-armstrong »

So here's one thing about this incident where humans do have a system for this already.

People are very good at reading body language. It's possible to gather someone's likely intentions (wrt moving) in a near instant. A defensive driver will see body language that could dart out into the street and slow down, just in case, and give more attention to the person. We are really good at this.

I know you can say it was dark and therefore maybe harder to see this, but a self-driving car shouldn't take its eyes off anything anyway, so that seems irrelevant. Unless it's almost pitch black, people can read this sort of information.

So what gives? Uber's self-driving system clearly lacks the full suite of decisions made by human drivers. This makes me skeptical that their cars can be significantly safer than human drivers.

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

#37

Post by rdiddly »

Just to continue my line of unpopular opinions about this: whoever chooses to put a car on the road instead of traveling in a way that hurts others less (walking, transit, bike), is responsible at least in part for any damage, injury or death, just by being there. How many people die by wandering out in front of somebody else walking along? Nobody even has to call a cop, much less determine whose fault it was, because nothing happens.

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

#38

Post by rory096 »

stefan_ wrote: post #10

This is just police standard operating procedure. In any kind of manslaughter where a vehicle is involved, save on paperwork and blame whichever party ended up dead before the driver has even spoken the words "she came from nowhere". Here is the police chief spelling it out for Uber: she came from the shadows I wonder what that LIDAR thinks about the shadows . I mean, this system is in place because everybody drives…

>before anyone has even downloaded the recordings

The second paragraph of the article states "video footage taken from cameras equipped to the autonomous Volvo SUV potentially shift the blame to the victim herself."

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

#40

Post by dang »

pishpash wrote: post #31
stefan_ wrote: post #10

This is just police standard operating procedure. In any kind of manslaughter where a vehicle is involved, save on paperwork and blame whichever party ended up dead before the driver has even spoken the words "she came from nowhere". Here is the police chief spelling it out for Uber: she came from the shadows I wonder what that LIDAR thinks about the shadows . I mean, this system is in place because everybody drives…

Arizona is in bed with Uber on this, they were enthusiastic about getting this on the road, so political cover is much needed. I read this like a joint press release by the Governor and Uber.

Your comments on this heated topic stand out as being particularly unsubstantive and flamebaity. Could you please not do that here? It isn't just that they're bad comments for HN, it's that they encourage worse.

If you'd (re-)read https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and take the spirit of this site to heart when commenting here, we'd appreciate it.

Post reply on HN