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

Mobileye says its software would have seen pedestrian in Uber fatality

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 91 posts

Re: Mobileye says its software would have seen pedestrian in Uber fatality

#61

Post by vkou »

pdpi wrote: post #30
zer00eyz wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except their technology was ON the car that was involved... they are part of the story - Uber turned their gear off in favor of their own.

The whole point is that uber is developing their own gear. Dunno about you, but for me giving two self-driving systems control over the car at same time seems like a recipe for disaster. Of course they turned off the other systems.

> Dunno about you, but for me giving two self-driving systems control over the car at same time seems like a recipe for disaster.

When I drive a car, I am a 'self-driving system'. It is intended that I am used in conjunction with the car's existing driving-assist functionality.

Re: Mobileye says its software would have seen pedestrian in Uber fatality

#62

Post by dogma1138 »

c22 wrote: post #39
pdpi wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The whole point is that uber is developing their own gear. Dunno about you, but for me giving two self-driving systems control over the car at same time seems like a recipe for disaster. Of course they turned off the other systems.

Mobileye isn't a "self-driving" system, it's a collision prevention/mitigation system, like airbags or ABS. Leaving it on while a human controls the car hasn't been seen as a disaster.

Tesla’s autopilot runs on MobilEye only AP 2 runs on NVIDIA.

Re: Mobileye says its software would have seen pedestrian in Uber fatality

#63

Post by always_good »

frgtpsswrdlame wrote: post #43
always_good wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, they were still jaywalking in the middle of the night hoping oncoming cars would stop for them. It's not like the car hopped the curb.

They were crossing a low speed, brightly lit street.

It's a gamble that jaywalkers lose every year.

When you're going to jaywalk, ensure that the next car is far enough away to where it doesn't matter if they stop. That's the correct way that would've saved this person's life without any further analysis.

I'm taking issue with this:

>that person died for no good reason beyond Uber rushing tech out the door before it was ready

Well, no. They died because they lost their gamble on an unguided crossing where the oncoming car did not stop.

We are now analyzing why the car didn't stop, but notice how no charges were pressed.

Re: Mobileye says its software would have seen pedestrian in Uber fatality

#64

Post by darkmarmot »

pdpi wrote: post #30
zer00eyz wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except their technology was ON the car that was involved... they are part of the story - Uber turned their gear off in favor of their own.

The whole point is that uber is developing their own gear. Dunno about you, but for me giving two self-driving systems control over the car at same time seems like a recipe for disaster. Of course they turned off the other systems.

Aircraft use multiple flight systems developed by separate teams in separate languages/technologies -- and then compare their answers to get redundant consensus.

Re: Mobileye says its software would have seen pedestrian in Uber fatality

#65

Post by russdill »

ars wrote: post #54
linsomniac wrote: post #35

Ok, Mobileye would have seen the pedestrian 1 second before impact. That's not important though... The important thing is would it have saved her life? Would it have taken action and if so when and how? It's not clear that Uber's platform didn't see the pedestrian. In fact, I find it unlikely that it didn't see her, between radar and the bike, lidar, and optical (and sonar). I think the situation here is that there w…

> The important thing is would it have saved her life? It probably would have. Slamming on the brake for 1 second would have reduced the car's speed enough to change things from fatal to seriously injured. According to: http://www.batesville.k12.in.us/Physics/PhyNet/Mechanics/Kin... In one second you can shed 20 miles/hour of speed. That would take the car from 38mph to 18mph. (Those numbers are overly precise, but g…

Not only that, she was crossing from left to right and was hit by the edge of the right side of the car. She could have been missed entirely.

Re: Mobileye says its software would have seen pedestrian in Uber fatality

#66

Post by jyrkesh »

frgtpsswrdlame wrote: post #43
always_good wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, they were still jaywalking in the middle of the night hoping oncoming cars would stop for them. It's not like the car hopped the curb.

They were crossing a low speed, brightly lit street.

Did you watch the video? I think any decent self-driving tech would've seen her, but I highly contend with OP's assertion that an "alert human" would have stopped in time. The road was very dark, and she came out of nowhere.

If the car was speeding, you might be able to make that argument, but I don't think anyone has made that claim yet.

Re: Mobileye says its software would have seen pedestrian in Uber fatality

#67

Post by _ea1k »

reificator wrote: post #3

Look. It's generating bad press right now for your industry. I get that. I also think that in the long run your industry will be far safer than human drivers. But now is not the time to post speculative bullshit like this. Would your car also have run into a school shooting unarmed? You weren't in that situation, you don't know all the edge cases, the best you can say is that you had a similar situation under control…

I believe that Mobileye has said the opposite in cases where their current technology would not have been able to respond as well. And their technology was on the vehicle being involved in the crash, but not being used.

In the past, Mobileye has made it a point to be very specific about what their technology is and is not currently capable of. I don't see a problem with that.

Re: Mobileye says its software would have seen pedestrian in Uber fatality

#68

Post by _ea1k »

ggg9990 wrote: post #42
reaperducer wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I imagine we'll see self-driving car horror movies soon. We've had them in the past (Christine, Trucks, Herbie the Love Bug), but the only thing Hollywood loves more than latching on to a trend (Emoji Movie) is blowing something out of proportion.

Damn, I’m already imagining them like the climate change movies where a 800-foot tsunami hits Manhattan. 200 million self driving cars have become hostile and are trying to kill the humans. The problem is that they have commandeered a group of friendly-looking Japanese humanoid robots to pump gas for them. One rogue humanoid robot is the one who will save humanity along with help from a 6-year-old girl with pigtails…

Who leaked our script? Ugh...

Re: Mobileye says its software would have seen pedestrian in Uber fatality

#69

Post by _ea1k »

2474 wrote: post #22
reificator wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're right. Developing video games has taught me that a second is a long time. But we still don't even know that Uber didn't detect them that early. The CV system or other sensors could have picked out the pedestrian but something else went wrong instead. I tend to think that if Uber did detect the pedestrian, they would have said something by now. But perhaps they prefer the optics of not having seen her to the op…

This reminds me of a survey I had taken. I can't remember the survey publisher but it was related to self-driving vehicles. You were presented two pictures (e.g. a picture of school kids crossing a crosswalk and the other a picture of an adult male and female walking their dog across a crosswalk). Presumably you had to choose; would you swerve to hit the adults and dog or would you stay course and hit the kids. I kno…

I really doubt that the survey was about actually training the cars. It probably has more to do with positioning the marketing messaging around them.

AFAIK, the trolley problem isn't something that the engineers consider to actually be a major problem.

Re: Mobileye says its software would have seen pedestrian in Uber fatality

#70

Post by omgPhysics »

Good for these people. If Uber really had lidar+radar [1] and disabled Volvo safety features [2] (such as radar) there is no excuse for this. Uber should have clarified the video released may not be representative of the information they have.

[1] https://techcrunch.com/2018/03/19/heres-how-ubers-self-drivi... [2] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-03-26/uber-disa...

Post reply on HN