Self Driving Uber Vehicle Bags First Pedestrian

The car had between 250'-300' to see the woman crossing the road, at 45 mph that is about 5-6 seconds.

 

No we were stopped at a stop sign at an intersection where the road we were on intersects at a steep angle and you have to look way back over your shoulder. She started to take off and as she did I looked back over my shoulder to make sure I could go and started to roll forward but she had only gone forward about a foot and stopped again. It was barely a bump. And I waved a "hey sorry" expecting her to just go on. But she didn't. So I got out and look and there wasn't even a scratch. There happened to be a amublance with EMT's and they got out and looked and scratched their heads and went up to speak to the driver who turned out to be an elderly woman. Well she's starting to have a panic attack or something. In the meantime a police officer drives by and pulls over and he looks and ask me what's going on and I tell him we barely bumped after she started to go and then stopped for some reason. He looked at the bumpers and gave me what's this kinda of look and goes over to talk to her and she sitting on her car seat with her feet on the ground and she............................faints. Now the paramedics have to officially go into action. Her husband comes up, they are both teachers. The police office says sorry but I gotta write it up now as an accident. He didn't charge me with anything it happens there routinely and there is damage. We were actually almost laughing about it at the scene but felt sorta sorry for the lady but give me a break.

Any way the couple filed for like 3 days she couldn't go to work not because she was injured but for "emotional distress", my insurance took care of it.

 

Right. Always expect the unexpected and drive defensively with 100% concentration.

Somebody hit a motorcyclist today and while a good Samaritan had time to stop, exit his car, and run toward the victim, a second pungenthole ran over the victim's legs. Really hope both are caught and thrown in the hole.

 

If you were riding in an autonomous vehicle you wouldn't have hit her.

 

Because of this thing called freedom where not everyone wants to be subject to a computer running their life.

 

So she also had 250' - 300' to see the car which had head lights on, she in darkness, yet she still crossed over into his lane.

 

So we have one woman in hysterics and legally you're still at fault for the bump. Neither of those situations would happen with autonomous cars. I would also question how good was the eyesight of this woman - many elderly people drive with poor eyesight

 

yes, but if a sensor is dirty or damage, doesn't mater, it like a human distracted by a text, if they don't see the person, can't react to them

 

And must be held totally responsible and pay up, or get thrown in the hole for a number of years.

 

If the automatic car is killing people its not rubbish, clearly if the vehicle is murdering people without our input its actually worse than any human on the road...

 

Yea, because we know that human driven cars have never killed anyone on the roads !

 

The automatic car is not murdering people. The argument is that they are safer than humans.

 

Of course they have, and some intentionally, but an automated car killing people without human input is just a murder machine. Simply put these machines shouldn't be out of a completely controlled area until they are safe...

 

The machine killed a human, how safe is that?

 

Here's more:

 

Using roads - as a driver or pedestrian - is an inherently dangerous activity, arguably the most dangerous thing people do on an everyday basis. The fact that an automated car killed a pedestrian does not imply automated cars are less safe than human driven cars (to say nothing of the fact that the pedestrian was the one at fault).

 

Statistically, automated cars are exponentially more dangerous. How many automated cars are there? A single death compared to the limited number of automated cars would be significant, whereas a pedestrian death per the millions of regular cars would be insignificant in comparison.

The truth of it is that automation on that level shouldn't be conducted in uncontrolled areas. They started in the wrong industry and are pushing the wrong concepts. They should have automated agriculture, large empty fields, limited human contact, pushing the tech to rural areas, where it will ultimately need to be if the automated car thing is going to work...

 

Do you have anything whatsoever to support that statement or are you just pulling it out of thin air?

Don't bother responding as I already know the answer to my question.... you're pulling it completely out of thin air.

The number of automated cars is insignificant as the stat is calculated as a function of miles driven. Tesla claims their cars have driven 250 million miles. That may sound like a lot but it is far too small to draw any statistically significant conclusions.

Plus one should consider the potential "learning curve" of automated driving. It is perfectly reasonable to assume that as the technology advances, it will get safer. So how much should we be afraid of short term results when the long term is promising?

One should also consider the exponential benefits of increased automation. In other words, dropping one automated car into the real world here and now may be dangerous. But if *everyone* was driving automated cars, that would be incredibly safe.

 

The best way to end the debate is to compel gamer geeks to ride back and forth through downtown Los Angeles in a self driving vehicle 24 hours a day for a week, blindfolded.

 

How many automated cars are on US roads? This is simple math, we are talking about ratios. One death to an automated car is going to reflect much differently than one to a human driven car based solely on the sheer volume of human driven cars. Its not thin air its junior high level math. You simply cannot use 'miles driven' as a legitimate standard, as that cannot be attributed to where and when these miles were counted, you need to look at the actual number of vehicles used on the road.

Automating cars is not the right step now. Perhaps when it is much safer and when the technology is better, but not now. Move automation to agriculture. Automated cars will only create more problems on our roads than they'll fix at this point...

 

It seems you don't know AI. A program that learns

 

You haven't given any numbers, facts or statistics to back up your assertion. You simply pulled it completely out of thin air.

According to some estimates, automated cars have driven 200 million miles Tesla alone claims their cars have 100 million. 2 people have died in accidents involving automated cars. That equates to 1 death every 100 million miles, which is very much in line with the national average when people are behind the wheel.

Uh, "deaths per 100 million miles" is the standard they use when looking at these things.

 

only the programmer , but hes in india so hes exempt

 

Your washing machine has killed people. Do you still use it?

 

And you're basing your entire argument on a single data point. You can't be serious.