6 ms·

It's said she's been hit immediately after entering a car lane outside a crosswalk. Quite possibly there was no time for the autopilot to react at all. I hope a

It's said she's been hit immediately after entering a car lane outside a crosswalk. Quite possibly there was no time for the autopilot to react at all. I hope all video footage for self-driving crashes is mandatorily released.

ionforce 9y ago
Isn't the point of smart vehicles that they have superhuman reaction speed?
- lokopodium 9y ago
  It is, actuators still have their lag, probably not much different from foot-pedal combo.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
- fastball 9y ago
  There are many instances in Asia of people committing suicide by car (jumping in front of a car with no chance for the driver to stop). Not saying this is the case here, but it could be. As others have said, we need to wait until we know more before jumping to conclusions.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
- bmelton 9y ago
  e=mv2, whether or not the driver is a superhuman robot or a human. This means that there's a fixed distance from which the optimal driver can stop a car doing xmph. Yes, an autonomous vehicle has a faster reaction time* to begin the stop, but no matter the reaction time, a stop cannot be instantaneous from any substantial amount of speed. If it takes 20 feet to stop a car doing 20MPH, it will take 80 feet to stop a car doing 40mph. If there's a human between the initial brake point and 80 feet from it, that human will be hit, no matter who or what the driver is.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
  - Buldak 9y ago
    Tempe police have said that the car didn't brake ("significantly") prior to the collision[1]. So it does not seem that the car reacted optimally but simply had too much speed to halt in time. [1]http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/news/cops-uber-self-driving-car-didnt-brake-much-in-arizona-pedestrian-death-10247629 http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/news/cops-uber-self-driving-c...
    - bmelton 9y ago
      I haven't any insight to whether or not the car did or didn't attempt to brake, but it's necessary to respond to the "superhuman reaction speed" remark as, even if the reaction speed is superhuman, that doesn't necessarily mean that it's enough. Accidents can still occur even if the car is perfect.
  - akira2501 9y ago
    > to begin the stop It, or the driver, could do more than just stop though. You can change directions, even at 38mph. Then we have to get into other questions, would I as a driver willingly sideswipe a car next to me to avoid hitting a pedestrian? Is it reasonable to expect an AI to make the same value decision?
    - deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
    - mirimir 9y ago
      It's not unknown for people to crash and burn to avoid hitting squirrels. And with modern airbag systems, it's arguably safer for all concerned for cars to risk hitting poles, and even trees. But on the other hand, once leaving the roadway there's the risk of hitting other pedestrians.
      - kamaal 9y ago
- ekianjo 9y ago
  superhUman reaction speed does not mean that the laws of physics stop applying. A vehicule at 40mph will still take the same distance to stop.
- kamaal 9y ago
  Actually you can't go from 40 miles/ph to 0 miles/ph in an instant. At least not with a passenger car. The reaction time is typically a few seconds. If one throws themselves in front of a car, the car would need a few seconds to react. Based on the speed, distance and other parameters, I don't think any car would be able to stop in an instant. Thinking about it seriously, it may be shouldn't. Also these things could lead to a crash pile up with other vehicles coming in from behind.
mirimir 9y ago
From the other post on this:[0] > Chief of Police Sylvia Moir told the San Francisco Chronicle on Monday that video footage taken from cameras equipped to the autonomous Volvo SUV potentially shift the blame to the victim herself, 49-year-old Elaine Herzberg, rather than the vehicle. > “It’s very clear it would have been difficult to avoid this collision in any kind of mode [autonomous or human-driven] based on how she came from the shadows right into the roadway,” Moir told the paper, adding that the incident occurred roughly 100 yards from a crosswalk. “It is dangerous to cross roadways in the evening hour when well-illuminated managed crosswalks are available,” she said. 0) http://fortune.com/2018/03/19/uber-self-driving-car-crash/ http://fortune.com/2018/03/19/uber-self-driving-car-crash/
- empressplay 9y ago
  er... LIDAR needs ambient light now? Also if you look on Google Street View, the pedestrian entered the road from a median crossing that you can see straight down the middle of from the road hundreds of feet away. I bet they don't release the footage from the car though ;)
  - arbie 9y ago
    Sensor Fusion typically merges LiDAR with stereoscopic camera feeds, the latter requiring ambient light.
    - deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
- jcranmer 9y ago
  Non-driving advocates have pointed out that many investigations of car crashes with pedestrians and cyclists tend to blame the pedestrian/cyclist by reflex and generally refuse to search for exculpatory evidence. Based on the layout of the presumed crash site (namely, the median had a paved section that would effectively make this an unmarked crosswalk), and based on the fact that the damage being all on the passenger's side (which is to say, the pedestrian would have had to have crossed most of the lane before being struck), I would expect that there is a rather lot that could have been done on the driver's side (whether human or autonomous) to avoid the crash.
LoSboccacc 9y ago
"no time for the autopilot to react" - that may be technically true but humans tend to slow before if they recognize a situation they don't understand http://fortune.com/2018/03/19/uber-self-driving-car-crash/ http://fortune.com/2018/03/19/uber-self-driving-car-crash/ > she came from the shadows right into the roadway also we were told radars would have have solved exactly this limitation of humans > Uber car was driving at 38 mph in a 35 mph zone also we were told these car would be inherently safer because they would always respect limits and signage > she is said to have abruptly walked from a center median into a lane with traffic I don't know other driver, but when someone is on the median or close to the road I usually slow down in principle because it doesn't match the usual expectations of a typical 'safe' situation. I've been advocating against public testing for a long time, because it's just treating people safety as an externality. Uber is cutting corners, not all company are that sloppy, but this is, overall, unacceptable.

ionforce 9y ago

Isn't the point of smart vehicles that they have superhuman reaction speed?

lokopodium 9y ago
It is, actuators still have their lag, probably not much different from foot-pedal combo.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
fastball 9y ago
There are many instances in Asia of people committing suicide by car (jumping in front of a car with no chance for the driver to stop). Not saying this is the case here, but it could be. As others have said, we need to wait until we know more before jumping to conclusions.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
bmelton 9y ago
e=mv2, whether or not the driver is a superhuman robot or a human. This means that there's a fixed distance from which the optimal driver can stop a car doing xmph. Yes, an autonomous vehicle has a faster reaction time* to begin the stop, but no matter the reaction time, a stop cannot be instantaneous from any substantial amount of speed. If it takes 20 feet to stop a car doing 20MPH, it will take 80 feet to stop a car doing 40mph. If there's a human between the initial brake point and 80 feet from it, that human will be hit, no matter who or what the driver is.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- Buldak 9y ago
  Tempe police have said that the car didn't brake ("significantly") prior to the collision[1]. So it does not seem that the car reacted optimally but simply had too much speed to halt in time. [1]http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/news/cops-uber-self-driving-car-didnt-brake-much-in-arizona-pedestrian-death-10247629 http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/news/cops-uber-self-driving-c...
  - bmelton 9y ago
    I haven't any insight to whether or not the car did or didn't attempt to brake, but it's necessary to respond to the "superhuman reaction speed" remark as, even if the reaction speed is superhuman, that doesn't necessarily mean that it's enough. Accidents can still occur even if the car is perfect.
- akira2501 9y ago
  > to begin the stop It, or the driver, could do more than just stop though. You can change directions, even at 38mph. Then we have to get into other questions, would I as a driver willingly sideswipe a car next to me to avoid hitting a pedestrian? Is it reasonable to expect an AI to make the same value decision?
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
  - mirimir 9y ago
    It's not unknown for people to crash and burn to avoid hitting squirrels. And with modern airbag systems, it's arguably safer for all concerned for cars to risk hitting poles, and even trees. But on the other hand, once leaving the roadway there's the risk of hitting other pedestrians.
    - kamaal 9y ago
ekianjo 9y ago
superhUman reaction speed does not mean that the laws of physics stop applying. A vehicule at 40mph will still take the same distance to stop.
kamaal 9y ago
Actually you can't go from 40 miles/ph to 0 miles/ph in an instant. At least not with a passenger car. The reaction time is typically a few seconds. If one throws themselves in front of a car, the car would need a few seconds to react. Based on the speed, distance and other parameters, I don't think any car would be able to stop in an instant. Thinking about it seriously, it may be shouldn't. Also these things could lead to a crash pile up with other vehicles coming in from behind.

mirimir 9y ago

From the other post on this:[0] > Chief of Police Sylvia Moir told the San Francisco Chronicle on Monday that video footage taken from cameras equipped to the autonomous Volvo SUV potentially shift the blame to the victim herself, 49-year-old Elaine Herzberg, rather than the vehicle. > “It’s very clear it would have been difficult to avoid this collision in any kind of mode [autonomous or human-driven] based on how she came from the shadows right into the roadway,” Moir told the paper, adding that the incident occurred roughly 100 yards from a crosswalk. “It is dangerous to cross roadways in the evening hour when well-illuminated managed crosswalks are available,” she said. 0) http://fortune.com/2018/03/19/uber-self-driving-car-crash/ http://fortune.com/2018/03/19/uber-self-driving-car-crash/

empressplay 9y ago
er... LIDAR needs ambient light now? Also if you look on Google Street View, the pedestrian entered the road from a median crossing that you can see straight down the middle of from the road hundreds of feet away. I bet they don't release the footage from the car though ;)
- arbie 9y ago
  Sensor Fusion typically merges LiDAR with stereoscopic camera feeds, the latter requiring ambient light.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
jcranmer 9y ago
Non-driving advocates have pointed out that many investigations of car crashes with pedestrians and cyclists tend to blame the pedestrian/cyclist by reflex and generally refuse to search for exculpatory evidence. Based on the layout of the presumed crash site (namely, the median had a paved section that would effectively make this an unmarked crosswalk), and based on the fact that the damage being all on the passenger's side (which is to say, the pedestrian would have had to have crossed most of the lane before being struck), I would expect that there is a rather lot that could have been done on the driver's side (whether human or autonomous) to avoid the crash.

LoSboccacc 9y ago

"no time for the autopilot to react" - that may be technically true but humans tend to slow before if they recognize a situation they don't understand http://fortune.com/2018/03/19/uber-self-driving-car-crash/ http://fortune.com/2018/03/19/uber-self-driving-car-crash/ > she came from the shadows right into the roadway also we were told radars would have have solved exactly this limitation of humans > Uber car was driving at 38 mph in a 35 mph zone also we were told these car would be inherently safer because they would always respect limits and signage > she is said to have abruptly walked from a center median into a lane with traffic I don't know other driver, but when someone is on the median or close to the road I usually slow down in principle because it doesn't match the usual expectations of a typical 'safe' situation. I've been advocating against public testing for a long time, because it's just treating people safety as an externality. Uber is cutting corners, not all company are that sloppy, but this is, overall, unacceptable.