4 ms·

I hope for the industry this is the case. Although tragic, I can’t help but wonder how many pedestrians have been killed today by human drivers.

Numberwang 9y ago
Killed today by 1000 randomly selected human drivers.
- apotheothesomai 9y ago
  Given the incredibly small number of unmanned, autonomous vehicles on the road, and the fact that they stick to fairly uncomplicated urban and suburban terrains, the comparison would be meaningless. The numbers for autonomous vehicles would border on statistical insignificance. You're being very tendentious rather than objective, rhetorical rather than dialectical.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
  - jryle80 9y ago
    Statistically speaking, I agree that comparison isn't helpful. At the same time we have to take into account it's still learning phase for self-driving. I'd be interested to learn from the history how well automobile was received by public a century ago, and whether the accident rate spiked early on.
TheGrumpyBrit 9y ago
While I agree with your inference that autonomous vehicles are still safer than human drivers, this incident throws doubt on a lot of my previous assumptions. A human driver, in the scenario as reported, can be expected to take a certain amount of time to react to an unexpected event, such as a pedestrian walking out in front of it. An autonomous driver, IMO, doesn't have that luxury. That vehicle should be aware of every other object it's sharing a length of road with (sidewalks and medians included). It should be tracking every other object at all times, anticipating a change of course. It should know the proximity of other vehicles, and be able to calculate whether it has space to swerve if necessary, and whether the following vehicle has enough stopping distance in an emergency. It should know EXACTLY what it will do in response to any of the potential hazards it can detect. It should absolutely not be exceeding the speed limit under any circumstances. I suspect this incident will highlight one of the areas where investigators are not currently up to speed with technology. You can't look at an incident like this as if it was a human driver using multiple dashcams, because "It was dark and she came from nowhere" doesn't cut it. For an autonomous vehicle accident, the video isn't enough - investigators need to see and understand all the sensor readings taken by the vehicle in the lead up to the accident. Did the car detect the pedestrian? If not, why not? Why didn't it notice the change of course? How long before impact did it identify that a collision was imminent? Why didn't it brake? Unlike a human driver, there's no human factor to consider. Every decision that vehicle made was based on rules. So "The Uber was not at fault" isn't enough - every day, thousands of people are involved in accidents where they're not at fault. That doesn't mean they couldn't have avoided it, and part of being a good driver is allowing for other people doing dumb things. The investigation needs to highlight exactly what decisions that vehicle made which resulted in this tragedy, and what can be changed to make sure it isn't repeated.
- pintxo 9y ago
  Sounds like the NTSB is going to get a new job?
  - TheGrumpyBrit 9y ago
    I think accident investigators could certainly take some tips from them when it comes to autonomous vehicles. They need to understand exactly what data is collected by these vehicles, and how they can use that data as part of their investigation. There should also be a full root cause investigation into every single accident involving an autonomous vehicle. These protocols really need to be in place now, with training and funding of accident investigators written in as part of the operating license for each city, because if we wait a decade, we'll get a lot more resistance from the operators.

Numberwang 9y ago

Killed today by 1000 randomly selected human drivers.

apotheothesomai 9y ago
Given the incredibly small number of unmanned, autonomous vehicles on the road, and the fact that they stick to fairly uncomplicated urban and suburban terrains, the comparison would be meaningless. The numbers for autonomous vehicles would border on statistical insignificance. You're being very tendentious rather than objective, rhetorical rather than dialectical.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- jryle80 9y ago
  Statistically speaking, I agree that comparison isn't helpful. At the same time we have to take into account it's still learning phase for self-driving. I'd be interested to learn from the history how well automobile was received by public a century ago, and whether the accident rate spiked early on.

TheGrumpyBrit 9y ago

While I agree with your inference that autonomous vehicles are still safer than human drivers, this incident throws doubt on a lot of my previous assumptions. A human driver, in the scenario as reported, can be expected to take a certain amount of time to react to an unexpected event, such as a pedestrian walking out in front of it. An autonomous driver, IMO, doesn't have that luxury. That vehicle should be aware of every other object it's sharing a length of road with (sidewalks and medians included). It should be tracking every other object at all times, anticipating a change of course. It should know the proximity of other vehicles, and be able to calculate whether it has space to swerve if necessary, and whether the following vehicle has enough stopping distance in an emergency. It should know EXACTLY what it will do in response to any of the potential hazards it can detect. It should absolutely not be exceeding the speed limit under any circumstances. I suspect this incident will highlight one of the areas where investigators are not currently up to speed with technology. You can't look at an incident like this as if it was a human driver using multiple dashcams, because "It was dark and she came from nowhere" doesn't cut it. For an autonomous vehicle accident, the video isn't enough - investigators need to see and understand all the sensor readings taken by the vehicle in the lead up to the accident. Did the car detect the pedestrian? If not, why not? Why didn't it notice the change of course? How long before impact did it identify that a collision was imminent? Why didn't it brake? Unlike a human driver, there's no human factor to consider. Every decision that vehicle made was based on rules. So "The Uber was not at fault" isn't enough - every day, thousands of people are involved in accidents where they're not at fault. That doesn't mean they couldn't have avoided it, and part of being a good driver is allowing for other people doing dumb things. The investigation needs to highlight exactly what decisions that vehicle made which resulted in this tragedy, and what can be changed to make sure it isn't repeated.

pintxo 9y ago
Sounds like the NTSB is going to get a new job?
- TheGrumpyBrit 9y ago
  I think accident investigators could certainly take some tips from them when it comes to autonomous vehicles. They need to understand exactly what data is collected by these vehicles, and how they can use that data as part of their investigation. There should also be a full root cause investigation into every single accident involving an autonomous vehicle. These protocols really need to be in place now, with training and funding of accident investigators written in as part of the operating license for each city, because if we wait a decade, we'll get a lot more resistance from the operators.