4 ms·

To be fair about one thing, the pedestrian would not have survived with a human driver either. They crossed the road in pitch black darkness. The only reason it

To be fair about one thing, the pedestrian would not have survived with a human driver either. They crossed the road in pitch black darkness. The only reason it was news was because it was a self driving car.

smolder 7y ago
Citation? I didn't get that impression at all when it happened and I read up on it.
- jagged-chisel 7y ago
  > I didn't get that impression at all when it happened... What impression? >> the pedestrian would not have survived with a human driver either. Car meets pedestrian at speed causes death often. I don't think this is questionable. >> They crossed the road in pitch black darkness. The circumstances of the incident were well publicized by the media, and the video released shows this is obvious. >> The only reason it was news was because it was a self driving car. All the statistics around pedestrians being injured or killed ... how many of those stories result in reports across the country in most media outlets? Which part requires citation for you?
  - smolder 7y ago
    The part where a human driver would have hit them. The dark video I just googled myself isn't any proof of that, it was on a road with at least sparse overhead lights and the car had headlights. The poor quality video is not equivalent to human eyes or something adequate for driving a car. There was no reason to downvote me.
jrkatz 7y ago
This is not so clear, especially on the darkness point (though I'm sure uber is pleased their message has taken the day in some circles). The car knew it needed to brake over 1 second before impact but failed to apply the brake. [0] A second of hard braking would have made a large difference in the survivability of the crash. What's more, the video uber released was misleading with respect to how dark it was. [1] You can make what you will of the first point - uber had their reasons for disabling automatic emergency braking (who knows how many times erroneous stops would have caused accidents). The second point is fairly clear, though - the pedestrian in fact had every reason to feel very visible. [0] https://www.ntsb.gov/news/press-releases/Pages/NR20180524.aspx https://www.ntsb.gov/news/press-releases/Pages/NR20180524.as... [1] https://arstechnica.com/cars/2018/03/police-chief-said-uber-victim-came-from-the-shadows-dont-believe-it/ https://arstechnica.com/cars/2018/03/police-chief-said-uber-...
- greatpatton 7y ago
  "the pedestrian in fact had every reason to feel very visible." Why because the pedestrian was high? Otherwise the NTSB report state: "the pedestrian was dressed in dark clothing, did not look in the direction of the vehicle until just before impact, and crossed the road in a section not directly illuminated by lighting. The pedestrian was pushing a bicycle that did not have side reflectors and the front and rear reflectors, along with the forward headlamp, were perpendicular to the path of the oncoming vehicle. The pedestrian entered the roadway from a brick median, where signs facing toward the roadway warn pedestrians to use a crosswalk, which is located 360 feet north of the Mill Avenue crash site. The report also notes the pedestrian’s post-accident toxicology test results were positive for methamphetamine and marijuana." I don't know how you derive that the pedestrian had every reason to feel visible.
  - orisa2 7y ago
    Read the Arstechnica article linked in the parent. It was not pitch-black. The pitch-black video was PR.

smolder 7y ago

Citation? I didn't get that impression at all when it happened and I read up on it.

jagged-chisel 7y ago
> I didn't get that impression at all when it happened... What impression? >> the pedestrian would not have survived with a human driver either. Car meets pedestrian at speed causes death often. I don't think this is questionable. >> They crossed the road in pitch black darkness. The circumstances of the incident were well publicized by the media, and the video released shows this is obvious. >> The only reason it was news was because it was a self driving car. All the statistics around pedestrians being injured or killed ... how many of those stories result in reports across the country in most media outlets? Which part requires citation for you?
- smolder 7y ago
  The part where a human driver would have hit them. The dark video I just googled myself isn't any proof of that, it was on a road with at least sparse overhead lights and the car had headlights. The poor quality video is not equivalent to human eyes or something adequate for driving a car. There was no reason to downvote me.

jrkatz 7y ago

This is not so clear, especially on the darkness point (though I'm sure uber is pleased their message has taken the day in some circles). The car knew it needed to brake over 1 second before impact but failed to apply the brake. [0] A second of hard braking would have made a large difference in the survivability of the crash. What's more, the video uber released was misleading with respect to how dark it was. [1] You can make what you will of the first point - uber had their reasons for disabling automatic emergency braking (who knows how many times erroneous stops would have caused accidents). The second point is fairly clear, though - the pedestrian in fact had every reason to feel very visible. [0] https://www.ntsb.gov/news/press-releases/Pages/NR20180524.aspx https://www.ntsb.gov/news/press-releases/Pages/NR20180524.as... [1] https://arstechnica.com/cars/2018/03/police-chief-said-uber-victim-came-from-the-shadows-dont-believe-it/ https://arstechnica.com/cars/2018/03/police-chief-said-uber-...

greatpatton 7y ago
"the pedestrian in fact had every reason to feel very visible." Why because the pedestrian was high? Otherwise the NTSB report state: "the pedestrian was dressed in dark clothing, did not look in the direction of the vehicle until just before impact, and crossed the road in a section not directly illuminated by lighting. The pedestrian was pushing a bicycle that did not have side reflectors and the front and rear reflectors, along with the forward headlamp, were perpendicular to the path of the oncoming vehicle. The pedestrian entered the roadway from a brick median, where signs facing toward the roadway warn pedestrians to use a crosswalk, which is located 360 feet north of the Mill Avenue crash site. The report also notes the pedestrian’s post-accident toxicology test results were positive for methamphetamine and marijuana." I don't know how you derive that the pedestrian had every reason to feel visible.
- orisa2 7y ago
  Read the Arstechnica article linked in the parent. It was not pitch-black. The pitch-black video was PR.