![]() |
Uber halts self-driving car tests after death.
Quote:
Surely something like this was foreseeable :hmmm: |
Not a big fan of the concept but I doubt it's going away. Eventually, once driverless cars are more prevalent, stats will be generated that show traffic accident or road collision deaths declining. Having said that, I don't even want to think about how these things will perform in severe winter driving conditions like what we are still going through here in Calgary. The road clearing has been terrible because our city has always gambled every year and lost this time on the chinook winds we get taking care of it for them. I can't imagine how driverless cars or trucks can be expected to safely navigate such conditions. Same with those winter storms that often hit the American NE.
|
Quote:
|
Not just since this accident I have problems to imagine that autonomous driving will become wide-spread reality outside very well guarded, clearly defined perimeters. There is a lot of hype in this, like in e-mobility for saving climate and good conscience.
Relevant for clearly defined, controlled perimeters, yes. But in the open, chaotic wild? I believe it when I see it. And I will not see it during my lifetime. |
Somehow I'm always reminded of this scene.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_c...&v=0H5k--n7sFI |
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
I'm left wondering how much of this accident was the fault of the " driver-less car. " The link that you provided mentions the fact that the woman was not crossing in a designated crosswalk. I'm wondering how likely it was that she crossed the street against the light. Further, was she oblivious to the street traffic because she was busy talking or playing with her cell phone. We have all seen people on their cell phones not paying any attention to their surroundings and walking right into traffic. The article doesn't mention if that was a factor in the accident. A human driver makes allowances for the most part for the negligence of other people. This driver-less vehicle may not. |
What about Uber's self driving truck program ... how long will it last if they hit someone?
https://www.motorauthority.com/news/...now-in-service Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
I'm sure UBER will somehow try to pin the blame on the pedestrian...:ping: |
$$$$!
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
I'm also not in favor of a driver-less car, big truck or anything automated like that. With that being said, the investigators sifting through the evidence have said on record that this accident may not be the fault of UBER or the automated car. The police have said it would have been impossible to stop in time even if the car had been driven by a human. https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/585443...down-cops-say/ This would suggest that the behavior of the woman who was unfortunately killed contributed in some way to her untimely demise. The investigation is ongoing so more information should be forthcoming in the days and weeks ahead. It's unfortunate that it took a woman's death to call in to question the desirability or viability of having a self driving vehicle. The technology is there but what about the software packages ? The car that struck the woman was said to be traveling at 38mph in a designated 35mph zone. While police routinely give drivers a 5 mph buffer, the computer controlled car should have been traveling slower as one would expect from a better controlled, computerized car. |
Quote:
|
|
Quote:
The video sheds a bit of light on this accident. The woman was wearing dark clothing and impossible to see and only visible at the 00:20 mark right before she is fatally injured. I understand now why law enforcement investigators have said it wouldn't have mattered if there was a human driver or not. A human driver would probably not be charged for this accident. My only question is this: Don't these autonomous vehicles have sensors, like radar to detect if an obstacle is in the way ? They are supposed to be functioning to be able to drive themselves. A number of auto manufacturers like Ford and Japanese made vehicles have automatic braking cars and some cars made by Ford can even park themselves in tight quarters. I think a sensor suite like this coupled with ABS braking might have lessened the impact to the unfortunate woman. That is, if the sensors are working properly. http://www.thedrive.com/tech/8657/he...mous-cars-work http://insideunmannedsystems.com/com...e-development/ |
Interesting complications ahead: in case of an accident, who is to be charged on side of the car? The software engineers? The hardware engineers? The producing company? The car owner? The state? The traffic departement?
The question of legal responsibilities so far is completely unanswered. Autonomous system can prevent accidents that humans would be unable to avoid, right becasue they do not depend or trust on "guts-feeling", "experience" and other typically human "habits" :) Thats why you have such systems in subways, trains, on planes already. Also, such robotized traffic systems have been demonstrated to work incredibly well inside factories and Japanese (or were it Chinese...) mail sorting centres. However, such systems then were operated in relatively pre-sorted, normatized, limited environment with more or less strictly ocntrolled numbers of potentially disturbing variables. Public private traffic is all that NOT. Thats why I would not even trust in autonomous cars being operated only on exclsuvely reserved own street lanes. The human factor remains, and it brings chaos into the well-ordered world of autonomous cars, inevitably, always. And as far as there are attempts of centralised car and traffic control in autonomous traffic environments, that is a nightmare. Hack this centrlaised control, and then imagine the carnage you can do, or threaten with in order to blackmail complainace with your demands. I read that some experts say this accident now has pushed back autonomous driving by at least five years. Some even say one or two more accidents like this that end lethally, and it will be over for autonomous driving. Another intreesting scenario. Imagine autonomous driving controlled by not a set of automatic repsonse schemes (nothing else the term artifical intelligence today and so far means), but by an AI that indeed has reached true self-awareness. I would assume that such self-aware artifically intelliegnces then also may have or form a sense of self-preservation. Everythign that is swelf-aware in our world, is a living mind, and every living mind we know of fights for its survival, forms borders that defeines wehre it begins and where the boutside has to end. It is conflict-ready. What if there is an accident forming up where the AI, self-aware and wanting to survive, decides to kill the human (allows him to get killed) in order to survive itself, what if the human could only be saved by the aI destroying itself - and refuses to do so? I assume where there is self-awareness, the carrier of such self-awareness is no longer limited by the prohibitions of its code that express ethical imperatives designed by an alien life form humans. |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
Ultimately the issue is not whether automated cars kill zero people, but rather do they kill less people than human-driven vehicles driving in the same conditions? If the answer is yes, that's a net benefit. If it's no, then they need more work or should be abandoned. Mike |
IT'$ ALL ABOUT THE $HEKEL$ BBY!
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:06 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 1995- 2025 Subsim®
"Subsim" is a registered trademark, all rights reserved.