It is happening now! It is scary!Autonomous cars and other robots are after us humans on the streets of Alabama.

www.nytimes.com/2018/03/19/technology/uber-driverless-fatality.html


With speed, almost 40 mph ( in 35 mph zone) , poor cyclist or pedestrian has little chance to escape the carnage

It's ok, it was only a cyclist time for more of these I say.

Yeah well it was bound to happen and i daresay progress has been pushed back a little

I read some comments online.I must say I am a bit astounded

but can't say that disagree completely.

Maybe really future belongs to self-driving cars and no people roaming free on the planet?

I read a prophetic story by Stephen King, some time ago now.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trucks(short_story)

Skynet has begun.

wonder if they pick up road works speed signs?

Who would get nicked for speeding the passenger or the car (the cars still have to be supervised)

Who wanted SD cars in the first place ? Anyone ?
And they aren't only SD. They are self learning. If one gets taste of human blood, they all thirst for it !

I find it interesting that on average the safety driver "only" has to take over every 5600miles on average.
So given how much a taxi travels, autonomous ones would have a prang about every month.
That would be about 1500 prangs a month in just a little city like Perth.

The obsession with innovation in some fields is a little concerning. Is there a need for driverless cars, given the potential for problems? Balanced one against the other I doubt it...

New York Times:

"The car, a Volvo XC90 sport utility vehicle outfitted with Uber's sensor system, was in autonomous mode when it struck Elaine Herzberg, a 49-year-old woman, on Sunday around 10 p.m. There was a human safety driver at the wheel, but the car was carrying no passengers.

The vehicle was doing about 40 miles per hour on a street with a 45 m.p.h. speed limit when it struck Ms. Herzberg, who was walking her bicycle across the street, according to the Tempe police."

Select to expand quote

albers said..
New York Times:

"The car, a Volvo XC90 sport utility vehicle outfitted with Uber's sensor system, was in autonomous mode when it struck Elaine Herzberg, a 49-year-old woman, on Sunday around 10 p.m. There was a human safety driver at the wheel, but the car was carrying no passengers.

The vehicle was doing about 40 miles per hour on a street with a 45 m.p.h. speed limit when it struck Ms. Herzberg, who was walking her bicycle across the street, according to the Tempe police."

Just shows you cannot replace human eyes with sensors. Ai's will need eyes as good if not better than us before cars can be independent of us.

U need a human to be responsible. To be able to prosecute If theynfxckup. Instead of a glitch

It'll be interesting to see this hit the US court system to determine who is responsible for the damages claim .................................

Select to expand quote

rockmagnet said..

albers said..
New York Times:

"The car, a Volvo XC90 sport utility vehicle outfitted with Uber's sensor system, was in autonomous mode when it struck Elaine Herzberg, a 49-year-old woman, on Sunday around 10 p.m. There was a human safety driver at the wheel, but the car was carrying no passengers.

The vehicle was doing about 40 miles per hour on a street with a 45 m.p.h. speed limit when it struck Ms. Herzberg, who was walking her bicycle across the street, according to the Tempe police."

Just shows you cannot replace human eyes with sensors. Ai's will need eyes as good if not better than us before cars can be independent of us.

there was a human behind the wheel who is supposed to take over if something like this occurs. of course this is speculation at the moment, but if they didn't take over and break then maybe they also didn't see her or there wasn't enough time to re-act. Unless of course said human was in the back making a sandwich...

I don't think anyone is expecting autonomous cars to eradicate accidents - just reduce them.

I'd rather have one coming towards me than a drunk or inexperienced driver, or a hoon

^^ But how many accidents do taxi's have? Do they have one every 5600miles? Cos thats what the autonomous cars are having........
Risk outweighs benefit so far

I'd love one of those self driving cars in the nor west
Bucket bongs all the way to gero

Just a bump in the road for progress. My son will most probably learn to drive in one if Macro hasn't taken over the world by then.

Select to expand quote

Mark _australia said..
^^ But how many accidents do taxi's have? Do they have one every 5600miles? Cos thats what the autonomous cars are having........
Risk outweighs benefit so far

They are what is known as "brittle". They work just fantastic nearly all of the time. Better than a human. But when they break suddenly and in an unexpected way they go off the deep end.

When I first read about self driving cars I thought it was a joke. Not because it is impossible but that it is such a huge leap from our level of autonomous vehicles prior that. Yes, planes fly themselves but that is far easier than driving a car because of the lesser number of variables. When driving a car you really, really have to be ready for the unexpected, far more than flying a plane, driving a train or dump truck in a mine, or playing Go against a champion. So how do you program unknown unknowns into the system?

And, does the system protect the passenger first or the pedestrian?

They are pretty ****ing amazing. Reactions are clearly faster than the average human on a long drive, and they don't suffer from target fixation.

Select to expand quote

Gazuki said..
It's ok, it was only a cyclist time for more of these I say.

Dude this is not ok.

Saying it's ok to run over a person riding a bicycle is like saying it's ok to kill a gay or black person... all prejudiced views that thankfully we have moved on from as a society.

How would you feel if a car ran over your kid or wife FFS who's just trying to enjoy a bike ride?

Has no one asked for the driver-less car to have pedestrian orientated airbags on the front of the car?
1). to lift the person up to over bonnet level
2). to stop the bounce effect by having an air cushion on the bonnet windscreen
3). possible chuck out a mattress airbag to try and prevent the head trauma on tarmac
4). radicle - a designed honeycomb shoot bag to target the pedestrian and wrap them up before impact
Basically there are always going to be unpreventables = accidents which have too much kinetic energy at the time of detection to stop.
The aim is to mitigate these and try to downgrade their impact.

Didn't the recent TESLA slamming into a stationary truck expose some design decisions which to the lay-person were gobsmacking...
i.e. A decision to not include the ability to detect a static vehicle in this scenario?
The automation of the driver function will never be flawless while humans / animals (in their natural - un-augmented state) can share the same space while moving.

Flying Dutchman is on the money for me.

NO autonomous surf orientated craft thanks (there are enough lunch-box legends as it is)!!
Cheers
AP

Before they give SD cars stamp of approval, all should be tested in our Australian harsh conditions.
Only those that do not hit guruuu for a year while driving outback should be allowed then in city jungle.
I could be first to accept SD Tesla or other Volvo for free of charge testing.
While driving 300 km one way every weekend I didn't score a single possum yet.
Still, need to resolve how to recharge EV on my off the grid farm tough.
www.facebook.com/NTDTelevision/videos/2192666247442140/

In this incident, when you look at the video apparently it was a person walking their bike out of the shadows, and it would be very difficult for any human driver to react in time.

The software is amazing. Sensor fusion is something that humans simply can't have, whereas machines find it easy.

Select to expand quote

nebbian said..
In this incident, when you look at the video apparently it was a person walking their bike out of the shadows, and it would be very difficult for any human driver to react in time.

The software is amazing. Sensor fusion is something that humans simply can't have, whereas machines find it easy.

To muddy our verdict we have to consider following too:
-Electric cars are silent, Could sneak on you anytime
-Dark color for test vehicle is not "cool" ( especially at 10 PM at nightBut for Assie judge, the verdict could be straightforward. The cyclist wasn't wearing a helmet at the time, His fault to die.

I have got a funny feeling the SD fan boys here are the ones who sit on the far right lines @10 Ks under the speed limit.

Can we change the subject of the article to "Pedestrian wearing dark clothes walks in front of a car at night on a poorly lit road and not paying attention to the traffic around them gets hit by an equally in-attentive driver"?

Self-drive car or not more than one person to blame here.

Select to expand quote

AquaPlow said..
Has no one asked for the driver-less car to have pedestrian orientated airbags on the front of the car?
1). to lift the person up to over bonnet level
2). to stop the bounce effect by having an air cushion on the bonnet windscreen
3). possible chuck out a mattress airbag to try and prevent the head trauma on tarmac
4). radicle - a designed honeycomb shoot bag to target the pedestrian and wrap them up before impact
Basically there are always going to be unpreventables = accidents which have too much kinetic energy at the time of detection to stop.
The aim is to mitigate these and try to downgrade their impact.

Didn't the recent TESLA slamming into a stationary truck expose some design decisions which to the lay-person were gobsmacking...
i.e. A decision to not include the ability to detect a static vehicle in this scenario?
The automation of the driver function will never be flawless while humans / animals (in their natural - un-augmented state) can share the same space while moving.

Flying Dutchman is on the money for me.

NO autonomous surf orientated craft thanks (there are enough lunch-box legends as it is)!!
Cheers
AP

Google pedestrian airbag, Volvo started fitting them several years ago. Not sure if they still are though, one link I just saw suggests they were going to drop them in lieu of technology avoiding the collision. Didn't bother reading the articles properly or watch the videos though.

Is anyone that is sitting behind the wheel 'supervising' an autonomous car going to be ready for that 1 in 5600 miles intervention? I'd say just about never.

Select to expand quote

evlPanda said..
They are pretty ****ing amazing. Reactions are clearly faster than the average human on a long drive, and they don't suffer from target fixation.

REALLY , I DO THAT TO AVOID ACCIDENTS EVERY MOMENT I DRIVE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

My two cent worth...
I have always felt it would take a super-cra' computer system to properly validly interpret all the sensor information for such a purpose and i think "driver-less cars" are a glorified jumped up version of naming a semi-driver-less system that itself truthfully requires a super-cra' to interpret data at that speed for true accuracy and safety !
It is extreme irresponsibility to call these vehicles driverless knowing that almost no vehicles are registered with the US government as having true autonomous capability and its prediction with the US government is really uncertain and decades away in their estimation !
Since 2000 the second advancement in light aircraft at the cheap consumer level (well under 100k for four seat) has occurred and i place my bet this is better way:
windsolarhybridaustralia.x10.mx