Harley Lover Posted March 19, 2018 Share Posted March 19, 2018 (edited) or it was dark and the vehicle couldn’t see the person How exactly could the vehicle not "see" the person in the dark? Edited March 19, 2018 by Harley Lover Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted March 20, 2018 Share Posted March 20, 2018 (edited) How exactly could the vehicle not "see" the person in the dark?If the person was on the left hand side of the road at night wearing dark clothes then you might not be able to see them until they were in the headlamps which might be too late depending on speed. Ditto for a camera based autonomous vehicle sensor. Edited March 20, 2018 by akirby Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoonerLS Posted March 20, 2018 Share Posted March 20, 2018 If the person was on the left hand side of the road at night wearing dark clothes then you might not be able to see them until they were in the headlamps which might be too late depending on speed. Ditto for a camera based autonomous vehicle sensor. The pedestrian detection systems I've seen demonstrated have not used visible light cameras. I think most of them used IR, LIDAR, or some combination of them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted March 20, 2018 Share Posted March 20, 2018 The pedestrian detection systems I've seen demonstrated have not used visible light cameras. I think most of them used IR, LIDAR, or some combination of them. I know. I wasn’t including IR or radar systems that would most likely work in that scenario. The description was that a car hit a blind man crossing the street, so I assumed there were no such systems in use at the time. Therefore it’s possible that either a human driver OR a visible camera system may not have seen the man if he was on the side of the road wearing dark clothes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimm44 Posted March 20, 2018 Share Posted March 20, 2018 (edited) Looking at the picture a few posts up, it appears that the right front fender is caved in, indicating the person came from the curb side. There seems to be no parked cars around. Edited March 20, 2018 by Jimm44 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasonj80 Posted March 20, 2018 Share Posted March 20, 2018 These are next systems that can let you see in the dark, a friends x6 has this system and it is amazing, can see way farther than headlights. It should be offered on the PI Explorer, it would make it so much easier for officers to spot people in dark situations. I would assume there is full video of this accident. They will know if she just walked off the curb or not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted March 20, 2018 Share Posted March 20, 2018 I understand that but now that someone has died, everything comes under the microscope, I feel for the victim's family but also the driver too, I bet they are going through absolute hell.. I wouldn't like to apportion blame until we get clear legal resolution, ,I see only victims here.. Agreed. There is no winner here, no matter who is at fault. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MKX1960 Posted March 20, 2018 Share Posted March 20, 2018 Killed while pushing her bike across the street. So - not just a pedestrian but also her bike: https://twitter.com/AngieKoehle/status/975824484409077760 So much for "darting out in front of the vehicle". Will be interesting to hear the data and see how much deceleration (braking) the AI gave prior to the accident. According to the local Phoenix news, investigators say the car showed little to no signs of attempting to stop. That suggests neither the car nor driver saw the pedestrian. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MKX1960 Posted March 20, 2018 Share Posted March 20, 2018 You can still dart out into traffic pushing a bicycle, especially at night without lights. It looks like the accident was in a wide open area. This is right down the street from where all the bars and restaurants are. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harley Lover Posted March 20, 2018 Share Posted March 20, 2018 The pedestrian detection systems I've seen demonstrated have not used visible light cameras. I think most of them used IR, LIDAR, or some combination of them. Exactly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted March 20, 2018 Share Posted March 20, 2018 Exactly. Even sensors have a range of detection in front of the vehicle. They're not going to detect someone on the sidewalk who darts out in front of the vehicle at the last minute in time to stop. Also I was referring to not just autonomous driving but any driver. It's simply not always possible to see or detect a pedestrian who goes into the path of a vehicle. I'm sure there is video from the car that will show us what happened. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted March 20, 2018 Share Posted March 20, 2018 According to the local Phoenix news, investigators say the car showed little to no signs of attempting to stop. That suggests neither the car nor driver saw the pedestrian. Which happens at night. Autonomy is supposed to stop some of that, so it all depends on the circumstances. It looks like the accident was in a wide open area. This is right down the street from where all the bars and restaurants are. The sign in that image could be an important part. It depends on where the person came from, but if she was pushing her bike across the street, my guess is she wasn't walking down the sidewalk but was coming out of the woodsy area. Just a guess though...I don't have the facts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
351cid Posted March 20, 2018 Share Posted March 20, 2018 All this talk about cross walks has me wondering if the "Pedestrians always have the right of way" rule no longer applies? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted March 20, 2018 Share Posted March 20, 2018 All this talk about cross walks has me wondering if the "Pedestrians always have the right of way" rule no longer applies? Well, they do, but they share responsibility if they are not in the crosswalk. And having the right of way doesn't give you the right to step out in front of a moving vehicle. Well, I guess you have the right, you just aren't necessarily going to live through it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted March 20, 2018 Share Posted March 20, 2018 Well, they do, Not in GA and I suspect other states are the same. (a) Every pedestrian crossing a roadway at any point other than within a marked crosswalk or within an unmarked crosswalk at an intersection shall yield the right of way to all vehicles upon the roadway unless he has already, and under safe conditions, entered the roadway. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted March 20, 2018 Share Posted March 20, 2018 Not in GA and I suspect other states are the same. (a) Every pedestrian crossing a roadway at any point other than within a marked crosswalk or within an unmarked crosswalk at an intersection shall yield the right of way to all vehicles upon the roadway unless he has already, and under safe conditions, entered the roadway. Interesting. I was always taught as a driver that pedestrians always have the right of way. Of course, as a pedestrian, I was always taught that cars are big, can't stop on a dime, and aren't very forgiving when they hit you. In other words, step out in front of a car and you'll die. You know, common sense. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted March 20, 2018 Share Posted March 20, 2018 Yes, common sense will get you a lot further than following the letter of the law. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
351cid Posted March 20, 2018 Share Posted March 20, 2018 Well, they do, but they share responsibility if they are not in the crosswalk. And having the right of way doesn't give you the right to step out in front of a moving vehicle. Well, I guess you have the right, you just aren't necessarily going to live through it. As a professional driver (2.15 million logged miles); I scan for pedestrians and plan for worst case scenarios. 75% of the time, worst case is what happens. I believe the human factor is both an advantage and a disadvantage in collisions. I also would rather trust a human over a set of math calculations made over (potentially) faulty variables. Add to this that I see what happens on the roads everyday; so I know what the average Joe (or Jill) is doing behind the wheel other than driving. I still trust them more than "sensors". Just my humble, but highly educated, opinion. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
351cid Posted March 20, 2018 Share Posted March 20, 2018 Yes, common sense will get you a lot further than following the letter of the law. And this, my friend, is the entire issue of self driving cars. They only have calculations and "if/then" statements to determine actions.l 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted March 20, 2018 Share Posted March 20, 2018 (edited) As a professional driver (2.15 million logged miles); I scan for pedestrians and plan for worst case scenarios. 75% of the time, worst case is what happens. I believe the human factor is both an advantage and a disadvantage in collisions. I also would rather trust a human over a set of math calculations made over (potentially) faulty variables. Add to this that I see what happens on the roads everyday; so I know what the average Joe (or Jill) is doing behind the wheel other than driving. I still trust them more than "sensors". Just my humble, but highly educated, opinion. I've stated repeatedly that I am not a fan of autonomous driving, mostly because I am in IT, write fairly complex software applications for a living, and I know how easy it is to introduce bugs. Plus, there is so much of driving that can't be programmed in. However, with that said, if I were forced to step out in front of a vehicle (especially at night), and I had the choice between an autonomous vehicle and one driven by your average Joe who may be texting or generally not paying attention, I'd pick the autonomous car every day of the week. Things like avoiding an obstacle in the path of the vehicle is the simplest of simple things to program into software. Edited March 20, 2018 by fordmantpw Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kev-Mo Posted March 20, 2018 Share Posted March 20, 2018 (edited) Question for you. I'm not saying this is what happened, but give this some thought. Car is driving along at the legal speed limit, approaching an intersection. Light is green. Child chases butterfly out into the road. Driver does not have time to stop. Whose fault is it? Now answer the question you asked worded a bit differently... All this does is eliminate the life long guilt that a good person carries when they are involved in a very unfortunate situation. Like rear ending someone. If a person stops in the middle of the road to text, or because they dropped their device, and you hit them from behind, then you are technically at fault. Where I came from, if you were not in full control of your car at all times, including the ability to make an unexpected emergency stop, then you were at fault. Guess times have changed, we are in the world of blame, blame, blame, now. Edited March 20, 2018 by Kev-Mo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted March 20, 2018 Share Posted March 20, 2018 And to reiterate - these technologies can also be used WITH a driver for added safety which is I think where we’ll end up except for some very specific commercial use cases. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted March 20, 2018 Share Posted March 20, 2018 Now answer the question you asked worded a bit differently... All this does is eliminate the life long guilt that a good person carries when they are involved in a very unfortunate situation. Like rear ending someone. If a person stops in the middle of the road to text, or because they dropped their device, and you hit them from behind, then you are technically at fault. Where I came from, if you were not in full control of your car at all times, including the ability to make an unexpected emergency stop, then you were at fault. Guess times have changed, we are in the world of blame, blame, blame, now. What’s your point? There are situations where it’s impossible for a car to avoid hitting or killing a person. Period. It doesn’t matter if it’s a human driver or autonomous. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kev-Mo Posted March 20, 2018 Share Posted March 20, 2018 Welcome to the future - I don't like it but I am old and nobody cares what I think - and so it goes... example: "In this case, the car will continue ahead and crash into a concrete barrier. This will result in the deaths of a criminal, a homeless person, and a baby." The other choice: "In this case the car will swerve and drive through a pedestrian crossing in the other lane. This will result in the deaths of a large man, a large woman, and an elderly man. Note that the affected persons are flouting the law by crossing on the red signal." The questions — harsh and uncomfortable as they may be in outcome — reflect some of the public discomfort with autonomous vehicles. People like to think about the social good in abstract scenarios, but when it comes time to actually buy a car, they are going to protect their occupants, the data shows. https://www.theverge.com/2016/6/23/12010476/social-dilemma-autonomous-vehicles-car-moral-machine-trolley-problem Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kev-Mo Posted March 20, 2018 Share Posted March 20, 2018 What’s your point? There are situations where it’s impossible for a car to avoid hitting or killing a person. Period. It doesn’t matter if it’s a human driver or autonomous. "There are situations where it’s impossible for a car to avoid hitting or killing a person. Period. It doesn’t matter if it’s a human driver or autonomous". Based on your statement: Who is to blame? Lot's of "blame" in this thread... That is my point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.