akirby Posted March 28, 2018 Share Posted March 28, 2018 That happens pretty much with anything-real world experience is the best teacher..then again software/IT development 101 is always have a backup or backup plan Cloud computing is allowing and in some cases almost encouraging developers to take shortcuts. It’s very easy to deploy an application and get it working on Amazon AWS but it’s very difficult to make it production hardened for high availability and recoverability. As was evident in the AWS problems a few years ago where all these storefronts had no DR plan whatsoever and some went out of business as a result. It’s a real dilemma and this is exactly why we IT folks don’t trust this type of software to safely operate a vehicle in the real world. The potential border/error conditions are staggering and the consequences are lethal. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted March 29, 2018 Share Posted March 29, 2018 Uber reaches settlement with family of autonomous vehicle victim March 28, 2018 @ 11:30 pm Bernie Woodall Reuters.......... TEMPE, Ariz. -- The family of the woman killed by an Uber Technologies Inc. self-driving vehicle in Arizona reached a settlement with the ride services company, ending a potential legal battle over the first fatality caused by an autonomous vehicle. Cristina Perez Hesano, attorney with the firm of Bellah Perez in Glendale, Arizona, said "the matter has been resolved" between Uber and daughter and husband of Elaine Herzberg, 49, who died after being hit by an Uber self-driving SUV in the Phoenix suburb of Tempe earlier this month. Terms of the settlement were not given. The law firm representing them said that Herzberg's daughter and husband, whose names were not disclosed, will have no further comment on the matter as they consider it resolved. http://www.autonews.com/article/20180328/MOBILITY/180329629/uber-reaches-settlement-with-family-of-autonomous-vehicle-victim Wow, that didn't take long.... 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted March 29, 2018 Share Posted March 29, 2018 (edited) Of course. My guess is Uber just didn’t anticipate that the software wouldn’t function properly and they didn’t train the backup driver accordingly. This is a common problem with software developers who don’t have a lot of real world experience like us old guys. In the real world, the system cannot do what the developers think it can. This is common in areas where people are results driven and and amount of back up redundancy is offered but in the end, it's like giving a blind man three sets of glasses because the system still can't see a person crossing four lanes of traffic and no amount of explanation can resolve that. Edited March 29, 2018 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MKX1960 Posted March 29, 2018 Share Posted March 29, 2018 Wow, that didn't take long.... With everyone pointing fingers their direction, they must have realized it would cost them far more if the case got tied up in court for years. No state would be willing to allow them to test. Paying out a couple million now will save them money in the long run. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blwnsmoke Posted March 29, 2018 Share Posted March 29, 2018 Tesla shares plummet as NTSB investigates fatal crash A 38-year-old man was killed last Friday when his Tesla Model X crashed into a barrier on a California highway. What does this have to do with Uber or the Volvo? And this crash is already posted in the Competition thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted March 29, 2018 Author Share Posted March 29, 2018 (edited) Edited March 29, 2018 by silvrsvt Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted March 29, 2018 Share Posted March 29, 2018 With everyone pointing fingers their direction, they must have realized it would cost them far more if the case got tied up in court for years. No state would be willing to allow them to test. Paying out a couple million now will save them money in the long run. Correct, imagine if it was proved in court that the technology could not "see" what Uber's AV developers claim it can and that the Arizona AV trial stipulated a human observer for vigilance at all times.. none of that would play well under scrutiny Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MKX1960 Posted March 31, 2018 Share Posted March 31, 2018 Cop pulls over self driving car. https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/motorcycle-cop-tickets-self-driving-142500847.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coupe3w Posted April 1, 2018 Share Posted April 1, 2018 What does this have to do with Uber or the Volvo? And this crash is already posted in the Competition thread. The Model X was on autopilot. ... It's the technology that has to do with it. Sorry I didn't see the other thread, so shoot me. http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/04/01/tesla-car-on-autopilot-when-fatal-crash-occurred-company-says.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted April 1, 2018 Share Posted April 1, 2018 Interesting to hear GM's stance on competitors beta testing on public roads, is this the first time that Barra has said publicly that beta testing should be done by engineers on controlled closed tracks not on public roads? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tbone Posted April 2, 2018 Share Posted April 2, 2018 So I was driving home northbound on Interstate 55 and encountered an ice storm. Heres what the truck looked like when I got home, an hour and a half later than I anticipated I might add. Once again the front sensors were all iced over and did not function. The camera at the top of the windshield did work when it could see the lines but otherwise it did not function either. I bring this up, because I still do not understand how these automated systems are going to handle common weather phenomenon like this, when the sensors do not work and the vehicle is blinded. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted April 2, 2018 Author Share Posted April 2, 2018 So I was driving home northbound on Interstate 55 and encountered an ice storm. Heres what the truck looked like when I got home, an hour and a half later than I anticipated I might add. Once again the front sensors were all iced over and did not function. The camera at the top of the windshield did work when it could see the lines but otherwise it did not function either. I bring this up, because I still do not understand how these automated systems are going to handle common weather phenomenon like this, when the sensors do not work and the vehicle is blinded. Because non-automotive companies that have no clue to as how the automotive market works said it will. If anything an accident like this that just happened, just pushed back everything at least another 5-10 years because this is far from ready for prime time. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted April 2, 2018 Share Posted April 2, 2018 I still do not understand how these automated systems are going to handle common weather phenomenon like this, when the sensors do not work and the vehicle is blinded. FM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coupe3w Posted April 2, 2018 Share Posted April 2, 2018 FM Fake it to you make it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted April 2, 2018 Share Posted April 2, 2018 Fake it to you make it. F...ing Magic 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coupe3w Posted April 2, 2018 Share Posted April 2, 2018 F...ing Magic LOL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted April 2, 2018 Share Posted April 2, 2018 Wow, I'm glad I took a week off and didn't read (and respond) to these threads in real-time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meyeste Posted April 10, 2018 Share Posted April 10, 2018 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. What is your definition of "wide open" to you see that 3' x 5' sign to the right of the Volvo? My guess is that would easily block both a person and any sensors. The police decided it wasn't the driver or the cars' fault. I have seen many people that simply step out into traffic thinking it's driver of the car's responsibility to stop, no matter what. First off, that's suicidal and also imply not true. I am sure that the vast majority of drivers will try to stop if someone steps in front of them however, fact is the law will not hold them at fault for an incident like this and in fact I recall reading about a woman winning a lawsuit against a dead child's parents after she struck and killed a teen that did nearly the same thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted April 10, 2018 Share Posted April 10, 2018 Well in this case she came from the left side, not the right. But your points are well taken. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noah Harbinger Posted April 10, 2018 Share Posted April 10, 2018 Here's a map view of the area in Tempe, Arizona where the incident occurred. The arrow shows the path the victim most likely used. This path, separating northbound and southbound Mill Avenue, is not a crosswalk even though it looks like one from overhead. A sign tells pedestrians not to cross Mill Avenue here. The crosswalk is about 500 feet to the north where Mill Ave intersects with Curry Rd/W Washington St. Look at the frame of the video immediately before she is hit: She is by the broken white line on the right that indicates the start of the right-hand turn lane - so, about lined up with the top of the X, an even more open and exposed crossing point. (But also, even closer to the crosswalk). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noah Harbinger Posted April 10, 2018 Share Posted April 10, 2018 What is your definition of "wide open" to you see that 3' x 5' sign to the right of the Volvo? My guess is that would easily block both a person and any sensors. She was crossing from the other direction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rperez817 Posted September 18, 2020 Share Posted September 18, 2020 On 3/27/2018 at 6:29 PM, coupe3w said: I'm sorry but somebody had their head up their ass and should be held responsible for the death of that woman. The Uber safety driver in this incident, Rafaela Vasquez, was indicted on August 27, 2020 and charged with negligent homicide. She pleaded not guilty during arraignment on September 15, 2020 at Maricopa County Superior Court. https://www.bizjournals.com/phoenix/news/2020/09/15/uber-driver-charged-in-fatal-crash.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe771476 Posted September 18, 2020 Share Posted September 18, 2020 Here is the real problem: Have you seen a "LOOK BOTH WAYS" sign at any crosswalks lately? NO!!!! Young people and the population in general have been conditioned that cars must stop for pedestrians. Whether they are in a crosswalk or not shouldn't matter! Pedestrians must be responsible. Yeah they may be right, but they'll be dead right if they don't look! The reason is -- in my opinion -- because lawyers can't sue pedestrians (they have no insurance) so they put the burden on the motorist who does! You get it? Money! School children need to be taught from the first day at school to look both ways when crossing streets, driveways etc. and never ASSume that the car is going to stop! I've seen kids step off a school bus and walk across the front of the bus and run across the street without looking, assuming all cars will stop. I don't know if there is a protocol that has the bus driver say, "Ok, you can cross" or not, but that can change in the blink of an eye! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jniffen Posted September 18, 2020 Share Posted September 18, 2020 This has been a major sticking point for me when there is an accident with an autonomous vehicle, who is responsible. I have to wonder if this will be the precedent from this point forward for any self driving car, so the manufactures and software developers are kept out of the cases. Finally, still believe it won't happen, to many variables in the world and what will break upon every update? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jcartwright99 Posted September 18, 2020 Share Posted September 18, 2020 9 hours ago, rperez817 said: The Uber safety driver in this incident, Rafaela Vasquez, was indicted on August 27, 2020 and charged with negligent homicide. She pleaded not guilty during arraignment on September 15, 2020 at Maricopa County Superior Court. https://www.bizjournals.com/phoenix/news/2020/09/15/uber-driver-charged-in-fatal-crash.html You didn’t think Uber would be held responsible did you? LOL, whatever fine print probably put all of the liability on the driver. I’d be interested in what the driver says she was told by Uber. 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.