Kontact

If the car could not see the victim, and the driver could not see the victim, how could either decide to create a buffer?

Maelochs

Research ... why do research?

The speed limit in the area id 45 mph. Several people including a resident of Tempe who rides there and posts here have clarified that. In any case, 38 in a 35 would not be considered "speeding."

As for how much of a buffer ... read, then post.

There really isn't any point in discussing stuff which is untrue, made up, or ignored but available. There really isn't anyway to have a profitable discussion if people want to substitute opinion for fact.

Everyone ere is by far smart enough to know that. even I know that and my IQ would shame a Neanderthal.

yet ...

tyrion

Sure it can. If AV cars don't do this now, they certainly will in the near future.

jefnvk

I'm a Comp Sci major who wound up with a Mechanical Engineering position in vehicle dynamics. I can drive cars fast and tune software. Lets not confuse me by expecting me to know the intricacies of the electronics and hydraulics hardware too

CliffordK

Which is part of the "Basic Rule". Drive based on the situation.

I-Like-To-Bike

More relevant: bad, as in unethical and corrupt, owners and upper management.

robertorolfo

A SF newspaper acting as a mouthpiece for/covering up for the Silicon Valley hand that feeds them? Nahhhh, totally implausible...

Some local AZ police chief not being the absolute best of characters? Nahhhh, who would believe that?

InOmaha

Theoretically, AV may not even need headlights. Head lights are for humans and the car is not restrained to using the human vision spectrum. It should be able to sense things people can not see, which is one reason it should theoretically be better. Mentioning dark or shadows isn't necessary unless the developers put some sort of human vision limitation on their design.

njkayaker

Yes.

In any case, the headlights let other people see the car.

I-Like-To-Bike

Certainly not the AV fan-bois, political prostitutes and/or media hucksters who are "all in" with the AV promoters' we can do no wrong (in fact are incapable of doing wrong), no need to require impartial regulatory oversight hype machine.

I-Like-To-Bike

Yeah, just speculating here but if the Tempe police chief should be outed as less than reputable, there is always the precedent of a presidential pardon for a corrupt AZ police chief.

njkayaker

1- That's one guess. Or it isn't any of these things. Who knows!
2- It's not like publishing it in a SF is keeping it a secret.
3- If it's a "coverup", it seems like a really bad one. Especially, if the subsequent investigation "reveals" it.

avole

Sorry to interrupt, guys, but I can't send a private message to some dickhead called billyd to tell him to **** off. Where can I turn this feature on?

njkayaker

Don't you repeatedly complain about other people "speculating"?

CliffordK

Here is a general description of the Uber car.

https://techcrunch.com/2018/03/19/he...t-pedestrians/

"Shadows" indicate a light source, and something blocking it. It is a complex term. Poor urban street lighting can cause shadows.

On the other hand, a shadow caused by a car's headlights can be a far more dangerous situation as it may mean that there is an object between the vehicle and the target object. Although, I suppose one wouldn't necessarily see the shadow cast by one's own lights.

One of the issues, however. Apparently the system is using a form of active IR, but there isn't any mention of using passive IR. Passive IR is problematic during the daylight, but could potentially give vital information at night, especially for picking up engines, motors, exhaust, and LIFE.

The police were provided with two videos. One forward facing video, and one video of human co-driver. But, there should be a lot of data relating to this incident. Perhaps taking a couple of days to pick through. When did the person first show up on the computer's sensors. Should the person have shown up earlier? When did the computer first identify the person? What preventative evasive actions were taken? When? And, evasive actions immediately before impact? When and why, or why not?

Apparently this incident is serious enough to warrant a full NHTSA investigation.

I-Like-To-Bike

Let us speculate some more. If the victim had not been allegedly a homeless woman, and the vehicle owner not a multi million dollar local operation, would the police chief have been so quick to be a mouthpiece for blaming the victim to the operator's hometown newspaper, and see the operator excused from any blame prior to the appropriate investigation?

Kontact

The headlights that didn't allow the driver to see the victim, either?

I-Like-To-Bike

I identify it as such, not claim it as facts such as speculating that the victim's actions made the collision unavoidable and declaring such unsubstantiated guesswork about the faultless operation of the AV in question as facts.

Leisesturm

Well other road users may not need them, but AV's will be held to a much higher standard. An unreasonable standard by any measure but, that is the way it is. Most of the regular posters here have been arguing the complete unfitness of AV's for full deployment, now and forever. Typical that when actual proof of that is revealed they clam up and actually argue that the car had no chance. The woman was homeless... what does that have to do with it? Cars were allowed to prove their worth decades before the crowding in cities and sheer density of modern life made occasional (but ongoing) negative interactions with the public commonplace. AV's will not get that chance. Their utility is too theoretical, too suspect and, too unwanted, by a vocal majority. If they don't burst out of the gate doing impossible feats of navigation and collision avoidance they will be drummed out of the corps and their backers divested of vulnerable assets by the rabble.

tyrion

You think a San Francisco paper is going to cover up for Uber? Lol.

njkayaker

You identified it later as speculation. And you are doing what you complain about other people doing.

I-Like-To-Bike

Perfect! Sure why not, when pedestrians, cyclists and non-AV vehicles step, ride or drive in front of an approaching near invisible AV it will still always be their fault because AV systems do not make errors or fail under any circumstances.

CliffordK

For some reason we're not allowed to mount Xenon Tungsten Arc lamps on our cars, otherwise surely the shadows would have been peeled away.



What are the rules that the Uber cars use to select high vs low beams? I find constantly blinking my lights in an urban environment is a pain, but depending on traffic, this may well have been a place where the lights should have been on high.

Hopefully data analysis will come out over the next few days, weeks, or months to indicate what was visible to the computer system, what wasn't, and what should have been visible. And, if there are changes that would have brought more into view.

02Giant 

A single word? I'm confused.
Nothing I said was to incite a fight. Ignore me because you won't admit you used the same tactic as others.

Kontact

I have too little faith in the power of public outcry to believe that self driving cars will face any more resistance than self parking cars, self avoiding cars, self braking cars, airplanes with autopilot or intersection cameras. Some people will get riled up about, some lip service will be payed, and the cars will sell if people want to buy or rent them.

But if you are right, maybe the US will also get to the bottom of all its other problems that people raise a fuss about without any actual action.