Autonomous vehicle kills a pedestrian

[jpblue1000]

MIT in the U.S. has undertaken a huge ethics study of over 4 million people to help guide programmers on an autonomous vehicles respond to various scenarios. Known as Moral machine it is exploring a community expectation for autonomy.

Also the human eye and associated part of the brain is close to a trillion dollar device...a dash cam probably 1-2 million in development maybe 10? If the driver was looking and paying due attention they more than likely would have seen a lot more than the camera.

Arguably the pedestrian made a mistake that many people make and paid the ultimate price identifying a significant problem.with the installed technology and the law.
JP

[ipn]

Originally Posted by jpblue1000

MIT in the U.S. has undertaken a huge ethics study of over 4 million people
JP

They (the us) also voted in trump also obama also bush and the long list goes on again , so i take that study like the one found at the bottom of my cereal packet IE:real important .

Don't forget , from that place we got door open beepers/chimes , lights on chimes and all the rest of that stuff , bad weather alarms ect , i'll be back as i have to go to the shed to see if the door open chime is chiming to see if the door is open or not (a tiny bit of sarcasm :-) .

Paul .

[jpblue1000]

The moral machine study was global!
Most People in the U.S. Didn't vote for trump.
JP

[barnz_xr8]

sad news, but now you can drop a half mile powerskid and blame computer lol.

[zipping]

Uber had disabled an emergency braking system in a self-driving vehicle that struck and killed a woman in Arizona in March even though the car had identified the need to apply the brakes, the US agency investigating the incident has found.

The modified 2017 Volvo XC90’s radar systems observed the pedestrian six seconds before impact but “the self-driving system software classified the pedestrian as an unknown object, as a vehicle, and then as a bicycle with varying expectations of future travel path”, a preliminary report released by the National Transportation Safety Board showed The incident was the first fatal crash caused by a self-driving vehicle.

The self-driving system only recognised the woman was a human 1.3 seconds before impact, when it determined emergency braking was needed.

But Uber said, according to the NTSB, that automatic emergency braking manoeuvres in the Volvo XC90 were disabled while the car was under computer control in order to “reduce the potential for erratic vehicle behaviour.”

The report gives new fuel to opponents in Congress who have stalled a bill designed to speed the deployment of self-driving cars on US roads and puts a spotlight on the fact that the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration does not test self-driving vehicles or certify them before they are deployed on US roads.

Uber, which voluntarily suspended testing after the crash in the city of Tempe, said on Wednesday it planned to end testing in Arizona and focus on limited testing in Pittsburgh and two cities in California.

Elaine Herzberg, 49, was walking her bicycle outside the crosswalk on a four-lane road when she was struck by the Uber vehicle travelling at 63 kmph. A safety operator behind the wheel appeared to be looking down, and not at the road, moments before the crash, according to video from inside the car released by police. The operator told the NTSB she was not looking at a mobile phone but monitoring the vehicle’s self-driving systems.

Tempe police said on Wednesday it had completed its investigation and turned the findings over to prosecutors to review. Police did not release the results of the probe.

Reuters

[DJR-351]

Originally Posted by zipping

Uber had disabled an emergency braking system in a self-driving vehicle that struck and killed a woman in Arizona in March even though the car had identified the need to apply the brakes, the US agency investigating the incident has found.

The modified 2017 Volvo XC90’s radar systems observed the pedestrian six seconds before impact but “the self-driving system software classified the pedestrian as an unknown object, as a vehicle, and then as a bicycle with varying expectations of future travel path”, a preliminary report released by the National Transportation Safety Board showed The incident was the first fatal crash caused by a self-driving vehicle.

The self-driving system only recognised the woman was a human 1.3 seconds before impact, when it determined emergency braking was needed.

But Uber said, according to the NTSB, that automatic emergency braking manoeuvres in the Volvo XC90 were disabled while the car was under computer control in order to “reduce the potential for erratic vehicle behaviour.”

The report gives new fuel to opponents in Congress who have stalled a bill designed to speed the deployment of self-driving cars on US roads and puts a spotlight on the fact that the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration does not test self-driving vehicles or certify them before they are deployed on US roads.

Uber, which voluntarily suspended testing after the crash in the city of Tempe, said on Wednesday it planned to end testing in Arizona and focus on limited testing in Pittsburgh and two cities in California.

Elaine Herzberg, 49, was walking her bicycle outside the crosswalk on a four-lane road when she was struck by the Uber vehicle travelling at 63 kmph. A safety operator behind the wheel appeared to be looking down, and not at the road, moments before the crash, according to video from inside the car released by police. The operator told the NTSB she was not looking at a mobile phone but monitoring the vehicle’s self-driving systems.

Tempe police said on Wednesday it had completed its investigation and turned the findings over to prosecutors to review. Police did not release the results of the probe.

Reuters

Ahh ok....

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-06-2...-crash/9902208

[Bossxr8]

Originally Posted by DJR-351

Ahh ok....

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-06-2...-crash/9902208

She deserves to be charged with manslaughter. Why you would watch tv on your phone in a car that won't emergency brake in an emergency is beyond stupid.

[zipping]

I'm biased against Uber being in taxis, but this doesn't absolve Uber although obviously the operator is the major contirbutor.

Autonomous car experiments where not every system is operating encourage complacency. You can tell an operator that the emergency brakes are not working but the car will brake in traffic by itself.

So the operator is literally sitting there waiting for that emergency situation that is possible at any time but very rarely happens. Not an optimal situation, there is not enough driving activity to fully engage the operator. The conditions set by Uber contribute to the lack of attention by lack of engagement making Uber complicit imo.

[Work Horse]

Originally Posted by zipping

I'm biased against Uber being in taxis, but this doesn't absolve Uber although obviously the operator is the major contirbutor.

Autonomous car experiments where not every system is operating encourage complacency. You can tell an operator that the emergency brakes are not working but the car will brake in traffic by itself.

So the operator is literally sitting there waiting for that emergency situation that is possible at any time but very rarely happens. Not an optimal situation, there is not enough driving activity to fully engage the operator. The conditions set by Uber contribute to the lack of attention by lack of engagement making Uber complicit imo.

Too late for you to get out of taxis and into law?

You make a compelling argument for Uber to shoulder some blame.

[Bossxr8]

Originally Posted by zipping

I'm biased against Uber being in taxis, but this doesn't absolve Uber although obviously the operator is the major contirbutor.

Autonomous car experiments where not every system is operating encourage complacency. You can tell an operator that the emergency brakes are not working but the car will brake in traffic by itself.

So the operator is literally sitting there waiting for that emergency situation that is possible at any time but very rarely happens. Not an optimal situation, there is not enough driving activity to fully engage the operator. The conditions set by Uber contribute to the lack of attention by lack of engagement making Uber complicit imo.

They are testing to find faults. The driver needs to be completely aware of what is going on cause apparently they make mistakes quite often. How you could drive around in the thing and not be aware of whats going on if and when something goes wrong is beyond me. Negligent to the extreme.

And as Uber stated the driver is not allowed to use a phone while driving around.

[zipping]

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

They are testing to find faults. The driver needs to be completely aware of what is going on cause apparently they make mistakes quite often. How you could drive around in the thing and not be aware of whats going on if and when something goes wrong is beyond me. Negligent to the extreme.

And as Uber stated the driver is not allowed to use a phone while driving around.

Yes they are testing for faults.

On a public road.

What credentials did the driver possess to participate in the test? Haven't paid much attention lately but wasn't she just a normal driver with no particular qualifications? You would assume she had training was it appropriate? etc etc