Self-driving Uber car killed a pedestrian
- Thread starter Trav
- Start date
- Status
Self-driving is still a long way from being in prime time. The AI decision to determine which objects to ignore (such as an empty plastic bag in the roadway) vs. something more substantial needs to be vetted, hopefully without running over more pedestrians/dogs/deer etc.
Originally Posted By: Rmay635703
Couldn’t have said it better myself fdcg
There is a large financial interest that is pushing self driving tech at all costs
That will drive these onto the roads ready or not over the next 5 years.
Even though we are likely 20 years away from approaching reasonable confidence that the systems can be safe even in rather benign situations like the one in the video.
and the narrative amongst even very intelligent people is that you can’t blame the self driving car
The tech is infallible and knows better than you.
Almost like evangelism.
Stating concerns about the SAE standard governing them or about the cars themselves is sac religious in many circles.
I am uncertain why a large chunk of our society views these as infallible and think such a huge need exists
But the attitude I get from other channels is that it’s not the cars fault rather we just need to remove human controlled devices (like bicycles) off the road and everything’s fine.
I find this trend confusing at best.
Good points and I have a feeling that the huge money that is as stake here is behind the notion that these vehicles cannot be blamed.
For the average consumer, just mention AI, even if it's a simple alogorithm, and the automatic assumption is that it is superior to humans.
Simple changes to the language and terminology that play with human imagination. Many people now view any automated program as AI.
Couldn’t have said it better myself fdcg
There is a large financial interest that is pushing self driving tech at all costs
That will drive these onto the roads ready or not over the next 5 years.
Even though we are likely 20 years away from approaching reasonable confidence that the systems can be safe even in rather benign situations like the one in the video.
and the narrative amongst even very intelligent people is that you can’t blame the self driving car
The tech is infallible and knows better than you.
Almost like evangelism.
Stating concerns about the SAE standard governing them or about the cars themselves is sac religious in many circles.
I am uncertain why a large chunk of our society views these as infallible and think such a huge need exists
But the attitude I get from other channels is that it’s not the cars fault rather we just need to remove human controlled devices (like bicycles) off the road and everything’s fine.
I find this trend confusing at best.
Good points and I have a feeling that the huge money that is as stake here is behind the notion that these vehicles cannot be blamed.
For the average consumer, just mention AI, even if it's a simple alogorithm, and the automatic assumption is that it is superior to humans.
Simple changes to the language and terminology that play with human imagination. Many people now view any automated program as AI.
My prediction is that soon after self driving cars are deployed, lawyers will litigate them out of existance. Every branch in the AI decision making process will be repeatedly evaluated by unqualified jury members led on by emotionally persuasive litigators. Legal fees and award costs will overwhelm even the deep pocketed developers.
Originally Posted By: 59Rod
That employee should have been fired long ago. Doesnt Uber watch the interior camera and could see that this fat lazy employee is texting during work? I know many security guards have been fired because the boss sees on CCTV that they are texting during their shift.
Also why are they using giant, gas-guzzling SUVs if the system is still being beta tested? If it had been a little smart car or small sub-compact maybe the woman would not have been killed to death by a 4 ton tank
Agreed,
As to why you see a lot of self driving SUVs it’s because of two reasons
Consumer tastes
And the fuel economy hit gets more covered up
https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/257428-self-driving-cars-face-unexpected-problem-fuel-economy
Self driving cars actually draw 5-7 HP more than a conventional car
And are more spastic with the throttle
Both add to fuel economy drops that are very noticeable on a small car but less so on something bigger
That employee should have been fired long ago. Doesnt Uber watch the interior camera and could see that this fat lazy employee is texting during work? I know many security guards have been fired because the boss sees on CCTV that they are texting during their shift.
Also why are they using giant, gas-guzzling SUVs if the system is still being beta tested? If it had been a little smart car or small sub-compact maybe the woman would not have been killed to death by a 4 ton tank
Agreed,
As to why you see a lot of self driving SUVs it’s because of two reasons
Consumer tastes
And the fuel economy hit gets more covered up
https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/257428-self-driving-cars-face-unexpected-problem-fuel-economy
Self driving cars actually draw 5-7 HP more than a conventional car
And are more spastic with the throttle
Both add to fuel economy drops that are very noticeable on a small car but less so on something bigger
From Nov 2017 (before recent AZ fatal accident:
http://www.latimes.com/business/autos/la-fi-hy-volvo-uber-20171120-story.html
Quote:
Volvo said Monday that it would sell Uber tens of thousands of luxury sport utility vehicles between 2019 and 2021 outfitted with the Swedish automaker's safety, redundancy and core autonomous driving technologies. Uber will then add its own self-driving technology to the autonomous taxi fleet.
Jeff Miller, head of auto alliances at Uber, said in a statement that the agreement put Uber on a path toward "mass produced self-driving vehicles at scale."
Quote:
"For autonomy to really work, you have to have trust," said Grayson Brulte, co-founder and president of Brulte & Co. "Right now, Uber does not have a very trusting relationship with the public."
If it was low then, imagine what it is now...
Quote:
The Volvo deal marks one of Uber's first major business initiatives under new CEO Dara Khosrowshahi, the former chief of travel-booking firm Expedia. Uber, which is privately held and valued at just below $70 billion, is moving toward an anticipated 2019 initial public offering.
That's one inflated stock...
http://www.latimes.com/business/autos/la-fi-hy-volvo-uber-20171120-story.html
Quote:
Volvo said Monday that it would sell Uber tens of thousands of luxury sport utility vehicles between 2019 and 2021 outfitted with the Swedish automaker's safety, redundancy and core autonomous driving technologies. Uber will then add its own self-driving technology to the autonomous taxi fleet.
Jeff Miller, head of auto alliances at Uber, said in a statement that the agreement put Uber on a path toward "mass produced self-driving vehicles at scale."
Quote:
"For autonomy to really work, you have to have trust," said Grayson Brulte, co-founder and president of Brulte & Co. "Right now, Uber does not have a very trusting relationship with the public."
If it was low then, imagine what it is now...
Quote:
The Volvo deal marks one of Uber's first major business initiatives under new CEO Dara Khosrowshahi, the former chief of travel-booking firm Expedia. Uber, which is privately held and valued at just below $70 billion, is moving toward an anticipated 2019 initial public offering.
That's one inflated stock...
Originally Posted By: 59Rod
That employee should have been fired long ago. Doesnt Uber watch the interior camera and could see that this fat lazy employee is texting during work?
You guys just don't get what automation does to the "worker", who these manufacturers stat it "always ultimately in control"...
You can't take away 100% of the input/decision/output for the 99% of the easy decisions, and then require the "driver" to instantaneously react to the most difficult ones.
Just doesn't work if you are running a factory, even with trained people.
Certainly can't work in an automobile, with millions of unskilled people.
Yes, the occupant was being paid to be attentive and wasn't.
The car and the programmers are still at fault.
That employee should have been fired long ago. Doesnt Uber watch the interior camera and could see that this fat lazy employee is texting during work?
You guys just don't get what automation does to the "worker", who these manufacturers stat it "always ultimately in control"...
You can't take away 100% of the input/decision/output for the 99% of the easy decisions, and then require the "driver" to instantaneously react to the most difficult ones.
Just doesn't work if you are running a factory, even with trained people.
Certainly can't work in an automobile, with millions of unskilled people.
Yes, the occupant was being paid to be attentive and wasn't.
The car and the programmers are still at fault.
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: 59Rod
That employee should have been fired long ago. Doesnt Uber watch the interior camera and could see that this fat lazy employee is texting during work?
Yes, the occupant was being paid to be attentive and wasn't.
The car and the programmers are still at fault.
The texting employee scenario is what it's going to be like in real life if self driving cars do catch on. The whole reason someone would want a self driving car is so they can tune out of watching the road and instead play with their cell phone or do some other activity that's not concentrating on driving.
It would almost take more concentration to be posed and ready to intervene in a split second while waiting for a self driving car to make a mistake on the road. In that case, just driver the [censored] thing and forget about "AI".
Originally Posted By: 59Rod
That employee should have been fired long ago. Doesnt Uber watch the interior camera and could see that this fat lazy employee is texting during work?
Yes, the occupant was being paid to be attentive and wasn't.
The car and the programmers are still at fault.
The texting employee scenario is what it's going to be like in real life if self driving cars do catch on. The whole reason someone would want a self driving car is so they can tune out of watching the road and instead play with their cell phone or do some other activity that's not concentrating on driving.
It would almost take more concentration to be posed and ready to intervene in a split second while waiting for a self driving car to make a mistake on the road. In that case, just driver the [censored] thing and forget about "AI".
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
Major screw up with the programming logic that was too dumbed down to distinguish a plastic bag from someone walking a bicycle across the road. Wow ...
You see that in any kind of industrial automation. I was using an optical reader that judge the quality of some characters read and give it a "score". Most of the time it is pretty good and when things doesn't work as expected, we adjust the position and angle through trial and error.
It is a lot more trial and error (aka statistics) than mathematical (aka deterministic) than you think. Unfortunately this is the incident when they have problem, the training session went bad and hit someone.
Reflective based technologies will always have uncertainty and risk involved, compare to through beam (elevator door light curtain) or dedicated transponder (i.e. your smart phone emitting signal telling driver less car you are there, and magnet on the road to guide the cars). We will probably get there when self driving cars become standardized and well understood, and when all the roads are retired and replaced to work better with self driving cars.
In the mean time, buckle up and drive safely.
Originally Posted By: Shannow
You guys just don't get what automation does to the "worker", who these manufacturers stat it "always ultimately in control"...
You can't take away 100% of the input/decision/output for the 99% of the easy decisions, and then require the "driver" to instantaneously react to the most difficult ones.
If you can stop the line and wait for a supervisor to take a look, yes.
Unfortunately on the road this may not work, unless you are tail gating another car and just follow a close distance. Which is why I think that will be the 1st step in self driving cars until a majority of the infrastructure (road tags, safety transponder on human / smart phones, traffic laws regarding to right of way) are redesigned to handle them.
Originally Posted By: ArrestMeRedZ
My prediction is that soon after self driving cars are deployed, lawyers will litigate them out of existance. Every branch in the AI decision making process will be repeatedly evaluated by unqualified jury members led on by emotionally persuasive litigators. Legal fees and award costs will overwhelm even the deep pocketed developers.
You have to remember laws are written by the wealthy and influential, and products liability insurance can cover a majority of the incidents. Unless a company intentionally cheat and lie about a known issue, it will be unlikely to get awards more expensive than say, a drunk driver fatality.
Major screw up with the programming logic that was too dumbed down to distinguish a plastic bag from someone walking a bicycle across the road. Wow ...
You see that in any kind of industrial automation. I was using an optical reader that judge the quality of some characters read and give it a "score". Most of the time it is pretty good and when things doesn't work as expected, we adjust the position and angle through trial and error.
It is a lot more trial and error (aka statistics) than mathematical (aka deterministic) than you think. Unfortunately this is the incident when they have problem, the training session went bad and hit someone.
Reflective based technologies will always have uncertainty and risk involved, compare to through beam (elevator door light curtain) or dedicated transponder (i.e. your smart phone emitting signal telling driver less car you are there, and magnet on the road to guide the cars). We will probably get there when self driving cars become standardized and well understood, and when all the roads are retired and replaced to work better with self driving cars.
In the mean time, buckle up and drive safely.
Originally Posted By: Shannow
You guys just don't get what automation does to the "worker", who these manufacturers stat it "always ultimately in control"...
You can't take away 100% of the input/decision/output for the 99% of the easy decisions, and then require the "driver" to instantaneously react to the most difficult ones.
If you can stop the line and wait for a supervisor to take a look, yes.
Unfortunately on the road this may not work, unless you are tail gating another car and just follow a close distance. Which is why I think that will be the 1st step in self driving cars until a majority of the infrastructure (road tags, safety transponder on human / smart phones, traffic laws regarding to right of way) are redesigned to handle them.
Originally Posted By: ArrestMeRedZ
My prediction is that soon after self driving cars are deployed, lawyers will litigate them out of existance. Every branch in the AI decision making process will be repeatedly evaluated by unqualified jury members led on by emotionally persuasive litigators. Legal fees and award costs will overwhelm even the deep pocketed developers.
You have to remember laws are written by the wealthy and influential, and products liability insurance can cover a majority of the incidents. Unless a company intentionally cheat and lie about a known issue, it will be unlikely to get awards more expensive than say, a drunk driver fatality.
I was recently reading an article (probably on a secured site) that had some interviews with folks workin on “self driving cars” and they pretty much all agreed that that anything above level 2 wasn’t ready for prime time and would not be for quite sometime.
According to GM we were supposed to be there by the 70’s...
Also, UBER allegedly reduced the number of sensors in use recently, I haven’t read which this vehicle had (the higher or lower number)
According to GM we were supposed to be there by the 70’s...
Also, UBER allegedly reduced the number of sensors in use recently, I haven’t read which this vehicle had (the higher or lower number)
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: 59Rod
That employee should have been fired long ago. Doesnt Uber watch the interior camera and could see that this fat lazy employee is texting during work?
You guys just don't get what automation does to the "worker", who these manufacturers stat it "always ultimately in control"...
You can't take away 100% of the input/decision/output for the 99% of the easy decisions, and then require the "driver" to instantaneously react to the most difficult ones.
Just doesn't work if you are running a factory, even with trained people.
Certainly can't work in an automobile, with millions of unskilled people.
Yes, the occupant was being paid to be attentive and wasn't.
The car and the programmers are still at fault.
I could excuse away inattentiveness if maybe the paid-employee-driver was looking out the window at a woman in a bikini walking down the street or some other random event but that is not the scenario here. Employee driver was texting and not watching the road. Not doing the job that she is being paid to do. And it resulted in a fatality. That is textbook case of culpible negligence. Of course I read another article already about how Uber has already made a settlement with the family and paid them off. Im going to assume it was over 5 million just for the sake of being conservative. it was probably alot more than that.
But let me ask you this. If the person run over had been your own mother or wife than would you be satisfied with just the cash or would you want this inattentive driver to be charged as a criminal and have to face the punishments?
This employee does not deserve a free pass on this. She should spend at least 90 days in jail, I mean cmon. A person has died here
And....... bread & water. Maybe Im old but it should be 30 days in isolation and bread & water. After that she wont be texting and driving BELIEVE ME. You know, like the Trump voice when he says BELIEVE ME
Originally Posted By: 59Rod
That employee should have been fired long ago. Doesnt Uber watch the interior camera and could see that this fat lazy employee is texting during work?
You guys just don't get what automation does to the "worker", who these manufacturers stat it "always ultimately in control"...
You can't take away 100% of the input/decision/output for the 99% of the easy decisions, and then require the "driver" to instantaneously react to the most difficult ones.
Just doesn't work if you are running a factory, even with trained people.
Certainly can't work in an automobile, with millions of unskilled people.
Yes, the occupant was being paid to be attentive and wasn't.
The car and the programmers are still at fault.
I could excuse away inattentiveness if maybe the paid-employee-driver was looking out the window at a woman in a bikini walking down the street or some other random event but that is not the scenario here. Employee driver was texting and not watching the road. Not doing the job that she is being paid to do. And it resulted in a fatality. That is textbook case of culpible negligence. Of course I read another article already about how Uber has already made a settlement with the family and paid them off. Im going to assume it was over 5 million just for the sake of being conservative. it was probably alot more than that.
But let me ask you this. If the person run over had been your own mother or wife than would you be satisfied with just the cash or would you want this inattentive driver to be charged as a criminal and have to face the punishments?
This employee does not deserve a free pass on this. She should spend at least 90 days in jail, I mean cmon. A person has died here
And....... bread & water. Maybe Im old but it should be 30 days in isolation and bread & water. After that she wont be texting and driving BELIEVE ME. You know, like the Trump voice when he says BELIEVE ME
Originally Posted By: Shannow
The people who programmed the car to see her and ignore her caused the fatality....
Appeals to my mother or wife don't change that fact.
Let's not forget they disabled the Volvo tried and tested sensors/sequence.
Also, by the nightly photo posted by our local BITOG friend, the street was not that dark at night...
The people who programmed the car to see her and ignore her caused the fatality....
Appeals to my mother or wife don't change that fact.
Let's not forget they disabled the Volvo tried and tested sensors/sequence.
Also, by the nightly photo posted by our local BITOG friend, the street was not that dark at night...
From several articles I've now read, "Uber" seems a royal screw-up of a company: One crisis after another. Evidently they're way behind the competition, cutting corners (and sensors) to catch up, 'dumbing down' what's detected, the last CEO was fired, the new one wanted to EXIT from 'self-driving' vehicles period. Plus, the issue of whether their drivers are employees or contractors. Where are the boundaries for liability and responsibility?
And this clueless woman....she spent 4 yrs in prison for robbery if I recall!!? Uber decided she was "fit for duty"?? Responsible enough for such a task? She even knew she was being recorded, yet spent the whole time staring down at a bright screen, wrecking her night-vision, while the vehicle drove at night?? The woman she hit was wearing blue jeans and a BLACK top. Further, the vehicle collided with her on the passenger side! The victim was that far across the front of the vehicle.. which was already in the far right hand lane!!
In another incident, driver dude was "air drumming" through an intersection and caught on a traffic camera????
What a bunch of idiots!
Safety is the LAST thing on Uber's mind: Catching up is FIRST! Only winning matters to them.
And this clueless woman....she spent 4 yrs in prison for robbery if I recall!!? Uber decided she was "fit for duty"?? Responsible enough for such a task? She even knew she was being recorded, yet spent the whole time staring down at a bright screen, wrecking her night-vision, while the vehicle drove at night?? The woman she hit was wearing blue jeans and a BLACK top. Further, the vehicle collided with her on the passenger side! The victim was that far across the front of the vehicle.. which was already in the far right hand lane!!
In another incident, driver dude was "air drumming" through an intersection and caught on a traffic camera????
What a bunch of idiots!
Safety is the LAST thing on Uber's mind: Catching up is FIRST! Only winning matters to them.
Originally Posted By: sleddriver
Safety is the LAST thing on Uber's mind: Catching up is FIRST! Only winning matters to them.
They think they're reinventing the taxi industry. That shows how clueless they are.
Safety is the LAST thing on Uber's mind: Catching up is FIRST! Only winning matters to them.
They think they're reinventing the taxi industry. That shows how clueless they are.
https://arstechnica.com/cars/2018/05/eme...ays/?comments=1
Quote:
The National Transportation Safety Board has released its preliminary report on the fatal March crash of an Uber self-driving car in Tempe, Arizona. It paints a [censored] picture of Uber's self-driving technology.
The report confirms that the sensors on the vehicle worked as expected, spotting pedestrian Elaine Herzberg about six seconds prior to impact, which should have given it enough time to stop given the car's 43mph speed.
The problem was that Uber's software became confused, according to the NTSB. "As the vehicle and pedestrian paths converged, 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," the report says.
Things got worse from there.
Quote:
At 1.3 seconds before impact, the self-driving system determined that an emergency braking maneuver was needed to mitigate a collision. According to Uber, emergency braking maneuvers are not enabled while the vehicle is under computer control, to reduce the potential for erratic vehicle behavior. The vehicle operator is relied on to intervene and take action. The system is not designed to alert the operator.
This is particularly daming:
Quote:
"Uber had been racing to meet an end-of-year internal goal of allowing customers in the Phoenix area to ride in Uber’s autonomous Volvo vehicles with no safety driver sitting behind the wheel," Efrati wrote.
Read all of it. Also read the NTSB's prelim. report linked within.
Quote:
The National Transportation Safety Board has released its preliminary report on the fatal March crash of an Uber self-driving car in Tempe, Arizona. It paints a [censored] picture of Uber's self-driving technology.
The report confirms that the sensors on the vehicle worked as expected, spotting pedestrian Elaine Herzberg about six seconds prior to impact, which should have given it enough time to stop given the car's 43mph speed.
The problem was that Uber's software became confused, according to the NTSB. "As the vehicle and pedestrian paths converged, 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," the report says.
Things got worse from there.
Quote:
At 1.3 seconds before impact, the self-driving system determined that an emergency braking maneuver was needed to mitigate a collision. According to Uber, emergency braking maneuvers are not enabled while the vehicle is under computer control, to reduce the potential for erratic vehicle behavior. The vehicle operator is relied on to intervene and take action. The system is not designed to alert the operator.
This is particularly daming:
Quote:
"Uber had been racing to meet an end-of-year internal goal of allowing customers in the Phoenix area to ride in Uber’s autonomous Volvo vehicles with no safety driver sitting behind the wheel," Efrati wrote.
Read all of it. Also read the NTSB's prelim. report linked within.
More information on this story:
Quote:
The police in Tempe, Arizona, say evidence shows the "safety" driver behind the wheel of a self-driving Uber was distracted and streaming a television show on her phone right up until about the time of a fatal accident in March, deeming the crash that rocked the nascent industry "entirely avoidable."
The police obtained records from Hulu, the online service for streaming television shows and movies, which showed Vasquez's account was playing the television talent show "The Voice" the night of the crash for about 42 minutes, ending at 9:59 p.m., which "coincides with the approximate time of the collision," the report says.
The police said a review of video from inside the car showed Vasquez was looking down during the trip, and her face "appears to react and show a smirk or laugh at various points during the times that she is looking down." The report found that Vasquez "was distracted and looking down" for close to seven of the nearly 22 minutes before the collision.
http://www.businessinsider.com/uber-driv...ollision-2018-6
Quote:
The police in Tempe, Arizona, say evidence shows the "safety" driver behind the wheel of a self-driving Uber was distracted and streaming a television show on her phone right up until about the time of a fatal accident in March, deeming the crash that rocked the nascent industry "entirely avoidable."
The police obtained records from Hulu, the online service for streaming television shows and movies, which showed Vasquez's account was playing the television talent show "The Voice" the night of the crash for about 42 minutes, ending at 9:59 p.m., which "coincides with the approximate time of the collision," the report says.
The police said a review of video from inside the car showed Vasquez was looking down during the trip, and her face "appears to react and show a smirk or laugh at various points during the times that she is looking down." The report found that Vasquez "was distracted and looking down" for close to seven of the nearly 22 minutes before the collision.
http://www.businessinsider.com/uber-driv...ollision-2018-6
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Problem with pointing at the safety "driver" is that they are tasked with a job that the human mind can't do.
Sit there and do nothing at all, but be prepared to step in and take control in seconds...for the duration of your shift.
Sounds a lot like my job when the airplane is in cruise flight, crossing an ocean...
However, I AM ready to step in and take control in seconds.
Problem with pointing at the safety "driver" is that they are tasked with a job that the human mind can't do.
Sit there and do nothing at all, but be prepared to step in and take control in seconds...for the duration of your shift.
Sounds a lot like my job when the airplane is in cruise flight, crossing an ocean...
However, I AM ready to step in and take control in seconds.
Even if the gal was "monitoring" the self driving car instead of looking at her cell phone, she might have had 1~2 seconds max to react. Still might not have made any difference. I know if I was cursing along in the dark and all of a sudden someone came walking out of the shadows 50 ft in front of me, I'd be pretty lucky to react in enough time to not run over them.
- Status
