Self-driving Uber kills Arizona woman in first fatal crash involving pedestrian

[Milchshake]

And once again, an accident is caused by a human breaking the rules.

As a human driver I've manage to hit zero jaywalkers over 30 years of driving.

Checkmate diverless cars!

[Doctor Funkenstein]

How is this any different from a live driver? Or what, live drivers never kill idiot pedestrians when they refuse to pay attention to what the fuck they're doing?

Prove that the car did something wrong, then you'll have a point. Until then, this is on the moron who got themselves killed for being stupid.

[Aitch]

I guess that answers the whole trolley problem question.

[Dextroden]

Wait... You're an SJW against STEM?

Are you real?

- - - Updated - - -



Pedestrians have the right of way.

As long as they don't impede traffic and are crossing properly. I'm in between on this. Drivers ALWAYS need to be alert. But people either need to stick to crosswalks or pay attention and hurry if they're going to risk going across active traffic lanes.

[Pyro1990]

Wait... You're an SJW against STEM?

Are you real?

- - - Updated - - -



Pedestrians have the right of way.

Depends on how much reaction time there was. If she stepped out directly in front of the car not really much that can done.

[Self Inflicted Wounds]

Sad, but still safer than the alternative. Cars are one of the leading causes of death, at least in the US.

[DSRilk]

Pedestrians have the right of way.

At least here in the US, this is totally untrue. It's even untrue in YOUR state.

"Pedestrians crossing a roadway in an urban area outside of a marked crosswalk must yield the right-of-way to all vehicles upon the roadway."
http://www.ncsl.org/research/transpo...e-summary.aspx

In or out of a crosswalk however, a driver *should* stop. However, that's not always possible. Pedestrians do stupid stuff all the time. It is possible the car hit her when a driver would not have. It is also possible that neither could have possibly stopped in time. There's not remotely enough information to make a judgment on this yet, at least not that I could see in either of the articles.

[Sage89]

Wait... You're an SJW against STEM?

Are you real?

- - - Updated - - -



Pedestrians have the right of way.

They do have the right of way but that doesn't mean if one jaywalks out in front of you that you can stop in time.

[lummiuster]

I cant believe it is legal to let fault intolerant programmed machine capable of killing wander outside in the same area as pedestrians.
If this case happened in my city, I would have beat my mayor right away.

[abracmike]

The buried lead here:

The beast has had its' first taste of blood. Now the real trouble begins!

On topic: While horrible, still seems to be a better rate of error than humans.

[DSRilk]

They <pedestrians> do have the right of way...

They actually don't always, and from what was described here, she certainly didn't. See the link I put right above your post.

[Flarelaine]

As a human driver I've manage to hit zero jaywalkers over 30 years of driving.

Checkmate diverless cars!

And as a pedestrian, I have managed to not get hit over 30 years of jaywalking. That still does not change the fact that all accidents involving self-driving cars so far have also involved humans behaving outside the expected patterns.

In the present case, visibility may have been an issue. The articles suggest the accident may have happened at night.

Oh, and the guy sitting in the car is proably at fault as well. Those guys sit in those cars for exactly these situations.

[LMuhlen]

Automated cars can be improved. Human drivers, not so much.

[Swalload]

https://www.independent.co.uk/life-s...-a8263921.html

https://www.theguardian.com/technolo...-arizona-tempe




Looks like the self driving car fantasy is crashing into reality.

Now there will be more due dates for 'the future' pushed back, and promises downscaled.

The human takeover fudge they have in this case clearly is worse than an actual driver because of they wont have any feeling for the setting which leads to slower reactions in emergency situations. A slower response than a human that is driving the whole time is just a worse outcome.

Hope Uber get sued hard.

Yeah, the technology is not ready. And so are human skills since there's proportionally more human caused incidents than robot caused incident.

Also this is a very good example of what it looks like when an object kills people, when the object moves on its own. Which is the total opposite of guns.

[Socialhealer]

skynet claims it's first victim.

[Vanyali]

Pedestrians have the right of way.

I've always thought of right away as this, whether i'm driving or walking:

I can have the legal right of way, and someone else charged after I get hit, but that means dickall to physics. If you're gonna get smashed, being legally in the right won't make the ton of metal stop moving any faster. So even if I legally have the right... I should still watch and yield if it's going to result in people discussing over my body who had the right.

Jaywalkers, especially those that walk from between two parked cars, are trying to play legalese with physics, and sometimes it turns out terribly.

[Uncle]

We don't know what happened precisely, don't assume anything til' we have more informations.

[God Save The King]

Wait. So it's not okay for the police to stop or citation someone for, in your own words, illegally jaywalking, but getting hit is a proper outcome?

OT: People need to consider that science fiction has been a long continuation of "If humans make something that can think, it'll turn on us" and that is a piece of why people are going to be nervous. Personally, I'm worried about the people that will inevitably try to hack them.

Please quote anywhere where I suggested what you're accusing.

I said all unnecessary deaths were bad.

I also pointed out the fuzzy circumstances surrounding the issue. I, as a driver, am far more likely to expect a pedestrian crossing in a crosswalk, not jaywalking across the road while a car is oncoming. I mean, think about it, how close would you have to be for the car to not be able to stop, nor the human back up driver to be able to stop the car. If the car was reasonably far away, enough so that you feel safe crossing, then you would not be hit. As crappy as it it is, I feel like the fault is with the walker, not the car.

I am unsure if police should actually city people for jaywalking; it's certainly dangerous so perhaps they should.

[Scottyjscizzle]

At least here in the US, this is totally untrue. It's even untrue in YOUR state.

"Pedestrians crossing a roadway in an urban area outside of a marked crosswalk must yield the right-of-way to all vehicles upon the roadway."
http://www.ncsl.org/research/transpo...e-summary.aspx

In or out of a crosswalk however, a driver *should* stop. However, that's not always possible. Pedestrians do stupid stuff all the time. It is possible the car hit her when a driver would not have. It is also possible that neither could have possibly stopped in time. There's not remotely enough information to make a judgment on this yet, at least not that I could see in either of the articles.

Shhh..you need to have a knee-jerk reaction to how evil and scary these cars are. Also get out of here with your sources we don't trust facts and citation around these parts!

[LMuhlen]

I've always thought of right away as this, whether i'm driving or walking:

I can have the legal right of way, and someone else charged after I get hit, but that means dickall to physics. If you're gonna get smashed, being legally in the right won't make the ton of metal stop moving any faster. So even if I legally have the right... I should still watch and yield if it's going to result in people discussing over my body who had the right.

Jaywalkers, especially those that walk from between two parked cars, are trying to play legalese with physics, and sometimes it turns out terribly.

This right of way thing is more to try and protect the weaker part of the potential incident. If they didn't have a right of way, drivers could just accelerate and hit jaywalkers on purpose. Most drivers hit pedestrians by accident, so it is working.

It still falls to the pedestrian to make his part and not put himself in a dangerous situation where the driver, potentially distracted or without enough time to react, would hit them. Because the pedestrian is the most interested party in avoiding accidents, even if the blame lands on the other side.