Self-Driving Car Kills Pedestrian in AZ

[MU82]

I have a feeling I'd find robocars to be very .. Sunday Driver. 

I mean .. I'm no lead foot, but I do keep to whichever lane is fastest, trying to go +10 of the speed limit.  (Got one ticket on my record in 1995.)

My last car had "adaptive cruise" which kept me XX feet behind the car in front of me, and I freaking hated it.    First .. the gap was likely very safe, but so big that people would constantly cut in front of you -- which means suddenly the cruise control would slow to get back to the proper gap.    Second, say you were going 80 and another car passed you and got in your lane going faster .. again, the cruise would slow you down momentarily, even though a human knows .. the guy who passed you is going to create a new gap.

I guess I figure that robocars will be very conservative drivers, always with the proper safety distances, always at the speed limit (yes?), never intuiting the 'faster' lane == Sunday Driver, just getting you safely from A to B.

That's very interesting. Although I've heard of adaptive CC, I don't know anybody else whose cars have that feature. That would drive me nuts!

And I'm a guy who tends to keep a pretty safe distance behind the person in front of me, inviting yahoos to cut in front.

[Spotcheck Billy]

That's very interesting. Although I've heard of adaptive CC, I don't know anybody else whose cars have that feature. That would drive me nuts!

And I'm a guy who tends to keep a pretty safe distance behind the person in front of me, inviting yahoos to cut in front.

Know someone that just bought a new Honda with that and whatever Honda calls the feature that corrects for drifting out of their lane. So far they are frustrated with the car steering and at times braking in slight turns thinking he was drifting out of his lane.

[MUEng92]

I had a rental car last month when we were in Florida.  I didn't know it had lane departure warning and adaptive cruise control when we pulled out of the parking garage.

As I was leaving the Miami airport, my GPS took forever to tell me which ramps to take and I missed an entrance ramp from one highway to the other.  I was already stressed trying to figure out where I was supposed to be and the damn car was beeping at me for, what I later realized, crossing over the ramp lane lines. 

Later in the trip, when I set the cruise control and approached a car, my car starting slowing down and freaked me out.  I had the same problem as Hilltopper in that the car would start to slow down when I got within what seemed like 75 yds away.   It wasn't until the 2nd day, half way down to Key West that I realized (accidently) that you could change the allowable distance between my car and the one in front of me.  When I set it to the shortest allowable distance, the car started driving like I normally do.  Might say more about me than the car.

[jesmu84]

I have a feeling I'd find robocars to be very .. Sunday Driver. 

I mean .. I'm no lead foot, but I do keep to whichever lane is fastest, trying to go +10 of the speed limit.  (Got one ticket on my record in 1995.)

My last car had "adaptive cruise" which kept me XX feet behind the car in front of me, and I freaking hated it.    First .. the gap was likely very safe, but so big that people would constantly cut in front of you -- which means suddenly the cruise control would slow to get back to the proper gap.    Second, say you were going 80 and another car passed you and got in your lane going faster .. again, the cruise would slow you down momentarily, even though a human knows .. the guy who passed you is going to create a new gap.

I guess I figure that robocars will be very conservative drivers, always with the proper safety distances, always at the speed limit (yes?), never intuiting the 'faster' lane == Sunday Driver, just getting you safely from A to B.

In an ideal scenario, all the cars around you would be autonomous and talking to each other. So they'd be able to go significantly fast than we currently allow humans to drive. Plus they could be closer as reaction time would be much better and would know well ahead of time when they would need to slow/stop/change lanes.

[mu_hilltopper]

In an ideal scenario, all the cars around you would be autonomous and talking to each other. So they'd be able to go significantly fast than we currently allow humans to drive. Plus they could be closer as reaction time would be much better and would know well ahead of time when they would need to slow/stop/change lanes.

Also .. I wonder if car "transponders" will be installed in non-robocars as well.  That way, robocars will know not only which cars are driven by humans, but also collect data on them, e.g., Red Mustang ABH-034 WI plates makes rapid lane changes and drives 20 over the speed limit all the time, expect irrational moves from it.

[Benny B]

I would look at flying as an example. If anyone knows any pilots out there please ask them this but in my hundreds of thousands miles flown almost all of that has been done by an autopilot. Even in bad weather now days pilots don't do very much but usually help with taxi, takeoff and landing. I am guessing that this revolution scared people back in the day but now days it's hardly given a thought to.

I am thinking now that the full adaptive cruise technology becomes more widely available more people will get exposed to computer driving. Right now it's primarily in luxury cars but it will be more available in about 2-3 years. Once people get a taste of it and see it's not the boogie man - it will accelerate at a multiplier pace.

My cousin flies for AAL.  A couple years ago I asked him how much flying the autopilot does.  His answer was along the lines of "from the time you're 500 feet off the ground to the time you're 500 feet from the ground."

[MU82]

My cousin flies for AAL.  A couple years ago I asked him how much flying the autopilot does.  His answer was along the lines of "from the time you're 500 feet off the ground to the time you're 500 feet from the ground."

Did any of the auto-pilot-flying planes ever hit a pedestrian?

[warriorchick]

Did any of the auto-pilot-flying planes ever hit a pedestrian?

You haven't heard about the Boeing/FAA coverup?

[tower912]

Discussion today about the autonomous car that hit a fire truck parked at a scene with lights on.  Programming  didn't recognize it as a hazard.  So, a lot like a human on a cellphone.

[MU82]

An alert driver would have been able to slam on the brakes to avoid the pedestrian - and obviously the fire truck.

Maybe the driver would have failed to do so, been too slow, been on the phone, whatever ... but an alert driver at least would have had a chance to avoid ending a human life.

I spent 16 years driving in some of the most densely populated areas of the city of Chicago - an extremely unpleasant experience if there ever was one - and I learned to be ready for pedestrians to step into the street at any time, bikes to appear out of nowhere, doors of parked cars to fly open suddenly, fellow drivers to go through red lights, etc.

Until the car companies can come up with a driverless car that can handle such situations - not to mention a little kid running into a street after a bouncing ball - they simply do not belong on public roads.

And I say this as one who welcomes the technology.

[tower912]

https://www.wired.com/story/tesla-autopilot-why-crash-radar/

[StillAWarrior]

https://www.wired.com/story/tesla-autopilot-why-crash-radar/

Interesting.  Thanks for posting.  A very serious limitation in the current technology out there.

[g0lden3agle]

Also .. I wonder if car "transponders" will be installed in non-robocars as well.  That way, robocars will know not only which cars are driven by humans, but also collect data on them, e.g., Red Mustang ABH-034 WI plates makes rapid lane changes and drives 20 over the speed limit all the time, expect irrational moves from it.

That will almost definitely happen.  In fact Ford announced today they are developing technology to allow older cards to add WiFi and other connectivity technology to their cars as old as 2010 model year.

[mu_hilltopper]

So .. the video of the self-driving pedestrian death has been released:

https://twitter.com/TempePolice/status/976585098542833664

This road was a 35 mph road.    The dashcam doesn't see her until the headlights get to her, and by then the driver would have half a second to react.

That pedestrian was dead no matter who was behind the wheel.   Crossing a medium-speed road, in the dark, with dark clothing, without concern for traffic had an inevitable result. 

On a really good day, technology might have saved her.

[tower912]

Saw that.  Completely agree.  Unlikely a human driver misses the pedestrian.

[Hards Alumni]

So .. the video of the self-driving pedestrian death has been released:

https://twitter.com/TempePolice/status/976585098542833664

This road was a 35 mph road.    The dashcam doesn't see her until the headlights get to her, and by then the driver would have half a second to react.

That pedestrian was dead no matter who was behind the wheel.   Crossing a medium-speed road, in the dark, with dark clothing, without concern for traffic had an inevitable result. 

On a really good day, technology might have saved her.

Very savy of them to release the video.  Shows that the person hit shares in the blame.

[mu_hilltopper]

Very savy of them to release the video.  Shows that the person hit shares in the blame.

I would submit that the pedestrian doesn't share the blame, it's entirely hers. 

Though the irony in the inevitable multi-million dollar lawsuit is .. the robocar will be held to a higher standard than a human driver.   "The robocar should have detected the pedestrian in dark clothing, at night, crossing illegally because its sensors are better than human abilities."

[Eldon]

An alert driver would have been able to slam on the brakes to avoid the pedestrian - and obviously the fire truck.

Maybe the driver would have failed to do so, been too slow, been on the phone, whatever ... but an alert driver at least would have had a chance to avoid ending a human life.

I spent 16 years driving in some of the most densely populated areas of the city of Chicago - an extremely unpleasant experience if there ever was one - and I learned to be ready for pedestrians to step into the street at any time, bikes to appear out of nowhere, doors of parked cars to fly open suddenly, fellow drivers to go through red lights, etc.

Until the car companies can come up with a driverless car that can handle such situations - not to mention a little kid running into a street after a bouncing ball - they simply do not belong on public roads.

And I say this as one who welcomes the technology.

Boom.  Nailed it.  This is exactly why I am bearish on self-driving cars.  At least in the foreseeable future. 

I know people are high on AI, but the human mind makes so many calculations.  So many that I don't think people realize the scope.

Autopilot on airplanes is completely different in that there is hardly any air traffic (all three dimensions are at your disposal), and there is zero chance of a ball-chasing kid running out in front of the plane.

[mu_hilltopper]

There's no doubt that "accidents will happen."  Completely unexpected and unavoidable events will occur, now and forever, where object A, travelling at 20-100 feet per second meet object B that appears suddenly.

Eldon and MU82 .. so how do (would you) respond when there's data (now or in the future) that robocars are safer per million miles than humans?

[Golden Avalanche]

Very savy of them to release the video.  Shows that the person hit shares in the blame.

She took the risk of death in her hands. It's entirely her fault.

[Benny B]

There's no doubt that "accidents will happen."  Completely unexpected and unavoidable events will occur, now and forever, where object A, travelling at 20-100 feet per second meet object B that appears suddenly.

Eldon and MU82 .. so how do (would you) respond when there's data (now or in the future) that robocars are safer per million miles than humans?

This.  And even though the car failed, I'd still trust the autonomous car more than I'd trust an AARP driver.

I can't find anything to confirm yet, but it appears this car was not outfitted with any IR (heat) sensors.... seems to me that would have been of some help in detection; although truth be told, I have no clue how accurate consumer-grade IR can be at 40 mph, let alone the range, but if something like an A-10 can detect Hakmed and shower him a few dozen 30mm presents from a mile away, someone should be able outfit these cars with something that can pick up an intercepting ball of heat from 100 feet.

[rocket surgeon]

if there are going to be "self-driving" vehicles on the road, they should be prominently marked like a dominoes or pizza hut maniac trying to deliver it's goods on time. 

i'd consider an exception if it were an arby's mobile unit

[WarriorDad]

So .. the video of the self-driving pedestrian death has been released:

https://twitter.com/TempePolice/status/976585098542833664

This road was a 35 mph road.    The dashcam doesn't see her until the headlights get to her, and by then the driver would have half a second to react.

That pedestrian was dead no matter who was behind the wheel.   Crossing a medium-speed road, in the dark, with dark clothing, without concern for traffic had an inevitable result. 

On a really good day, technology might have saved her.

Would a human being have turned on the high beams?  I would have on a road like that.  Did the automated car?

[g0lden3agle]

Would a human being have turned on the high beams?  I would have on a road like that.  Did the automated car?

I was thinking about this too.  Certainly seemed like the headlights on this car were not producing a whole heck of a lot of visibility of the road ahead.  I think the idea is that the autonomous car should have enough extra sensors (IR, LIDAR, RADAR. etc.) that it should not need to turn on high beams to gain the extra visibility that our naked eyes need.

[StillAWarrior]

While I definitely agree that the video looks like the pedestrian was really foolish and this probably would have been hard for the driver to avoid, I also think the video could be somewhat misleading.  Video, while good (and getting better), is not nearly as good as the human eye.  It is often quite dim and doesn't perceive nearly the gradations that we can see.  Just look at the stark contrast between the very deep, dark black (in spite of the headlights and street lights) and the well-lit area.  Not too uncommon for video, but not really how my eyes see things when when I'm driving at night.  In other words, I'm not convinced by the video that an attentive driver wouldn't have seen that pedestrian (with or without high beams).  Mind you, I'm not convinced the other way either...I think the video is inconclusive.