Preliminary NTSB report on Uber accident

[pembquist]

https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/AccidentReports/Reports/HWY18MH010-prelim.pdf

This is the part that looks a little "oopsy":

"According to data obtained from the self-driving system, the system first registered radar and LIDAR
observations of the pedestrian about 6 seconds before impact, when the vehicle was traveling at 43 mph.
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.
At 1.3 seconds before impact, the self-driving system determined that an emergency braking maneuver
was needed to mitigate a collision (see figure 2).
2 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."

[Mickey1992]

"The system is not designed to alert the operator"

This to me is the most damning part of the article.

[eagl]

I"m not sure how that's any different than putting a brick on the accelerator, aiming the car down any random busy street, and hopping out to let the car careen down the street on its own.  Whoever signed off on this is going to be lucky if all they face is a civil suit, since it seems like there may be a criminal case for endangerment or any number of other charges that rhyme with willful, negligence, dangerous, and deadly.

[Shuffler]

"The system is not designed to alert the operator"

This to me is the most damning part of the article.

It does not have to. The operator is supposed to be watching the road with both hands on the wheel.


I will never own a so called self driving car. I do not trust them.

The driver of this car is at fault in this accident.

[Puma44]

"The system is not designed to alert the operator"

This to me is the most damning part of the article.

Likewise.  That’s a major, irresponsible flaw on the part of Uber.

[Devil 505]

It does not have to. The operator is supposed to be watching the road with both hands on the wheel.


I will never own a so called self driving car. I do not trust them.

The driver of this car is at fault in this accident.

I agree with you.

But this raises the the big question - What the hell is the point of a self driving car when a human operator is still required to be present and alert?

[Meatwad]

Only true self driving cars I know of are one ones that Google is experimenting with. All these other cars that claim self driving but require the person in the driver seat to keep both hands on the wheel in case of emergency procedures is nothing more then catering to the laziness of people that can afford those cars and willing to shell out extra $$$ to have one. I will never trust a self driving anything, including the people that have severe lack of common sense to ket the car drive while they play on facebook/sleep/etc

[Delirium]

I will never own a so called self driving car. I do not trust them.

I'm sure you would have been yelling, "Get a horse!" over 100 years. Inability to adapt is a clear sign of getting older.

[Wiley]

From the article, this is FAR more damning of the Uber system and their capability to develop a system.

According to Uber, the developmental self-driving system relies on an attentive operator to intervene if the  system  fails  to perform  appropriately  during  testing.  In  addition,  the  operator  is  responsible  for  monitoring diagnostic messages that appear on an interface in the center stack of the vehicle dash and tagging events of interest for subsequent review.

"Here.  Watch this screen for anything interesting, and also drive the vehicle."

A freaking 4 year old could see the problem with that statement.

I'm sure you would have been yelling, "Get a horse!" over 100 years. Inability to adapt is a clear sign of getting older.

I don't think that's a fair comparison.  Based on the above paragraph, I don't think a healthy mistrust of the people designing these systems is completely misplaced.  I'm sure the tech will get there eventually, and likely within this generation.  However, I'm not going to call someone a Luddite for not being thrilled at the prospect of the "Oops, the design team never thought of that" phase of product development.

Now they've learned the lesson that the trial vehicle maybe shouldn't have only one person in it.  The jaywalker's unfortunately not going to get to benefit from that lesson.

Frankly everything I've seen about the Uber system looks pretty much like it is garbage.  Autonomous vehicles are not a product that should have a cut rate cheaply developed version, IMO.

Wiley.

[Delirium]

It is an absolutely fair comparison! Cars had numerous deaths and many cities/states considered banning them. The populace said the same thing about elevators, they are not safe and are detrimental to society.

I do agree there is a huge push from several design teams and ultimately few will win the race to create the right system.

It will happen, accept change and adapt or get old listening to AM radio.

[Wiley]

It is an absolutely fair comparison! Before cars were invented the populace said the same thing about elevators, they are not safe and are detrimental to society.

I do agree there is a huge push from several design teams and ultimately few will win the race to create the right system.

It will happen, accept change and adapt or get old listening to AM radio.

There's a few orders of magnitude in complexity between something simple like an elevator and an autonomous vehicle.  It's a monumentally complex system, and at the end of the day you're abdicating responsibility for your safety doing the most dangerous thing the average person does every day to a software design team in an age where "It compiled.  It's ready for beta testing." is the norm.

Statistically, they're going to be safer than most human drivers in a short time.  That should be a horrifying thought, but that's the world we live in.

I still don't think it's unreasonable not to trust them, at least in the early phases.

Wiley.

[Delirium]

Time will prove me correct, I have no doubt.

[Wiley]

Time will prove me correct, I have no doubt.

Oh, it's coming.  I'm just saying not trusting it is not as unreasonable as you're making it out to be.

Wiley.

[Delirium]

I am looking at the appearance of automated vehicles much in thr same way people look at the deaths that cars caused when they shared the road with horses. In 25 years all of these accidents will be a footnote, as heartless as that sounds.

[Oldman731]

Inability to adapt is a clear sign of getting older.

That's what they said about people who couldn't disco dance.

Not to mention those who wouldn't wear leisure suits.

- oldman