SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
A self-driving Uber SUV struck and killed a pedestrian in Tempe, Arizona. It was in autonomous mode at the time of the collision, with a vehicle operator behind the wheel. Uber has suspended testing of its self-driving cars.
http://money.cnn.com/2018/03/19/technology/uber-autonomous-car-fatal-crash/index.html
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/19/technology/uber-driverless-fatality.html
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/self-driving-uber-kills-arizona-171055918.html
https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2018/03/19/594950197/uber-suspends-self-driving-tests-after-pedestrian-is-killed-in-arizona
https://www.wsj.com/articles/uber-suspends-driverless-car-program-after-pedestrian-is-struck-and-killed-1521480386
https://www.theverge.com/2018/3/19/17139518/uber-self-driving-car-fatal-crash-tempe-arizona
https://techcrunch.com/2018/03/19/uber-self-driving-test-car-involved-in-accident-resulting-in-pedestrian-death/
I couldn't find any good analysis of the liability situation here.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 20 2018, @11:16AM (1 child)
> reasonable to require an autonomous vehicle to observe the limits
Disagree -- it should be a judgement call and this could be quite difficult to turn into a useful algorithm--
+ Sometimes (as mentioned elsewhere in this discussion), the speed limits are stupidly high. Not all roads near schools have low limits during school hours. Personally, if I'm on a dark street with cars parked on both sides, I may be going slower than the limit. Same for suburban streets at dawn and dusk where there are deer (this is when deer seem to be most likely to move around and cross the road)...deer move a lot faster than pedestrians and pop out of wooded areas very quickly.
+ Sometimes it makes sense to observe the limits, in particular where the limits have been sensibly posted in towns/cities. Much of the time the limits are set by traffic engineers that have a clue (but not everywhere).
+ Other times it makes much more sense (and I believe is generally accepted to be safer) to move with the flow of traffic. One car obeying the limit makes trouble...on a freeway/motorway where everyone else is speeding.
I believe that "driving at imprudent speed" is a judgement call cops can make just about any time they like. For example, failure to slow down through a temporary construction zone.
Based on the limited data available at this time, I think Uber has a lot of work left to do.
(Score: 2) by vux984 on Tuesday March 20 2018, @08:49PM
"+ Sometimes (as mentioned elsewhere in this discussion), the speed limits are stupidly high."
One isn't required to drive "stupidly fast" though; and in fact you are legally obligated to reduce your speed where safety requires it. The speed limit is the *maximum* it is legal to go; it's not a requirement.
In theory if the majority of vehicles end up autonomous and they are programmed to observe the limits then they will effectively dictate the flow.
Until then though, your note that it is safer to go with the flow is not wrong. But it's also a catch-22; speeding to go with the flow may be safer, but it is still speeding - its still illegal and if there is an accident, the damage will have been increased by the speeding factor. There is no real winning move there.
There are so many such cases when driving, where you are damned if you do, and damned if you don't. Where the legal system is at odds with safety. Where the liability conflicts with safety. Where you can avoid an incident that won't be your fault, but in doing so increases the chances of an incident that will be your fault.