Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

Uber Pulls Self-Driving Cars After First Fatal Crash of Autonomous Vehicle

posted by Fnord666 on Monday March 19 2018, @10:31PM   Printer-friendly
from the bound-to-happen dept.

vux984 writes:

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.

Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Uber Pulls Self-Driving Cars After First Fatal Crash of Autonomous Vehicle | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 84 comments | Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

  • (Score: 1) by pTamok on Wednesday March 21 2018, @08:37AM (1 child)

    by pTamok (3042) on Wednesday March 21 2018, @08:37AM (#655991)

    There is a really good Twitter thread about the infrastructure design at the accident site.

    https://twitter.com/EricPaulDennis/status/975891554538852352/photo/1 [twitter.com]

    There are pedestrian footways build on the 'median', which are exactly where a good engineer would put them, but 'closed off' with signs, but no fences.

    Well worth reading.

  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by vux984 on Wednesday March 21 2018, @10:29PM

    by vux984 (5045) on Wednesday March 21 2018, @10:29PM (#656369)

    Wow, yeah... I mean, it's still clear the pedestrian shouldn't be there. But talk about setting things up to fail. And I find it ever less convincing that a human driver would ever found completely faultless for striking a pedestrian walking there, without so much as attempting to brake. It's just wide open. The pedestrian was walking. Its not like they were hiding behind a truck and jumped out in front of traffic to try and commit suicide.

    The pedestrian has responsibility too; they aren't innocent but the driver/vehicle should have had some time to react.

    But I just don't see how uber could get a complete walk on this; even if they weren't charged for the accident (which I'd understand; lots of accidents end without charges -- accidents happen and I'm not at the point of saying uber was criminally malicious or negligent); but you'd think in terms of insurance they'd have at least some liability.