This won't stop the progression of self driving automobiles one bit, and not to sound insensitive, it shouldn't. This is really no different than a clinical trial for a disease. A death isn't going to halt a clinical trial. It should expedite it if anything. Unfortunately, you need data to improve.

If you have AI technology that can prevent THAT unlikely, insane situation, I'd feel pretty comfortable with its overall functionality.

---

This won't stop the progression of self driving automobiles one bit, and not to sound insensitive, it shouldn't. This is really no different than a clinical trial for a disease. A death isn't going to halt a clinical trial. It should expedite it if anything. Unfortunately, you need data to improve.

If you have AI technology that can prevent THAT unlikely, insane situation, I'd feel pretty comfortable with its overall functionality.

The proverbial and literal bump in the road, huh? I’m with you, self driving cars are on the way to ubiquity. If it will have one positive effect (and which is why it is being developed so quickly, IMHO) is to reduce the number of accidents by idiots on their phones. Cadillac just introduced its Super Cruise, which is the next development level of consumer SD cars. In the very near future it will not be uncommon to see people completely ensconced on their phones in traffic while they allow the car to stop, go, and do slight maneuvers on its own.

---

More importantly, self driving cars will lead to communal or community ownership and reduce the number of cars on the road. That cuts costs for fuel, roads, parking lots, maintenance and other expenses related to over production and over popoulation.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

My kids are 6 and below. I selfishly imagine this technology should be perfected in the next decade with drunk driver fatalities hopefully all but eliminated.

---

Over/under on when self driving cars get rights/genders?

---

More importantly, self driving cars will lead to communal or community ownership and reduce the number of cars on the road. That cuts costs for fuel, roads, parking lots, maintenance and other expenses related to over production and over popoulation.

Commie.

---

Over/under on when self driving cars get rights/genders?

Better yet, will insurance companies base policy premiums on what a car identifies as?

You may be on to something.

---

With Uber the credit card owner is the only one that’s insured by Uber
the driver and passengers are on the drivers policy
Which at the time of the impact the policy is torn up
Because it’s not comercial insurance

---

“You may never know what results come of your actions, but if you do nothing, there will be no results.”
“If you find a way to motivate an idiot you have a motivated idiot”

More importantly, self driving cars will lead to communal or community ownership and reduce the number of cars on the road. That cuts costs for fuel, roads, parking lots, maintenance and other expenses related to over production and over popoulation.

Should reduce the cost of insurance and maybe cars too since the demand will eventually be lower.

---

There's a place for self driving cars... I just don't see it being a wholesale replacement for private ownership.

Driving is a staple of freedom. It's the evolution of the man and his horse.

Whether it's just getting in and driving to nowhere, offroading, etc., etc... there will be always be independent people who will prefer to drive themselves for as long as they feasibly can.

---

"You do your own thing in your own time. You should be proud."

Well all they need to do is ride like the Jetsons
above the automobiles
That would solve the problem

---

“You may never know what results come of your actions, but if you do nothing, there will be no results.”
“If you find a way to motivate an idiot you have a motivated idiot”

There's a place for self driving cars... I just don't see it being a wholesale replacement for private ownership.

Driving is a staple of freedom.  It's the evolution of the man and his horse.

Whether it's just getting in and driving to nowhere, offroading, etc., etc... there will be always be independent people who will prefer to drive themselves for as long as they feasibly can.

This would describe me. I don't need nor want anyone or anything driving for me. I like the freedom of getting in my truck and taking off.

---

Maybe so however does the Uber car get a free pass on operator error

Uber having this car on the road is like hiring a drunk driver for a taxi. There was enough space even in the visible realm for a human to at least slow, a car with lidar and radar should have seen her way before that.

Its coming out now that had UBER left the basic safety features in the volvo intact (the ones from the factory) the car would have likely stopped and prevented the accident.

They have been banned from testing in Arizona and Uber will no longer be testing in Ca (they are not going to renew their lincense to test after California DOT indicated they would investigate the arizona crash also). 

Uber messed up big on this one, in a situation they not only claimed the car could deal with, but do it better than a human, when in fact it did worse.

---

Yes, it's improvement, but it's Blaine Gabbert 2012 level improvement. - Pirkster

http://youtu.be/ouGM3NWpjxk The Home Hypnotist!

http://youtu.be/XQRFkn0Ly3A Media on the Brain Link!
 

Peyton must store oxygen in that forehead of his. No way I'd still be alive after all that choking.

 

Maybe so however does the Uber car get a free pass on operator error

Uber having this car on the road is like hiring a drunk driver for a taxi. There was enough space even in the visible realm for a human to at least slow, a car with lidar and radar should have seen her way before that.

Its coming out now that had UBER left the basic safety features in the volvo intact (the ones from the factory) the car would have likely stopped and prevented the accident.

They have been banned from testing in Arizona and Uber will no longer be testing in Ca (they are not going to renew their lincense to test after California DOT indicated they would investigate the arizona crash also). 

Uber messed up big on this one, in a situation they not only claimed the car could deal with, but do it better than a human, when in fact it did worse.

Have you seen the video?

That lady was crossing in the middle of the night, slow as molasses and it doesn't even look like she was looking in the direction of oncoming traffic.

---

If Uber is going to use these self driving cars in Florida, they need to program them to run away after an accident. I'm pretty sure that's the law here.

And to accelerate on yellow and floor it on red.

My kids are 6 and below. I selfishly imagine this technology should be perfected in the next decade with drunk driver fatalities hopefully all but eliminated.

What happens if a self-driving car gets hacked? Or if there's a solar flare or magnetic storm that momentarily disrupts the GPS grid? Or cars become sentient and create Roadnet? I think there are too many questions out there for widespread adoption within the next decade. I think driverless cards and hydrogen fuel cell-powered cars are going to develop hand in hand over the next 15-20 years.

Over/under on when self driving cars get rights/genders?

I just now realized that I have referred to every single car that I have ever owned as "she".

Well all they need to do is ride like the Jetsons
above the automobiles
That would solve the problem

"Self-driving flying car hits 747, both crash into theme park. Hundreds dead, Small World ride remains intact."

---

Maybe so however does the Uber car get a free pass on operator error

Uber having this car on the road is like hiring a drunk driver for a taxi. There was enough space even in the visible realm for a human to at least slow, a car with lidar and radar should have seen her way before that.

Its coming out now that had UBER left the basic safety features in the volvo intact (the ones from the factory) the car would have likely stopped and prevented the accident.

They have been banned from testing in Arizona and Uber will no longer be testing in Ca (they are not going to renew their lincense to test after California DOT indicated they would investigate the arizona crash also). 

Uber messed up big on this one, in a situation they not only claimed the car could deal with, but do it better than a human, when in fact it did worse.

I question if they'd actually be able to detect the pedestrian, and I feel like they're just saying that so people don't lose all faith in their driverless system. 

I'm certainly not a mathwiz, so correct me if you know better. At her speed, the driver would need about 100 feet to stop the car. It'd take between 1-2 seconds to travel 100 feet. If she's walking at a normal 3 mph, then she would take about 3 seconds to cross two lanes. The pedestrian wouldn't even have been on that side of the road until the car is well within the unstoppable range. My guess, because she's not visible, is that she was in the median or slightly on the other side as the car was within 100 feet.

I assume their technology would have detected something already in the driver's lane, but because she wasn't in the driver's lane (or maybe even on that side of the road), I question if the technology could actually detect that movement.

---

Uber messed up big on this one, in a situation they not only claimed the car could deal with, but do it better than a human, when in fact it did worse.

That lady was crossing in the middle of the night, slow as molasses and it doesn't even look like she was looking in the direction of oncoming traffic.

Slow as molasses only makes it a bigger system malfunction.  The car failed to detect a slow-moving obstacle in it's path and drove directly into it.

---

When you get into the endzone, act like you've been there before.

That lady was crossing in the middle of the night, slow as molasses and it doesn't even look like she was looking in the direction of oncoming traffic.

Slow as molasses only makes it a bigger system malfunction.  The car failed to detect a slow-moving obstacle in it's path and drove directly into it.

I'm against autonomous vehicles. I see no value in them whatsoever. Call me old-fashioned, but when a person gets killed, I want it to be the fault of another person, not a "thinking" machine.

---

Slow as molasses only makes it a bigger system malfunction.  The car failed to detect a slow-moving obstacle in it's path and drove directly into it.

I'm against autonomous vehicles. I see no value in them whatsoever. Call me old-fashioned, but when a person gets killed, I want it to be the fault of another person, not a "thinking" machine.

The "thinking" portion is what scares me.  Yes, in some situations an automated system will outperform a human (ABS for example), but a self-driving car is dependent on sensors providing information to a computer, which then reacts according to a program with pre-established values.  I think we just saw the result of a situation the car wasn't prepared for.

---

When you get into the endzone, act like you've been there before.

Uber having this car on the road is like hiring a drunk driver for a taxi. There was enough space even in the visible realm for a human to at least slow, a car with lidar and radar should have seen her way before that.

Its coming out now that had UBER left the basic safety features in the volvo intact (the ones from the factory) the car would have likely stopped and prevented the accident.

They have been banned from testing in Arizona and Uber will no longer be testing in Ca (they are not going to renew their lincense to test after California DOT indicated they would investigate the arizona crash also). 

Uber messed up big on this one, in a situation they not only claimed the car could deal with, but do it better than a human, when in fact it did worse.

Have you seen the video?

That lady was crossing in the middle of the night, slow as molasses and it doesn't even look like she was looking in the direction of oncoming traffic.

Yes I watched it multiple times. This is a situation every self driving tech company claims they can handle with ease. Uber couldn't, despite thier claims to the contrary. Its negliance, they put a car out that they claimed could do something that it couldn't which resulted in a death. Thats a huge deal.

People will say she was jaywalking and thier right, but the bigger deal is Uber lying or being so incompetent that they couldn't handle a situation which the tech in the stock vehicle could have. It does not matter that the pedestrian was jay-walking, what matters is that someone was crossing the road and was a big obvious target and the uber mowed her down.

Uber released technology that was no where near ready and activly put the public in danger. Thats what this is about.

---

Yes, it's improvement, but it's Blaine Gabbert 2012 level improvement. - Pirkster

http://youtu.be/ouGM3NWpjxk The Home Hypnotist!

http://youtu.be/XQRFkn0Ly3A Media on the Brain Link!
 

Peyton must store oxygen in that forehead of his. No way I'd still be alive after all that choking.