(03-29-2018, 05:55 PM)HandsomeRob86 Wrote:

(03-28-2018, 03:07 PM)13Coronas Wrote: 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.

---