who’d a thunk it???

I’m in the field now....

I’m certain you guys will dig up more info until I get home....

(03-19-2018 01:09 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  who’d a thunk it???

I’m in the field now....

I’m certain you guys will dig up more info until I get home....

Gotcha covered Stinky!

It was a cyclist and not a pedestrian

https://electrek.co/2018/03/19/uber-self...sh-police/

Quote:Local news in Tempe, Arizona are reporting a Uber self-driving prototype was involved in a fatal crash with a cyclist. Local police are currently investigating.

The accident reportedly occurred early this morning at the corner of Mill Avenue and Curry Road. According to Tempe Police, a woman with a bicycle was crossing the street at a cross walk when she was struck by the Uber self-driving prototype on autonomous mode with a Uber employee at the wheel.

She was taken to the hospital, but she later died from her injuries, according to ABC15.

The police are now investigating the accident and Uber said it was cooperating with the authorities.

Quote:The company has been highly criticized for their self-driving effort, which was kickstarted by their acquisition of Otto, which in turn led them to be sued by Google’s Waymo over the theft of the technology – a lawsuit that the companies recently settled after Uber paid $250 million to Waymo.

When first testing their cars in California, they had some issues with the authorities which led the California DMV to shut down Uber’s unlicensed self-driving car program in reaction to footage of a prototype running a red light in front of a pedestrian.

The company claimed that the vehicle was being driven by the engineer at the time it ran a red light, but other reports contradicted Uber’s statement.

It led to them moving most of their effort to Arizona, where one of their prototypes was quickly involved in an accident – though the police said Uber was not at fault.

And now this tragic fatal accident that is adding to Uber’s long list of problems with their self-driving vehicle program.

Uber should pay dearly.

This is uber bad!

Garbage company with a race to the bottom business model. They pay their drivers pennies, and are actively working to even cut that cost. A significant portion (I believe it's 35% or so) actually lose money after you figure in depreciation.

Sue them out of existence, we'll all be better off.

It will be interesting to see what actually happened. There was a driver at the wheel, which I believe is required with any such vehicle, but the accident still occurred. Was he not able to override the car or did something else go wrong?

(03-19-2018 01:18 PM)Kronke Wrote:  Garbage company with a race to the bottom business model. They pay their drivers pennies. A significant portion (I believe it's 35% or so) actually lose money after you figure in depreciation.

Sue them out of existence, we'll all be better off.

Interesting...isn't much of the current corporate business model in many facets to be more productive with less workers through automation?

This driverless car **** is so stupid.

(03-19-2018 01:22 PM)BuffaloTN Wrote:  This driverless car **** is so stupid.

I wouldn't go that far...it certainly needs to be looked into. I think most of us are pretty happy that we have pilot-less drones in our military, right?

The problem will always be, when faced with an impossible decision, which one do you choose? Do you hit the other car or the baby carriage?

Uber idiotic

(03-19-2018 01:22 PM)BuffaloTN Wrote:  This driverless car **** is so stupid.

But inevitable. They want trains of driverless trucks arriving just in time. $$ will overcome all concerns.



Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Tapatalk

They really should force those cars to be marked and signed so that people know that its a car in autonomous mode.

And I just love how we the people are the test subjects for the technology.

They just got I40 from Memphis to Nashville safe enough to drive again. (They installed those steel cable barriers which prevents 18 wheelers from running into oncoming traffic) I cant wait until I have to deal with an assload of autonomous 18 wheelers on the road.

Never want to see injuries or deaths, but a part of me is glad these death traps are being exposed now before the number of fatalities get out of control. Hopefully they never really ever see the road.

(03-19-2018 01:33 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  They really should force those cars to be marked and signed so that people know that its a car in autonomous mode.

And I just love how we the people are the test subjects for the technology.

They just got I40 from Memphis to Nashville safe enough to drive again. (They installed those steel cable barriers which prevents 18 wheelers from running into oncoming traffic) I cant wait until I have to deal with an assload of autonomous 18 wheelers on the road.

Sad thing is that they don't even do that. Hell, I've personally witnessed a car blow through one here in SC.

Dissapointing for this to happen, both for technology and certainly for that poor soul, killed by Skynet 1.0

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/19/techn...ality.html

Those steel cables don't work. Mostly they cause damage to cars that would be avoided from not tangling with them.

(03-19-2018 01:50 PM)Paul M Wrote:  Those steel cables don't work. Mostly they cause damage to cars that would be avoided from not tangling with them.

I wouldn't say that they don't work because I have seen plenty of times they have prevented a crossover. But they aren't anywhere near as foolproof as the designers and DOT likes to make them out to be, and simple physics will tell you that there's no way that they are going to stop most loaded tractor trailers simply because the mass and velocity of the truck is going to overcome a few poles usually driven in the ground without concrete.

(03-19-2018 01:54 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(03-19-2018 01:50 PM)Paul M Wrote:  Those steel cables don't work. Mostly they cause damage to cars that would be avoided from not tangling with them.

I wouldn't say that they don't work because I have seen plenty of times they have prevented a crossover. But they aren't anywhere near as foolproof as the designers and DOT likes to make them out to be, and simple physics will tell you that there's no way that they are going to stop most loaded tractor trailers simply because the mass and velocity of the truck is going to overcome a few poles usually driven in the ground without concrete.

Agree. I shouldn't have used the definitive "don't".

(03-19-2018 01:50 PM)Paul M Wrote:  Those steel cables don't work. Mostly they cause damage to cars that would be avoided from not tangling with them.

They're especially problematic up north with all the slide-offs due to ice and snow covered roads. Do nothing but tear up bumpers and side panels.

(03-19-2018 01:56 PM)Paul M Wrote:  

(03-19-2018 01:54 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(03-19-2018 01:50 PM)Paul M Wrote:  Those steel cables don't work. Mostly they cause damage to cars that would be avoided from not tangling with them.

I wouldn't say that they don't work because I have seen plenty of times they have prevented a crossover. But they aren't anywhere near as foolproof as the designers and DOT likes to make them out to be, and simple physics will tell you that there's no way that they are going to stop most loaded tractor trailers simply because the mass and velocity of the truck is going to overcome a few poles usually driven in the ground without concrete.

Agree. I shouldn't have used the definitive "don't".

And honestly I've never seen anything that works 100% of the time. We had a MVC one night where an F250 went clean through a concrete median barrier and head on into traffic.