- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Tubeless valves
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
Self-driving car caught on camera running red light (YouTube still)Video: Self-driving Uber caught running red light; company blames human error
A trial run of Uber self-driving taxis has been shelved in California after one of the vehicles was filmed running a red light on the first day of the test program.
In a move Uber attributed to ‘human error’, the self-driving Volvo, one of a fleet rolled out across the city on Wednesday morning, was filmed heading straight through a red light in San Francisco around four seconds after the light went red, and as a pedestrian had begun to cross the road.
The company has been threatened with legal action unless it stops testing the vehicles on California’s streets, but Uber argues that its vehicles still have a person in the vehicle monitoring them, so the same licensing rules should apply to cars without someone at the wheel.
In a statement to the Huffington Post, Uber said the incident was a human mistake, rather than a technical one. “This incident was due to human error,” the spokesperson said. “This is why we believe so much in making the roads safer by building self-driving Ubers. This vehicle was ... not carrying customers. The driver involved has been suspended while we continue to investigate.”
In a letter to Uber, California’s Department of Motor Vehicles ordered the company to stop testing until it had obtained a permit for operating the vehicles, threatening legal action.
Mercedes-Benz chooses drivers in self-driving car safety debate
The letter read: “It is illegal for the company to operate its self-driving vehicles on public roads until it receives on autonomous vehicle testing permit.”
“If Uber does not confirm immediately that it will stop its launch and seek a testing permit, DMV will initiate legal action.”
Uber’s Anthony Levandowski contested the notion the self-driving cars need a special permit to operate on roads. He wrote in a blog post: “The rules apply to cars that can drive without someone controlling or monitoring them. For us, it’s still early days and our cars are not yet ready to drive without a person monitoring them.
How Google’s self-driving car shares the road with cyclists
“But there is a more fundamental point—how and when companies should be able to engineer and operate self-driving technology. We have seen different approaches to this question. Most states see the potential benefits, especially when it comes to road safety. And several cities and states have recognized that complex rules and requirements could have the unintended consequence of slowing innovation.
“Pittsburgh, Arizona, Nevada and Florida in particular have been leaders in this way, and by doing so have made clear that they are pro technology. Our hope is that California, our home state and a leader in much of the world’s dynamism, will take a similar view.”
Latest Comments
- mdavidford 7 hours 25 min ago
You can't have more than 100% of a finite thing, but you can have an increase of more than 100% in a thing that's not finite. It's just that in...
- David9694 8 hours 12 min ago
One Stop in Evesham ram raided on Christmas Day by thieves https://www.worcesternews.co.uk/news/24821392.one-stop-evesham-ram-raide...
- Spangly Shiny 11 hours 28 min ago
Bullseye!
- chrisonabike 12 hours 20 min ago
Shurely "we have to build more housing! But developers won't build 'affordable housing'. And where can we find land anyway (lots of nimbys)?"...
- RoubaixCube 12 hours 29 min ago
Its an Garmin'less Garmin for a lot less Garmin money.
- hawkinspeter 17 hours 1 min ago
I've noticed previously that it can take a couple of hours for the post to show up in the forum posts section, but if it's not appearing at all,...
- wtjs 17 hours 9 min ago
Unable to trust it... My solution to this problem began a few years ago- just get another one when they're cheap and light enough
- Dnnnnnn 1 day 8 hours ago
The CUK members' own stories about their travels in the mag make me wonder whether road.cc could built up a bank of readers' favourite routes? It...
- Hirsute 1 day 10 hours ago
There is no way on that terrain the wheels would clog up.
- TempleOrion 1 day 11 hours ago
No. But do you think Trump is? 🤡💩🤣
Add new comment
14 comments
I don't know California law of course but I would have thought that something/someone had to be in full control of the vehicle at all times. If that's not the comptuer than presumably it should be the human in which case he'd better have had his hands on the wheel at all times and not distracted with clipboards and the like...
If I had a cart hen it wouldn't be ready to drive without being monitored either. I doubt that means they would let me send that down the road without actually keeping hold.
Well, cart hens do need tight reins.
That shouldn't be classed as 'human error' though surely, it's blatant law breaking. What is the point of safe technology that then turns them back into killing machines?
Shouldn't Calafornia have banned people feom cars for this rather than self drives from the road. Or next time a human controlled car is filmed doing the same ban all of them!
You'd ha e thought Uber would release much more detail about the incident as the story here just suggests something failed...
The biggest threat on the road to cyclists are drivers that are either distracted, under the influence, or ignorant and/or beliggerant of traffic laws. I'd rather take my chances with a self-driving car than many drivers on the road.
Human in-car drivers cause 8 deaths per day in California.
When will California's DMV bring that failed experiment to a halt?
So Uber are saying that the car started slowing for the red and the driver overrode this with their heavy (if taxi driver, probably obese) right foot?
All next to, what appears to be a clearly marked police vehicle.
Something is very wrong here.
So, when we have self driving cars (which work) all over the place. Will we just need a red light on a pole attached to the back of our bikes to stop them all?
Sounds good...
- "funny that California want it off the road when it was a person that screwed up"
I want proof before I believe that. I wouldn't trust any of these tax dodging, low paying, only out to get themselves rich companies.
Can't say I'll be sad to see the back of taxis driven by utter twats when this finally comes over this side of the pond.
There'll be a few less confrontation videos on Road.cc but overall it'll be worth it.
I remember years ago one shot out of a right hand junction too early and tagged the rear of my car. He claimed it wasn't his fault as he had an MP in the back to back him up! It was back in the days of those black girders for bumpers so no real damage done and I left it. I was also 18 so thought it was more trouble than it was worth. These days I'd have not let it go.
Not sure about that, there will likely still be bugs where the software misreads what someone is about to do, but it will be a more one sided argument under the rider spots there is no one in the driver's seat.
I'm with you on this one. Knocked my bike twice by taxis pulling out of a side road.
Seems Uber's response ties in with their usual "laws and regulations don't apply to us" stance.
depends what the actual rules says, regardless of its intention. - if it says, as uber suggests, its for vehicles that are not being monitored then fine.
Regardless funny that California want it off the road when it was a person that screwed up ay.
They don't call themselves "Uber" for nothing .