Remember the Uber self-driving car that killed a woman crossing the street?

FluffyKittenofTindalos wrote:

FluffyKittenofTindalos wrote:

Yes, yes, I get that you are quite right-wing  and hence like to pretend race and wealth are not factors in social issues.  That’s obvious. 

 

It’s also obvious you have no idea what an analogy is.  It has to have a partial similarity that is relevant to the point under discussion.  Yours does not.

You may disagree with the dictionary definition but that makes you wrong not the dictionary.

I’m not even going to bother with your student union identity politics nonsense.

AlsoSomniloquism wrote:

hawkinspeter wrote:

She may have been drunk or suffering from mental issues or just simply pre-occupied with whatever was going on in her life. She wasn’t threatening or violent and just simply wanted to get across the road. Maybe she would have been sorry for causing a few seconds of inconvenience to a driver.

Did you have the same understanding for the Kim Briggs in the Alliston case? Or the ped knocked down on  the crossing who then sued the cyclist? Because when you look at what happened in all of these cases, they are all pedestrians crossing the road and getting hit by a vehicle that was on the road. Or where you more on the side of the cyclist on these, and apportioning some fault for the incident on the pedestrian to some extent?

That seems a weak  kind of argument, as it ignores what was actually said about those cases. 

Mungecrundle wrote:

Mungecrundle wrote:

Argus Tuft wrote:

Without autonomous ride-share vehicles,Uber is in deep trouble.They’ve convinced legislators in one maverick state to relax the rules enough to allow a  limited experiment. Carmakers are backing away from this as fast as they can. The public has lost interest. Look up “What happened to autonomous cars” on your search engine of choice.

Think of all the better,more useful ideas that have proved futile-Supersonic passenger aircraft,Maglev trains,flying cars-it’s a long,long list.I may be wrong but I’d be ready to bet that these cars will be the next addition.

I guess widespread takeup of autonomous vehicles will create something of an issue for driving instructors…

Not quite sure if that’s intended as a real point or is just a throwaway  jokey comment.

But I can’t believe that’s a job that anyone is going to call for a national-strike to preserve.  I doubt anybody will care about that issue, not even driving-instructors.

And I agree with Argus above.  There are as many over-hyped ‘next big things’ that didn’t pan out in tech as there are in rock music.  I think there’s a fair chance self-driving cars will be “the Stone Roses second album” of technology.

Maybe you’ll get automated lorry convoys on US highways or some motorways.  I’m not holding my breath when it comes to real urban transport.

Also, what bothers me is the hidden agenda strongly alluded to in this sort of disengenuous article – from someone who is a proponant of AI, yet, significantly, admits we’ll have to rearrange ourselves for its convienience, rather than the reverse.  Funny how infrastucure changes are a huge stumbling block if it’s for bicycles, but apparently can be easily achieved if it suits the commercial interests behind AVs.

https://www.wired.com/2016/03/self-driving-cars-wont-work-change-roads-attitudes/

I’m not a fan of Uber as a

I’m not a fan of Uber as a company and this kind of P.R. doesn’t help: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2019/11/11/uber_ceo_murder_mistake/

Is Uber CEO Dara Khosrowshahi a psychopath? Well, let’s take a look at the main traits that the most respected psychopath test – the revised Psychopathic Personality Inventory – looks for:

• Machiavellian egocentricity – best described as a lack of empathy and sense of detachment from others
• Social Potency: The ability to charm and influence others
• Coldheartedness: A distinct lack of emotion, guilt, or regard for others’ feelings
• Carefree nonplanfulness: Difficulty in planning ahead and considering the consequences of one’s actions
• Fearlessness: An eagerness for risk-seeking behaviors, as well as a lack of the fear that normally goes with them
• Blame externalization: Inability to take responsibility for one’s actions, instead blaming others or rationalizing one’s behavior
• Impulsive nonconformity: A disregard for social norms and culturally acceptable behaviors
• Stress immunity: A lack of typical marked reactions to traumatic or otherwise stress-inducing events

So how does responding to a question about the gruesome murder of a journalist by calling it a mistake and then equating that mistake to another mistake in which your company killed someone because you have failed to consider an obvious component of driving on roads in your self-driving car program, and then insisting that you be forgiven, come in that listing?

Bmblbzzz wrote:

Bmblbzzz wrote:

That the softare had no way of recognizing her as a person crossing the road because she wasn’t at a designated pedestrian crossing shows it’s not simply a software failure, it’s a failure of consideration on the part of Uber. 

This actually ties back well to what someone was saying earlier about level 4 vs level 5 autonomy. The system has to be fully independent of human intervention, because whether it is or not drivers will behave as though it is. They aren’t going to be paying attention just in case the system asks for their help, and to be honest that makes sense, because what is the point of a self driving car that you have to drive? It’s all or nothing, which is why it needs incredibly rigorous testing, not this half arsing from uber.

That the softare had no way

That the softare had no way of recognizing her as a person crossing the road because she wasn’t at a designated pedestrian crossing shows it’s not simply a software failure, it’s a failure of consideration on the part of Uber. 

Without autonomous ride-share

Without autonomous ride-share vehicles,Uber is in deep trouble.They’ve convinced legislators in one maverick state to relax the rules enough to allow a  limited experiment. Carmakers are backing away from this as fast as they can. The public has lost interest. Look up “What happened to autonomous cars” on your search engine of choice.

Think of all the better,more useful ideas that have proved futile-Supersonic passenger aircraft,Maglev trains,flying cars-it’s a long,long list.I may be wrong but I’d be ready to bet that these cars will be the next addition.

Rich_cb wrote:

Rich_cb wrote:

Argus Tuft wrote:

Just to shift the subject a little,do you see these cars as being single occupant vehicles,or will they pick up passengers along the way?

I think we’ll see a mix, smaller single occupancy vehicles will have a place but most cars will probably be roughly the size of cars now but split into 4 dividable sections, if you’re travelling as a group the divisions will be open, if you’re travelling individually your section will be private. You’ll be able to pay more to go straight to your destination without any stops, slightly less to stop once en route, less again to stop twice etc. You could even pre book the pick ups so you can share lifts too and from work etc. You didn’t answer my previous question, do you think level 5 is necessary? I think level 4 will deliver almost all of the benefits far earlier, I’m not sure level 5 will ever be needed.

If it needs a driver it’s not autonomous.The value only begins when you can send a vehicle to pick up a child or your mum. I’d need to be able to sleep aboard.To me,being “on call” would diminish the travel experience to the point of being an interesting novelty-not a life-changing invention.

So anything less than level 5 is a gimmick.I’m out.