Self driving Uber vehicle kills pedestrian, tests suspended

Summitric

SUPER COOL MOD & Supporting Vendor
Moderator
Joined
Oct 21, 2006
Messages
48,075
Reaction score
32,180
Location
Edmonton/Sherwood Park
Website
www.bumpertobumper.ca
[h=1]Self driving Uber vehicle kills pedestrian, tests suspended[/h]
Toronto is one of the cities where the ride-hailing company is testing autonomous vehicles Uber Technologies Inc. has suspended all of its self-driving vehicle testing – including a program in Toronto – after what is believed to be the first fatal pedestrian crash involving autonomous vehicles.Uber’s testing was halted after police in a Phoenix suburb said one of its self-driving vehicles struck and killed a pedestrian overnight Sunday.The vehicle was in autonomous mode with an operator behind the wheel when a woman walking outside of a crosswalk was hit, Tempe police Sgt. Ronald Elcock said.“The pedestrian was outside of the crosswalk, so it was midblock,” Elcock said. “And as soon as she walked into the lane of traffic, she was struck by the vehicle.”The woman died of her injuries at a hospital.The National Transportation Safety Board, which makes recommendations for preventing crashes, and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, which can enact regulations, sent investigators.“Some incredibly sad news out of Arizona,” said Uber CEO Dara Khosrowshahi on Twitter.“We’re thinking of the victim’s family as we work with local law enforcement to understand what happened.”The testing has been going on for months in Toronto, the Phoenix area, Pittsburgh and San Francisco as automakers and technology companies compete to be the first with the technology.
[h=3]“The pedestrian was outside of the crosswalk, so it was midblock. And as soon as she walked into the lane of traffic, she was struck by the vehicle.”[/h]— Tempe police Sgt. Ronald Elcock
Uber Canada said Monday in an email that two of its vehicles are being tested in Toronto but they have not been picking up passengers.It said testing has been conducted since last fall, using software that was studied in simulation and on the test track before being deployed to the road.But the fatality isn’t likely to derail the driverless vehicle industry because it is at such an early stage in its development, said Ross McKenzie, managing director at the University of Waterloo Centre for Automotive Research.“I’m shocked. It’s very, very disappointing,” he said.“It’s shocking because it’s something we aspire to never have happen. The whole purpose of autonomous driving is to make the operation of vehicles safer because you take out of equation the random, unpredictable behaviour of human operators, like speeding to get through an amber light or taking your eyes off the road to pick up a coffee cup.”He added the incident will serve to further focus the industry on safety.

[h=5]Read more:[/h]

The Waterloo research centre has a four-car fleet of autonomous car it is currently testing. McKenzie said most of the testing takes place on a closed track but the first tests on a public road took place last year.More on-road testing is scheduled for this year and he said the incident has not resulted in any immediate change to that schedule.Canada has been slow to embrace driverless vehicles but some advances have been made.In January, Suncor Energy Inc. announced it would go ahead with a project to deploy driverless ore-hauling trucks at its remote oilsands mines in northern Alberta to replace the ones humans operate.The initiative, which follows years of testing, is expected to eliminate about 400 jobs. The Calgary-based company plans to build a 150-truck fleet of 400-tonne capacity Komatsu trucks over the next six years.The public’s image of the vehicles will be defined by stories like the crash in Tempe, said Bryant Walker Smith, a University of South Carolina law professor who studies self-driving vehicles. It may turn out that there was nothing either the vehicle or its human backup could have done to avoid the crash, he said.Either way, the fatality could hurt the technology’s image and lead to a push for more regulations at the state and federal levels, Smith said.Autonomous vehicles with laser, radar and camera sensors and sophisticated computers have been billed as the way to reduce the more than 40,000 traffic deaths a year in the U.S. alone. Ninety-four per cent of crashes are caused by human error, the government says.Self-driving vehicles don’t drive drunk, don’t get sleepy and aren’t easily distracted. But they do have faults.“We should be concerned about automated driving,” Smith said. “We should be terrified about human driving.”Peter Kurdock, director of regulatory affairs for Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety in Washington, said the group sent a letter Monday to Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao saying it is concerned about a lack of action and oversight by the department as autonomous vehicles are developed. That letter was planned before the crash.Kurdock said the deadly accident should serve as a “startling reminder” to members of Congress that they need to “think through all the issues to put together the best bill they can to hopefully prevent more of these tragedies from occurring.”
 

Iron Horse Racing

Active VIP Member
Joined
Dec 23, 2008
Messages
1,499
Reaction score
1,514
Location
Sherwood Park, ALberta
Lots of people talking how
autonomous
vehicles are the future....as someone that enjoys driving I just don't see it....and this was predictable, as will the next and the next, they'll get chalked up in the acceptable losses column....

On the other hand I can think of lots of drivers that shouldn't be on the roads that this would be better then them driving....

Now where's my Jetsons flying car....
 

LBZ

Active VIP Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2010
Messages
3,068
Reaction score
3,651
Location
Central Alberta
Well 2 things I see, one being the pedestrian probably walked out from between cars so the vehicle driverless or not may have not been able to stop depending on what side of the road they came from and two this is the future and I believe it will happen. Technology just needs to advance a bit more and more road sensors installed to aid the vehicles.
 

whoDEANie

Active VIP Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2009
Messages
4,633
Reaction score
8,479
Location
Edmonton
I agree with LBZ in that this will be the future - it's pretty much impossible to refute. However, I since working as a software developer for more than a decade, I now cannot bring myself to trust software of any kind. I'm even wary of bugs in simpler devices like my alarm clock.
 

freeflorider

Active VIP Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2011
Messages
2,804
Reaction score
8,750
Location
West koots
I sure most of you will concur, growing up I was told to look before crossing the street... look one way then another and again. Retards somehow just assume they have the right a way to walk where ever they please. Stupid is what stupid dose. driverless or not PEOPLE wake up and be responsible for your actions, your crossing a road with 2-4ton steel objects are speed around.
 

RGM

Active VIP Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2009
Messages
1,773
Reaction score
3,878
Location
Pemberton
I sure most of you will concur, growing up I was told to look before crossing the street... look one way then another and again. Retards somehow just assume they have the right a way to walk where ever they please. Stupid is what stupid dose. driverless or not PEOPLE wake up and be responsible for your actions, your crossing a road with 2-4ton steel objects are speed around.

Yup saw one lady push a cross walking button and didn't even look to see if everyone stopped. A few minutes previous I saw a car blow through a crosswalk with lights flashing.
 

LBZ

Active VIP Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2010
Messages
3,068
Reaction score
3,651
Location
Central Alberta
Outside of a crosswalk they don't. However I heard a rumour in some places if there is a sidewalk on both sides of the street they don't need a crosswalk to cross. Not sure how valid that is though.
 

crashidy

Active VIP Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2011
Messages
380
Reaction score
588
Location
canmore, alberta
I agree with LBZ in that this will be the future - it's pretty much impossible to refute. However, I since working as a software developer for more than a decade, I now cannot bring myself to trust software of any kind. I'm even wary of bugs in simpler devices like my alarm clock.
This, I'm sure i set my alarm properly last night. Even told me 5hrs and 17 min before coming on. Saved it and i woke up in my own luckily today and it was at for next Wednesday... But yes i love driving and will never go autonomous.
 

Iron Horse Racing

Active VIP Member
Joined
Dec 23, 2008
Messages
1,499
Reaction score
1,514
Location
Sherwood Park, ALberta
Outside of a crosswalk they don't. However I heard a rumour in some places if there is a sidewalk on both sides of the street they don't need a crosswalk to cross. Not sure how valid that is though.

In the province of Alberta, you can be charged with failing to yield to a pedestrian if the fall out of the sky in front of you, I know for a fact first hand....insurance company and a bank of lawyers couldn't stop the stupidity....
 

Iron Horse Racing

Active VIP Member
Joined
Dec 23, 2008
Messages
1,499
Reaction score
1,514
Location
Sherwood Park, ALberta
I agree with LBZ in that this will be the future - it's pretty much impossible to refute. However, I since working as a software developer for more than a decade, I now cannot bring myself to trust software of any kind. I'm even wary of bugs in simpler devices like my alarm clock.

I hope your wrong, I love tech, and gadgets but unless you can guarantee that it cant be hacked or fail, I'll take my chances doing my own driving....maybe someday I'll loose the fun/thrill of driving, but I don't see that happening...... "Road Trip" still gets my juices going...oh and yes I've been told I make a terrible passenger....
 

eclipse1966

Active VIP Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2010
Messages
4,599
Reaction score
7,824
Location
Armstrong BC
not to derail the subject but, apparently that is a woman in that pic :eek:

Crossing a dark highway at night you are for sure taking your life in your hands. My question would be isn't the avoidance system supposed to pick that kind of stuff up.
 

X-it

Active VIP Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2007
Messages
7,789
Reaction score
17,781
Location
Prince George
Not sure why but it used to be look both ways before crossing the road, now it is just head down and cross without looking...absolute stupidity. We need to retrain people to go back to look both ways before crossing.
 

Iron Horse Racing

Active VIP Member
Joined
Dec 23, 2008
Messages
1,499
Reaction score
1,514
Location
Sherwood Park, ALberta
After looking at the video a couple times, I still think this tech isn't anywhere near ready, I do think a driver that is alert and paying attention (excludes a lot I know) would have seen her coming and reacted...I travel in deer country every day and have avoided them (knock on wood) so far, have had two family vehicles make an attempt to avoid and weren't successful, but they tried, in this video the
autonomous
car doesn't appear to even make an attempt....I get the stupidity of the pedestrian, but if someone has a cure for it other than running them all over, I'm all ears....there's always going to be something jumping in front of you, a object from another vehicle, animals, giant bolder from between the duals on a gravel truck ( that fun, damn near $hit myself ) I'd rather be in control then rely on software that someone sitting at a desk made...
 
Top Bottom