Reply to post: Re: "Fall Creators Update"

Re: "Fall Creators Update"

I am thinking precidence is more the least maneuverable rather than size,

That would also make sense :)

however where it comes to pedestrains then they are more likely to be damaged than say the driver which should be the main consideration.

One of the things I've tried to get through to some people with walking/riding and driving. If a truck fails to give way, and you could've avoided the crash, will it matter who had the right of way or how culpable the truck driver was? If a car hits you while you're riding, does it matter that they should've given the ROW/not been tailgating etc? You'll be lucky if you can walk home, but your vehicle will be towed at best. And even if their insurance pays out in full next week, you still have to get to work tomorrow.

I often base my assessment of risk and road-rules not on what the law says but on 'how much could it hurt". Even at low speed, a car hitting a person could hurt a lot. As the vulnerable party, if I wish to remain at my current state of pain, I must take care to avoid being in an accident even if I am completely innocent.

We have some very cold and wet weather here today (so much for the 'long hot summer' we were warned of just a week ago!), and I had to do some driving. A couple of instances where I had the ROW but I yeilded to others for the simple reason that under the conditions they may not have seen me, and worse they may be travelling too fast for the conditions. Doesn't matter to me if I had the ROW or they had great full-cover instant payout insurance, I'd still lose my car.

Not defending Uber, but I do say that we need to be responsible for our own safety and sometimes let someone else go even when we have the right (especially when on foot).

The intention should never have been for the vehicle controller to run people over and yet this was the manufacturers chosen behaviour

I don't think they chose it from a deliberate choice but from some bad thinking, ie trying to determine the class of object and forgetting about it's movement. I do get that identifying something as a car or chunk of roadside furniture changes the threat landscape somewhat (cars likely to move out, furniture likely to stay put but could hide a kid), but tracking whether or not something is moving is still very important. The movement track should take absolute precedence.

Don't get me wrong, I think someone at Uber should be held very accountable for this, preferably someone higher up but especially anyone who was given a warning that such programming could be a problem and opted to ignore the warning. Prison time should be a very real possibility especially for those who signed off on stopping the emergency braking. As far as I'm concerned, the first thing you teach newbies is how to stop a vehicle.

Yes people walking in front of you are annoying but the vechicle controller carries the onus to avoid collisions more that the pedestrian since the car.

I'm guessing you were going to say something about the level of damage the car can do - yes I agree. As a driver it is my responsibility to do my best to avoid harming others and I share some responsibility for protecting them from their mistakes - if I can see someone doing something stupid I don't barrel into them at high speed, I back off or even brake. Even if my assessment of their actions is wrong, better to slow and be wrong then not slow and be wrong.

That the AI was intentionally configured to ignore it's onus says IMHO that the manufacturer is responsible for the collision and should be prosecuted for murder i.e. malicious intent and afore thought resulting in death

I still come back to thinking there was some messed up actions/mindsets but they did it from what were the best intentions. OTOH, while writing that last sentence I did get a mental reminder of some of Uber's other past actions so maybe they were doing it from a straight-out trying to get to market quicker and were less concerned about the well-being of others. Certainly, putting a car on the road with some safety systems disabled and the human driver being given some extra distractions increased the risks to what, to my mind at least, was an unacceptable level except on a controlled training ground. I would not be too upset if Uber was sued into oblivion, and many among the top-level managers/CxOs etc having plenty of time to study the inside of a small cell.