# Police have released the first video from inside the Uber self-driving car that killed a pedestrian



## jocker12 (May 11, 2017)

*Warning: This video shows a woman about to be hit by a car - and a driver about to hit someone on the road. Viewer discretion is advised*

https://www.recode.net/2018/3/21/17149428/uber-self-driving-fatal-accident-video-tempe-arizona


----------



## jocker12 (May 11, 2017)

Clear system failure, inattentive back up human monitor, Uber robot clearly at fault. A human driver would have pulled left aiming for the gap behind the pedestrian while the pedestrian was closing the right side of the road.


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

jocker12 said:


> Clear system failure, inattentive back up human monitor, Uber robot clearly at fault. A human driver would have pulled left aiming for the gap behind the pedestrian while the pedestrian was closing the right side of the road.


Only 2 feet of fender at most struck that woman.
So close to being alive.
24 INCHES.

NARROWER THAN HER COFFIN !

A HUMAN DRIVER WOULD HAVE GIVEN THAT SPACE !


----------



## IERide (Jul 1, 2016)

A human driver, paying attention would have seen her..

OTOH, who the ‘F walks right in front of a moving vehicle? Seems to be Darwinism at work..


----------



## iheartuber (Oct 31, 2015)

I saw the video. I see her on the video at 2 sec, she gets hit at 6 sec. in real life I probably would have seen her even before that. The human eye requires much less light to see stuff than a video camera does.

4 (or more) seconds are more than enough to avoid hurting her


----------



## Jesusdrivesuber (Jan 5, 2017)

In the SDC's defense, it was dark and it couldn't see.

LOL.


----------



## jocker12 (May 11, 2017)

iheartuber said:


> I saw the video. I see her on the video at 2 sec, she gets hit at 6 sec. in real life I probably would have seen her even before that. The human eye requires much less light to see stuff than a video camera does.
> 
> 4 (or more) seconds are more than enough to avoid hurting her


I am afraid all the self driving trucks uber has on the road, run the same software. That is a bigger problem....


----------



## iheartuber (Oct 31, 2015)

jocker12 said:


> I am afraid all the self driving trucks uber has on the road, run the same software. That is a bigger problem....


Luckily for Uber trucks run on highways and no one crosses a highway but yeah I see your point


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

IERide said:


> A human driver, paying attention would have seen her..
> 
> OTOH, who the 'F walks right in front of a moving vehicle? Seems to be Darwinism at work..


Creating Robots to Eliminate man ?

Darwinism ?

Not bright of the endorsers for sure.


----------



## Gung-Ho (Jun 2, 2015)

My question is did the car stop inself after hitting the woman or did the human driver stop.

If there were NO human driver would the car have stopped if the woman was no longer in the path of the vehicle after being hit.

If a NO human driver sdc hits a raccoon does it stop or continue driving.

If the NO human sdc just clips a pedestrian does it stop to do a wellness check if it doesn’t sense any obstructions in it’s way.

What I’m getting at is these things have the potential to be hit and run homicidal maniac machines.

Do they value human life the same as wild life?

Will they stop after striking a raccoon/dog/cat/possum/skunk/squirrel/other little creatures to attend to their medical needs.

How does a human exchange insurance papers with a robot?

Question Questions Questions.


----------



## jocker12 (May 11, 2017)

iheartuber said:


> Luckily for Uber trucks run on highways and no one crosses a highway but yeah I see your point


And another very important detail.

Because the companies are "testing" their robots on the streets and testing could mean software adjustments, I want all the companies to make public every single software modification that is done and the reason for it, because everybody would be able to understand how advanced or not their product is.


----------



## Gung-Ho (Jun 2, 2015)

Damn. 

I just watched the driver cam from the video. HE WASN’T PAYING ATTENTION!


----------



## RamzFanz (Jan 31, 2015)

iheartuber said:


> I saw the video. I see her on the video at 2 sec, she gets hit at 6 sec. in real life I probably would have seen her even before that. The human eye requires much less light to see stuff than a video camera does.
> 
> 4 (or more) seconds are more than enough to avoid hurting her


This is simply untrue. A properly designed and coded SDC system with infrared would easily detect this person long before a human would in the dark.

It appears from the video two humans failed in this accident. That's to be expected. The fact that the car also failed speaks volumes about the state of Uber's talentless SDC effort.


----------



## iheartuber (Oct 31, 2015)

RamzFanz said:


> A properly designed and coded SDC system with infrared would easily detect this person long before a human would in the dark.


But it didn't though.....


----------



## RamzFanz (Jan 31, 2015)

iheartuber said:


> But it didn't though.....


Because Uber's system is amateurish and flawed. This isn't news.


----------



## iheartuber (Oct 31, 2015)

RamzFanz said:


> Because Uber's system is amateurish and flawed. This isn't news.


So you mean it's not a case where any SDC system could fail it's just that the particular syste at uber is sub-standard because uber in general is sub-standard? That's your argument?

Riiiiiiiight


----------



## RamzFanz (Jan 31, 2015)

iheartuber said:


> So you mean it's not a case where any SDC system could fail it's just that the particular syste at uber is sub-standard because uber in general is sub-standard? That's your argument?
> 
> Riiiiiiiight


Yes. And I've pointed it out many times over the years.

I will not be surprised if Uber never revives their program. It was never going to succeed.

Even the most amateurish system should have detected that woman and reacted. That's how bad Uber's is.


----------



## iheartuber (Oct 31, 2015)

RamzFanz said:


> Yes. And I've pointed it out many times over the years.
> 
> I will not be surprised if Uber never revives their program. It was never going to succeed.
> 
> Even the most amateurish system should have detected that woman and reacted. That's how bad Uber's is.


I saw the woman 4 seconds before impact. That's plenty of time to stop, slow down, swerve, or slam on the brakes going at 38 mph.

The car did not do that.

Therefore, the system is to blame.

The human in the car was not paying attention so he (she?) is also to blame. But the biggest thing to not only acknowledge but absolutely to fix is that this was NOT SUPPOSED TO HAPPEN. The system was supposed to detect the person on the road.

If you think this glitch in the system is only happening with Uber's SDCs and all other SDC companies are "top shelf" all I can say is: I sure hope you're right. Because if not, more people will die.


----------



## jocker12 (May 11, 2017)

iheartuber said:


> I saw the woman 4 seconds before impact. That's plenty of time to stop, slow down, swerve, or slam on the brakes going at 38 mph.
> 
> The car did not do that.
> 
> ...


The guy is in complete denial and I am concerned for his family members that live inside the same house with him.

The robot was advertised as not killing pedestrians proof system but clearly fails to apply breaks or change direction to avoid a fatal collision, and his comment is - "this is not news".

All the companies involved in this scheme and their software have the same flaws, and he is like "no" ..... "lalalalala"....

We need his location to send an ambulance to help him.


----------

