Autonomous cars? I think not
- bychosis
- Posts: 7250
- Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2012 1:10 pm
- Location: Lake Macquarie
Re: Autonomous cars? I think not
Postby bychosis » Fri May 25, 2018 2:18 pm
-
- Posts: 631
- Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2018 1:42 pm
Re: Autonomous cars? I think not
Postby Jmuzz » Fri May 25, 2018 2:53 pm
Depends on driver responsibilities.MichaelB wrote:Oh dear. Think Uber may be in a bit of poo.
The reports description is that the car was not an autonomous model, it is just an advanced cruise control which can follow a mapped route.
It doesn't clarify whether the car even supports stopping for lights or can overtake slower vehicles.
If that is the case then the driver is still the driver and is supposed to be giving full attention not playing with phone.
It will depend on what instructions were provided to the driver, were they made aware that it is only lane following cruise control or did they genuinely think it was a full automatic robot?
- mikesbytes
- Super Mod
- Posts: 22160
- Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:42 pm
- Location: Tempe, Sydney
- Contact:
Re: Autonomous cars? I think not
Postby mikesbytes » Fri May 25, 2018 3:56 pm
- Strawburger
- Posts: 1729
- Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 12:19 pm
- Location: Dulwich Hill, Sydney
Re: Autonomous cars? I think not
Postby Strawburger » Fri May 25, 2018 8:49 pm
-
- Posts: 631
- Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2018 1:42 pm
Re: Autonomous cars? I think not
Postby Jmuzz » Fri May 25, 2018 9:27 pm
Perhaps it gets sent crazy by the self drive radar, or vice versa.bychosis wrote:Out of all the things to disable, why was the emergency braking system disabled?
Or perhaps related to driver not holding steering wheel so an emergency brake could cause the steering to serve, or drivers hand to hit wheel while trying to grab it during hard braking, causing swerve into another worse object or to roll.
- London Boy
- Posts: 818
- Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2010 3:43 pm
Re: Autonomous cars? I think not
Postby London Boy » Fri May 25, 2018 11:40 pm
Seemingly that was a safety measure. Leave the braking to the human rather than risk a vehicle that brakes unnecessarily and causes cars behind to crash. Flawed logic I know, though I do get the idea that a vehicle should be predictable to other road users. The human factor was the cause, not the technology per se, and that includes the person killed who was loaded up with meth and cannabis at the time.bychosis wrote:Out of all the things to disable, why was the emergency braking system disabled? Worried about whiplash for he 'driver' when teh emergency braking system kicks in and the driver is looking at their phone in their lap?
- Ross
- Posts: 5742
- Joined: Sat Nov 07, 2009 8:53 pm
Re: Autonomous cars? I think not
Postby Ross » Sat May 26, 2018 7:11 am
I find it quite interesting that in The Canberra Times/Bloomberg link it says that the family of the victim have already settled a compensation claim with Uber. This seems extraordinary fast, especially as the crash report has only just been released. Compensation cases (in Australia, maybe USA is different?) often take years to settle.London Boy wrote: and that includes the person killed who was loaded up with meth and cannabis at the time.
- Ross
- Posts: 5742
- Joined: Sat Nov 07, 2009 8:53 pm
Re: Autonomous cars? I think not
Postby Ross » Sat May 26, 2018 7:21 am
Often there are signs out a km or so ahead of roadworks warning/alerting motorists of roadworks ahead, how will autonomous cars deal with this as they aren't able to read (it could be argued no differently to motorists who ignore/don't see them because of mobile phone use/other distraction...).
Will each traffic ccone require an embeded chip so te austonomous vehicle recognises what it is? Will the temporary speed limit signs also need an ebedded chip so the car knows to drive at 40km/h instead of 100km/h? What about the stop/go sign?
-
- Posts: 9810
- Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:48 am
Re: Autonomous cars? I think not
Postby human909 » Sat May 26, 2018 8:20 am
This wasn't a 'compensation' case in a court of law. This was a contract agreed to by two parties. Thus it can be very quick. Contracts can take under 10 seconds to agree upon form and complete in fact you do this almost every day. More comprehensive ones just takes two parties and their lawyers to agree and do their due diligence on the terms and it is done.Ross wrote:I find it quite interesting that in The Canberra Times/Bloomberg link it says that the family of the victim have already settled a compensation claim with Uber.
Uber played smart. Better to settle compensation BEFORE the crash report is complete if you don't think it is going to come out in your favour.
Ross wrote:This seems extraordinary fast, especially as the crash report has only just been released. Compensation cases (in Australia, maybe USA is different?) often take years to settle.
Uber would have seen writing on the wall, said hey here is $2million dollars (or whatever) for you loss accept it in the next 3 weeks or the offer is gone.
-
- Posts: 1021
- Joined: Sun Nov 10, 2013 8:37 am
Re: Autonomous cars? I think not
Postby zebee » Sat May 26, 2018 9:01 am
Braking was disabled because it was unreliable - kept coming on when they didn't want it to. But they did not have any warning to the driver that the car detected something that it should brake for.
Driver was not looking at phone, driver was looking at the car interface. Not clear if they were doing the logging and reporting they were required to do or looking at the interface because they were bored.
Shifts were 8+ hours with almost no breaks. Usually on the same loop of driving. Which is not really going to make the human involved able to manage a sudden major change. Especially at night.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... idn-t-stop
-
- Posts: 631
- Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2018 1:42 pm
Re: Autonomous cars? I think not
Postby Jmuzz » Sat May 26, 2018 9:14 am
Google was always going to settle out of court as quickly as possible. It is nothing to them to throw millions at it to eliminate the family causing a scene.Ross wrote: I find it quite interesting that in The Canberra Times/Bloomberg link it says that the family of the victim have already settled a compensation claim with Uber. This seems extraordinary fast, especially as the crash report has only just been released. Compensation cases (in Australia, maybe USA is different?) often take years to settle.
Settlement would include clauses that family never talk to the media or make any statement blaming anyone.
- Alex Simmons/RST
- Expert
- Posts: 4997
- Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 3:51 pm
- Contact:
Re: Autonomous cars? I think not
Postby Alex Simmons/RST » Sat May 26, 2018 12:24 pm
Only if they go to court (believe me, I know). Compensation can be privately agreed between parties in a matter of minutes.Ross wrote:I find it quite interesting that in The Canberra Times/Bloomberg link it says that the family of the victim have already settled a compensation claim with Uber. This seems extraordinary fast, especially as the crash report has only just been released. Compensation cases (in Australia, maybe USA is different?) often take years to settle.London Boy wrote: and that includes the person killed who was loaded up with meth and cannabis at the time.
- Alex Simmons/RST
- Expert
- Posts: 4997
- Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 3:51 pm
- Contact:
Re: Autonomous cars? I think not
Postby Alex Simmons/RST » Sat May 26, 2018 12:25 pm
You mean Uber, not Google.Jmuzz wrote:Google was always going to settle out of court as quickly as possible. It is nothing to them to throw millions at it to eliminate the family causing a scene.Ross wrote: I find it quite interesting that in The Canberra Times/Bloomberg link it says that the family of the victim have already settled a compensation claim with Uber. This seems extraordinary fast, especially as the crash report has only just been released. Compensation cases (in Australia, maybe USA is different?) often take years to settle.
Settlement would include clauses that family never talk to the media or make any statement blaming anyone.
- Strawburger
- Posts: 1729
- Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 12:19 pm
- Location: Dulwich Hill, Sydney
Re: Autonomous cars? I think not
Postby Strawburger » Sun May 27, 2018 8:29 pm
Additional measures to ensure the vehicle will be able to read what it needs to. It would just be a modification to the traffic management processRoss wrote:Not sure how autonomous cars will react around roadworks where there are just plastic cones set out to mark the "road" and a roadworker with a "lollipop" stop/go sign and a reduced speed limit? The traffic cones are often just lazily set out and not really in a tight or symetrical configuration.
Often there are signs out a km or so ahead of roadworks warning/alerting motorists of roadworks ahead, how will autonomous cars deal with this as they aren't able to read (it could be argued no differently to motorists who ignore/don't see them because of mobile phone use/other distraction...).
Will each traffic ccone require an embeded chip so te austonomous vehicle recognises what it is? Will the temporary speed limit signs also need an ebedded chip so the car knows to drive at 40km/h instead of 100km/h? What about the stop/go sign?
- biker jk
- Posts: 7001
- Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 6:18 pm
- Location: Sydney
Re: Autonomous cars? I think not
Postby biker jk » Fri Jun 22, 2018 7:30 pm
The "driver" was indeed looking at her phone (was watching The Voice) and may now be charged with vehicle manslaughter. Uber policy prohibited the use of mobile phones by the safety drivers.zebee wrote:Some more info has surfaced.
Braking was disabled because it was unreliable - kept coming on when they didn't want it to. But they did not have any warning to the driver that the car detected something that it should brake for.
Driver was not looking at phone, driver was looking at the car interface. Not clear if they were doing the logging and reporting they were required to do or looking at the interface because they were bored.
Shifts were 8+ hours with almost no breaks. Usually on the same loop of driving. Which is not really going to make the human involved able to manage a sudden major change. Especially at night.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... idn-t-stop
https://goo.gl/GNkagg
- bychosis
- Posts: 7250
- Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2012 1:10 pm
- Location: Lake Macquarie
Re: Autonomous cars? I think not
Postby bychosis » Fri Jun 22, 2018 8:10 pm
- mikesbytes
- Super Mod
- Posts: 22160
- Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:42 pm
- Location: Tempe, Sydney
- Contact:
Re: Autonomous cars? I think not
Postby mikesbytes » Fri Jun 22, 2018 9:01 pm
- uart
- Posts: 3208
- Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2016 9:15 pm
- Location: Newcastle
Re: Autonomous cars? I think not
Postby uart » Fri Jun 22, 2018 9:20 pm
Unfortunately the victim (Elaine Herzberg) had previously served jail time for drug convictions, so I imagine it is very unlikely that either her or her family were wealthy - likely the exact opposite. The settlement amount will no doubt remain private, but I suspect that Uber realised fairly quickly that they could be bought off fairly easily - and the sooner the better (and cheaper).Jmuzz wrote: Google (Uber) was always going to settle out of court as quickly as possible. It is nothing to them to throw millions at it to eliminate the family causing a scene.
Settlement would include clauses that family never talk to the media or make any statement blaming anyone.
- Tequestra
- Posts: 193
- Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2018 2:12 pm
Re: Autonomous cars? I think not
Postby Tequestra » Sat Jun 23, 2018 4:31 pm
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-06-23/w ... sh/9902208Arizona police say the woman riding inside a self-driving Uber that crashed and killed a pedestrian in Arizona earlier this year was watching The Voice on her phone at the time.
I hope I haven't doubled-up on someone else's report. The story tells me that it was 'Updated about an hour ago'.
- find_bruce
- Moderator
- Posts: 10580
- Joined: Mon May 09, 2011 8:42 pm
- Location: Sydney
Re: Autonomous cars? I think not
Postby find_bruce » Sat Jun 23, 2018 5:18 pm
Ever catch a commercial flight ? And that is just routine pilots - test pilots would be at another levelbychosis wrote:Put someone in charge of something where they don’t have to ‘do’ anything except observe and what did they think would happen.
- redsonic
- Posts: 1772
- Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2012 8:08 pm
- Location: Brisbane
Re: Autonomous cars? I think not
Postby redsonic » Sat Jun 23, 2018 6:56 pm
On a different note, the ABC article states:
Ms Vasquez told police Ms Herzberg "came out of nowhere" and that she didn't see her prior to the collision.
Gee, where have we heard statements like this before? Without front and rear facing cameras and detailed telemetry, the above statement from the driver would normally be the end of it as far as the police are concerned.
"they came out of nowhere." Here we have evidence it is code for "I was watching TV at the time"
- antigee
- Posts: 1028
- Joined: Sun Sep 01, 2013 10:58 am
- Location: just off the Yarra Trail but not lurking in the bushes
Re: Autonomous cars? I think not
Postby antigee » Fri Aug 10, 2018 1:24 pm
"Cars and trucks with electronic driver assist systems may not see stopped vehicles and could even steer you into a crash if you're not paying attention, an insurance industry group warns...."
http://www.chicagotribune.com/classifie ... story.html#
as far as I know no paywall - if want to read without the Journalists input the referenced report can be found here (also if you make it to the end some other relevant reports are linked)
http://www.iihs.org/iihs/news/desktopne ... rack-tests
- uart
- Posts: 3208
- Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2016 9:15 pm
- Location: Newcastle
Re: Autonomous cars? I think not
Postby uart » Fri Aug 10, 2018 2:34 pm
Yeah, when teleportation is invented then that might be a real excuse. Until then ... not so much.redsonic wrote: On a different note, the ABC article states:Ms Vasquez told police Ms Herzberg "came out of nowhere" and that she didn't see her prior to the collision.
- mikesbytes
- Super Mod
- Posts: 22160
- Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:42 pm
- Location: Tempe, Sydney
- Contact:
Re: Autonomous cars? I think not
Postby mikesbytes » Fri Aug 10, 2018 8:30 pm
1. MGIF
2. Scream up wrong lane and push in near the front
3. Accelerate on orange lights that don't have speed/red light cameras
4. Blast horn if vehicle in front doesn't commence within [user selectable] 10'ths seconds from light turning green
5. Park on no stopping if closer to coffee shop
6. Ignore one metre rule
7. Ignore advisory signs
8. Wind windows down and play doof doof music full blast
Retiree options;
9. Get confused between the accelerator and brake pedals
10. Drive at 50kph in an 60kph zone
11. Drive at 50kph in an 80kph zone
12. Drive at 50kph in an 100kph zone
13. Park 800mm from the kerb
- Ross
- Posts: 5742
- Joined: Sat Nov 07, 2009 8:53 pm
Re: Autonomous cars? I think not
Postby Ross » Sat Aug 11, 2018 7:53 am
That reply reads like a govt press release. Tells us nothing. I'm interested in a real world actual processes answer.Strawburger wrote:Additional measures to ensure the vehicle will be able to read what it needs to. It would just be a modification to the traffic management processRoss wrote:Not sure how autonomous cars will react around roadworks where there are just plastic cones set out to mark the "road" and a roadworker with a "lollipop" stop/go sign and a reduced speed limit? The traffic cones are often just lazily set out and not really in a tight or symetrical configuration.
Often there are signs out a km or so ahead of roadworks warning/alerting motorists of roadworks ahead, how will autonomous cars deal with this as they aren't able to read (it could be argued no differently to motorists who ignore/don't see them because of mobile phone use/other distraction...).
Will each traffic ccone require an embeded chip so te austonomous vehicle recognises what it is? Will the temporary speed limit signs also need an ebedded chip so the car knows to drive at 40km/h instead of 100km/h? What about the stop/go sign?
Return to “General Cycling Discussion”
- General Australian Cycling Topics
- Info / announcements
- Buying a bike / parts
- General Cycling Discussion
- The Bike Shed
- Cycling Health
- Cycling Safety and Advocacy
- Women's Cycling
- Bike & Gear Reviews
- Cycling Trade
- Stolen Bikes
- Bicycle FAQs
- The Market Place
- Member to Member Bike and Gear Sales
- Want to Buy, Group Buy, Swap
- My Bikes or Gear Elsewhere
- Serious Biking
- Audax / Randonneuring
- Retro biking
- Commuting
- MTB
- Recumbents
- Fixed Gear/ Single Speed
- Track
- Electric Bicycles
- Cyclocross and Gravel Grinding
- Dragsters / Lowriders / Cruisers
- Children's Bikes
- Cargo Bikes and Utility Cycling
- Road Racing
- Road Biking
- Training
- Time Trial
- Triathlon
- International and National Tours and Events
- Cycle Touring
- Touring Australia
- Touring Overseas
- Touring Bikes and Equipment
- Australia
- Western Australia
- New South Wales
- Queensland
- South Australia
- Victoria
- ACT
- Tasmania
- Northern Territory
- Country & Regional
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users
- All times are UTC+11:00
- Top
- Delete cookies
About the Australian Cycling Forums
The Australian Cycling Forums is a welcoming community where you can ask questions and talk about the type of bikes and cycling topics you like.
Bicycles Network Australia
Forum Information
Connect with BNA
This website uses affiliate links to retail platforms including ebay, amazon, proviz and ribble.