[wdb]

Originally Posted by glennQNYC

It's a Volvo

I can't tell the difference. (To be honest I pulled up a stock photo.)

[Banana Hammock]

Police Chief says the car might not be at fault after reviewing onboard footage of the accident.

https://www.engadget.com/2018/03/20/...y-police-chief

[Dog Face Pony Soldier]

Originally Posted by Germanauto

Looks like the lady darted in front of the car...

Darting or not; if you or I hit and killed a pedestrian there would full investigation too. They would be testing for drugs and alcohol... Checking your phone to see if you were in a call or texting... etc. Considering the failure of the human safety backup, I want to know more.

[F30lolz]

Sad news that someone died but FTT I was NOT the driver.

[EdM5]

Originally Posted by cautjit

A serious question, why do we need self driving cars? Do we need them or is it just to prove it can be done?
KP

It is technology push for sure.
The reasons most commonly stated are less traffic casualties, less congestion and emission, more quality of life in urban areas (mobility AAS).

[Dog Face Pony Soldier]

Originally Posted by Germanauto

...the car which was going below the speed limit.

Fake news. The vehicle was doing 38 mph in a 35 mph zone.

This brings up an interesting topic... Who the Hell is programming autonomous vehicles to break the law? To me this is Dieselgate x 1000.

[M3_WC]

It will be interesting in future to have a larger sampling size of autonomous vehicles vs human driven vehicles. It won't be a matter of which has a higher rate of accidents and/or causing fatalities. It will be a matter of how much higher is the rate of human driven vehicles causing accidents.

[M3_WC]

It doesn't even really need to be that complicated, when autonomous driving cars goes mainstream. They simply should be insured just like normal cars and accident payouts would be done as they are done today. Individuals get sued all the time for vehicle fatalities, insurance usually pays up.

[Red Bread]

Originally Posted by glennQNYC

Fake news. The vehicle was doing 38 mph in a 35 mph zone.

This brings up an interesting topic... Who the Hell is programming autonomous vehicles to break the law? To me this is Dieselgate x 1000.

If this is the part of this discussion that you're upset about, then maybe you've missed the point?

I got a bunch of tickets when I was in college and ended up on deferred adjudication. I decided to drive at or under the speed limit for those two months. I've never felt so at risk. People get amazingly mad about you slowing them down.

So someone probably programmed the cars to all go over the speed limit, but less than five over, the amount that you're given for speedometer inaccuracy. It's likely safer for surrounding drivers and even pedestrians for automated cars to go the flow of traffic and/or a realistic speed.

[wdb]

I once saw a person get hit by a car.

While on my way into town I noticed an older guy in a particular neighborhood, wandering around on the sidewalk, waving his arms, and generally acting like he was off his meds. On my way back out of town I saw the man again. This time he stepped into the street in front of the car that was just ahead of me. I watched him bounce over the hood, off the windshield, and then disappear in front of the vehicle.

He was pronounced dead at the scene.

The driver was now the one ranting and acting crazy on the sidewalk. He was completely freaked out. He had two kids in the back seat of the car. They looked shell shocked. I leaned in and said, "your dad did absolutely nothing wrong -- there was nothing he could have done."

And there wasn't. One second the guy was on the sidewalk, the next he was in the middle of the street. Computer or no, there was no time for the car to stop or swerve. None. Looking back I think it was suicide.

[Dog Face Pony Soldier]

Originally Posted by M3_WC

It doesn't even really need to be that complicated, when autonomous driving cars goes mainstream. They simply should be insured just like normal cars and accident payouts would be done as they are done today. Individuals get sued all the time for vehicle fatalities, insurance usual pays up.

But damages can easily exceed coverage. When that happens the policy owner is responsible for the remaining damages. So I have the potential responsibility for life-changing debt, or maybe losing my house because of my autonomous vehicle's error? That isn't going to go well.

[MightyMouseTech]

Originally Posted by glennQNYC

Fake news. The vehicle was doing 38 mph in a 35 mph zone.

This brings up an interesting topic... Who the Hell is programming autonomous vehicles to break the law? To me this is Dieselgate x 1000.

Relax, it was actually a 45 MPH zone.

[Dog Face Pony Soldier]

Originally Posted by Red Bread

If this is the part of this discussion that you're upset about, then maybe you've missed the point?

I got a bunch of tickets when I was in college and ended up on deferred adjudication. I decided to drive at or under the speed limit for those two months. I've never felt so at risk. People get amazingly mad about you slowing them down.

So someone probably programmed the cars to all go over the speed limit, but less than five over, the amount that you're given for speedometer inaccuracy. It's likely safer for surrounding drivers and even pedestrians for automated cars to go the flow of traffic and/or a realistic speed.

First, I agree with your point about the safety of matching the flow of traffic. Although this vehicle didn't appear to be matching traffic flow, my point is directly related. It seems as though a manufacturer would be opening themselves up to huge risk by programming their vehicle to break the law. That was exactly what happened with Dieselgate... Manufacturers were programming their car to violate regulations. Massive penalties were assessed, and nobody died there.

[Dog Face Pony Soldier]

Originally Posted by MightyMouseTech

Relax, it was actually a 45 MPH zone.

You can tell the family members to relax.

Although some keyboard commandos are using google maps to claim a 45 mph zone, local police are on record as stating that section of roadway is a 35 mph zone. I'll go with experts on the ground. Maybe this is why the damn vehicle was speeding?

[Red Bread]

Three over is still within range of speedometer error. Of course an automated car likely has accurate GPS data, so this is a bit silly.

Yes, they're probably programmed to speed slightly. I'm not sure I'd consider this on the same scope of multiples of pollutants being put out over the understood levels though.

But I drive a VW and speed, so I'm probably not the person that should be responding to your concerns.

[Dog Face Pony Soldier]

I've stated this in at least one other thread but I'll repeat myself...

Autonomous vehicles are going to need various driving modes to cater to different situations. I know I drive very differently when my elderly mother is in the car... different when my girlfriend is in the car... different still when I'm alone. Can you imagine your autonomous car always driving like your grandmother was in the car? I'd go insane!

[Dog Face Pony Soldier]

Originally Posted by Red Bread

Three over is still within range of speedometer error. Of course an automated car likely has accurate GPS data, so this is a bit silly.

Yes, they're probably programmed to speed slightly. I'm not sure I'd consider this on the same scope of multiples of pollutants being put out over the understood levels though.

But I drive a VW and speed, so I'm probably not the person that should be responding to your concerns.

Lawyers already argue drivers can be accountable for manslaughter when excessive speed is a factor in an accident. Thus manufacturers should be held just as accountable when the law breaking is willfully pre-programmed by the factory. The argument is clear... The posted speed is there for a reason. Who provided [said manufacturer] with the authority to ignore this law?

[M3_WC]

In 25 years, our kids are going to laugh at threads like this.

Autonomous driving tech is going to prove to be much safer than human drivers. Once statistics from larger sampling sizes are available, insurance companies will tailor their policies. Same thing how they use statistics to charge females lower rates than males or teenagers higher rates than grown adults. The tech will prove itself, in fact I wouldn't doubt in future you will be able to get a discount for owning an autonomous car.

[MightyMouseTech]

Originally Posted by M3_WC

In 25 years, our kids are going to laugh at threads like this.

Autonomous driving tech is going to prove to be much safer than human drivers. Once statics from larger sampling sizes are available, insurance companies will tailor their policies. Same thing how they use statistics to charge females lower rates than males or teenagers higher rates than grown adults. The tech will prove itself, in fact I wouldn't doubt in future if will be able to get a discount for owning an autonomous car.

Feel the same. They don't have to be 100% safe, they only have to be safer than the average driver. That is not hard to do from what I see on the roads.

I have a feeling when it hits mainstream, you will still be able to drive yourself, but insurance rates are going to be ludicrous.

[Dog Face Pony Soldier]

Imagine one of your loved ones is killed because of a purposeful, pre-programmed decision made by autonomous vehicle, and people tell you "hey- don't worry they'll be safer than humans one day." Nuts.

[M3_WC]

Originally Posted by glennQNYC

Imagine one of your loved one dies from a purposeful, pre-programmed decision made by autonomous vehicle, and people tell you "hey- don't worry they'll be safer than humans one day." Nuts.

It would feel just as bad as if a human driver did it.

[MightyMouseTech]

Originally Posted by glennQNYC

Imagine one of your loved one dies from a purposeful, pre-programmed decision made by autonomous vehicle, and people tell you "hey- don't worry they'll be safer than humans one day." Nuts.

And that is the type of discussion that is happening these days. There will be times when the car has to decide, do I kill person A, or person B.

http://moralmachine.mit.edu/