General Discussion

brush

(61,033 posts)

43. Don't remember anyone saying scrap them. Improve them, yes. How is that hard to understand?

Reply to tonedevil (Reply #39)

Fri Mar 23, 2018, 09:43 PM

Mar 2018

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

44 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

The rider in the Uber vehicle is NOW at fault??? Ah come on...... [View all] a kennedy Mar 2018 OP

Its possibke for multiple parties to be at fault Lee-Lee Mar 2018 #1

This is the very technological problem janterry Mar 2018 #2

It's a good thing... tonedevil Mar 2018 #3

So, by that reasoning, defects in autonomous systems and sensors are acceptable? FrodosNewPet Mar 2018 #10

What reasoning says that defects are acceptable? tonedevil Mar 2018 #16

Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Isn't that how the saying goes? Hassin Bin Sober Mar 2018 #37

I'm not against autonomous cars FrodosNewPet Mar 2018 #40

I think we are on the same page. Hassin Bin Sober Mar 2018 #42

At 4 seconds in, you can begin to see pedestrians, even in the crappy resoltion of the video above FrodosNewPet Mar 2018 #11

These cars must be held to a higher standard lame54 Mar 2018 #12

Apparently... tonedevil Mar 2018 #17

If they are going to take millions of jobs they'd better... lame54 Mar 2018 #18

The way I understand it... tonedevil Mar 2018 #20

Why defend a failure in the lidar and radar? The car's sensors failed miserably and need to... brush Mar 2018 #24

How is there no competition... tonedevil Mar 2018 #28

There shouldn't be any competition. Self-driving cars, if they accomplish their most important task, brush Mar 2018 #30

So far Uber seems to agree... tonedevil Mar 2018 #35

You should also be confident in their abilities. If you continue to say they should be on the road.. brush Mar 2018 #36

The only way it matters... tonedevil Mar 2018 #39

Don't remember anyone saying scrap them. Improve them, yes. How is that hard to understand? brush Mar 2018 #43

What should we do with that driver (and millions like him) who was supposed to be the safety... Hassin Bin Sober Mar 2018 #41

Well technically, the uber car should have been capable of dealing with this situation. honest.abe Mar 2018 #4

I agree with you sdfernando Mar 2018 #7

Reality is that anyone co-piloting a self-driving car is going to occasionally be distracted. Jim__ Mar 2018 #5

Indeed. honest.abe Mar 2018 #9

"sue everyone let the courts sort it out". n/t PoliticAverse Mar 2018 #6

Worse, this is also saying the woman who got killed could be at fault. pnwmom Mar 2018 #8

It is entirely possible that the pedestrian Voltaire2 Mar 2018 #13

Not more than the car that didn't either steer away or brake when she was detectable. n/t pnwmom Mar 2018 #15

When she was detectable is the point. Voltaire2 Mar 2018 #19

These systems are supposed to be able to see much better than a human in the dark. pnwmom Mar 2018 #22

Nah, it was a failure of the lidar and radar. They are supposed to detect objects in the road way... brush Mar 2018 #25

thank gaud onethatcares Mar 2018 #14

I understand why misanthrope Mar 2018 #21

This is good to know ProudLib72 Mar 2018 #23

Our driver's ed program was very stringent, and it was drummed into us LisaM Mar 2018 #26

You need a license to drive, but you don't need a license to walk ProudLib72 Mar 2018 #27

Theres a more pressing question Major Nikon Mar 2018 #29

"the knee jerk reaction that happens every time one is the least bit involved in a fatality" ProudLib72 Mar 2018 #31

The biggest cause cause of vehicle fatalities is... Major Nikon Mar 2018 #32

Because, until now, there have been no driverless cars ProudLib72 Mar 2018 #34

I didnt get that out of the article Major Nikon Mar 2018 #38

Here is what I posted above, a direct quote from the article ProudLib72 Mar 2018 #44

Why does the title say "The rider in the Uber vehicle is NOW at fault"? sl8 Mar 2018 #33