[Kraven]

Driver Fails to Yield and Crashes into Uber Car (taking Bacardi's and Steverino's suggestion)

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-uber-tech-crash-idUSKBN16W0UZ?utm_campaign=trueAnthem:+Trending+Content&utm_content=58d71ac604d301335fc6e7a7&utm_medium=trueAnthem&utm_source=twitter

 

[saghost]

So someone screwed up and hit the self driving car, and as a result they are suspending the program? More self driving is the only way to get the idiots off the road...

At least this article tells us the car was driving itself - most of the ones I've seen so far weren't even sure of that.

 

[Bacardi]

Usual click bait (author of the story, NOT the OP)...An authentic title should be "driver fails to yield and crashes into human assisted self-driving Uber vehicle"...

If I got hit in an accident, I'd much rather have it be a "self driving" car where they would actually learn from it vs a distracted or a drunk driver...

 

[Steverino]

Usual click bait (author of the story, NOT the OP)...An authentic title should be "driver fails to yield and crashes into human assisted self-driving Uber vehicle"...

I agree. The emphasis should be on "driver crashes into uber car".

 

[Qinsp]

We will see. If autonomous cars cannot deal with idiots, there will a huge number of accidents. You see idiots every day that require you to evade them when they violate your right of way. It's part of dealing with traffic, to allow people to break the law and not ram them unintentionally.

 

[Bacardi]

We will see. If autonomous cars cannot deal with idiots, there will a huge number of accidents. You see idiots every day that require you to evade them when they violate your right of way. It's part of dealing with traffic, to allow people to break the law and not ram them unintentionally.

Like a QB giving up and just taking the sack, sometimes there's no way to evade (without causing a new accident) regardless if a supercomputer like Watson was driving or a human driver...We don't know the details except for there were multiple cars involved...Tesla AP will override human input and serve/autosteer you into another lane if it detects an accident...I don't know if the Uber Volvos does that too...Until we hear more details, all we can do is speculate, there is 3rd car involved slightly increasing the speculative odds that Volvo, regardless of whomever is driving may not have been able to evade...

Think about this, in the future will we see a situation where an accident is about to happen, a self driving car has no where to go, could other self driving cars synchronize in evasive maneuvers (such as change lanes to create an opening) in unison to prevent accidents?

 

[Raymondjram]

There were two riders in the Uber car, so they are "witnesses" to the crash event. I expect totally autonomous cars to use their cameras to record everything that happened at a future crash, so the real culprit is stated, and not take the other driver's comments as if the driverless car was totally at blame. This is what happens when one side is killed: the other side that survives shifts the blame because the dead cannot defend themselves. Now with technology, the car (driver or not) can defend itself.

 

[volt spain]

Probably "Texting ,or CellPhone user hits selfdriving car"....The Government should give big fines for "texting and driving",,,good income without taking money from tax payers...LOL

 

[Ladogaboy]

I thought they were suspending their autonomous vehicle program because one of their engineers might have stolen technology from Waymo.

Waymo Injunction

 

[Upper5Percent]

I thought they were suspending their autonomous vehicle program because one of their engineers might have stolen technology from Waymo.

Waymo Injunction

No, in fact Uber put the self-drivers back on the road in CA & AZ
http://money.cnn.com/2017/03/27/technology/uber-san-francisco-self-driving-cars/index.html

However...the law suit is heating up...
In May...A federal judge has denied an attempt by Uber Technologies Inc. to route Google Inc.’s lawsuit over autonomous vehicle technology into private arbitration.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/03/...t-case-self-driving-cars-technology.html?_r=0

And in another hearing...
What it specifically rejected was the argument that Anthony Levandowski's Fifth Amendment rights should preclude Uber from turning over potentially incriminating documents sought in the case.

This is going to be interesting...

 

[Upper5Percent]

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-uber-tech-alphabet-lawsuit-idUSKBN17Z0U6

Interesting that the court is going to make Google produce evidence that Anthony Levandowski's Otto Company was just a legal shell in an attempt to shield Uber from a direct connection with the theft of documents from Waymo...