Self-Driving Uber Running A Red Light

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
I got $5 that says Uber blames this incident on the driver. I wonder what the excuses will be when the cars are eventually unmanned? Software glitch? BSOD? Sensor malfunction?
 
I see I struck a nerve. You do know that we just report the news right? It's not like Kyle was behind the wheel of the Uber. :rolleyes:
How many tech news posts do you see about uber on the front page? Just curious if you've reached your quota or not.
 
Are we going back to uber hating again?
Who knows, who cares.

There are legal implications. If it's a red light camera that catches them, then its the registered owner that gets the ticket (because lack of proof keeps it from being a criminal case, thus a civil offense).

If a police officer catches them, then it's the driver (since there is proof and it's now a criminal case). So who is the driver? The owner of the car, or the person who programmed the decision? I would say, if you were to mimick a human, then it's whoever made the decision to drive through the redlight. Gonna issue traffic court appearances to programmers not even in the same county (or country possibly)?
 
I see this as a Tech fail, not an Uber fail. I'd be curious if the DOT make a driving test for self-driving cars that varied each time, so see if they could trip them up before giving them a driving license.
 
How many tech news posts do you see about uber on the front page? Just curious if you've reached your quota or not.

Really dude? Really? That's what you think of us because we post tech news? When a self-driving car (Uber-Google-Tesla etc.) runs a red light / drives off a cliff / runs over pedestrian etc. etc. it's tech news. It's not our fault when a tech company is in the news every week (sometimes good, sometimes bad). This is the stuff people want to read about. I am sorry that upsets you enough to make rude comments about us and imply that we have "quotas" but that's just the way it is.
 
I'm just saying. There seems to be a big focus on uber in particular. For a service i don't use, don't care about, am not invested in it, etc, it's useless info.
I just don't recall it ever being shown in a good light on this site. It's always when they're getting in trouble with the law (not tech related) or something like this which is inconclusive. Just because it has sensors doesn't mean someone was driving it (isn't that what you alluded to Steve?). I've seen hundreds of people running past red lights. Because they're in an uber car with sensors for automation doesn't make it news or tech related or anything of the sort.
And this is a forum right? I'm allowed to disagree, correct?
 
I'm just saying. There seems to be a big focus on uber in particular. For a service i don't use, don't care about, am not invested in it, etc, it's useless info.
I just don't recall it ever being shown in a good light on this site. It's always when they're getting in trouble with the law (not tech related) or something like this which is inconclusive. Just because it has sensors doesn't mean someone was driving it (isn't that what you alluded to Steve?). I've seen hundreds of people running past red lights. Because they're in an uber car with sensors for automation doesn't make it news or tech related or anything of the sort.
And this is a forum right? I'm allowed to disagree, correct?

Uber is nothing new, and it is not something this site reviews, it was talked about when it first came out. After that, anytime it makes the news, just like anyone else, it will probably be negative. This site does not write these, it is nothing more than Staff members finding tech news from other sites they think members might want to see, and linking to it here.

The car ran a red light, it's a legitimate tech fail, assuming there was not an actual person controlling it at the time, why you are mad about that I have no idea.
 
Uber has a long way to go before it can catch up with Tesla and Google I would imagine. Wonder who will corner this market eventually, gonna be big big bucks.
 
Uber is nothing new, and it is not something this site reviews, it was talked about when it first came out. After that, anytime it makes the news, just like anyone else, it will probably be negative. This site does not write these, it is nothing more than Staff members finding tech news from other sites they think members might want to see, and linking to it here.

The car ran a red light, it's a legitimate tech fail, assuming there was not an actual person controlling it at the time, why you are mad about that I have no idea.
It's only a legitimate tech fail if it was the automation system that ran a red light.
Can you tell that from the video? I can't.

Uber is a taxi company. Very recently in the past 2-3 weeks they've made the news about having driverless cars. Before that, not so much.
 
Since there's a driver behind the wheel, and self driving cars even when in self driving mode will return control to the driver under certain conditions, how do you know a driver wasn't in control during that brief period?

Given that there's 2 red lights and a pedestrian (and brief flash of brakes as the car nears the pedestrian without stopping), those behaviors are far more typical of a human driver than during self driving mode.
 
I wouldn't mind seeing the technical shake down of them diagnosis that problem.

Me too.

Since there's a driver behind the wheel, and self driving cars even when in self driving mode will return control to the driver under certain conditions, how do you know a driver wasn't in control during that brief period?

You don't, and that's what makes this a great news item because it is a bit of a mystery and it sparks conversation / debate (and accusations that we have quotas to fill against <insert company>)
 
Since there's a driver behind the wheel, and self driving cars even when in self driving mode will return control to the driver under certain conditions, how do you know a driver wasn't in control during that brief period?

Given that there's 2 red lights and a pedestrian (and brief flash of brakes as the car nears the pedestrian without stopping), those behaviors are far more typical of a human driver than during self driving mode.
If the driver couldn't take control to prevent running the red light, how can they take control to avoid an accident. Therefore there is no valid backup in that car. Driver is going under the bus to avoid that conclusion.
 
It's only a legitimate tech fail if it was the automation system that ran a red light.
Can you tell that from the video? I can't.

Uber is a taxi company. Very recently in the past 2-3 weeks they've made the news about having driverless cars. Before that, not so much.

All they can do is link to what is known, the Staff can not predict the future. Should they hold off on all news until every detail is set in stone? Good God man, are your feelings about Uber that easy to hurt?

Yes, we all know who/what Uber is, and before that and this, Uber has been talked about a number of times. Googles self driving cars have also been talked about here MANY times, and just about every time one was in a crash, people talked about it and waited for more information and we found that the Google cars were not at fault, but we learned good information about what was going on, and issues with self driving cars taking road rules to strictly.

This is also not the first time a Uber self driving car has run red lights, each time Uber has claimed it was the driver, not the car...Maybe they should look into getting better test drivers? As each car has a driver AND tech in them monitoring what is going on. Cabs running red lights is nothing new, but if this turns out to actually be the tech, its a serious problem that needs to be fixed and talked about.
 
Uber is likely partnered with someone.

http://fortune.com/2016/08/18/volvo-uber-partner-on-self-driving-cars/

I bet they have more than one.

Ouch, I hope that's not Volvo's solution then, I figured they had this issue behind them by now. Tesla's "fleet learning" approach is turning out to be a major asset, other companies should start implementing this approach to accelerate their machine learning.

Top 2 comparison:
https://electrek.co/2016/04/11/google-self-driving-car-tesla-autopilot/

"1.5M miles in 6 years vs 47M miles in 6 months"
 
You don't, and that's what makes this a great news item because it is a bit of a mystery and it sparks conversation / debate (and accusations that we have quotas to fill against <insert company>)
Come on. You and i both know it was a snarky comment and not an accusation. I've been critical about the focus on uber before because it's meaningless fluff pieces mostly. I've sarcastically asked who on this site owns taxi medallions before as well.
The expectation was made that running of the red light was caused by the automation system when there is no evidence to support that besides the fact it was a car equipped with the system.
That and the other 3 articles posted about uber seem to indicate there's a focus on uber. It's my opinion that i'm sticking to.
 
If the driver couldn't take control to prevent running the red light, how can they take control to avoid an accident. Therefore there is no valid backup in that car. Driver is going under the bus to avoid that conclusion.
That response doesn't address anything I wrote. :p

Steve already responded anyways, and he's just stirring the pot on this news item. Yay, post-truth society!
 
How does a self driving car determine the difference between a red light and a brake light... Say on a motorcycle. Especially in hilly areas (where there may be roads behind the light).
 
Steve already responded anyways, and he's just stirring the pot on this news item.

Bad Steve! Bad Steve!

I can't help it, this is one of those news items where inevitably someone (not you) proclaims they "don't care" about the news item, posts 95 responses in the thread about the subject they totally don't care about. :D
 
Bad Steve! Bad Steve!

I can't help it, this is one of those news items where inevitably someone (not you) proclaims they "don't care" about the news item, posts 95 responses in the thread about the subject they totally don't care about. :D
I would like to specify as generally disinterested in uber but genuinely interested in never seeing any news about them again.
Maybe put tags on the articles and allow users to filter? I'm trying to be constructive here.
 
Google is the only one putting out stats, but working their stats, their self driving cars are about 98% as safe as human drivers.

However, the human drivers rack up a lot of accidents through DUI, distracted driving, drowsy driving, driving in snow, ice, heavy rain, on seriously potholed streets, etc. this is something that google's automated cars do not have contributing to their not quite as good driving record.

This tells me they are kind of crap at the actual act of driving compared to a person.

So far we have seen video form tesla where there software cuts EVERY SINGLE FRIKIN corner. Many of them in a manner that is ticketable.

Now we have the volvo system running red lights.

This shit is not ready yet.
 
I'd say the biggest fault in this is the extremely poor light placement. The self driving system probably didn't see the lights.
 
There's nothing wrong with the light placement, but with the driver who sucks. :p

Now we have the volvo system running red lights.
Uber uses its own self driving system, not Volvo's. Either way, it was almost certainly a human driver operating the vehicle, at least to people who actually watched the short video.

(For people who do not understand how these self-driving cars work, click the link above. It mentions how frequently the system disengages, and how a driver has to take over almost constantly on Uber's vehicles.)
 
Google is the only one putting out stats, but working their stats, their self driving cars are about 98% as safe as human drivers.

However, the human drivers rack up a lot of accidents through DUI, distracted driving, drowsy driving, driving in snow, ice, heavy rain, on seriously potholed streets, etc. this is something that google's automated cars do not have contributing to their not quite as good driving record.

This tells me they are kind of crap at the actual act of driving compared to a person.

So far we have seen video form tesla where there software cuts EVERY SINGLE FRIKIN corner. Many of them in a manner that is ticketable.

Now we have the volvo system running red lights.

This shit is not ready yet.

I was thinking of a scenario on an unsigned intersection where a person is standing on the corner but not trying to cross. What does the car do? Courteous drivers stop and let a person like that cross but how will the car realise that the person is just waiting there, not wanting to cross? Does it have a time limit? What if the person is blind and just needs a lot of time to prepare and doesn't fit into the time slot? What if you put a mannequin there? Imagine the prank possibilities ;)
 
How many tech news posts do you see about uber on the front page? Just curious if you've reached your quota or not.
I think you're onto something. We need to investigate this [H] + Uber conspiracy.

People wouldn't be protesting so vehemently if nothing was there.
 
I'd say the biggest fault in this is the extremely poor light placement. The self driving system probably didn't see the lights.

Humans deal with it, the robots have to to. It's the way things are.

Uber uses its own self driving system, not Volvo's. Either way, it was almost certainly a human driver operating the vehicle, at least to people who actually watched the short video.

(For people who do not understand how these self-driving cars work, click the link above. It mentions how frequently the system disengages, and how a driver has to take over almost constantly on Uber's vehicles.)

I watched the short video. You can't tell shit about the state of the vehicle. If uber's system is that shitty that it is constantly saying "whoops, this shit is too hard for me", why is it operating on public roads?

Maybe it's not volvo's system. So many people are developing self-driving vehicles at this point their's either a zillion systems that will wind up in court, or there are a lot fewer systems than it seems when you really get under the hood so to speak.

It doesn't really matter. So far they all appear to be mediocre at driving, and simply get to the level of safety they have by being tediously cautious and incapable of distraction. They need to improve the driving part, possibly not all that much, but they clearly still do.
 
So if the uber self driving software hands control over to the human 2 feet before the intersection going 30mph, that's human error, right?

They probably need to hire some drivers that compete in ESPORTS to have the reaction time necessary to stop in time when the car fails to do so. ;) :) :)

Skills like this.

 
I see I struck a nerve. You do know that we just report the news right? It's not like Kyle was behind the wheel of the Uber. :rolleyes:


Does Kyle offer UberEats and does he pick up passengers in the Hummer or the Viper?
 
I'm just saying. There seems to be a big focus on uber in particular. For a service i don't use, don't care about, am not invested in it, etc, it's useless info.
I just don't recall it ever being shown in a good light on this site. It's always when they're getting in trouble with the law (not tech related) or something like this which is inconclusive. Just because it has sensors doesn't mean someone was driving it (isn't that what you alluded to Steve?). I've seen hundreds of people running past red lights. Because they're in an uber car with sensors for automation doesn't make it news or tech related or anything of the sort.
And this is a forum right? I'm allowed to disagree, correct?
This is technology in its infancy. No different than tech devices. Besides maybe the computer knew no-one was near the intersection and decided to get the customer to his destination cheaper that waiting to rack up minutes at a red light. Besides until Robo Cop is developed nothing to worry about. :)
 
Back
Top