Uber Wants To Resume Self- Driving Car Tests On Public Roads
Source: AP
3 hrs. ago.
DETROIT Nearly eight months after one of its autonomous test vehicles hit and killed an Arizona pedestrian, Uber wants to resume testing on public roads.
The company has filed an application with the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation to test in Pittsburgh, and it has issued a lengthy safety report pledging to put two human backup drivers in each vehicle and take a raft of other precautions to make the vehicles safe.
Company officials acknowledge they have a long way to go to regain public trust after the March 18 crash in Tempe, Arizona, that killed Elaine Herzberg, 49, as she crossed a darkened road outside the lines of a crosswalk.
Police said Uber's backup driver in the autonomous Volvo SUV was streaming the television show "The Voice" on her phone and looking downward before crash. The National Transportation Safety Board said the autonomous driving system on the Volvo spotted Herzberg about six seconds before hitting her, but did not stop because the system used to automatically apply brakes in potentially dangerous situations had been disabled. A Volvo emergency braking system also had been turned off. -More...
Read more: http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/uber-wants-to-resume-self-driving-car-tests-on-public-roads/ar-BBPgo5x?ocid=HPCOMMDHP15
msongs
(67,395 posts)Loki Liesmith
(4,602 posts)Will get in serious accidents than their bot driven cars as time goes on.
Bleacher Creature
(11,256 posts)keithbvadu2
(36,775 posts)Mandatory! A $20million policy payout for anyone killed in a UBER involved accident.
Lesser amounts, but still mandatory, for lesser injuries.
cstanleytech
(26,281 posts)that the Uber car has to be found at fault by the police and if it's the other person's than Uber does not have to pay it out.
bucolic_frolic
(43,128 posts)Once you rely on technology there's going to be a screw-up somewhere, sometime
Loki Liesmith
(4,602 posts)theres going to be a screwup sometime, somewhere.
Response to Loki Liesmith (Reply #8)
Post removed
Loki Liesmith
(4,602 posts)cstanleytech
(26,281 posts)A properly programmed artificial intelligence though is less likely to make as many mistakes however that aside a artificial intelligence able to deal with the randomness of human drivers as well as pedestrians is still decades away in my opinion.
Ferrets are Cool
(21,106 posts)paleotn
(17,911 posts)SkyNet hasn't yet proven that it can drive cars worth a damn. I'll take my chances with the carbon life forms behind the wheel.
Loki Liesmith
(4,602 posts)paleotn
(17,911 posts)But throw them anything outside of programmed parameters...say like...life...and Siri is as dumb as a stump.
Don't get me wrong. I'm not a Luddite. I think autonomous vehicles will have their place someday. But until they can routinely handle the fast changing circumstances and conditions humans deal with seamlessly everyday, I'm not betting my life on them. Thus, autonomous vehicles need to stay on the test tracks until they actually develop something that has some resemblance to thinking. We're no where close to that yet. They're still just running throw lines of code and when they hit a bug or experience something outside their programming they crash. Literally.
brush
(53,764 posts)FSogol
(45,476 posts)No one has a problem with that?
The general public can be my guinea pigs because technology and money!