Slashdot Mirror


Self-Driving Uber Car Kills Arizona Woman in First Fatal Crash Involving Pedestrian (gizmodo.com)

Joe_Dragon writes: Last night a woman was struck by an autonomous Uber vehicle in Tempe, Arizona. She later died of her injuries in the hospital. The deadly collision -- reported by ABC15 and later confirmed to Gizmodo by Uber and Tempe police -- took place around 10PM at the intersection Mill Avenue and Curry Road. Autonomous vehicle developers often test drive at night, during storms, and other challenging conditions to help their vehicles learn to navigate in a variety of environments.

According to Tempe PD, the car was in autonomous mode at the time of the incident, with a vehicle operator sitting behind the wheel. A police spokesperson added in a statement that the woman's 'next of kin has not been notified yet so her name is not being released at this time. Uber is assisting and this is still an active investigation.' The woman was crossing the street outside a crosswalk when she was hit, the spokesperson said.
Update: Uber says it is suspending self-driving car tests in all North American cities after a fatal accident.

6 of 953 comments (clear)

  1. Re:More to come by PeeAitchPee · · Score: 5, Insightful

    And yet, in most cases now they're orders of magnitude safer than the distracted meatbag texting away on their iPhone. Or the late-night drunk trying to make it home from the bar without getting caught. Yeah, even now I'd probably take my chances with the self-driving cars instead of humanity at the wheel, thanks.

  2. More or fewer pedestrian deaths per mile? by PeterM+from+Berkeley · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Self-driving cars don't need to be perfect, just better than people.

    If self-driving cars rack up fewer pedestrian deaths per mile driven than human drivers, that's the critical metric.

    --PM

  3. Come on, who would have no hit her? by SuperKendall · · Score: 5, Insightful

    We're 50 years out from a working self-driving car.

    Thank you Mr Luddite. It's a shame that we currently live in a perfectly safe world where no pedestrians ever git hit and these darn self-driving cars come along and...

    Wait, what? Drivers hit pedestrians all the time? Especially so when they cross in the middle of the street at night in the rain?

    Remember, there WAS a human sitting behind the wheel. The fact that he didn't see here / could not react in time means she was (A) really hard to see, and (b) probably came in front of the car very suddenly.

    We are not 50 years from self-driving cars. We are *0* years from self-driving cars. They are being deployed today and the ramp-up will only continue, because even if they make mistakes it's still FEWER mistakes than people will make, on average.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  4. Re:More to come by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There is no data to support your statement. Self driving cars haven't even started driving for real yet and Musk's marketing tweets don't count as a scientific study. Testing is not the same as real driving. At this time WHEN CONDITIONS GET BAD WE DON'T LET THE AI DRIVE. Let that sink in. If AI is so much better it should be able to outperform the worse the conditions get, not the other way around.

    Your statement is like saying you are a great basketball player but only during controlled ideal practice and you have never played a real game.

  5. Re: Jaywalking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Can't happen? Zero fucking times. Prove me wrong with a link.

  6. Re:More to come by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I don't know about you, but I personally power-cycle my brain every day or it starts to malfunction. My computer, not even every month.