Slashdot Mirror
California Police Ticket A Self-Driving Car (cbslocal.com)
Long-time Slashdot reader Ichijo writes: A self-driving car was slapped with a ticket after police said it got too close to a pedestrian on a San Francisco street.
The self-driving car owned by San Francisco-based Cruise was pulled over for not yielding to a pedestrian in a crosswalk. Cruise says its data shows the person was far away enough from the vehicle and the car did nothing wrong.... According to data collected by Cruise, the pedestrian was 10.8 feet away from the car when, while the car was in self-driving mode, it began to continue down Harrison at 14th St."
The person in the crosswalk was not injured.
The self-driving car owned by San Francisco-based Cruise was pulled over for not yielding to a pedestrian in a crosswalk. Cruise says its data shows the person was far away enough from the vehicle and the car did nothing wrong.... According to data collected by Cruise, the pedestrian was 10.8 feet away from the car when, while the car was in self-driving mode, it began to continue down Harrison at 14th St."
The person in the crosswalk was not injured.
Specifically: How does a cop pull over a self-driving car? I mean, exactly how does that happen logistically?
#DeleteChrome
No shit? The last time I got a speeding ticket, I told the judge that according to the data collected by me, I was actually driving within the posted limits and it was actually a different orange Challenger with white racing stripes that the cop must have seen doing 96 in a 55 zone. It was bullshit, of course, and the judge didn't buy it, but I'm comforted knowing that high-tech self-driving car companies use the same type of lame excuses that I do when they get traffic tickets.
I wonder if they use an AI to come up with their excuses.
You are welcome on my lawn.
This will be the main unintended consequence of self-driving cars. Tickets to pedestrians and cyclists will go through the roof to make up for lost revenue.
According to data collected by Cruise, the pedestrian was 10.8 feet away from the car...
Yeah okay, but if their foot was in the crosswalk it doesn't matter if you were one foot or 20. Just because a lot of people skate by unnoticed doesn't make it legal. I'm sure the prosecutor is grateful for the data though.
I like my 6-speed. It's a catharsis, like a mechanical anti-depressant.
Well, the people in charge of the police better start thinking about the future. With self-driving cars, they might lose an important stream of revenue. Because lots of stuff in traffic is a question of opinion, I bet a cop can simply observe you and hand you a ticket for what you consider decent driving.
However with self-driving cars, the companies behind them will probably not stand for such random punishments. I mean, look at how fast Tesla comes with a statement whenever there was an accident with a model S or X.
It might actually mean more meaningful works for law enforcement officers as well. I can't imagine it's fun for them, handing out tickets.
8 of 13 people found this answer helpful. Did you?
'nuff said.
And if the car hit the cop?
Good times ahead for Cruise.
10.8 feet is one second away at 7 mph. Too damn close -- company deserves a ticket.
That would be enough to disturb my crossing the street. If I have the right away and a car drives right in front of me, Iâ(TM)d have to stop to make sure another vehicle didnâ(TM)t decide to follow right behind.
Cruise says its data shows the person was far away enough from the vehicle and the car did nothing wrong....
Sounds like Cruise is finding out the imbalance of power that human motorists have to deal with apply to their cars, too. Doesn't really matter what happened, if the cop says you were doing something you're gonna get ticketed. And the courts will take his word above yours.
here, a car must stop and wait for the pedestrian to make it all the way across the street (or to a median dividing lanes of traffic) before proceeding. being "far enough away" or clear of the car's own lane is not enough. so, sounds like may be a nit-picking cop, but still a valid ticket nonetheless.
self driving cars in gatlinburg, tennessee (or other jurisdictions where jaywalking, basically, is legal -- encouraged, even -- and cars must stop for them, no exceptions.. except active first responders), will be interesting, to say the least.
a self driving car will probably have GB of data and video to prove it's innocence (unless it's an Uber killbot)
On the other hand, if I had a self driving car, you could bet there would be some additional programming that kicks in when needed called "High Speed Chase" if a cop tries to pull me over.
They have to write a certain amount of ticks per month so they double-down at the end of the month.
A self-driving car is a low-hanging fruit because there is nobody in there to argue with them.
Expect many more of these tickets.
The company in this case is making up a rule about the distance from the pedestrian being critical (and asking us to trust it's assessment that the ped was 10 feet away). The actually rules have nothing to do with distance:
https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/...
Can't their AI tell when someone is making eye-contact? Japanese photo-booths have been able to find human eyes for years now.
I have got a ticket when pedestrian was waiting on a center divider and I was on the right lane with one lane in between and it was not an intersection or pedestrian crossing area. I had nothing to prove my innocence. That is the only traffic ticket I have in my more than 25 years of driving.
I think Cruise is a menace that drives like a lost drunk senior citizen, but they may not be at fault in this case. The rules governing crosswalks in California are *mostly* clear, though the responsibility to yield to pedestrians does not make clear whether yielding requires mere allowance for unimpeded progress or full affordance of the crosswalk to the pedestrian when the crosswalk is lawfully occupied.
Any California traffic attorneys want to chime in?
Pedestrians in San Francisco often enter crosswalks without looking or allowing queued traffic to proceed. Pedestrians do have the right of way while in the crosswalk, irrespective of distance from a vehicle, but there's a pretty blatant disregard for social contracts. If a car (read: the people in the car) have been waiting for some time, pause and allow them through. Streets would be much safer overall if everyone stopped to consider the other actors in any interaction.
That's far enough. The cop was just in ticket-writing mode, and didn't want to seem like a moron when presented with an AI. And somehow managed to look like more of a moron.... go figure.
So, how does giving a ticket to a car with no driver make sense?
If the damn thing was a public nusance, breaking laws, or a danger to society why was it not impounded? Since there is no HUMAN ownership, or human presence in the whole situation, how can the ticket apply? Since you ticket the human owner, and not the vehicle, how the fuck can you actualy think this applies? I think the PIG shoudl be put on suspension for fraudlent/ biased behavior.
Fraudlent because to ge this tossed out on face value, one has to employ a lawyer, go to court, pay court costs, pay for the priv. to travel there, parking, food, etc.. All because some dumbass pig sees a crooked path to revenue. On the other hand, everything is SF is fucked any way.. Whom ever heard of a place where they frown on Family and the Family life because it gets in the way of progress( as they perceive it)
It's like the only place i know where they endorse adults eating their young to survive and pay someone else for the priv to suffer.. I wonder what nationality the cop was?
What the fuck, Thats somethng I would expect from msmash..
quit playing with your dork..
So, how does giving a ticket to a car with no driver make sense?
If the damn thing was a public nusance, breaking laws, or a danger to society why was it not impounded? Since there is no HUMAN ownership, or human presence in the whole situation, how can the ticket apply? Since you ticket the human owner, and not the vehicle, how the fuck can you actualy think this applies? I think the PIG shoudl be put on suspension for fraudlent/ biased behavior.
Fraudlent because to ge this tossed out on face value, one has to employ a lawyer, go to court, pay court costs, pay for the priv. to travel there, parking, food, etc.. All because some dumbass pig sees a crooked path to revenue. On the other hand, everything is SF is fucked any way.. Whom ever heard of a place where they frown on Family and the Family life because it gets in the way of progress( as they perceive it)
It's like the only place i know where they endorse adults eating their young to survive and pay someone else for the priv to suffer..
I hope the city throws this out with the evidence presented by the owner of the self-driving car.
Self-driving cars can simply be programmed to follow all rules of the road. If a pedestrian breaks the rules (jay-walking or not crossing at a designated cross walk), then that's on the pedestrian, not on the car.
Also, if the ticket does stick, then an update can be released to all of the self-driving cars over the air with the new rules, and the city can't collect traffic fines. Eventually, the city would either have to relent that self-driving cars will reduce revenue or that they'll continue to make up new violations to the point that cars would be completely illegal as you couldn't go anywhere without a ticket being issued.
If so, then the ticket is totally valid.
Just because someone's in a crosswalk doesn't automagically turn it into a no enter zone for automobiles. A car that forces a pedestrian to alter their speed or direction can be ticketed. It can also be ticketed for cutting it too close. Similar to making a left turn and yielding to oncoming traffic.
In other news, tickets being issued to lamp posts for standing still too close to pedestrians. In America.
It seems possible to me that this incident could be used in a future argument for automated traffic enforcement. I'm not advocating the idea, but it does serve to demonstrate another place where electronic observation may trump human observation.
Self driving cars will eliminate accidents because humans aren't good drivers. All these accidents and that dead woman are simply fake news designed to impede the glorious future of perfectly safe transportation, by elimination of the human from the process.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
Always drive this color, and not a black or brown one.
I just checked the transportation code for CA and TX because they are the biggest states. They both require pedestrians to walk facing traffic on roadways without sidewalks. I'm not sire if I'm feeding a troll or not but for anyone's information its VA code 21956.
refactor the law, its bloated, confusing and unmaintainable.
Local ordinance is that a vehicle must stop if the pedestrian is in the crosswalk -- no matter what the distance. We have a few 3-lane streets where it's entirely possible for the distance to be 10.8 feet, or even more. And the vehicle would be in violation for entering the crosswalk.
The second the AI knows the cops are out of range, however ...
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
ALL the flaws in this so-called 'technology' need to be uncovered. Maximum scrutiny. If it can't adhere flawlessly to human standards of performance then it doesn't belong on public roads.