Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I doubt the police had the records from the car’s system.

With all due respect, then why are they using their bully pulpit to blame this woman for her death at this early stage? The vehicle made no attempt to stop, which seems worrying if the sensors and algorithms were working as intended, so maybe it would be worth looking at those systems.



I think you are confusing the legal term “at fault” with the subjective term of “blame”.


How does the police determine that a vehicle "made no attempt to stop" today, without video and sensor data?


I don’t know, but made no attempt to stop is according to the police.

Uber’s self-driving car was traveling at a speed of 40 mph when it struck a 49-year-old woman in Arizona Sunday night, and did not show significant signs of slowing down, police said today.

https://www.theverge.com/2018/3/19/17140936/uber-self-drivin...

If you’re saying that the whole “blame it on the homeless lady” routine is premature the im with you though.


Yes, I think it is premature. What I am trying to say is that I don't think the police used the proper data from the car to give the results. If they were looking for break marks from the tires on the road, for instance (I have no idea what method they use), that doesn't necessarily mean the car wasn't breaking.


Where the skid marks start (if there are skid marks at all), probably. Witness reports might help, too.


A modern car that makes skidmarks under heavy breaking is a car with a broken brake and safety system. Modern ABS brakes actuate fast enough that they don't leave skidmarks under maximum braking.


They might have meant skid marks indicating an emergency stop though with the prevalence of ABS that is no longer a surefire sign.


The same way they do it now??


That’s what I am asking. How do they do it now?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: