[Dprglist] uber death

Fri Mar 23 08:35:49 PDT 2018

n = 1 does not allow for any type of valid statistical analysis of what 
is safer / not safer.

"Do you ever feel like technology is out to get you?"
"No, but I say please and thank you to Alexa so when the robot uprising 
does happen, they know I'm on their side."

(paraphrase) BBC Friday Night Comedy.

------ Original Message ------
From: "Mary Mathias" <mjmmaker at gmail.com>
To: "Dan Miner" <miner at zmail0.centtech.com>
Cc: "dprglist" <dprglist at dprg.org>
Sent: 3/23/2018 10:23:36 AM
Subject: Re: [Dprglist] uber death

>Autonomous, large robotic vehicles actually should be designed to be 
>safer than human driven ones.  That is one of the largely touted 
>selling points for these vehicles.  So, shadows and light that affect 
>mere human drivers should not be an impairment for any large or any 
>otherwise potentially lethal autonomous robot.  After all, even the 
>simple ultrasonic sensors can detect obstacles in the dark.   One would 
>think any large autonomous vehicle out on the roads would be equipped 
>with an over abundance of redundant types of high end obstacle sensors 
>to make sure it is MUCH safer than a human driving it.  The same goes 
>for road condition sensing, construction zone issues, accident site and 
>emergency vehicle recognition...and on and on.
>
>Obviously there will inevitably be those cases where a child runs 
>directly into the path of a vehicle or an adult is mentally impaired to 
>the point of practically throwing themselves directly in front of it so 
>that the braking or avoidance steering is not able to overcome the 
>momentum.  But the true goal of even creating these vehicles should be 
>to make it respond better than a human driver in all conditions.
>
>My personal slant is that if we humans are determined to replace 
>ourselves with non-humans then we need to make sure they are truly 
>better than us.  (Of course, either way we basically classify ourselves 
>as expendable life forms...get run over sometimes..."oh well"...or have 
>machines so much better than us that we are simply downgraded.)
>
>Aren't I just a little ray of sunshine here?
>~MJ
>
>
>
>On Tue, Mar 20, 2018, 1:17 PM Dan Miner <miner at zmail0.centtech.com> 
>wrote:
>>From this article:  
>>http://fortune.com/2018/03/19/uber-self-driving-car-crash/
>>
>>
>>
>>“Chief of Police Sylvia Moir told the San Francisco Chronicle 
>><https://www.sfchronicle.com/business/article/Exclusive-Tempe-police-chief-says-early-probe-12765481.php?utm_campaign=twitter-premium&utm_source=CMS%20Sharing%20Button&utm_medium=social> 
>>on Monday that video footage taken from cameras equipped to the 
>>autonomous Volvo SUV potentially shift the blame to the victim 
>>herself, 49-year-old Elaine Herzberg, rather than the vehicle.
>>
>>“It’s very clear it would have been difficult to avoid this collision 
>>in any kind of mode [autonomous or human-driven] based on how she came 
>>from the shadows right into the roadway,” Moir told the paper, adding 
>>that the incident occurred roughly 100 yards from a crosswalk. “It is 
>>dangerous to cross roadways in the evening hour when well-illuminated 
>>managed crosswalks are available,” she said.”
>>
>>
>>
>>So “blaming the victim” but it seems like this person probably would 
>>have been killed even without the autonomous driving aspect.
>>
>>-          Dan Miner
>>
>>
>>
>>From: DPRGlist [mailto:dprglist-bounces at lists.dprg.org] On Behalf Of 
>>Ezra Christensen
>>Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2018 11:36 AM
>>To: dprglist
>>Subject: Re: [Dprglist] uber death
>>
>>
>>
>>I'll wait to see the details before drawing conclusions. It happened 
>>at 10pm in clear, dry conditions and there was no speed adjustment by 
>>the car and no operator disengagement? Some part of the story is 
>>missing.
>>
>>
>>
>>It's unrealistic to assume autonomous cars will have zero fatalities. 
>>The goal has always been to be significantly safer than human 
>>operators.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>------ Original Message ------
>>
>>From: "Steve Edwards" <steve.edwards214 at gmail.com>
>>
>>To: davida at smu.edu; "dprglist" <dprglist at dprg.org>
>>
>>Sent: 3/19/2018 6:22:23 PM
>>
>>Subject: Re: [Dprglist] uber death
>>
>>
>>
>>>Yea with an operator in the car no less.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Sent via the Samsung Galaxy S® 6, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>-------- Original message --------
>>>
>>>From: David Anderson <davida at smu.edu>
>>>
>>>Date: 3/19/18 1:28 PM (GMT-06:00)
>>>
>>>To: dprglist <dprglist at dprg.org>
>>>
>>>Subject: [Dprglist] uber death
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>"Oh brave new world where such things are possible!"
>>>
>>>
>>><https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/19/technology/uber-driverless-fatality.html>
>>>
>>>
>>>-D
>>>
>>>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>DPRGlist mailing list
>>>DPRGlist at lists.dprg.org
>>>http://lists.dprg.org/listinfo.cgi/dprglist-dprg.org
>>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>DPRGlist mailing list
>>DPRGlist at lists.dprg.org
>>http://lists.dprg.org/listinfo.cgi/dprglist-dprg.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.dprg.org/pipermail/dprglist-dprg.org/attachments/20180323/54289294/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/png
Size: 786 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.dprg.org/pipermail/dprglist-dprg.org/attachments/20180323/54289294/attachment.png>