It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Uber suspends self-driving car program after Arizona crash

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 26 2017 @ 08:14 PM
link   
A self driving Uber crashed and everyone's freaking out. This is new technology so it will not be perfect.


Uber Technologies Inc suspended its pilot program for driverless cars on Saturday after a vehicle equipped with the nascent technology crashed on an Arizona roadway, the ride-hailing company and local police said.

The accident, the latest involving a self-driving vehicle operated by one of several companies experimenting with autonomous vehicles, caused no serious injuries, Uber said.

Even so, the company said it was grounding driverless cars involved in a pilot program in Arizona, Pittsburgh and San Francisco pending the outcome of investigation into the crash on Friday evening in Tempe.


www.cnbc.com...

I think suspending the program is a mistake. I think Uber is spooked by the bad press it's been getting for other things. I think there should be a review and maybe suspend in Arizona but this shouldn't stop progress.

There were no injuries.



These things need to be put into perspective:

Road Crash Statistics. Nearly 1.3 million people die in road crashes each year, on average 3,287 deaths a day. An additional 20-50 million are injured or disabled. More than half of all road traffic deaths occur among young adults ages 15-44.

asirt.org...




posted on Mar, 26 2017 @ 08:35 PM
link   
a reply to: neoholographic

Uber is screwed if this self driving car thing takes years and years due to "glitches".

They need huge pools of new recruits to fuel their business, and people caught on to the low pay. Soooo, they need to get rid of the drivers so the wonderful gig-econ can continue, and Uber can rake in huge profits.



posted on Mar, 26 2017 @ 08:37 PM
link   
Yeah, gotta push along this tech.
driverless cars is a very desired thing. much cheaper than a taxi and will allow for a safer and more vibrant nightlife. learn from, improve, and continue on.



posted on Mar, 26 2017 @ 08:39 PM
link   
a reply to: SaturnFX

I agree, imagine having a car show up and drop you off, at work. That would be awesome.



posted on Mar, 26 2017 @ 09:06 PM
link   
a reply to: neoholographic

I bet UBER either gets bought out or goes bankrupt by the end of the year. There business has taken a huge hit lately, and for them to suspend the one think that has the potential to keep the company afloat is a huge mistake. It will be interesting to see how this effects the company now.



posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 05:16 AM
link   
a reply to: neoholographic

I lived in Arizona for 2 years,drive down freeways,18 wheelers,cars etc,all texting and driving,all over the road,doesn't suprise me a tech car taken out,that place is scary and speed limit 70



posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 05:16 AM
link   
a reply to: neoholographic

I lived in Arizona for 2 years,drive down freeways,18 wheelers,cars etc,all texting and driving,all over the road,doesn't suprise me a tech car taken out,that place is scary and speed limit 70



posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 05:35 AM
link   
a reply to: neoholographic


The accident occurred when the driver of a second vehicle "failed to yield" to the Uber vehicle while making a turn,


" failed to yeild " - thats a curious turn of phrase


my mind translates that as :

" the other vehicle made an illegal turn across a lane marking where the uber and right of way "

i cannot find a citation - but i remember reading an article that claimed that one potential flaw of a certain self driving tech was that an idiot driver could induce " paralysis " in the autonomous unit at junctions forcing it [ the autononous vehicle ] to stop "



posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 06:49 AM
link   
The suspension is pending the outcome of the investigation, which is fair.

As for the crash, the car was expecting the other driver to at least try to follow the rules. "Failed to yeild" means the other driver essentially cut it off. Odd that the vehicle didn't react well enough, though.

The one thing these cars will never have is an idiot sensor. On the road, mine goes off all the time. I can just look at a car and decide if that driver is dumb enough to do something stupid or not.



posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 07:22 AM
link   
a reply to: neoholographic

It's a temporary suspension. It's actually the proper thing to do.



posted on Aug, 7 2017 @ 03:54 AM
link   
The EUrogarchs and NATO had 2 objectives during the past 16 years (among others):

1) Hide the real number of casualties in the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq
2) Reinforce the UN panel on climate change and other global warming supporters
2) Impair people's abilities to own cars and severely limit people's mobility, plus guarantee that Europol can electronically hack and control your car.

The trick they have been using is to mix up the idea of electric cars and self-driving cars into a single thing to make sure that car buying price and ownership would become extremely expensive overall.

Myth1 : Electric cars are expensive because they are a new technology especially due to Li-Ion batteries.
Electric cars are not a new technology and existed during the 20s. Li-Ion batteries are a new technology but due to their massive production during the past 10 years they are not anymore to be considered expensive.

Myth2 : Electric cars require more complex software and electronics systems compared to internal combustion cars.
This is blatantly false, because the mechanical complexity is much simpler with electric cars especially the control logic that act upon the electric motor

Myth3 : Self-driving cars are safer because human error causes most accidents on the road.
This is a fraud because most of the worst accidents on the road are caused by excessive traffic of heavy vehicles (big commercial trucks) and bad maintenance of vehicles.

Myth4 : The deaths and severe injuries caused by car accidents has been increasing since about 10 years.
Here's where the military fraud comes into play. NATO armed forces are hiding their real casualties in the Afghan and Iraqi war (deaths and severe injuries) and disguising them as 'car accidents' since about 2005-2006.
The number of deaths in the battlefield or grave injuries are reported in NATO countries statistics as car accidents.

Myth5 : Electric cars must provide self-driving capabilities and very fancy electronic and software systems to their owner otherwise they do not represent a leap in technology.
Again electric cars existed already during the 20s and there's no way that an electric motor can be made to appear as a new and revolutionary technology.

Myth6 : Electric cars are to replace all internal combustion cars some time in the future.
This is only applicable in countries and areas in which Nuclear Energy and nuclear fuel cycles are fully developed, because it would render transport fully dependent on electricity. This can only be achieved with nuclear energy, as other hydrocarbon based production would simply be shifting the balance from one hydrocarbon to another, or from a local energy production to a centralized energy production. Moreover the centralized energy production would be strained and a failure of one such power plant would result in a paralysis of an entire region or country in the worst case.

Myth7 : The best way to use the new AI and electric drive technology is on cars, and this would reduce dependency on hydrocarbons.
Actually the best way to exploit AI and self-driving technologies together with electric drive is on the development and consolidation of train transport for heavy cargo. That includes modernization of classic railway for the operation of automated (drone trains) and magnetic levitation technology for transport of cargo on "special rails"
This would significantly reduce the need of big semi-trailers moving long distances on highways and leave the road free for small vehicles. Semi-trailers or container trucks would only be used from a railway hub to a final destination, hopefully no more than 50Km away from the hub.



posted on Aug, 7 2017 @ 04:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: SaturnFX
Yeah, gotta push along this tech.
driverless cars is a very desired thing. much cheaper than a taxi and will allow for a safer and more vibrant nightlife. learn from, improve, and continue on.


I agree and think it's *the future.* They'll help major population centres to maximise the movement of traffic too. It's easy to envisage all cars in the future automatically switching to city mode and rumbling smoothly along at the exact same speed as all the others. Optimal breaking distances and patched in to traffic lights and pedestrian crossings or even deferring to pedestrians altogether.

Someone with their hands full of shopping bags will be able to press a button on their phone and a car will appear. Same for rolling out of bars blind drunk.

One element that should be addressed is the malicious hacker. It's quite the blackmail proposition to threaten to gridlock a city unless monies are paid. There's an obvious national security issue in that idea as well. Moreover we've had hackers shutting down systems in hospitals and they might not be too fussed about causing cars to crash.

a reply to: ignorant_ape

You sparked a thought I haven't had before and it's akin to the Asimov laws of robotics. I wonder how they programme them for random accidents? By which I mean those when a driver might have to do some very quick thinking with information a self-driving car wouldn't have.

For example, I've had to put two wheels up on a pavement to avoid an oncoming idiot. In the moment, there was nobody on the pavement and therefore it was the safest move to make. A collision with the car would have been the safer option if someone was there. Or last week when a mattress was in the central lane of the M61 and wasn't visible until the car ahead swerved into the outside lane.




top topics



 
2

log in

join