This is drummed into students during the motorcycle training syllabus here (Sydney Australia) - "Do not ride beyond your field of view. It you can't see beyond a curve, crest, fog, rainstorm, queue of traffic or whatever - make sure you're going slow enough that you can stop before you get to the end of where you can see".

I always explain it to friends starting out "you need to assume that just around every corner there's a stationary shipping container that's fallen off a truck. If you cant stop in time by the time you see it - it's your fault for going too fast."

Many people don't seem aware that the reduced speeds at curves aren't because your car can't take the curve at that speed (most can) but because you can't tell if there's an obstruction from a sufficient distance.

Also, it should have been using its brights to increase the visible range, to provide backup for the LIDAR that should've caught this.

This does not seem reasonable. Should it drive at < 35 MPH on highways at night? That's probably even more dangerous.

A car should not ever be driven faster than conditions allow. If the driver cannot see (from rain, snow, darkness, etc.), then they need to slow down. To do otherwise is putting people on the roads at sever risk of injury or death.

People shouldn't be "on the roads" (outside of intersections) anymore than cars should be "on the sidewalks".

a) there are people on the roads inside those metal boxes on wheels, y'know. b) "shouldn't be there" is not a bianco cheque for "run them over", at least in the civilized world

The point is that if a autonomous car can't drive faster than 35 MPH and be able to detect objects, it shouldn't be on the road.