News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Mobileye says its software would have seen pedestrian in Uber fatality. Parent comment

Re:Mobileye says its software would have seen pedestrian in ... by always_good on Tuesday March 27, 2018 @01:52PM (#16691033)
It's a gamble that jaywalkers lose every year.

When you're going to jaywalk, ensure that the next car is far enough away to where it doesn't matter if they stop. That's the correct way that would've saved this person's life without any further analysis.

I'm taking issue with this:

>that person died for no good reason beyond Uber rushing tech out the door before it was ready

Well, no. They died because they lost their gamble on an unguided crossing where the oncoming car did not stop.

We are now analyzing why the car didn't stop, but notice how no charges were pressed.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Mobileye says its software would have seen pedestrian in ... by wpietri on Tuesday March 27, 2018 @03:57PM (#16692183)
No charges were filed yet, but that's unlikely to happen until after the NTSB report.

It's true that jaywalking is a gamble, but so is crossing a street with the light. Leaving the house is a gamble. That doesn't mean we can blame the victim of a collision for leaving the house. It can be simultaneously true that A) jaywalking is not always a great idea, and B) the Uber car should have avoided this collision.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Mobileye says its software would have seen pedestrian in ... by thrownaway954 on Tuesday March 27, 2018 @02:17PM (#16691268)
i agree with you 10,000%. i think everyone is so concerned about why the car didn't stop, they forget that jaywalking or running out into the middle of the road is a gamble always.

i wonder... if the person crossing had been behind an obstruction and stepped out right in front of the car, would everyone still blame the car or the driver for hitting the person crossing?

[ Parent | on HN ]