|
ElCondemn posted:Seems like the human driver didn't have the reaction speed to prevent it either, not sure what you expect? the autonomous system didn't even try to prevent the accident. it never applied the brakes and plowed in to her at 40mph (the speed limit of the street) pangstrom posted:I kind of hope that when they release the victim's name it's Sarah Conner. it was Elaine Herzberg
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2018 02:11
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 2, 2024 17:29 |
|
|
Kerning Chameleon posted:Looking at that exterior video, I can't say I wouldn't have hit her either, even being fully alert. Could just be the video making the outside look darker than human perception would have been, though. there's that, plus you are not equipped with lidar, which itself is a light emitting sensor (laser light, usually infrared or ultraviolet)
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2018 02:02
|
|
|
BENGHAZI 2 posted:I'll say it, I would not have hit that lady ditto, cause if it was as dark as it looks in that video i would not be driving that fast. or I would have my brights on.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2018 02:08
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:Just like I am sure you will never talk about the Chief of Police's statement: so you don't know what lidar is? cause shadows like that aren't a problem for lasers
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2018 02:17
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:this conspiracy goes right to the chief of police! even if you ignore that the light emitting sensors the car was equipped with are not affected by "shadows", you don't have an actual excuse for the way the car was driving. lets go ahead and analyze your dumb claim that the car could only see what was illuminated by its headlights (even though that's completely untrue). if that was the case, why was the vehicle travelling at a speed at which it would be impossible for it to react to anything coming into it's limited range of visibility? the woman did not pop out of some bushes, or dash into the path of the car, or any of the other bs theories you were trying to spin before. she was walking slowly, and the time between her being visible in the video and the car hitting her is one second. too short for any corrective action to be taken. and that would be the same issue if she wasn't jaywalking. if it was another car, the uber car wouldn't be able to react in time in your scenario. if you believe that its visibility was so severely hampered, then it was clearly driving at a ludicrously unsafe speed and uber is responsible for this woman's death. however, the facts are much simpler. the car could detect her on account of the multiple sensor arrays it had that are not affected by darkness, and failed to do so and ran over her at full speed. case closed, uber was at fault for this woman's death.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2018 02:27
|
|
|
here's a vid someone posted showing the actual lighting conditions on the road the uber AV hit that lady https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1XOVxSCG8u0&t=32s so even more indefensible. uber killed someone with their janky tech Condiv fucked around with this message at 08:25 on Mar 22, 2018 |
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2018 08:21
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:I mean, they released the video first because it's a human readable format. It's a lot easier to tweet out a video than like, an array of hundreds of thousands of [x,y,z] points. They might release a rendering from the lidar data later, but it's more steps to make that than just release a video that is viewable as is. lol the people working on self driving autonomous vehicles can’t map 3D data to a 2D video format That’s some high grade bullshit
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2018 14:04
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:They haven't said they won't or can't release lidar renderings, just they haven't done so as fast as they released video. Since video is a lot less steps to release. it doesn't take a day or two days or three days to produce that rendering oocc
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2018 15:31
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:Render what? data clouds? depth maps? concentric circles? volumentic? false color? color overlay? You’re trying to make this way more complicated than it is. 
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2018 18:40
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:Not really, those super pretty videos of lidar use a ton of interpolation, and smoothing and sanding the models it generaties. It's really cool, but if you are looking for like, an accident reconstruction they aren't what you should use. But if you just released a video of the raw point cloud or something it'd look like a crazy mess of points jittering all around. No one said it’s as fast as raw camera footage. It’s deffo not a multi day process though. Like I said, you’re making it out to be more difficult than it is
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2018 19:21
|
|
|
ElCondemn posted:I don't know how useful a visual representation of a point cloud is going to be, that's not how this poo poo works. Even if you as a human see a visual representation and can say "I can see a person" doesn't mean that's how the model they're working with sees it. that's a problem with their model then Owlofcreamcheese posted:Like what are they releasing to who? again, you're making it more complicated than it is. don't claim they couldn't release a video rendering of their lidar data in a day next time, cause you're dead wrong Xae posted:It is always multiple days to get things ready. And I already explained why to you. that wasn't what was being discussed though xae. sorry, but try to not wander into a conversation if you can't keep up
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2018 20:46
|
|
|
Xae posted:You're try to say the discussion about why things take time isn't relevant to why things take time? xae, we were discussing technical poo poo. no-one was talking about courtrooms or discovery or anything until you decided to interject. and quite frankly, i don't care about any of that if you wanna argue with someone about discovery or legal proceedings, do it with someone else. ok?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2018 21:05
|
|
|
Xae posted:You think Uber's lawyers aren't heavily involved in this and aren't running the show? i already said i don't care about any of that. oocc made a claim it wasn't technically feasible, i argued otherwise. go argue with someone else about what uber's lawyers are doing
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2018 21:14
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 2, 2024 17:29 |
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:where? Owlofcreamcheese posted:I mean, they released the video first because it's a human readable format. It's a lot easier to tweet out a video than like, an array of hundreds of thousands of [x,y,z] points. They might release a rendering from the lidar data later, but it's more steps to make that than just release a video that is viewable as is. hth. i hope the rest of the argument doesn't need to be traced out again for you
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2018 21:26
|
|