I knew this was an accident waiting to happen.

[dryheat]

http://money.cnn.com/2018/03/26/technology/arizona-suspends-uber-self-driving-cars/index.html

They will have the bugs worked out eventually, but I still think its a goofy idea. She was walking across in the middle of the block in the dark. She might have gotten hit by a "regular' car but still...

[JB White]

Merely collateral damage in pursuit of the greater good. No need to worry. *pffft*

[Sunray]

The Uber mobile's sensors failed to see her in the middle of the block, in the dark. A human mostly likely would have noticed the movement.

[Ken The Kanuck]

I am constantly amazed with the people who walk around the roads in the dark in dark clothing, throw in a bit of rain and they are puttng their lives at risk.

KTK

[S.A. Boggs]

I am constantly amazed with the people who walk around the roads in the dark in dark clothing, throw in a bit of rain and they are puttng their lives at risk.

KTK

Watch a student walking and talking and there is an accident waiting to happen. I have had them walk out right in front of me, not bothering to look in any direction oblivious to their AO.
Sam

[Vern Humphrey]

Nevertheless, the car should have detected her. The failure to do so tells us there's a flaw in the system.

[clintonhater]

One less bicycle asshole to dodge.

[Johnny P]

They will work great when the car and everything outside the car uses the same guidance system.

[Tom Trevor]

Watch the video fron the car on the news. The person in the car WAKES up a second before it hits her. The facial expression is priceless.

[dryheat]

I've seen twice mentioned that she was homeless(note the plastic bag on the handlebars). A case of, worth more dead than alive. A wop-bop-a-loo-wop lawsuit. The creepy relatives will show up now.

[Major Tom]

I love it when people who are texting and walk into a swimming pool! 8-)

[clintonhater]

I love it when people who are texting and walk into a swimming pool! 8-)

Much better than that when their car hits a tree, telephone pole, bridge abutment, etc.; one less public enemy.

[bruce]

Autonomous cars will come to the market. At some point, the technology will be cheap enough that it will be the norm. People will get used to it just like they did when they went from shift transmissions to automatics. Nowadays you can't hardly find a shift on a car lot. Virtually no one wants one. The automatics are now superior in just about every possible way. Even over the road tractors use automatic transmissions. When we headed out on a call the other night the pumper we were on had a automatic transmission. It'll be the same with autonomous vehicles.

As to bicycles ... can't see the problem. You yield the right of way to them just like you would a pedestrian. Vehicle does not have the right to the road over the pedestrian. The bicyclist who is obeying the rules of the road is absolutely no different than the man on a motorcycle. As more people use bicycles and motorcycles, everyone best just get used to them and get along with them. JMHO. Sincerely. bruce.

[clintonhater]

As to bicycles ... can't see the problem.

CLEARLY, you do NOT live in an area where they CLOG the roads! Winding, hilly, 2-lane roads, usually with no shoulders! Don't lecture me about "getting along" with these yuppie FAHs until you do!

[JB White]

CLEARLY, you do NOT live in an area where they CLOG the roads! Winding, hilly, 2-lane roads, usually with no shoulders! Don't lecture me about "getting along" with these yuppie FAHs until you do!

You got that right! Cyclists I can deal with so long as the cycle weenies could be kept from the streets. Darting about with the mindset that motorized vehicles must stop for them. Sure, we can stop. Is that before or after they get run over? Sadly the laws giving right of way to bicycles and pedestrians don't make allowances for things like human reaction time and laws of physics. As if a 2 ton car can drop from 30 to 0 mph in only four feet.
Then there are the cycle weenies who think following traffic laws means following the motorized traffic patterns. Instead of crossing with the lights like pedestrians at major intersections, they believe it's correct for them to be out across 2 or more lanes into the left turning lane. Oh, some perch out there giving a proper hand signal as if that shows how correct they are while on their way to sip a latte.

Recently our area passed some stricter pedestrian laws making it tougher for cars to turn in traffic. They now dawdle through crosswalks intentionally knowing cars cannot turn once they step off the curb. Or...they step off the curb just to stop traffic only to turn around and walk back. It's a new game. Others simply walk off into traffic intentionally looking off to who-knows-where any time they decide. Doesn't matter to them traffic is running in both directions at 35 mph. The law says drivers must stop until they step up the curb.
Stop-Look-Listen no longer applies. To some, walk/don't walk signals do not matter. I honestly believe they're listening closely awaiting the sounds of a rear end collision...or grounds for a law suit.

[clintonhater]

Then there are the cycle weenies who think following traffic laws means following the [B]motorized traffic patterns.

Actually, they don't--90% of the yuppie airheads will run stop signs without slowing down if there are no other cars waiting at the intersection.

[JB White]

Actually, they don't--90% of the yuppie airheads will run stop signs without slowing down if there are no other cars waiting at the intersection.

True, but not all are yuppies. I've done it myself at empty intersections. At least I slow down and am prepared to stop if need be. Heh heh...it actually bothers me a little when I do stop and a courteous driver waves me to go first. I'd rather they go because it takes me more time to get going again.

[Allen]

The highways are NO place for bicycles. Very few people actually need them for transportation. In Europe you see bike riders all over the place due to ancient narrow streets and lack of parking. My wife has relatives in Germany and she said that the bike riders travel at their own risk. Even if they hit or scratch a car they are responsible---the cars have right of way, period. Here in the states things are opposite, the bike riders are considered pedestrians and it is up the auto driver to give the bicycle right of way. Some riders will deliberately take a small bump from a car driver in order to sue. The highways, regardless of federal, state or county were paid for with taxes from car tags and gasoline taxes. I see no connection between these taxes and allowance of bicycle usage. If bikes are to be allowed then tricycles, skate boards, roller skaters, kids playing marbles, kids playing basketball, hop scotch, go carts and all other crap that would otherwise obstruct traffic should be allowed.

[clintonhater]

The highways are NO place for bicycles. Very few people actually need them for transportation.

99% of them are used for joy riding pure & simple. What's more, the idiots riding them usually DRIVE to the places they do their joy riding, ADDING to the number of cars on the road, not diminishing them.

And how can they NOT be required to be licensed & insured, if using a public highway??? In this state, even ATVs, prohibited from use on roads, have to be licensed & insured!

[bruce]

With respect, I live in a area of two lane roads. Cyclist are common. It is common to see groups of cyclist riding along the road even out a good way from cities, etc. In my area little children even ride their bicycles and skate boards on the walking path which (horrors!!!) some would prefer to see used only for walking, i.e., no runners, no one walking dogs, etc. Just ... walking. None of this is a problem for anyone. Never saw a sign on the back of a bike or car or pick-up identifying the operator as to politics, profession, etc. If they run a stop sign, it's no different than when a car runs a stop sign. We get along with motorcyclist. No reason we will not get along with cyclist.

As designed, most roads are intended for vehicles. Fine. Retrofit them for bicycles. As far as right of way, pedistrians are rightly presumed to have right of way. No one is so important that they have to drive so fast that they kill/injure someone just because they want to get somewhere fast.

Objections about taxes, supposing that cyclist are looking for ways to force a driver to pay for a accident, etc. are just simply irrelevant. The same goes for objections b/c cyclist are only using the roads for pleasure rather than "business." It is completely irrelevant. It just doesn't matter at all. The big issue behind all those sorts of objections boils down to the simple fact that there are folks who want to do as they please while driving a vehicle without any concern for how it might affect anyone else. They resent people who they don't like getting in their way. They would also complain if those same folks were driving a Corvette ... at 45 MPH in a 65 MPH zone. Complaining that they don't pay enough taxes are in the same class ... just trying to find a rational by which to exclude these people from using the pubic highways/roads/streets.

When vehicles were first beginning to come to common use, pedestrians were not required to cross streets at corners. The idea of jaywalking came into being as a way to adapt city streets for large numbers of vehicles. It was purposed to protect the automobile industry, not to protect pedestrians. JMHO. Sincerely. bruce.

[Allen]

Retrofit them for bicycles.

WHY ???? Whose money? More land for right of way going to be seized for this?

[Ken The Kanuck]

We all know that roads are paid for with taxes raised from the sale of gasoline.

Bicycles do not use gasoline and hence do not contribute to the building and maintaining of the roads.

Ergo bicycles should not be allowed to use the roads.

All very fine until one realizes that pedestrians also do not contribute via taxes on fuel. Nobody suggests that pedestrians not be allowed to use the roads.

I think this is because we are all pedestrians but not all of us ride bicycles.

KTK

[Allen]

cyclist are looking for ways to force a driver to pay for a accident, etc. are just simply irrelevant.

I'm sure you would quickly change your tune if you were sued for bumping into someone with your car even though the "staged" accident was unpreventable. I've seen it happen a lot, mostly with pedestrians. They see a car coming to a stop and deliberately step out in front of them. These are usually the Maxine Waters IQ caliber people and often miscalculate and end up with a squash instead of a slight bump. Most of the time the mishaps are not staged but still, if a motorist strikes a bicyclist for any unavoidable reason they are considered at fault till proven otherwise. The motorist are where they are supposed to be, the bicyclist not, so you don't always know they are present till it's too late. Not unlike a deer darting out in front of you.

People who have no place to ride a 4 wheelers might consider not buying one. The same applies to boats, skate boards and most of all bicycles. Motorist normally have enough to watch out for w/o having to babysit kids on bicycles.

With this type of attitude a person probably thinks all highways, roads and interstates should be shut down so a bunch of idiots can go play in the streets. If they weren't intended for other purposes and if the idiots paid for everything they might have a point otherwise.....

- - - Updated - - -


Nobody suggests that pedestrians not be allowed to use the roads.

When crossing the highways of course, that can't be helped, otherwise no but those that do walk the roads mostly have enough sense to step off the road till the car passes. I've never seen a pedestrian back up traffic for miles because they wouldn't get out of the way.

[clintonhater]

The big issue behind all those sorts of objections boils down to the simple fact that there are folks who want to do as they please while driving a vehicle without any concern for how it might affect anyone else.

No! What those folks want is to be allowed to drive without the unnecessary hazards of trying to pass these idiots on narrow winding roads, or being hit by another driver in the opposite lane who's trying to pass another mob of them. For about 5 months of the year, my weekly 10 m. trip to the nearest grocery store has become a harrowing, as well as dangerous, ordeal! When I get home, usually in a state of complete mental & nervous exhaustion, my first act after opening the door is downing a big glass of wine in one gulp!

Furthermore, EVERYONE I know (which excludes yuppies & tourists) feels just about the same way, and there's no topic of casual conversation more common than "bad experiences" of one kind or another with bicycles!

Nobody alleged that cyclists are the only FAHs on the road--far from it. The brainless jerk going 45 in a 65 zone (no doubt with his cell to his ear) is just one more variety of that thoughtless & detestable breed.

[dryheat]

The road that leads out of town to the mtns. is extremely busy on the wknds. There are bike lanes on both sides all the way out to the lake. But that's not enough. These guys have to ride past the lake and then onto the narrow two lane road with no bike lanes. So now you have the white knuckle experience of trying to squeeze past these guys who refuse to get off the edge of the pavement while a Big truck with a speedboat is coming at you from the other direction. They do get knocked into the ditch from time to time and I don't feel real sorry for them.

[clintonhater]

They do get knocked into the ditch from time to time and I don't feel real sorry for them.

If YOU do the knocking, better feel sorry for yourself! By law, it's automatically YOUR fault, regardless of what asshole behavior by the airhead cyclists led to the accident.

If some other unfortunate driver does the knocking, then you can cheer!

[JB White]

We all know that roads are paid for with taxes raised from the sale of gasoline.

Bicycles do not use gasoline and hence do not contribute to the building and maintaining of the roads.

Ergo bicycles should not be allowed to use the roads.

All very fine until one realizes that pedestrians also do not contribute via taxes on fuel. Nobody suggests that pedestrians not be allowed to use the roads.

I think this is because we are all pedestrians but not all of us ride bicycles.

KTK

Ken, in my area bicycles are on the road because they are more a hazard to pedestrians on the sidewalks. It's unlawful for an adult to ride on walkways. The tickets carry the same weight and penalties as those operating motor vehicles.
The areas which have bike lanes are a mess because the lane takes up traffic space, therefore adding to congestion even on days when there are no bikes to be seen. They (politicians) tried to solve a very real problem by creating a total clusterf**k. The city has simply run out of room!


I try to time my rides in the off hours of heavy traffic, Taking side streets to my destination since the main roads are...well, dangerous. I can get to a park before the dog walkers take over and get in as many laps as possible. 1 full lap = 1 mile. Then the dog walkers come out and there are 'tripwires' attached to pooches across the ways so even the joggers can't function. Riders and joggers seem to get along fairly well as far as sharing and courtesies are concerned.
Option 2 is to ride or drive to a wooded destination with bike trails going for miles or linking up with other trails where I might ride interstate if I chose to. Notice I underlined bike trails? A-hole yuppies will still clog the trails with leashes and toddlers thinking THEY have the absolute right-of-way and have even tried to have bicycles banned in certain parts. They want to picnic along the trails. That is until they decide its time to ride their own bikes.

[JB White]

I just saw where the 'security driver' in that test car was asleep at the wheel. So the so-called driverless car had a mishap due to human error. Ironic. They will not admit robo-cars technology is not as advanced as it needs to be.

[Former Cav]

Watch a student walking and talking and there is an accident waiting to happen. I have had them walk out right in front of me, not bothering to look in any direction oblivious to their AO.
Sam

need a few extra REQUIRED college undergrad courses to graduate:
101 walking ..............hey johny and sally, you need to look BOTH ways before you cross the street.
201 advanced walking...............hey johny and sally, you need to stay off that da*ned cell phone while walking across the street and in grocery store parking lots.
101 bicycling....hey megyn and cooper....you need to stay in the bicycle path
201 advanced bicycling.....hey megyn and cooper ..........you need to OBSERVE traffic laws like motorized vehicles do....stop for the RED LIGHT, go on the GREEN light AFTER LOOKING FOUR ways!!!
301 super advanced bicycling............hey megyn and cooper....you need to STAY OFF the cell phone while riding your bicycle.

(these courses will be repeated and required for your MS and PHD degrees...the course will remain the same the numbers will change 101 becomes 111, 201 becomes 211, for the PHD they become 311, etc, the tuition doubles for the MS program and triples for the PHD program)