The company left out some key details regarding the incident involving one of its robotaxis and a pedestrian.


On October 2, 2023, a woman was run over and pinned to the ground by a Cruise robotaxi. Given the recent string of very public malfunctions the robotaxis have been experiencing in San Francisco, it was only a matter of time until a pedestrian was hurt by the self-driving cars. New reports, though, suggest that Cruise held back one of the most horrifying pieces of information: that the woman was dragged 20 feet by the robotaxi after being pushed into its path.

The LA Times reports:

A car with a human behind the wheel hit a woman who was crossing the street against a red light at the intersection of 5th and Market Streets. The pedestrian slid over the hood and into the path of a Cruise robotaxi, with no human driver. She was pinned under the car, and was taken to a hospital.

But this is what Cruise left out:

What Cruise did not say, and what the DMV revealed Tuesday, is that after sitting still for an unspecified period of time, the robotaxi began moving forward at about 7 mph, dragging the woman with it for 20 feet.

read more: https://jalopnik.com/woman-hit-by-cruise-robotaxi-was-dragged-20-feet-1850963884

archive link: https://archive.ph/8ENHu

  • yiliu@informis.land
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    1 year ago

    On the other hand, there’s people who will condemn the very concept of self-driving cars because of the kind of event that happens every day with regular ol’ human-piloted cars.

    This is a serious incident, it should be thoroughly investigated, regulations on safety and reporting should be seriously considered. But don’t strangle the baby in the crib: self-driving cars have the potential to be much safer than human-driven cars (arguably, they already are). When there’s stories about Cruise taxis stopping in an intersection and the response is an overwhelming flood of “ban all self-driving cars!”, it causes proponents to get overly defensive.

    • FoundTheVegan@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      1 year ago

      When there’s stories about Cruise taxis stopping in an intersection and the response is an overwhelming flood of “ban all self-driving cars!”, it causes proponents to get overly defensive.

      But the problem is those events are happening. People are wanting to strangle that baby because the kid is causing harm in the real world. The cars DO need to be taken off the streets, but that doesn’t mean they should be outlawed. However, they absolutely are not fit for public service. As someone who has “driven” a Tesla while it was “Full Self Driving”, and I gotta tell ya that it just can’t handle the rules of the road. It’s not better than a human. We can adapt to new situations on the fly, but a self driving car can only operate in certain parameters.

      While I sympathize that there is nothing you can do about this, the real fault lies with the companies putting vehicles on the road before they are ready. Without a doubt, someday they will be. But as corporations push this out the door in the rush to be the first and the new name brand, they do so at the public expense. It’s the root problem for the cycle of backlash, resentment and defensiveness.

      • Not_mikey@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        If these need to be taken off the streets then all cars need to be, which I’m not totally opposed to. These ones have been on the streets in SF for a while and Im more afraid of human drivers then these, they are very cautious and more often then not they’ll err on the side of just stopping. That’s what most of the incidents have been, it just stopping and holding up traffic. Even in this scenario it was a human who did the actual hit and run. I’ve been in them a couple times now and feel safer in them then an Uber most times, they never try and blow through a yellow light cause they want to get to their next ride, they wont even speed.

        These also aren’t comparable to Tesla auto pilot. They have way more sensors while Tesla seems to be focused purely on cameras. Teslas are also trying to make a general solution for the whole country whereas these were specifically trained and work in SF. There’s a reason they got approved for full self driving in the city while Tesla hasn’t even applied yet.

    • yA3xAKQMbq@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      self-driving cars have the potential to be much safer than human-driven cars

      And if car makers have extensively proven that this is, in fact, the case, they might be allowed on the streets.

      (arguably, they already are)

      Narrator: they weren’t.

      “Tesla is having more severe — and fatal — crashes than people in a normal data set,”

      And I guess this normal data set is including US drivers only, who arguably are … not that good.

      it causes proponents to get overly defensive.

      Uh, no. Getting “overly defensive” is your choice, and yours alone. “Look what you made me do” is really a terrible excuse for anything.

      • Not_mikey@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Your comparing two very different systems. That’s like going to a gas station grabbing some sushi that gets you sick then saying all sushi is dangerous. Teslas have less sensors then the cruise cars and aren’t trained on a contained specific dataset (just San Francisco) like cruise cars have been for over 2 years. For these reasons they are at least even with humans if not safer already and have been approved for self driving in the city while Teslas are far off from even applying.

        • yA3xAKQMbq@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          You post this: “And because California law requires self-driving companies to report every significant crash, we know a lot about how they’ve performed” as a comment to an article where it’s being revealed that said company covered up some kind of important detail about a “significant crash”?

          Okay 👌