As long as Uber's system logged which automatic brake was triggered - or simply failed to log that its own braking system stepped in - it could have saved a life without impacting the data gathered.
They didn't put a tarp over the windshield; why get rid of other proven safety features?
You don't generally want multiple autonomous control systems in a single vehicle competing with each other for control. There are scenarios where the less-sophisticated collision avoidance radar could do the unsafe thing where the self-driving system has a more holistic plan.
Basically, there's no reason the self-driving tech shouldn't have been way more effective than the collision avoidance radar other than Uber royally screwed up. The LIDAR and other sensors should have (and by this article, likely did) detected the woman long before the vehicle was in striking distance, much longer range than the forward radar.
That argument applies equally to human drivers competing for control of a vehicle with automated braking systems. Are there not also scenarios where the less-sophisticated collision avoidance radar could do the unsafe thing where the human has a more holistic plan? If not, why not?
> There are scenarios where the less-sophisticated collision avoidance radar could do the unsafe thing where the self-driving system has a more holistic plan.
I believe the whole thing will require better conceptualization of something that we call crew resource management for human teams. That is, how do you respond if you have conflicting information?
