Videos released after the incident will show Herzberg walking her bike across the road from one side to the other. The dash cam footage from the interior of the vehicle owned and operated by Uber, a Volvo XC90, plants the victim clearly in line and sight of the camera and closing in until impact. (Viewers beware as the following footage is considered graphic)
The media is currently eliciting a rage on the widespread acceptance of autonomous vehicles and questioning whether the safety of human lives is worth this technological advancement. Tune to any news channel and you will find the commentators asking if this is truly worth the life of a human being. Arizona Governor Doug Ducey himself has temporarily halted Uber's ability to test their fleet of vehicles while an investigation is underway.
Very few media outlets seem to cover the fact, as illustrated in the second half of the vehicle which depicts the interior camera portraying Uber operator Rafaela Vasquez, that the operator was clearly distracted while sitting in the drivers seat. While it is understandable that the testing of autonomous vehicles can become a mundane routine, at what time should the designated operator intervene? Does the fault lie squarely with Uber and their implementation of a clearly flawed design-no perfect solution should allow a vehicle to move when a detected pedestrian is in the line of sight-and what implications does it hold on the operator if they were designated as an emergency backup? Does the waiver of liability permit a person to bypass their inherent moral code in times of apparent need? Questions such as those cannot be answered squarely and without deep debate as we transgress towards a society of autonomous everything.
When the media portrays a clear bias in the reporting of news, it shapes and forms the viewership upon which they are purported to serve. No longer is it the case of an unbiased viewer compiling their own thoughts based on the facts presented. Rather yet, it is already quickly formed and molded within the graphic scenes depicted on screen.
So it is with unfortunate sadness that America woke up on March 19th to media outlets around the country lambasting the technology Uber employed and the accidental death that occurred. A human being, a mother of a child, and one actively trying to reincorporate herself back into society was stolen from us that night. Yet, the very next morning the media outlets were only focused on selling viewership the discriminatory headlines of inaccuracy and hyperbole. In 2016 and within Arizona only, the number of fatal car crashes numbered 865 of which 962 deaths occurred. The nationwide number that same year totaled 34,439 car crashes with a death count of 37,461 lives. Let me re-iterate that. Thirty seven thousand four hundred and sixty-one lives were taken in 2016 from fatal car crashes. All of those lives combined did not generate the same amount of media attention than the death of Herzberg.
At the end of the day, upon the removal of the camera and the signage of Uber on the side of the Volvo XC90, would we care about this unfortunate incident? We are only captivated because of the hype surrounding the first death caused by an autonomous vehicle. Yet, one can question if this death was due to computer malfunction or human incompetency. If Vasquez was fully driving a non-autonomous vehicle and had his eyes planted to a mobile device when Herzberg was struck, would we have the same reaction as we did? If Herzberg conducted her negligent jaywalking into oncoming traffic and the vehicle that struck her was not an autonomous vehicle, would our media outlets provide such extensive coverage? The answer to all of the above, sadly, is no.
Question:
1) Do you think that the headlines generated by this incident is due to it being Uber or autonomous?
2) How sensitivity would this incident have been if the victim was hit by a vehicle traveling via cruise control and not autonomous driving?
3) As our society embraces autonomous driving, what responsibilities do you think the driver should bear? Do you think the driver should have a complete hands-off ability such as what was evidenced in this accident?
References:
https://www.citylab.com/transportation/2018/03/former-uber-backup-driver-we-saw-this-coming/556427/
https://www.forbes.com/sites/helenpopkin/2018/03/23/operator-in-arizona-uber-self-driving-car-crash-is-a-felon-thats-not-why-elaine-herzberg-is-dead/#761a68d5669b
http://www.iihs.org/iihs/topics/t/general-statistics/fatalityfacts/state-by-state-overview
https://www.theverge.com/2018/3/26/17166326/uber-self-driving-autonomous-vehicle-ban-arizona-fatal-crash
We discussed this previously. You offer an interesting point of view. Do you have any questions, or are we to comment on whether we agree or disagree with you and why?
ReplyDeletePersonally, I do not compare autonomous vehicles to "normal" car crashes from texting. Many more pedestrians are killed from texting and this increase in deaths is alarming. It may be why we wrote a law that bans texting. If caught by police or others who report it, there are steep consequences.
People kill themselves from texting, too. Autonomous vehicles allow you to text and look at your phone, unless of course you are testing the vehicle - and Arizona gov allowed you to do it with no regulations. It was night time and a bike was crossing in the middle of the street. Even if you were texting and killed her in a normal car, it would probably be a lot worse for the driver than for the company. Unless you have stock in Uber, they will have a hard time making inroads in this market. They lose money. Herzberg loses her life. My 2 cents.
I think Suzie does make a good point: self-driving cars do give drivers more of a reason to text instead of looking at the road. In this sense, self-driving cars don't actually help one of the biggest reasons car crashes happen. If drivers continue to not look at the road while operating a moving vehicle, deaths like this will always be occurring.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I also think that self-driving cars will save the amount deaths that happen in the United States per year. I hate to admit it, but this has been one of (if not the) first fatals incidents with Uber. And, at the end of the day, the biker was jaywalking. Since this did happen, Uber will investigate what went wrong and most likely fix it before this technology becomes a popular reality. This incident will also teach pedestrians to follow the rules more. If people start using cross-walks more like they're supposed to, this accident would have probably not happened. Even if this car didn't drive itself and the driver was forced to focus, he still could have hit the biker because it was nighttime and difficult to see. In the video, I couldn't even see the biker until she was right in front of the car.
While this is my viewpoint, I don't agree that the media blew this out of proportion. At the end of the day, a person was killed. The light needed be shown on this because it forces Uber to improve their technology while also giving pedestrians more of a reason to follow the rules. Self-driving cars are becoming more of reality every day, so everyone is going to have to adapt to it at some point.