XPost: az.politics, rec.video, sac.politics   
   XPost: alt.politics.liberalism   
   From: uber.sucks@21stcenturydems.org   
      
   On Sunday night, an Uber self-driving car killed 49-year-old   
   Elaine Herzberg in Tempe, Arizona. A key argument in Uber's   
   defense has been that the road was so dark that even an   
   attentive driver would not have spotted Herzberg in the seconds   
   before the crash.   
      
   Herzberg "came from the shadows right into the roadway," Tempe   
   police chief Sylvia Moir told the San Francisco Chronicle on   
   Monday. "The driver said it was like a flash."   
      
   When police released footage from the Uber vehicle's onboard   
   camera on Wednesday, it seemed to somewhat support this view. In   
   the video, Herzberg's feet become visible only about 1.4 seconds   
   before the final frame of the video. Prior to that point, she   
   appears shrouded in shadow.   
      
   But then people in the Tempe area started making their own   
   videos—videos that give a dramatically different impression of   
   that section of roadway.   
      
   In this nighttime video, posted to YouTube by Brian Kaufman on   
   Wednesday, the scene of the crash can be seen around 0:33.   
   Features at the sides of the road—including curbs, signs, and   
   bushes—are clearly visible. No pedestrians walk into the road   
   during the video, but it seems clear that Herzberg would have   
   been visible much earlier if the Uber video had been taken with   
   this camera.   
      
   Another YouTuber, Dana Black, posted this video. His camera work   
   isn't as good as Kaufman's—the video is blurry and he doesn't   
   hold his camera steady. But his video supports the same basic   
   conclusion. "It's not as dark as that video made it look," Black   
   says in the video as he drives past the point in the road where   
   Herzberg was hit (around 0:33). "My footage is from my Pixel XL   
   and looks pretty similar to real life," he writes in the YouTube   
   description.   
      
   To be fair, there are a few other cars on the road in Black's   
   video, which might be adding some illumination. But Kaufman's   
   car appears to be the only vehicle on the road, and visibility   
   is still much better than in Uber's dashcam video.   
      
   Headlights are supposed to illuminate more than two seconds   
   ahead of the car   
   It's not surprising that the road was actually more brightly lit   
   than the Uber video makes out. Think about it: the Uber car was   
   going 38 miles per hour (61km/h), and people on pitch-black   
   country roads drive faster than that all the time. That would be   
   extremely reckless if—as the video implies—headlights can't   
   illuminate the road two seconds ahead at that speed.   
      
   The video implies that the Uber car's headlights had a range   
   under 110 feet (33 meters). For comparison, here's a diagram   
   from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety showing   
   headlight ratings for the car in question, a Volvo XC90:   
      
   IIHS shows the XC90 with a range just under 250 feet (76 meters)   
   with "low beams" on. The car's headlights are rated poorly by   
   the IIHS compared with other cars on the market. Still, 250 feet   
   is more than 4 seconds of illumination for a car driving 38   
   miles per hour. If the Uber car's headlights really didn't   
   illuminate Herzberg until less than two seconds before the   
   crash, there was something seriously wrong with them.   
      
   The more likely explanation is that the Uber vehicle's dashcam   
   was poorly configured for nighttime recording, and so the video   
   gives a misleading impression of how bright the scene was and   
   how much warning the driver had.   
      
   And even if it's true that the road were poorly lit, it's not   
   clear if that would exonerate Uber. Uber's cars have lidar and   
   radar sensors in addition to cameras, and those sensors don't   
   require ambient light to function. So the vehicle should have   
   spotted Herzberg even if the road was pitch black.   
      
   Moreover, interior dashcam footage shows the driver looking down   
   for nearly five seconds just before the accident—so she likely   
   would have missed Herzberg no matter how good the illumination   
   on the road was.   
      
   Update: Originally this story featured a generic IIHS diagram on   
   headlight distance. But after it went up my colleague Jonathan   
   Gitlin pointed me to an XC90-specific diagram. So I replaced the   
   diagram and updated the paragraphs on either side accordingly.   
      
   sphigel Ars Centurion   
   JUMP TO POST   
   Thank you for writing this article. It was immediately obvious   
   to me that the Uber dashcam video was misleading. Why? Because   
   I've driven at night. It's really that simple. I know what it's   
   like to drive in pitch black with low beams on. You can still   
   safely drive 40 mph with the amount of illumination you get. I   
   also knew that the Volvo XC90 would have decent headlights   
   (although apparently not great) because it's a modern luxury   
   car. Reading accounts of people saying "I would have hit that   
   pedestrian too" had me bashing my head against the wall. Do   
   these people really think nighttime driving is as barenuckle as   
   the Uber dashcam video depicted? If so, then they shouldn't be   
   driving at night.   
      
      
   https://arstechnica.com/cars/2018/03/police-chief-said-uber-   
   victim-came-from-the-shadows-dont-believe-it/   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)