Google self-driving car blamed for crash with bus

Title says "Google self-driving car blamed for crash with bus"

Article ends with "Urmson said the self-driving car did bear some responsibility for the accident."

So, who is doing the blaming?

So does the Google car have to attend comedy traffic school?

From what I've heard, the bus was going 15mph & the Google car was going 2mph. Doesn't really sound like a crash, more like a "bump".

Skynet has achieved self awareness.

I am very sorry for the self driving car as it didn't know one thing and that is that it should consider the VTA bus a special case and yield to it without ever assuming that the bus will yield.
I have run into a similar situation with VTA buses many times. Approaching a stopped VTA bus on the lane to its left I have noticed that most of the bus drivers pull out of their bus stop and come into my lane if I show the slightest bit of hesitation. I think they feel their mission of shuttling people around on time is the highest priority or sth. Like that. It also doesn't hurt that the bus is so much bigger than a car.

In India, it is said: "Nirvana can be attained through a head-on collision with a lorry." What does enlightenment look like for a self-driving vehicle? Deep thoughts.

"the test driver sitting in the Google car noticed a Valley Transit Authority bus approaching from behind but thought the bus would yield or slow down."


It can only be attributed to human error.

In what circumstances would one use a self-driving car?
Most of the time one needs to be present at the destination.
ok, picking someone up at the airport?

I have seen Google self-driving cars: run a stop sign on San Antonio; make an illegal left turn against a red light on Shoreline; and run a stoplight on Castro. The first two times I called Mtn View PD with the license number, but was told there was nothing they could do if an officer didn't see it-- or if it didn't cause a collision. Actually, the incident of the illegal left turn on Shoreline very nearly caused a side impact to the Google Lexus-/ fortunately the Mercedes whose right-of-way was violated had very good brakes.

The stoplight violation on Castro I didn't bother calling in, because if the police don't care, why should I?

BTW, our insurance agent has twice told us that the auto insurance industry as a whole has decided that if the self-driving cars are made available to the general public, they will absolutely not insure them. The law states that an uninsured vehicle cannot be legally allowed on the road.

You DO NOT NEED insurance to drive in California.

You need any *one* of the following:

1.) Motor vehicle liability insurance policy.
2.) Cash deposit of $35,000 with DMV.
3.) DMV-issued self-insurance certificate.
4.) Surety bond for $35,000 from a company licensed to do business in California.

Source: Web Link

Call up Feinstein Deleon and Boxer these self driving cars must be banned. Think of thechildren!

If you want to report a problem with the self-driving cars, report it to Google at:
Web Link using the "Contact Us" link. I did that once and got a nice reply with a promise to address the issue I noted.

What happens to all the self-driving cards if the judge suspends Google's driver's license? ;-)

>>> Call up Feinstein Deleon and Boxer these self driving cars must be banned. Think of thechildren!

Wow, can self-driving cars have children already?

How many miles have these cars racked up and how many accidents have they had? I've heard they are more reliable than humans so far ... but they cannot make complicated decisions or parse unpredictable situations? In other words ... they are not really self-diriving at this point. So ... I wonder if this is something the software got wrong, of the human failed to react in time to save? I've seem these folks driving around in these cars around Safeway up and down San Antonio and into Palo Alto, and they do seem rather bored most of the time ... who knows what they might get up to in those cars????

Hope they get this productized sometime soon though ... it sure would be nice to be able to use driving time for something productive.

Legally, who exactly is the driver of these cars?

Apparently VTA buses and their drivers never yield the right of way.

Last night, on the way home from work, a VTA bus ran a red light to make a left turn and I came very close to T-boning the bus ( which had ONE passenger, BTW).

One week earlier, another VTA bus ran a stop sign to turn to make a right-hand turn right in front of me. That required that I slam on my brakes. I got the license plate and bus number of that one, and called the VTA.

Do these bus drivers think that because of the bus's size, other vehicles MUST stop for them, regardless of what stupid maneuver they make? Many times the other vehicle simple can NOT stop in time.

For this reason, I would be willing to bet the Google car's right of way was violated by the VTA bus!

"which had ONE passenger, BTW"

That's a pretty good load for VTA.

> VTA bus ran red light ..

This happens all the time. People can report these occurrences to VTA, but it's not clear what, if anything, will happen to the unionized driver.

What's needed are "black boxes" on these buses which log all actions by drivers, which would include running red lights. Forcing the issue with County Supervisors would be necessary, but it's hard to know how they will advocate for the public as opposed to protecting "union rights".

Can't we install Google's technology to drive those buses? Then we could achieve a major Guinness-worthy milestone: no humans at all on board most of them.

There is a famous quote: "People in the 'middle ages' didn’t know they were living in the 'middle ages'.”

We are in the "middle ages" of personalized transportation, but the enlightenment is approaching. In 10-20 years, all new cars will be driverless. All new cars will be electric. Most people (especially those in urban/suburban areas) will give up car ownership in lieu of Uber (Google/Apple?) self-driving, on-demand car services. We will look back at the inefficiencies of personal ownership of gas-guzzling cars and shake our heads at how we could have lived that way.

The naysayers will claim this is rubbish -- people will never trust driverless cars. People will never want to give up the luxury of driving themselves everywhere. At the turn of the 20th century, the naysayers declared the same about "horseless carriages".

While my children are learning to drive, and will have the "pleasure" of car ownership, buying insurance and maintaining their cars, I guarantee this will not be the case for my grandchildren...

In high school 45 years ago I was guaranteed we'd be long out of oil by now.

VTA cuts off bicyclists, too. I personally was cut off several times. Once I boarded the bus that was picking up passengers after it cut me off in the bike lane and chewed the driver out. Other times I was glad to escape uninjured.
One of these times I'll get injured or worse, and my heirs will sue "deep pockets".
Google cars expect other drivers to honor the rules of the road, and for people to be reasonably careful. Maybe that is expecting too much?

"Google cars expect other drivers to honor the rules of the road, and for people to be reasonably careful."

Google cars are apparently naive and also unaware that drivers use iPhones.

Naive today, but learning (like my teenagers!). Self-driving cars are not ready for prime time today, but will be in the next couple of years. It's the humans who are on their iphones that need the self-driving cars the most!

Will there be accidents with self-driving cars -- of course. Will there even be deaths in self driving car accidents -- has to be. But will the number of accidents / deaths be drastically lower than today -- guaranteed.