Hacker News Reader

Comment by dfee | Hacker News Reader

What no one seems to be talking about is that a person was walking their bike across a divided 4 lane road that in many places would be called a highway. This is not a pedestrian friendly crosswalk, and it’s not high noon.

You can tell by the tail lights of the car in front (first second of video) that a pedestrian would be able to see a car coming.

Which begs the question - why did the human step out in front of the car? Is there culpability there, too? If a person intentionally puts themselves into a deadly situation, how should AI handle this?

We’re all looking at the cars, but let’s keep in mind that crossing a dark divided highway in front of a car you can see coming is a really really bad idea.

View on HN

You make an interesting point regarding responsibility. Say that person were:

- Mentally deficient.

- A child suddenly running because thats what children do.

- A blind person making a mistake.

There are countries where if a pedestrian is crossing the road anywhere that isn't a designated crossing zone, then they are responsible for their fate.

In Canada and the USA, I believe that pedestrians "always" have right of way and drivers are supposed to be as vigilant as possible.

Of course, some pedestrians take this to heart and suicidally jump onto a road. In the US, this is more prevalent in walkable cities and college towns.

Pedestrians do not always have the right of way.

However, drivers must avoid collisions with pedestrians, even when the vehicle has right of way.

Here's the relevant vehicle code in Arizona: https://www.azleg.gov/ars/28/00793.htm https://www.azleg.gov/ars/28/00794.htm

In Arizona,

> 28-793. Crossing at other than crosswalk A. A pedestrian crossing a roadway at any point other than within a marked crosswalk or within an unmarked crosswalk at an intersection shall yield the right-of-way to all vehicles on the roadway.

(https://azbikelaw.org/jaywalking-in-arizona/)

I think we could all agree that:

1. The pedestrian should not have been there

2. The car should not have hit/killed him/her.

Those points needn't be mutually exclusive.

> This is not a pedestrian friendly crosswalk,

Indeed.

So, IYTM "why was there no stoplight to provide a safe crossing?"

Reply on news.ycombinator.com