Cruise wasn't hiding accident video from regulators – it had bad internet

https://www.theverge.com/2024/1/25/24050791/cruise-pedestrian-dragging-video-driverless-report

52 46 2 years ago

0xDEADFED5• 2 years ago

Somehow they've managed to look even more inept and morally bankrupt after this.

trhway• 2 years ago

Uber got off by showing video with extremely bad dynamic range "see, the killed woman wasn't visible", Cruise now suddenly - after months long of expensive lawyers work - got "bad connectivity".

Natsu6• 2 years ago

I've driven on Mill Rd. plenty of times, and it actually is hard to see pedestrians who have a bad habit of walking around wearing all black at night because they don't want to use the crosswalks that may be 1/2 mile away. The glare from all the lights makes it hard to see for normal humans, too.

Part of the problem is that their safety driver was watching something on their phone and not actually watching out like they were supposed to. If they had actually been paying attention, that would've been avoidable.

Still, the automatic cars have a much better record with me than the human drivers do. For all that these few accidents were stupid and avoidable, I've seen normal humans doing things far dumber.

vvvvvvvvvvvv• 2 years ago

Part of the problem is that their safety driver was watching something on their phone and not actually watching out like they were supposed to. If they had actually been paying attention, that would've been avoidable

Safety drivers are a poor solution, it's too easily boring (try watching driving videos for more than 10 min straight), so it's completely Cruise fault.

astrange3• 2 years ago

The largest problem with Uber's cars is they came with radar to stop them from hitting things, but they disabled it.

It seems pretty obvious that a self driving car has to be safe at night too.

_dain_• 2 years ago

it actually is hard to see pedestrians who have a bad habit of walking around wearing all black at night because they don't want to use the crosswalks that may be 1/2 mile away.

It's not on pedestrians to wear reflective clothing just for you. Nor is it reasonable to expect someone to make a 1/2 mile detour just to cross the road. That could add 10-15 minutes to their journey.

You are the one operating a heavy, fast-moving piece of machinery. If it's dark and there are people around, drive slowly and carefully.

disillusioned• 2 years ago

She was also crossing at a weird point: just beyond where Mill Ave crosses under the 202, and then starts and uphill climb on its way to the Washington intersection. Despite all this, the safety driver almost certainly would have noticed her if they cared to be doing their job instead of watching TV on their phone, as you say, because at least the area is well-lit.

The reason we average nearly 1 pedestrian death a day here is because of what you cite: unwillingness to walk further to cross at a crosswalk, people weirdly wearing all black, at night, and specifically on the arterial roads, the suicide lane meaning that you're being blinded by oncoming traffic with a person as far away from the streetlights as possible. It's crazy. (The spot where she was hit on Mill Ave, ironically, isn't any of those things; it's the end of the bridge connectors, so it's one-way there, but still.)

bgro• 2 years ago

This is like the scene in breaking bad where Skylar uses QuickBooks.

sschueller• 2 years ago

Are you referring to FTX?

a012• 2 years ago

Is it difficult to extract the video _then_ send it to the investigators? Directly? Blaming their internet connection in the meeting for the missing video is like blaming the dog for eating the homework.

Beldin2• 2 years ago

Blaming their internet connection in the meeting for the missing video

...repeatedly...

is like blaming the dog for eating the homework

...repeatedly...

bombcar2• 2 years ago

Especially when you’ve been training the dog to consume paper …

gruez2• 2 years ago

Is it difficult to extract the video _then_ send it to the investigators? Directly?

That seems to be what exactly happened?

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39157382

jonathanyc• 2 years ago

The NYT article is a lot better and has additional key details (https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/25/technology/cruise-crash-r... or https://archive.ph/GLYF6):

During Quinn Emanuel’s review, the employees who had met with the D.M.V. disagreed about whether the company had shown the complete video to regulators. The bigger problem was that Cruise didn’t tell regulators about what had happened, the law firm said.
“We were lucky they didn’t pick up on the dragging,” one employee said a participant in the D.M.V. meeting had said afterward.

XorNot2• 2 years ago

> “We were lucky they didn’t pick up on the dragging,” one employee said a participant in the D.M.V. meeting had said afterward.

Yeah...that's the real problem here. Something very bad happened with a safety critical product, and anyone involveds instinct is to think that "getting lucky things weren't noticed" is a good thing.

Not to mention speaking incredibly poorly of the moral compass of whoever said that.

zx8080• 2 years ago

If they cannot send a video over the internet, they cannot be trusted to operate the fleet of selfdriving cars on the public roads.

oli-g• 2 years ago

Pretty much this, end of thread.

Ukv• 2 years ago

If they cannot send a video over the internet

The internet issues were when showing the video live over screen-sharing in the briefings. Cruise did send NHTSA a copy of the full video later the same day:

Just as the NHTSA meeting was concluding, at 10:59 a.m., a NHTSA employee sent Cruise an email titled “File request: CBI Cruise Pedestrian Incident 10/2/23” with a link to upload video of the Accident. At 1:40 p.m., Cruise sent the Full Video to NHTSA.

gruez2• 2 years ago

From the article:

“However, in three of these meetings, internet connectivity issues likely precluded or hampered them from seeing the Full Video clearly and fully,” the report states.

It sounds like they're having issues with the meeting platform rather than with internet on the self-driving cars themselves. Dismissing an entire company's development efforts because of an IT SNAFU makes little sense. It'd be like dismissing the efforts of OpenAI because they had issues setting up a projector at a conference.

juggertao2• 2 years ago

according to a report compiled by a law firm investigating the incident. The law firm, Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, was hired by Cruise to determine whether its executives misled regulators

This is why lawyers are so expensive. Totally worth the money in this case to hire an "independent" auditor.

krisoft5• 2 years ago

Well, not sure what you mean by “totally worth the money”. Their report is quite damning:

https://assets.ctfassets.net/95kuvdv8zn1v/1mb55pLYkkXVn0nXxE...

Especially this quote from the ”Summary of Principal Findings and Conclusions”: “The reasons for Cruise’s failings in this instance are numerous: poor leadership, mistakes in judgment, lack of coordination, an “us versus them” mentality with regulators, and a fundamental misapprehension of Cruise’s obligations of accountability and transparency to the government and the public. Cruise must take decisive steps to address these issues in order to restore trust and credibility.”

Not exactly a warm endorsement.

juggertao2• 2 years ago

Look at the main message: it wasn't malevolence, just incompetence and technical difficulties.

Beldin2• 2 years ago

The unstated allegation is that they weren't hired for a warm endorsement, but to assuage the regulator and the public.

If that were true, you could expect certain things, such as casting blame towards folks who have left for company culture, or framing issues with informing the regulator as technical difficulties (eg, instead of deliberate malfeasance).

That the resulting report aligns with such expectations isn't proof - but it might raise an eyebrow here or there.

hiddencost• 2 years ago

Hold on.

If they were playing these videos for the regulators live, as it sounds like they were, they would have known the key segments weren't shown, right?

So they'd still have a duty to point out those details, because they'd know the regulators hadn't seen them?

Edit: this reminds me of kids intentionally corrupting their .doc files when mailing to teachers, so they could get an extension. Sounds like the kind of lie that, if proper forensics could be carried out, should result in serious jail time.

NietTim• 2 years ago

Very odd. You'd think that with an incident like this the second these connection issues popped up they'd put the car on a flatbed and tow it to an office/garage to ensure all evidence can be secured

krisoft5• 2 years ago

You are misunderstanding.

The alleged connection issue is not between the car and the cloud.

It is connection issues with the Cruise employee presenting the video to the regulatory agencies in a video meeting.

It is also only a tiny part of the whole picture. They made written reports to the regulatory agencies which failed to disclose the fact that they dragged the pedestrian. Overall the report is quite damning.

thih9• 2 years ago

And Cruise failed to augment the Full Video by affirmatively pointing out the pullover maneuver and dragging of the pedestrian

Is there nothing against lying by omission in this context?

krisoft5• 2 years ago

There is. They got their permit suspended for it and the company suffered severe negative consequences.

inciampati• 2 years ago

Why isn't there an independent video recording in the car itself that could be downloaded for review later?

anon373839• 2 years ago

It’s an interesting narrative that has been crafted for Cruise, but it beggars belief that Cruise would have ever intended to send the video alone and let it “speak for itself”.

krisoft5• 2 years ago

I think what we need is NTSB style investigations for every incident involving a self driving car.

An independent regulatory agency should secure the data, interpret it, and provide recommendations.

If this were an aircraft crash you wouldn’t have the designer/operator/manufacturer/maintainer (the same entity in all four roles) massage videos and hold presentations. You would have a competent and independent flyaway team secure the evidence and analyse it.

This is fundamentally in the best interest of the self driving companies themselves too.

bombcar2• 2 years ago

NTSB already investigates certain “commercial” incidents (usually involving railroads or busses but sometimes other transportation).

Self-driving cars should certainly be investigated, even if it’s mostly just a cursory “can we file this as user error” - as the self-driving part is a commercial operation.

As it is the NTSB already records data on various aspects of driving incidents and sometimes notices something and investigates. It’s why it’s worth reporting if you notice safety issues.

Jemm• 2 years ago

Another case of a self regulating industry failing basic competence.

htrp• 2 years ago

Over 100 Cruise employees were aware of the pedestrian-dragging incident prior to the October 3rd meeting with the San Francisco mayor’s office, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, the DMV, and other government officials. But Cruise said nothing about the pedestrian being dragged, instead letting the video speak for itself.

Quinn Emanuel is who you hire when you need corporate deniability. Technically, it was bad internet, not an active coverup.

rideontime• 2 years ago

“We are focused on advancing our technology and earning back public trust,” Cruise said in a blog post in response to the report.

When did they have it in the first place?

Cruise wasn't hiding accident video from regulators – it had bad internet

Related Stories