A human doesn't need to know and have seen every object in existence to know what it might be seeing or to make the right decision while driving. Based on logical reasoning, we can make pretty good assumptions. If we see a human walking, drunk, crouched, running, crawling, we are still able to identify it as a human and not misidentify it as an animal or anything else, least because we are also able to interpret the context of where and when we are seeing it.
To do something like this in software (with zero-intelligence) is rather complex, if not to say impossible.
One thing I find rather more intriguing though - even if that AV couldn't make the proper distinction between bicycle and human - it shouldn't matter, because it was an object in a direct path plain and simple. In the end, it could have been an elephant, a robot from the future, a guy concealed in a box crawling over the road... it still should have stopped.
It's one thing to identify what you are seeing - but it's another of simply seeing that there's an object within the path of the car and no matter what it is, to stop.
If the whole AV industry is built with the goal of simply identifying anything 'moving' that could be potentially on the road, I wonder what will happen if there's an object there that a piece of software simply wasn't programmed to identify.
Not for nothing, Rosberg's Championship is the only thing that lends credibility to Hamilton's recent success. Otherwise, he'd just be the guy who's had the best car. — bhall II