My best guess is they're lying, or they model curbs to have a "low damage score" so its okay if the ai thinks theres a 10% chance a path will hit a curb.
I'm excited for self driving cars, but I have reservations about a system that has to hard code "don't hit a telephone pole". It reminds me of this skit https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3m5qxZm_JqM
It would be extremely silly to lie about an implementation detail that doesn't matter in an official recall filing with an agency currently investigating you for your reporting of incidents like this.
It could also just be everything gets a damage score, including reflection artifacts that aren't really there or paper garbage in the road, and in this case the pole was identified incorrectly, given a low score, and the car thought it could keep driving.
The verge seems to quote the filing, it would be nice if they had linked it. I can't find it from searching.
Cars hit "objects" all the time without issue. Bits of paper flying through the air, bags, cups, steam clouds, and other small objects are very common sources of "motion planning collision" in urban environments.
In lidar it could have looked like a tall traffic cone or a one of those skinny flexible posts that line the boundaries of some bike lanes. Those things cause much less damage. Telephone poles are obviously much thicker but in lidar space the two can look more similar especially if the cloud is very sparse or the sensor is broken.
Other road users could be classified on the lawful/chaotic and good/evil axes.
Well-behaved vehicles are lawful good. Skateboarders are chaotic good. Drunk drivers are chaotic neutral. Road ragers are chaotic evil. Chaotic users are less predictable, and evil users require active evasion.
I'm excited for self driving cars, but I have reservations about a system that has to hard code "don't hit a telephone pole". It reminds me of this skit https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3m5qxZm_JqM