Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A Tragic Loss

teslamotors.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 511 posts

Re: A Tragic Loss

#91

Post by SapphireSun »

georgecmu wrote: post #25
simonsarris wrote: post #2

> What we know is that the vehicle was on a divided highway with Autopilot engaged when a tractor trailer drove across the highway perpendicular to the Model S. Neither Autopilot nor the driver noticed the white side of the tractor trailer against a brightly lit sky, so the brake was not applied. Tragic no doubt, but I'm relieved that this was not a "Autopilot did something very very wrong" story. Autopilot has the p…

Autopilot engaged when a tractor trailer drove across the highway perpendicular to the Model S. Neither Autopilot nor the driver noticed the white side of the tractor trailer against a brightly lit sky, so the brake was not applied. How is this not an "Autopilot did something very very wrong" story? Tesla autopilot drove the vehicle full-speed into a tractor-trailer, which wasn't registered by its sensor systems. It'…

I guess the question is, was the driver able to see it? I can see how maybe the contrast was so low that maybe it was impossible to see anything except for the wheels which you might not notice. And if the part of the tractor trailer in the path is elevated... sensors sweeping forward see just road.

I guess I'd like to see an NHTSB simulation of the situation in manual driving to see how humans do unassisted.

Re: A Tragic Loss

#92

Post by nomercy400 »

dvcc wrote: post #15
simonsarris wrote: post #2

> What we know is that the vehicle was on a divided highway with Autopilot engaged when a tractor trailer drove across the highway perpendicular to the Model S. Neither Autopilot nor the driver noticed the white side of the tractor trailer against a brightly lit sky, so the brake was not applied. Tragic no doubt, but I'm relieved that this was not a "Autopilot did something very very wrong" story. Autopilot has the p…

How would we ever know that the autopilot acted correctly? Should companies be required to release logs after every crash when a car is in autopilot? Seems fair.

Black box? But logs must be useful for the insurance claim (by either the manufacturer or the driver).

Re: A Tragic Loss

#93

Post by kordless »

Analemma_ wrote: post #40
BinaryIdiot wrote: post #21

I mean I understand Tesla has to make a statement here and I understand they want to ensure everyone that it's not really their fault but to title a post "A Tragic Loss" and then spend the majority of the post discussing all of your car's safety features and how it wasn't your fault just seems tone deaf and distasteful to me. Maybe they had to do it for legal reasons I don't know (I'm certainly not a lawyer) and I'd…

I agree. I'm starting to get really weirded out by Tesla's immediate "not our fault!" blog posts every time a Tesla is involved in any kind of accident. I could see the necessity the first few times back when it was new technology to a lot of people (and Top Gear had it in for them), but with it happening over and over it seems whiny and a bit callous. How long to they plan to keep doing this?

How long are people like you going to keep speaking dissonance for others every time a Black Swan happens?

Re: A Tragic Loss

#94

Post by jacquesm »

This is why driving AI is 'all or nothing' for me.

Assisted systems will lead to drivers paying less attention as the systems get better.

The figures quoted by Tesla seem impressive but you have to assume the majority of the drivers is still paying attention all the time. As auto-pilots get better you'll see them paying attention less and then the accident rate will go up, not down for a while at least until the bugs are ironed out.

Note that this could have happened to a non-electric car just as easily, it's a human-computer hybrid issue related to having to pay attention to some instrument for a long time without anything interesting happening. The longer the interval that you don't need to act the bigger the chance that when you do need to act you will not be in time.

Re: A Tragic Loss

#95

Post by curiousgal »

CobrastanJorji wrote: post #81

> It is important to note that Autopilot is...still in a public beta phase... No, it's not important to note that. You should not be able to hide behind the word "Beta" for systems that could kill people. Either you're willing to let people risk their lives on your software or you're not, and you were.

Judging from the description the accident would've happened either ways.

Re: A Tragic Loss

#96

Post by JustSomeNobody »

BinaryIdiot wrote: post #21

I mean I understand Tesla has to make a statement here and I understand they want to ensure everyone that it's not really their fault but to title a post "A Tragic Loss" and then spend the majority of the post discussing all of your car's safety features and how it wasn't your fault just seems tone deaf and distasteful to me. Maybe they had to do it for legal reasons I don't know (I'm certainly not a lawyer) and I'd…

Did they really have to paint us a picture of what happened? They could have left out some details and still made their point.

Edit: Given the down votes, I guess people really want the mental picture. Sad.

Re: A Tragic Loss

#97

Post by mozumder »

jackpirate wrote: post #11
mathattack wrote: post #3

Tragic. Good that they own it, though I'm not thrilled with this: It is important to note that Tesla disables Autopilot by default and requires explicit acknowledgement that the system is new technology and still in a public beta phase before it can be enabled. When drivers activate Autopilot, the acknowledgment box explains, among other things, that Autopilot “is an assist feature that requires you to keep your hand…

This statement is also disengenuous: This is the first known fatality in just over 130 million miles where Autopilot was activated. Among all vehicles in the US, there is a fatality every 94 million miles. Worldwide, there is a fatality approximately every 60 million miles. The wording implies that these numbers are directly comparable, but they are not. I would guess that Autopilot is much more likely to be activate…

Also, the US fatal accident rate is one death per 108 million miles, which includes motorcycles and teens and drunk people.

Not only that, you'd expect drivers in the higher-income demographic of US auto customers to have less fatal accidents.

The real comparison should between a model S and cars like the Mercedes S-Class, since this is all about car marketing anyways.

Re: A Tragic Loss

#98

Post by prodmerc »

jblow wrote: post #61
Analemma_ wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree. I'm starting to get really weirded out by Tesla's immediate "not our fault!" blog posts every time a Tesla is involved in any kind of accident. I could see the necessity the first few times back when it was new technology to a lot of people (and Top Gear had it in for them), but with it happening over and over it seems whiny and a bit callous. How long to they plan to keep doing this?

It is because, if Tesla allows it to happen, the media will attack them incessantly over these things because they smell a story (and because a lot of vested interests are willing to pay for PR). If you don't defend yourself in that kind of situation, you die.

"This guy died in a Tesla - you won't believe what happens next!"

Re: A Tragic Loss

#99

Post by andrewchambers »

orthoganol wrote: post #35
simonsarris wrote: post #2

> What we know is that the vehicle was on a divided highway with Autopilot engaged when a tractor trailer drove across the highway perpendicular to the Model S. Neither Autopilot nor the driver noticed the white side of the tractor trailer against a brightly lit sky, so the brake was not applied. Tragic no doubt, but I'm relieved that this was not a "Autopilot did something very very wrong" story. Autopilot has the p…

If autopilot fails when it's sunny and the obstacle is white, I have doubts about autopilot.

Humans fail for even more stupid reasons.

Re: A Tragic Loss

#100

Post by kennysmoothx »

Pxtl wrote: post #13
simonsarris wrote: post #2

> What we know is that the vehicle was on a divided highway with Autopilot engaged when a tractor trailer drove across the highway perpendicular to the Model S. Neither Autopilot nor the driver noticed the white side of the tractor trailer against a brightly lit sky, so the brake was not applied. Tragic no doubt, but I'm relieved that this was not a "Autopilot did something very very wrong" story. Autopilot has the p…

That doesn't sound like what happened. "The driver didn't notice" well, that's why they're using autopilot. No matter how many messages people throw at users, any autopilot that doesn't detect that the driver is awake and operating the vehicle is going to be used by sleeping or otherwise unattentive drivers. It's just human nature. So what likely happened was the driver was screwing around and the autopilot completel…

  > That doesn't sound like what happened.
Everything is speculation at this point so I am not sure how you can assume that's not what happened.

  > "The driver didn't notice" well, that's why they're using autopilot.
If Tesla builds and designs a system to be used as an assistant, explicitly tells and warns the user of it's use case and potential danger of using it as anything other than an assistant, then the excuse that "it's human nature" is null, I don't think it's human nature to leave your safety and well being at the hands of something designed to be nothing more than an assistant.

Perhaps the name autopilot exerts to much confidence in its capabilities.

Post reply on HN