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

A Tragic Loss

tesla.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 94 posts

Re: A Tragic Loss

#51

Post by madaxe_again »

efaref wrote: post #13

It sounds like the trailer didn't have underrun guards, which I think are mandatory in Europe, but presumably not in the US. http://www.transportsfriend.org/road/guards.html I expect those would have helped in this situation, as the car would have impacted the guards (and thus it would be a normal collision), rather than having its top sliced off.

Correct. The EU requires underrun guards on all vehicles except tipper trucks, which cause a disproportionate number of fatalities still.

There was an attempt to introduce legislation in the US in the 90's, I believe, but it was killed.

Re: A Tragic Loss

#52

Post by [deleted] »

efaref wrote: post #13

It sounds like the trailer didn't have underrun guards, which I think are mandatory in Europe, but presumably not in the US. http://www.transportsfriend.org/road/guards.html I expect those would have helped in this situation, as the car would have impacted the guards (and thus it would be a normal collision), rather than having its top sliced off.

[deleted]

Re: A Tragic Loss

#53

Post by Svip »

d8421l01vv4r wrote: post #50
Svip wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good point. But I think it is too early to call this a 'freak accident', because we don't know enough. Tesla have statistics on their side so far, but they still have not done a fraction of kilometres travelled by conventional means. I hope the technology moves forward, but the technology is not there yet and won't be appearing on a majority of new cars for decades. I predict - moreso than fear - that as more of thes…

Part of the reason why people are afraid of flying is because you are locked inside an aluminium container flying 10km above ground. Sitting in a self-driving car is psychologically quite different.

True, but that's those who are simply afraid of flying. It still doesn't necessarily explain those people who would be uncomfortable flying without a pilot, but perfectly fine with one.

I also hear people telling me that they would not be comfortable with a passenger on a self-driving bus. Anecdotal evidence, I know. And since they haven't actually experienced one, I still think the jury is out on this one; but it still strike me as curious that rational people are not always swayed by statistics.

Re: A Tragic Loss

#55

Post by hellofunk »

mschuster91 wrote: post #25
hellofunk wrote: post #14

> It is important to note > It is important to emphasize I am getting so disappointed by how widespread this wasteful use of the English language has become. The phrase is just filler and means nothing, yet it is used everywhere, nearly every HN thread has someone who uses it. If you need to note something, then note it. By putting it into words, you have said "this is important enough to actually say it." Further sa…

> The phrase is just filler and means nothing, yet it is used everywhere I guess this is due to legal concerns (which also provided us with pages-long email footer legalese bullcrap).

I don't think this has anything to due with legality. A legal contract, for example, doesn't need this phrase anywhere for the words to be legally binding: after all, they are in the contract itself, therefore don't need any special modifier.

Re: A Tragic Loss

#56

Post by cm3 »

Achshar wrote: post #36

Ok, I'll bite. What's [Dupe]? Kind of like reddit tags for posts I assume?

The dupe detector needs to be improved so that submissions cannot be posted twice. It works when I try to submit something which just has been posted the same day, but there must be some logic that allows it to be reposted and also the URL check isn't sufficient. Alternatively a merge of posts by moderators would be okay, too.

Re: A Tragic Loss

#57

Post by hellofunk »

vidarh wrote: post #43
hellofunk wrote: post #14

> It is important to note > It is important to emphasize I am getting so disappointed by how widespread this wasteful use of the English language has become. The phrase is just filler and means nothing, yet it is used everywhere, nearly every HN thread has someone who uses it. If you need to note something, then note it. By putting it into words, you have said "this is important enough to actually say it." Further sa…

Not everything that is important enough to write down has the same importance. While the phrase may be over-used, it is merely one in a long range of methods we use to draw more attention to statements we believe have particular importance at a specific point. If the statement is not genuinely something that needs particular attention, then I agree that such phrases should be avoided. However Wikipedia's policies in…

The Wikipedia policy is just an example, of course, not a suggestion that we follow that site's editing guidelines. But it does show good practice.

Re: A Tragic Loss

#58

Post by phire »

vadym909 wrote: post #26

This is just beyond me. How did the radars not see the front portion of the truck, the front wheels, the underbody of the container isn't that high to let the entire car go through?

It's a narrow beam radar (about 200m range) which checks the current lane is clear, it probably assumed the other parts of the truck were some obstacle on the side of the road (or in another lane)

I'm not even sure the radar has a height dimension, I suspect they just focused it at bumper height to catch most cars.

The car also has a single camera in the front to see the lane markers, and a short range ultrasonic system to give it a 360 degree view, out to a few meters.

For the amount of confidence drivers are putting into the system, Tesla don't have anywhere enough sensor data.

Re: A Tragic Loss

#59

Post by pisarzp »

mysterypie wrote: post #35

Paraphrasing from the article: Tesla Autopilot: 1 fatality per 130 million miles All US vehicles: 1 fatality per 94 million miles Worldwide vehicles: 1 fatality per 60 million miles If the statistics above are accurate, logically there should be no reason for distress, worry, accusations, or mistrust. Or at least much less so than for ordinary driving. It's like shark attacks: No matter how remote it is, there's goin…

But isn't Tesla autopilot working only in highways, which are much safer then average road? Then this statistic wouldn't be that good.

Re: A Tragic Loss

#60

Post by farhanhubble »

gargravarr wrote: post #37
tpatke wrote: post #11

Not good enough. I think Tesla have a lot to answer for here. They are pushing the limits of a technology which Google has said, "needs to be 100% autonomous". No steering wheel. Tesla knows this, but branded their car as 'auto-pilot' anyway. When it became clear from early youtube videos that people were not using the technology 'correctly' Tesla did nothing more than issuing a statement. They should be considering…

Tesla actually use the correct term for it, the fundamental problem is a mass misunderstanding of what aircraft autopilot does. Autopilot in an airliner is capable of flying the plane on a set course in ideal conditions . This means good weather, no other air traffic in the vicinity and full feedback from its various sensors. As soon as the plane enters a scenario outside of which it's designed to operate, control is…

If a radar system mistakes a mammoth trailer for an overhead sign, there's clearly something wrong with it.
Post reply on HN