Looking at the recent crash reports (driver watching Harry Potter, driver refusing to take over in winding road), it seems that it is just a matter of time for a news headline about a Tesla crash report with nobody on the front seats and a couple making out on the back seats.
Tesla confirms “Autopilot” crash in Montana
321–330 of 530 posts
Re: Tesla confirms “Autopilot” crash in Montana
#322> "As road conditions became increasingly uncertain, the vehicle again alerted the driver to put his hands on the wheel," said Tesla. "He did not do so and shortly thereafter the vehicle collided with a post on the edge of the roadway." If the autopilot's confidence was dropping that rapidly, why did it not slow the vehicle? If it hits zero confidence it should halt completely until the driver restarts the car in man…
There is not a simple, one-size-fits-all solution to this. Ideally if AP confidence drops to a critical level what you want is for the AP to safely remove the car from the road however how and when do you do that for every possible situation that can be encountered on the roads? At the end of the day the driver has to take responsibility and take over the controls like it asks.
If something on the road becomes unclear to me, I drop speed immediately, and then do anything else. Lower speed gives you more time to think.
Re: Tesla confirms “Autopilot” crash in Montana
#323Earlier quoted context omitted.
> or in fact a legitimate reason to swerve? Reasoning about what's legitimate can be a really fine line. Oncoming car, raccoon, fawn, human, doe, coyote, elk: some of these obstacles might actually be net-safer to not swerve around [perhaps depending on speed]. I'd be really curious if any of the autopilots have a value system that tries to minimize damage/loss of life. And how does it value the exterior obstacle aga…
> elk I'm pretty sure that hitting a full-grown elk is a poor choice, and often a fatal one. A large, full-grown elk can weigh 600 pounds and stand 5 feet tall at the shoulder, which means it will probably go over the crumple zone and directly strike the windshield. This happens commonly with moose in New England, which run up to 800 pounds and 6.5 feet tall at the shoulder. A car will knock their legs out from under…
In this situation, small-to-normal passenger cars are actually much safer than typical American trucks and SUVs. When the legs are taken, the mass of the body strikes the roof of the lower vehicle and bounces over the top. The larger vehicles direct the body through the windshield into the passenger compartment.
I'm not sure about moose, but with more nimble animals, swerving is no guarantee of avoiding collision. A deer can change direction quicker than an automobile, and if it had any sense, it wouldn't be running across the road in the first place. It's definitely safer to slow down and honk your horn than it is to try to guess which direction the damn thing will jump.
[EDIT:] When I was learning to drive, my father often recounted the story of a hapless acquaintance who, in swerving to avoid a snake, had precipitated a loss of control that killed her infant child. He's not a big fan of swerving for animals.
Re: Tesla confirms “Autopilot” crash in Montana
#324Earlier quoted context omitted.
> but actively steering a car while someone else is also actively steering it sounds pretty terrible. My passat has most assist systems and I like how it steers. It tries very hard to get my attention and get my hands back on the steering wheel. It barely lets me keep my hands 15 seconds of the wheel but this is perfect for what it's designed to do: keep you in the lane if you are being distracted by something (eg: b…
> keep you in the lane if you are being distracted by something (eg: baby). If you can't drive responsibly with a baby on board lane assist isn't going to save your ass. If something happens to your baby which distracts you ask someone else in the car to take care of it, if there is nobody to help pull over at the earliest opportunity. Lane assist will not save you from anything else but lane departure and there are…
Getting distracted by a sudden cry or a little child throwing an item is precisely what the feature was designed for. It was not designed for watching TV or cosntantly getting your hands of the wheel to do something else.
Also I find it interesting how much you assume about a person or situation from a single word.
Re: Tesla confirms “Autopilot” crash in Montana
#325Earlier quoted context omitted.
> keep you in the lane if you are being distracted by something (eg: baby). If you can't drive responsibly with a baby on board lane assist isn't going to save your ass. If something happens to your baby which distracts you ask someone else in the car to take care of it, if there is nobody to help pull over at the earliest opportunity. Lane assist will not save you from anything else but lane departure and there are…
I can't imagine the gymnastics involved in this feat either. A baby doesn't belong on the front seat without some modifications to the car as far as I know. I absolutely agree. There is absolutely no excuse for the driver to take their eyes off the road to assist a baby in the car. How would you assist a baby in the back seat while driving with a seat belt on anyway? As I read about people using these features, I'm c…
Who said anything about a) baby on a front seat (which is not permitted anyways) and b) assisting a baby.
If you have ever driven with a baby or child in a car you will have learned that they can cry or make a tantrum. Assist systems are intended to supplement and assist the driver in situations of increased stress. The idea that one would actively take their hands off the wheel to do something with a child is so preposterous ghat only commenters on HN could seriously suggest that.
Re: Tesla confirms “Autopilot” crash in Montana
#326Earlier quoted context omitted.
Am I the only one that thinks people should be held responsible for their own choices? This argument is completely bogus. No driver in the nearby lanes is aware the other driver is drunk, a bad driver or emotionally unstable. The entire idea of beta testing is to have your system on an "uncontrolled environment". The system has bugs, as any beta system does, and whoever uses it should be fully responsible for it. Yes…
"Tell me what's the difference between using a beta system and not caring (leaving hands off the wheel, etc) and drunk driving?" The latter is a clearly defined criminal offence whereas the former is currently unclear. While the driver is certainly liable for reckless driving, that the marketing seems to have suggested that the feature is usable, is a fact.
And does that remove the driver's responsibility?
Re: Tesla confirms “Autopilot” crash in Montana
#327With three accidents on "autopilot" in a short period, the defects in Tesla's design are becoming clear. 1. Tesla's "hands on wheel" enforcement is much weaker than their competitors. BMW, Volvo, and Mercedes have similar systems, but after a few seconds of hands-off-wheel, the vehicle will start to slow. Tesla allows minutes of hands-off time; one customer reports driving 50 miles without touching the wheel. Tesla i…
I still say they best damn well rename the feature. The connotations of the work autopilot are too strong as to be misleading to what it can actually do.
when the technology matures then bring the name back, but until then call it something else.
I am still amused that most of these self driving implementations only drive when people are least likely to need the assistance, good visibility conditions. They are the opposite of current safety features which are designed to assist in bad driving conditions. I won't trust any self driving car until it can drive in horrible conditions safely.
At most these services should be there to correct bad driving habits, not instill new ones
Re: Tesla confirms “Autopilot” crash in Montana
#328IMHO, autopilot means "vehicle drives by itself without my involvement"...it's not autopilot if my hands have to be on the wheel. It seems that this technology is Cruise Control v2.
Having the hands on the wheel only gives the car manufacturers leverage in denying there is any problem on their end.
Re: Tesla confirms “Autopilot” crash in Montana
#329With three accidents on "autopilot" in a short period, the defects in Tesla's design are becoming clear. 1. Tesla's "hands on wheel" enforcement is much weaker than their competitors. BMW, Volvo, and Mercedes have similar systems, but after a few seconds of hands-off-wheel, the vehicle will start to slow. Tesla allows minutes of hands-off time; one customer reports driving 50 miles without touching the wheel. Tesla i…
Once again Tesla have made the discussion about the driver. They have put an auto-control system out in the wild that steers the car into hard obstacles at high speed. Beeps to warn the driver at some stage in the preceding interval do not make this control systems failure any more acceptable. It still misjudged situation as acceptable to continue and it still drove into obstacles. Those are significant failures and…
I would never buy a Tesla for this reason.
You drive their cars, and you're always driving around with a third party with its own interests.
Re: Tesla confirms “Autopilot” crash in Montana
#330This is going to keep happening until Tesla change their approach from a move-fast-and-break-things startup philosophy to sound engineering one that puts safety in design front-and-centre. Traditional real-world enigneers have been drilled in this for longer than living memory. When the software guys decide to bring their software appraoches to the real world, this is what happens. From 12 days ago: https://news.ycom…
You do know Tesla has the highest safety rating of any car ever rated in history right? https://www.teslamotors.com/blog/tesla-model-s-achieves-best...
Er - that is wrong.
2014 Model S got 5-star/82%[0] (where 100% is best) adult occupant protection on EuroNCAP. For comparison, the smaller, lighter, cheaper 2015 Honda Jazz got 5-star/93%[1]
Other cars are significantly better than this [2]. E.g. 2016 Alfa Romeo Giulia 5-star/98%, 2016 Toyota Prius 5-star/92%, 2015 Volvo XC90 5-star/97%, 2014 Porsche Macan 5-star/88%. I could go on, but the Model S is not the safest car ever tested - it has approximately the same level of crashworthiess as the 2014 Smart Fortwo (4-star/82%) [3] according to EuroNCAP when looking at adult occupant safety.
Cars have come a long way in the past decade or two though - its amazing to see "small" cars like the Jazz where they dont even get a cracked windscreen when basically driving into a wall at 40mph. For comparison check out the 2000 Citroen Saxo fold up like a tin can... http://www.euroncap.com/en/ratings-rewards/latest-safety-rat...
[0] - http://www.euroncap.com/en/results/tesla/model-s/7897
[1] - http://www.euroncap.com/en/results/honda/jazz/21484
[2] - http://www.euroncap.com/