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

Tesla confirms “Autopilot” crash in Montana

ktvq.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 530 posts

Re: Tesla confirms “Autopilot” crash in Montana

#371

Post by jessaustin »

prof_hobart wrote: post #317
HNaTTY wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree; I think it's despicable that Tesla is acting in such a defensive manner. -- "No force was detected on the steering wheel for over two minutes after autosteer was engaged," said Tesla, which added that it can detect even a very small amount of force, such as one hand resting on the wheel. "As road conditions became increasingly uncertain, the vehicle again alerted the driver to put his hands on the wheel," sa…

It's certainly a major fault of Tesla's - if you know it's not safe, you've got no excuse to keep going. But the driver shouldn't be allowed to escape blame either. When your car is repeatedly telling you that you need to take control, then you should be taking control.

If the robocar were to warn once, and then steadily slow, all drivers would learn to take over when warned.

Re: Tesla confirms “Autopilot” crash in Montana

#372

Post by haikuginger »

azernik wrote: post #280
_Codemonkeyism wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With the PS/Linux decision, not sure they can just 'disable' the feature.

Not sure exactly to what you're referring, but if it involves hacking your Tesla to re-enable it, a) that will vastly reduce the level of usage, and b) the OTA update could very well completely remove the code from storage, making the job of hacking a much more involved process than just enabling a flag.

Sony is settling a class-action suit with people who bought PS3s while relying on the "Other OS" feature. So, it's not about technical ability to re-enable the Autopilot feature; it's about being liable to their customers who relied on the feature being present when they shelled out $70k+.

Re: Tesla confirms “Autopilot” crash in Montana

#374

Post by cmurf »

prof_hobart wrote: post #317
HNaTTY wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree; I think it's despicable that Tesla is acting in such a defensive manner. -- "No force was detected on the steering wheel for over two minutes after autosteer was engaged," said Tesla, which added that it can detect even a very small amount of force, such as one hand resting on the wheel. "As road conditions became increasingly uncertain, the vehicle again alerted the driver to put his hands on the wheel," sa…

It's certainly a major fault of Tesla's - if you know it's not safe, you've got no excuse to keep going. But the driver shouldn't be allowed to escape blame either. When your car is repeatedly telling you that you need to take control, then you should be taking control.

Incapacitated? The software needs to fail more gracefully than this when the driver is a dependency and isn't responding.

Re: Tesla confirms “Autopilot” crash in Montana

#375

Post by slaunchwise »

aresant wrote: post #29

I wrote this on a previously buried thread: Naming their system "autopilot" goes beyond the marketing dept overstepping and into the territory of irresponsibility. The "average" definition of autopilot per Wikipedia is "autopilot is a system used. . . WITHOUT CONSTANT 'HANDS-ON' control by a human operator being required." And yet Tesla's disclaimer states: "Tesla requires drivers to remain engaged and aware when Aut…

This. It's like they want marketing credit for the engineering feat of creating 'autopilot' while maintaining the narrow legal position that the system isn't actually automatic or a pilot.

Re: Tesla confirms “Autopilot” crash in Montana

#376

Post by icc97 »

mattlondon wrote: post #330
dayaz36 wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

The differences between the Tesla and the Jazz are a bit strange. The main difference in score between the two appears to be the side impact from a pole - which is all 'good' for the Jazz, but it was 'weak' for the Tesla in the body section. But if you look at the two videos of the cars, after the pole crash, Tesla is almost completely intact (29 kph) [1] and the Jazz is half destroyed (32 kph) [2]. The Jazz impact was 10% faster - but the difference in damage is remarkable.

It's also worth noting that where as this child rating is higher for the Jazz - the actual 'Crash Test Performance' was rated as Good for the Tesla but Adequate for the Jazz. The lower test score for the Tesla is because they don't have Isofix installed.

  [1]: https://youtu.be/7uhhYKJWEBw?t=1m4s
  [2]: https://youtu.be/PHptsZglju8?t=2m18s

Re: Tesla confirms “Autopilot” crash in Montana

#377

Post by jessaustin »

the_mitsuhiko wrote: post #324
jacquesm wrote: post #200

Earlier 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…

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.

Be honest, it's for texting, right? b^)

Re: Tesla confirms “Autopilot” crash in Montana

#378

Post by luca_ing »

prof_hobart wrote: post #317
HNaTTY wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree; I think it's despicable that Tesla is acting in such a defensive manner. -- "No force was detected on the steering wheel for over two minutes after autosteer was engaged," said Tesla, which added that it can detect even a very small amount of force, such as one hand resting on the wheel. "As road conditions became increasingly uncertain, the vehicle again alerted the driver to put his hands on the wheel," sa…

It's certainly a major fault of Tesla's - if you know it's not safe, you've got no excuse to keep going. But the driver shouldn't be allowed to escape blame either. When your car is repeatedly telling you that you need to take control, then you should be taking control.

I've worked on highly safety related (classification ASIL D) automotive systems. There are rules about how to think about the driver.

The driver is not considered a reliable component of such a system, and must not be used to guide decisions.

Yes, the driver clearly was a fool, but system design should not have taken his decision into account, and come to its own conclusion for a safe reaction (e.g., stopping the car).

Re: Tesla confirms “Autopilot” crash in Montana

#379

Post by cmurf »

forgetsusername wrote: post #311
madaxe_again wrote: post #307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Suppose I'm driving a "normal" car. I have my hands on the wheel, but I am reading a book. I hit a tree. Is the auto-maker responsible? They advertised the car as having cruise control. Call me old, but I remember similar hysteria when cruise control systems started appearing. People honestly thought it would be like autopilot or better - and ploughed into highway dividers, forests, other traffic, you name it, at 55m…

> Is the auto-maker responsible? Why would the auto-maker be responsible for your distracted driving, and what does it have to do with cruise control? Some of the uproar about these incidents is related to the fact that Tesla marketing is implying far more automation and safety here than the technology can actually provide. And apparently it can cost lives.

What if the manufacturer is permitting conditions that incentivizes distracting driving? Like not requiring hands on the wheel?

It's also a problem if it permits driving faster than the speed limit.

Re: Tesla confirms “Autopilot” crash in Montana

#380

Post by jrockway »

eertami wrote: post #368
vacri wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The moral choice is the opposite direction: the car should prefer to kill the occupant than a bystander. The occupant is the reason why the car is in use; if it fails, the penalty for that failure should be on the occupant, not bystanders.

But in this case it isn't a bystander, it's out in the middle of the road in front of a moving vehicle. If a child runs in front of my car then it is most definitely at fault and I'd honestly much rather it be dead than me, if those are the options.

You're using the word "it" to describe human children now?
Post reply on HN