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

Tesla’s Push to Build a Self-Driving Car Sparks Dissent Among Its Engineers

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 399 posts

Re: Tesla’s Push to Build a Self-Driving Car Sparks Dissent Among Its Engineers

#131

Post by s17n »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #31
empath75 wrote: post #8

The level-2 driving that Tesla is pushing seems like a worst case scenario to me. Requiring the driver to be awake and alert while not requiring them to actually do anything for long stretches of time is a recipe for disaster. Neither the driver nor the car manufacturer will have clear responsibility when there is an accident. The driver will blame the system for failing and the manufacturer will blame the driver for…

> The level-2 driving that Tesla is pushing seems like a worst case scenario to me What are you measuring? The current autopilot already appears to be materially safer, in certain circumstances, than human drivers [1]. It seems probable Level 2 systems will be better still. A refrain I hear, and used to believe, is that machine accidents will cause public uproar in a way human-mediated accidents don't. Yet Tesla's au…

> What are you measuring? The current autopilot already appears to be materially safer, in certain circumstances, than human drivers

That's a good question. Clearly, existing self-driving tech is safer than human drivers on average. However, "average" human driving includes texting while driving, drunk driving, falling asleep at the wheel, etc. Is the appropriate comparison the "average" driver, or a driver who is alert and paying attention?

Re: Tesla’s Push to Build a Self-Driving Car Sparks Dissent Among Its Engineers

#132

Post by tyrw »

crocal wrote: post #98
tyrw wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems like you're taking your own opinion as a universal truth. There are many people (myself included) who will happily ride in a well-tested autonomous vehicle, particularly if the alternative is a taxi, uber, or bus driver who is just going through the motions. 5x safer is still an improvement in my eyes, even if it's still short of the gold standard for aviation.

No personal opinion here. It's just facts from the only ones around who have done this before. Your argument is flawed. We have also been there. Here is the catch. You are willing to take the risk, but society as a whole will not. As soon as you release /total/ control to a machine, public authorities having authorized this become responsible for your life and those your car may threaten. Requirements for said author…

I'd disagree here too. Trains and planes have extremely catastrophic failure modes, while cars do not. Cars have the added benefit of being able to quickly come to a stop in most situations.

An even bigger driving factor (pun intended) will be that the cost of a driver relative to operation is much, much higher in a car. A solution that is better on both safety and cost will be quickly adopted.

Re: Tesla’s Push to Build a Self-Driving Car Sparks Dissent Among Its Engineers

#133

Post by notlob »

miahi wrote: post #69
jballanc wrote: post #11

Honestly, I don't understand why the automobile industry doesn't learn from the airline industry. Airplanes have worked out how to balance autopilot capabilities with the need for pilots to remain engaged and attentive for years. Simply implement a Drive-By-Wire, similar to Airbus' Fly-By-Wire systems. A driver's inputs to the controls would still be required, but the autonomous systems could prevent or limit certain…

Many of the current cars are 100% drive by wire (ECU/power brakes/electric power steering), but that doesn't mean anything. Probably quite a good part of the $hundred of millions price of a passenger plane is the autopilot (even 1% means $1M). And even at $1M/plane, 99% of a plane's autopilot works because it assumes that the current plane is the only one in a large vicinity of a point in space. This is assured by a…

> Many of the current cars are 100% drive by wire (ECU/power brakes/electric power steering), but that doesn't mean anything.

Electric power assisted steering. Few cars on the road currently are correctly termed steer-by-wire. Actually, only the properly-optioned Infiniti Q50 comes to mind.

Re: Tesla’s Push to Build a Self-Driving Car Sparks Dissent Among Its Engineers

#134

Post by JumpCrisscross »

s17n wrote: post #131
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The level-2 driving that Tesla is pushing seems like a worst case scenario to me What are you measuring? The current autopilot already appears to be materially safer, in certain circumstances, than human drivers [1]. It seems probable Level 2 systems will be better still. A refrain I hear, and used to believe, is that machine accidents will cause public uproar in a way human-mediated accidents don't. Yet Tesla's au…

> What are you measuring? The current autopilot already appears to be materially safer, in certain circumstances, than human drivers That's a good question. Clearly, existing self-driving tech is safer than human drivers on average. However, "average" human driving includes texting while driving, drunk driving, falling asleep at the wheel, etc. Is the appropriate comparison the "average" driver, or a driver who is al…

> Is the appropriate comparison the "average" driver, or a driver who is alert and paying attention?

The most appropriate comparison set would be the drivers who will replace themselves with autopilot-steered vehicles.

Re: Tesla’s Push to Build a Self-Driving Car Sparks Dissent Among Its Engineers

#135

Post by kuschku »

aerovistae wrote: post #56
tdees40 wrote: post #20

I just ordered a Model S with Autopilot, and as I've been reading the comments on the various Tesla forums, I'm not sure I'm ever going to use it. Some of the stories are honestly terrifying (sudden deceleration on the highway, swerving into other lanes, etc).

Absolutely do not use it. I am one of the biggest Tesla fans out there. I fucking love the company. But Autopilot in its current form is nothing short of dangerous. I took a test drive in a Model S a couple months ago and enabled Autopilot at the Tesla rep's encouragement while on a straight stretch of route 90 near Boston. We were going 70mph, a safe speed. The car came to a point where the highway curved, and a sli…

It gets worse, if your Tesla is following a car in front of you, and they switch lanes, but you can’t switch lanes because another car is coming from behind in that lane, the Autopilot will switch nonetheless.

This almost killed a tester from the German federal motor vehicle approval agency. Their overall report is devastating, and shows the Tesla autopilot is little more than a glorified cruise control, marketed in a very deceptive way.

Re: Tesla’s Push to Build a Self-Driving Car Sparks Dissent Among Its Engineers

#136

Post by Cshelton »

aerovistae wrote: post #56
tdees40 wrote: post #20

I just ordered a Model S with Autopilot, and as I've been reading the comments on the various Tesla forums, I'm not sure I'm ever going to use it. Some of the stories are honestly terrifying (sudden deceleration on the highway, swerving into other lanes, etc).

Absolutely do not use it. I am one of the biggest Tesla fans out there. I fucking love the company. But Autopilot in its current form is nothing short of dangerous. I took a test drive in a Model S a couple months ago and enabled Autopilot at the Tesla rep's encouragement while on a straight stretch of route 90 near Boston. We were going 70mph, a safe speed. The car came to a point where the highway curved, and a sli…

Yeah, this is 100% false. I've owned a Tesla for over a year. I take several curves on a daily basis with the speed set to around 82 mph. Going into the curve, the car slows down to about 65 mph, which is the speed every other car on the road takes that curve. It's even stated in the AP documentation and release notes. Go ask other Tesla owners as well. I've never heard of a Tesla being "swung" out of a lane on a curve.

Tesla uses a combination of the visual lanes, cars in front, and an accelerometer, to determine the curve and how much it needs to slow down.

Other than a freak situation last year (not on a curve, it was the hill crest with the white truck crossing the highway), every SINGLE accident has been shown to be the drivers fault with autopilot disengaged. Not a single accident of what you described has happened.

Re: Tesla’s Push to Build a Self-Driving Car Sparks Dissent Among Its Engineers

#137

Post by notlob »

ghaff wrote: post #108
Animats wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Requiring the driver to be awake and alert while not requiring them to actually do anything for long stretches of time is a recipe for disaster. Everybody who's looked at this seriously agrees. The aviation industry has looked hard at that issue for a long time. Watch "Children of the Magenta".[1] This is a chief pilot of American Airlines talking to pilots about automation dependency in 1997. Watch this if you have…

This is a well-researched area, in addition to being pretty obvious to everyone. Personally, I stopped using cruise control years ago. If I have to pay attention, I'm better off driving. This isn't just a matter for Tesla. The auto industry is rapidly heading for much better assistive driving systems. There's no way that the people heads-down in their cell phones are going to do this less once they realize they don't…

I’ve long wondered if people who extensively use advanced assist systems will see deterioration in manual driving aptitude, and if that deterioration will be restricted to the operating domain for the assist systems or be more general.

Re: Tesla’s Push to Build a Self-Driving Car Sparks Dissent Among Its Engineers

#138

Post by aerovistae »

Cshelton wrote: post #136
aerovistae wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Absolutely do not use it. I am one of the biggest Tesla fans out there. I fucking love the company. But Autopilot in its current form is nothing short of dangerous. I took a test drive in a Model S a couple months ago and enabled Autopilot at the Tesla rep's encouragement while on a straight stretch of route 90 near Boston. We were going 70mph, a safe speed. The car came to a point where the highway curved, and a sli…

Yeah, this is 100% false. I've owned a Tesla for over a year. I take several curves on a daily basis with the speed set to around 82 mph. Going into the curve, the car slows down to about 65 mph, which is the speed every other car on the road takes that curve. It's even stated in the AP documentation and release notes. Go ask other Tesla owners as well. I've never heard of a Tesla being "swung" out of a lane on a cur…

I am glad to hear this.

But it is not 100% false that the Tesla I test drove functioned this way. It is, in fact, 100% true. This happened last month.

Re: Tesla’s Push to Build a Self-Driving Car Sparks Dissent Among Its Engineers

#139

Post by akmiller »

empath75 wrote: post #8

The level-2 driving that Tesla is pushing seems like a worst case scenario to me. Requiring the driver to be awake and alert while not requiring them to actually do anything for long stretches of time is a recipe for disaster. Neither the driver nor the car manufacturer will have clear responsibility when there is an accident. The driver will blame the system for failing and the manufacturer will blame the driver for…

But L2 requires the drivers active attention as they have to have their hands on the wheel every 60 seconds (or something like that). As long as Tesla doesn't remove that constraint then there shouldn't be any worries.

I don't see how you can get to L5 without L2 and the learning that is going on in these cars today.

Re: Tesla’s Push to Build a Self-Driving Car Sparks Dissent Among Its Engineers

#140

Post by frgtpsswrdlame »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #109
frgtpsswrdlame wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>What are you measuring? The current autopilot already appears to be materially safer, in certain circumstances, than human drivers [1]. Actually the study explicitly doesn't show that. First of all, in the study, it purely measures accident rate before and after installation, so miles driven by humans are in both buckets. Second of all the study is actually comparing Tesla before and after the installation of Auotst…

> Actually the study explicitly doesn't show that You are correct. We do not have definitive data that the technology is safe. That said, we have preliminary data that hints it's safer and nothing similar to hint it's less safe.

>That said, we have preliminary data that hints its safer and nothing similar to hint it's less safe.

Safer than? Human driving? No, we don't.

Post reply on HN