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

201–210 of 399 posts

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

#201

Post by ghaff »

mulmen wrote: post #199
ghaff wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a well-documented concern in aviation. Hard to imagine it will be less prevalent in a population that doesn't even need to get re-certified now and then. General skills deterioration is probably not the issue that having to take over very quickly is, but it is one.

I wonder how much more the average driver's skill can degrade. We never re-train so isn't there a natural degradation already? Will automation make that worse or will it not be significant?

For the typical (certainly US) driver, the initial training is just to get to a minimally viable set of skills so they can pass their driving test. The vast majority of people aren't taking performance driving courses to get their drivers licenses. I'd pretty much guarantee that almost every driver is more skilled 10 years after they get their license.

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

#202

Post by kevmo314 »

cletus wrote: post #100
mdekkers wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Call it the uncanny valley of automation safety. I am not disputing your assessment, but please don't discount liability. Planes can pretty much fly themselves today - there are no significant technology issues with the idea of "taxi away, take off, fly to destination, land, taxi to gate". all of this happens in what is perhaps the most regulated traffic environment on the planet. The issue is with creating the code…

> Planes can pretty much fly themselves today but > The issue is with creating the code that deals with "oh shit" scenarios. So they fly themselves except they don't? That's kind of my point: what makes anyone think truly driverless cars are going to happen anytime soon when a human is required to deal with these "oh shit" scenarios? What's more, I think the "oh shit" scenarios for cars are FAR more complicated. With…

You could argue that in the "oh shit" scenarios for a car, the proper action is to always stop. Most human drivers will instinctively stomp on the brakes if they see anything they're not expecting, and this is pretty much what today's autonomous software does.

Recovering from the "oh shit" scenario is the difficult part, but human pilots often can't recover, after all it makes little sense to try and fix an engine on fire while flying, instead opting to land.

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

#203

Post by asteli »

Animats wrote: post #78

Tesla's system doesn't have enough sensors. Musk forced his engineers to try to do this almost entirely with vision processing, and that was a terrible decision. Vision processing isn't that good yet. Everybody else uses LIDAR. I've been saying for years that the right approach was to take the technology from Advanced Scientific Concepts' flash LIDAR and get the cost down. I first saw that demonstrated in 2004 on an…

I've seen you plug flash LIDAR (especially ASC's unit) several times here, but is anyone actually using it on SDVs? I've seen things that could have been flash LIDAR on test cars, but never as the primary sensor.

I worked on a team that evaluated the ASC unit a few years ago, but they found it unusable due to bloom issues. Has that changed?

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

#204

Post by wooter »

coldtea wrote: post #152
Cshelton wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same. I love reading opinions about how dangerous or bad the Tesla "autopilot" is, or that it dosen't work, from people who have never owned or driven in a Tesla with autopilot. I've probably gone about 8,000 miles on autopilot in mine (AP1) and it is truly amazing. After a road trip stint of ~200 miles, I feel much more energized and less fatigued in the Tesla with autopilot 99% of the way than I do in previous non-…

> Same. I love reading opinions about how dangerous or bad the Tesla "autopilot" is, or that it dosen't work, from people who have never owned or driven in a Tesla with autopilot. Would you say the same after if you happen to get involved in a serious autopilot accident though? That's the question. It's very easy to be all roses before one sees any issues.

could say the same about people "feeling safer" when driving themselves. which is what all the opposing side clings to. (sure isn't statistics)

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

#205

Post by castle-bravo »

Facemelters wrote: post #122
RonanTheGrey wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I were one of those engineers, and didn't believe in the claims being made, I'd personally be quite worried of being held personally liable if the company gets sued in the case of accidental death. Last thing I'd want is my bug being responsible for someone dying. E.g. I would quit too.

Good thing it would be almost impossible to attach personal liability to an employee of a corporation unless they intentionally designed the system to be unsafe with malicious intent.

Frankly, I would be more worried about someone dying using a system that I had a hand in than whatever effect it might have on my career.

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

#206

Post by wooter »

return0 wrote: post #52
smileysteve wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless it works. better than a human. > 90-99% of the time. Mostly, the drivers, insurance, companies and other people on the road have fewer accidents.

We don't usually switch to a new technology unless it's > 120% better than what exists today. The cool factor will not be enough for practical adoption.

tons of technology is used for lesser marginal gains. no clue where you got this idea from.

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

#207

Post by titanomachy »

int_19h wrote: post #150
kbenson wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I recently drove an Accord with lane-following and speed adaptive cruise-control recently. It completely failed (but thankfully by refusing to try) in the one instance that I wanted to use it (stop-and-go traffic), but it was nerve wracking when it was on as it kept losing the lane. People naturally alter the throttle and speed when going around corners and up slight inclines. It feels alien when that doesn't happen.

I have a Subaru with lane-following and adaptive cruise. Lane follow fails miserably because it keeps losing the lane boundaries, even on clearly marked roads. But adaptive cruise control works extremely well, and particularly shines in stop-and-go traffic. One catch there is that it'll stop automatically, but it won't ever go if it came to a full stop - you need to tap the gas to reactivate cruise. If the car in fro…

I also drive a new-ish Subaru, adaptive cruise seems to work well in some situations (low speed stop-and-go, like you mentioned) but at high speeds it is terrifying... A speed that is reasonable on straight highways is pretty jarring around curves. If my foot is on the gas I'll subconsciously make the needed adjustment, but with cruise on I don't usually react in time.

This could partly be a consequence of living in the Pacific Northwest... lots of winding mountain highways!

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

#208

Post by ghaff »

anarazel wrote: post #188
ghaff wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> Personally, I stopped using cruise control years ago. Cruise control seems fairly harmless - you still have to keep lanes, and keeping your foot on the gas isn't particularly demanding either. I largely use cruise control because I am able to save on gas that way, by avoiding unnecessary acceleration/deceleration. Combination with lane following and holding of distance is more problematic imo.

It's mostly that I tend to drive on roads with at least a moderate amount of traffic. It tempts me to not optimally mix with other vehicles. I just got out of the habit of using it.

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

#209

Post by aerovistae »

avar wrote: post #189
aerovistae wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

You may however be overestimating how much a car like the S needs to slow down in a turn. It has a really low center of gravity. Maybe it didn't need to slow down at all and you were just being paranoid. Can you provide a map link to the stretch of road where this happened?

I don't think I was being paranoid....I'm generally a very, very fast driver who prefers the inner lane and 85mph+ speeds given the opportunity. I do know the car has amazing handling but it unequivocally started swerving heavily out of the lane at the speed it was traveling at.

It's route 90 between Allston and Back Bay. It looks like a pretty gentle curve so looking at the map certainly makes my description of events seem questionable, but I can only tell you that it occurred as I described.

I understand your skepticism.

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

#210

Post by wooter »

crocal wrote: post #166
tyrw wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

For the first paragraph, I don't understand the logic behind your comparison between a train failure mode and a car failure mode. However your assumption on braking capability is wrong and it is a crucial point. It does not matter how well your car can brake. Can your autonomous driving system guarantee it will always brake as hard and as fast as required when you will need it? Can you guarantee that the system will…

dude. this is not logical. if a system kills less people, we should use it. otherwise, you're just choosing to kill more people for a false sense of authority/security. not only foolish, but i resent that you believe you can make the choice for others.

you are using appeals to authority and emotion rather than the scientific method.

Post reply on HN