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

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

#231

Post by pnathan » Thu, Aug 24, 2017, 10:40 PM UTC

wooter wrote: post #210

crocal wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

He's arguing from a position of someone who's familiar with the socio-political process. It's a different axis than technical arguments or ideological arguments.

I have no substantial comment other than to note that when a driverless car is insurable by Liberty Mutual at normal rates, with all liability held by Tesla, then it's probably reasonably safe.

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

#232

Post by speakingmachine » Thu, Aug 24, 2017, 10:41 PM UTC

aetherson wrote: post #200

delinka wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"neighborhood"? Who commutes across a neighborhood as the full extent of their commute? I suspect it's within a rounding error. Driving across a city, however, I definitely see this. Daily. And "accident" I expect to mean everything from a light tap rear-ending to a full fledged crash. People rear-end each other in my city every day. On my commute, I'll come across two a day. Wet days, a few more. The other five dire…

About six years ago, I would drive from San Mateo to Oakland at least twice a week, after work, to meet my then-girlfriend. So that's down 92, across the bridge, and up to Oakland. It's about 30 miles, all on freeway, and at that time of day all in heavy (though not all stop-and-go) traffic. I don't think I ever saw three separate rear-ends in a single drive. I can't say for certain that I ever saw two. I didn't driv…

You drove 30 miles up 880 twice a week and never saw a rear-end accident? You should play the lottery. I don't know if I see three every day, but I do see one every week. This week's was some clown in the #2 lane, _staring_ down at his phone, rear-end into a stopped car at ~20 MPH. His car was completely totaled with one of the wheels spinning off to the shoulder.

A few months ago I saw a guy, face-down in his phone, smash into an existing accident that was already surrounded by fire trucks. That was amazing.

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

#233

Post by chronic62a » Thu, Aug 24, 2017, 10:42 PM UTC

otakucode wrote: post #148

pmoriarty wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"People will be afraid of them as they are of flying." This is a great analogy, because at the dawn of flight, many people were really, really really afraid of flying -- for very good reasons: the airplanes of the day were incredibly dangerous. Yet people still flew, and flew more and more, despite many very public disasters in which hundreds of people died, and the airline industry grew and flourished. Now most peop…

Sure, planes were introduced at a time when people were willing to step back and tell themselves 'OK, I don't feel great about this but that's just my emotions running away with themselves, I really shouldn't be scared so I should just do it'. Those times are over. Suggesting people should question, much less actively resist, their most primitive impulses is seen as a direct threat to their person. It simply isn't do…

> that person gets punched in the face and lambasted on social media as an insensitive creep. That's just how it goes.

For now, yes.

Once self driving cars have proven their safety in 10-15 years, if you drive your kid to school instead of using an autonomous vehicle, you will lose custody of your children for endangering them. This is a fact even you cannot disagree with.

No one gives a shit about social media posts. Your kid's or parent's lives? All of a sudden people will use what maximizes their chance of survival: self driving cars.

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

#234

Post by nickpresta » Thu, Aug 24, 2017, 10:43 PM UTC

aetherson wrote: post #200

delinka wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"neighborhood"? Who commutes across a neighborhood as the full extent of their commute? I suspect it's within a rounding error. Driving across a city, however, I definitely see this. Daily. And "accident" I expect to mean everything from a light tap rear-ending to a full fledged crash. People rear-end each other in my city every day. On my commute, I'll come across two a day. Wet days, a few more. The other five dire…

About six years ago, I would drive from San Mateo to Oakland at least twice a week, after work, to meet my then-girlfriend. So that's down 92, across the bridge, and up to Oakland. It's about 30 miles, all on freeway, and at that time of day all in heavy (though not all stop-and-go) traffic. I don't think I ever saw three separate rear-ends in a single drive. I can't say for certain that I ever saw two. I didn't driv…

Here are the traffic stats for Canada[0]. In 2015 there were 116,000 "personal injury collisions". That is ~300 injuries a day across Canada.

The Greater Toronto Area has approx. 20% of Canada's population (~35M). If we assume that 300 injuries are evenly distributed across Canada, which seems unlikely due to how bad the driving conditions are on the 401 and DVP, there are ~60 injuries per day in the GTA of various severities.

I don't think someone encountering ~3 per commute during rush hour is unreasonable.

[0]: https://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/motorvehiclesafety/tp-tp3322-2015-1...

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

#235

Post by weaksauce » Thu, Aug 24, 2017, 10:44 PM UTC

dantillberg wrote: post #226

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…

There was a cruise control ish system I heard about on a car (a Mercedes, iirc) in Germany when I was a kid: instead of a target speed, you set a maximum speed, such that pressing normally down on the gas allowed the car to accelerate up to that speed. It trims down the excess gas to avoid exceeding the maximum speed. If you released the gas, the car would coast; and if you pushed the pedal down close to the floor (i…

That system sounds pretty fantastic compared to the dumb cruise control I have in my car. Though it's not as predictable for the people that don't understand how it works.

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

#236

Post by snark42 » Thu, Aug 24, 2017, 10:46 PM UTC

aetherson wrote: post #200

delinka wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"neighborhood"? Who commutes across a neighborhood as the full extent of their commute? I suspect it's within a rounding error. Driving across a city, however, I definitely see this. Daily. And "accident" I expect to mean everything from a light tap rear-ending to a full fledged crash. People rear-end each other in my city every day. On my commute, I'll come across two a day. Wet days, a few more. The other five dire…

About six years ago, I would drive from San Mateo to Oakland at least twice a week, after work, to meet my then-girlfriend. So that's down 92, across the bridge, and up to Oakland. It's about 30 miles, all on freeway, and at that time of day all in heavy (though not all stop-and-go) traffic. I don't think I ever saw three separate rear-ends in a single drive. I can't say for certain that I ever saw two. I didn't driv…

>I don't think I ever saw three separate rear-ends in a single drive. I can't say for certain that I ever saw two. I didn't drive it every day, but I probably did 100 such commutes.

I drive 30 miles through Chicago traffic on the Interstate everyday. I see at least 3-4 accidents per week (people pulled over to the side of the road, out of the way, or at the accident investigation sites.) Most of these are minor fender benders. I'm sure if I was in rush hour traffic for the full 4-6 hours (not just my 90 minutes of commute) I would see way more. They mostly happen in near bumper-to-bumper stop and go traffic (someone misses the guy in front of them stopping) or when traffic unexpectedly comes to a standstill from going 10-20 MPH.

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

#237

Post by tempz » Thu, Aug 24, 2017, 10:50 PM UTC

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…

There will likely be shift in the liability approach, and drivers will be made liable for accidents caused by inadequate technology.

This approach worked well (for some parties) in many other areas, for example in education: now the teachers are the only ones left responsible for the structuraly failing education system.

Now, if these were 1930s, with hundreds of independent auto makers, perhaps the invisible hand of the market would fix this.

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

#238

Post by devrandomguy » Thu, Aug 24, 2017, 10:52 PM UTC

Strom wrote: post #77

true_tuna wrote: post #61

Please stop posting paywalled articles. Especially WSJ. This community represents the future of the internet. I don't know what the answer is for making sure content providers get paid, but the WSJ model isn't it. So let's vote with our attention (or lack there of) and kill this annoying practice before it makes the internet an even more walled and unpleasant place.

Your post lacks information on the part of why the WSJ model isn't acceptable. Paying money for a newspaper isn't exactly unprecedented, and there are plenty of people who are fine with that model.

They want us to commit to a subscription, using a credit card, in US currency. That is significantly different from the newspaper model, because it requires some trust on my part, and it is quite awkward; my CC sits in a firesafe when I am not traveling. Subscriptions also encourage FOMO behavior, something I am currently having a bit of trouble with, personally.

I too would prefer that we do not allow subscription content here. If the story is significant, then it will be covered elsewhere.

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

#239

Post by smileysteve » Thu, Aug 24, 2017, 10:55 PM UTC

empath75 wrote: post #29

greglindahl wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Other companies are also shipping Level-2 systems. US law says that the driver has responsibility for accidents with a Level 2 system. And Tesla shows constant reminders to drivers.

The law is one thing, but if a system works most of the time, can you really blame a driver for drifting away and doing something else. It's asking a lot for a driver to remain focused on baby sitting a robot. I'd rather just drive.

There was a news story of how somebody lit a grill with the cover closed and it blew up. Yes, I still blame the person.

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

#240

Post by speakingmachine » Thu, Aug 24, 2017, 10:55 PM UTC

Animats wrote: post #90

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…

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…

If we're going to borrow from aviation, why don't automakers develop some rudimentary automation (not autonomy) that would help avoid the most common kinds of crashes? For example something that might be automated in a modern aircraft is change flight level. The pilot can command a change to a given flight level and the automation takes care of it. Why don't we have a "change lanes" command for cars? Changing lanes is a leading cause of car collisions, and even people who do it successfully forget to use their signals, check their blind spots, etc. It seems like this level of automation (not autonomy!) would be easier to achieve.