11–20 of 184 posts
It sounds like it's not 100% confirmed that Autopilot was at fault. The first sentence of the article also reads "reportedly on 'Autopilot'"
I wonder if it is imprudent to create too many vehicles that have partial self-driving capability before we have ones that can do 100% of it. Instead of to the point where you can take your attention away from the road, but not to the point where it can reliably avoid accidents on your behalf. Too many people aren't wise enough to use the partial autonomous technology without abusing it.
I suspect the primary problem is not the partial autonomous technology, but the marketing which is convincing people they can trust it. Nobody ever told you your cruise control means you don't have to pay attention, so very few[1] incidents happen due to misuse of it.
First and foremost, Tesla should never have been allowed to release "Autopilot" being called that. From the very name it provides a false impression of what it can do.
[1]I know you can find one. Humans are remarkably stupid.
I wonder if it is imprudent to create too many vehicles that have partial self-driving capability before we have ones that can do 100% of it. Instead of to the point where you can take your attention away from the road, but not to the point where it can reliably avoid accidents on your behalf. Too many people aren't wise enough to use the partial autonomous technology without abusing it.
Tesla I think has done a fantastic job at striking a balance between getting something into the market the generate real-world data and mitigating the risks that come with it. If this car really did crash into the fire truck at around 65 MPH then it did a pretty good job at keeping everyone safe.
I think I would be hard pressed to find any technological or mechanical innovation that did not initially involve risk or have an accident associated with it. I've seen more examples where a Autopilot has done the right thing and avoided an accident than I have read stories of it making a mistake and causing an accident.
I wonder if it is imprudent to create too many vehicles that have partial self-driving capability before we have ones that can do 100% of it. Instead of to the point where you can take your attention away from the road, but not to the point where it can reliably avoid accidents on your behalf. Too many people aren't wise enough to use the partial autonomous technology without abusing it.
I have a feeling Tesla knew this and didn't care. The marketing value of "Autopilot" is too great.
Airbags also kill babies if used incorrectly.
There are warning placards in several places in your car saying such.
Sometimes an airbag can cause more injury than the accident.
A seatbelt may trap you in a sinking car.
But overall, airbags and seatbelts have significantly reduced traffic injuries and fatalities.
Autopilot saves lives. Autopilot used incorrectly can kill people. But overall, Autopilot has significantly reduced the number of accidents involving Teslas.
So do we take airbags away because using them incorrectly might hurt a child? Are they a safety feature or marketing value?
How obvious is the data recording on a Tesla? There's always a chance an inattentive driver will blame the smart car.
I wonder if it is imprudent to create too many vehicles that have partial self-driving capability before we have ones that can do 100% of it. Instead of to the point where you can take your attention away from the road, but not to the point where it can reliably avoid accidents on your behalf. Too many people aren't wise enough to use the partial autonomous technology without abusing it.
Maybe they could take some ideas from the rail industry, which have been dealing with this issue for quite some time now. Engineers are required to to make some kind of input to verify that they're still alert, or the train stops[1] if they haven't done anything in X seconds. Obviously you wouldn't want the car to just stop in the middle of the road, but there could be something like that designed. [1] https://www.qu…
I'd imagine Tesla wasn't thinking about how the driver alertness feature could be countered unfortunately. Perhaps we'll see Tesla adapting the eye tracking tech that Cadillac Hypercruise is using.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have a feeling Tesla knew this and didn't care. The marketing value of "Autopilot" is too great.
Airbags save lives. Airbags also kill babies if used incorrectly. There are warning placards in several places in your car saying such. Sometimes an airbag can cause more injury than the accident. A seatbelt may trap you in a sinking car. But overall, airbags and seatbelts have significantly reduced traffic injuries and fatalities. Autopilot saves lives. Autopilot used incorrectly can kill people. But overall, Autopi…
There is no evidence of this.
I wonder if it is imprudent to create too many vehicles that have partial self-driving capability before we have ones that can do 100% of it. Instead of to the point where you can take your attention away from the road, but not to the point where it can reliably avoid accidents on your behalf. Too many people aren't wise enough to use the partial autonomous technology without abusing it.
As long as there is a human variable I severely doubt we will every get to a system that is 100%. The raw truth of it is to make a system that can do it close to 100% you need data. Tesla has chosen to put a semi-autonomous system into the hands of consumers in order to generate the massive amounts of data necessary to achieve full automation. Other companies have chosen to log a crazy amount of hours using technicia…
I believe your definition of keeping everyone safe differs from the common usage.