Tesla ‘on Autopilot’ slams into parked fire truck on freeway • Hacker News Board

Re: Tesla ‘on Autopilot’ slams into parked fire truck on freeway

#71

Post by FireBeyond » Tue, Jan 23, 2018, 2:43 AM UTC

rileymat2 wrote: post #35

jsjohnst wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I couldn’t agree more. It baffles me how Tesla can get away with such blatant false advertising (it’s anything but “autopilot” in any layman sense), especially in light of there being multiple incidents of bad accidents which showed them at fault.

I would be curious about the stats though, If accidents are less frequent, is it at fault for accidents, or did it save us from a bunch of accidents?

There's also those other issues:

Tesla has not been counting collisions caused by the driver having to brake hard because the autopilot was about to happily slam into another vehicle/object/person? Tesla's summation of those is that they were not a failing of Autopilot, because it was not active at the moment of impact. That's ... disingenuous ... at best.

And then:

"It would have avoided this accident [by braking, steering]", and studiously saying nothing about the future, "... but it would still have been in a collision 0.42 seconds later".

For all the collisions it would have avoided, there's another subset where it would only have "delayed" the collision. But that won't be mentioned. Because it doesn't fit the narrative.

Re: Tesla ‘on Autopilot’ slams into parked fire truck on freeway

#72

Post by jcranmer » Tue, Jan 23, 2018, 2:43 AM UTC

typicalbender wrote: post #13

rootusrootus wrote: post #2

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…

Data is insufficient. The most famous polling miss in history relied on 2.4 million responses (~1.8% of the population) to conclude in 1936 that the Republicans would win the presidential election. What matters is the quality of your data, and if it is sufficient to draw reasonable conclusions from.

I don't see any evidence that Tesla has more, or less for that matter, of the necessary high-quality data that is needed for self-driving cars. The fact that real people are driving those cars continuously, potentially generating reams of data, is pretty immaterial, since the majority of that data is going to be useless (let's face it, 10 million hours of driving in the same conditions isn't better than 1 million hours of driving).

Re: Tesla ‘on Autopilot’ slams into parked fire truck on freeway

#73

Post by manicdee » Tue, Jan 23, 2018, 2:44 AM UTC

jsjohnst wrote: post #25

frgtpsswrdlame wrote: post #17

You know I take issue with Tesla on these incidents. They're trying to have it both ways. They market it as 'autopilot' to appeal to the dream of complete self-driving but if an accident actually happens it can never be the fault of autopilot. After all it's required for the driver to be paying attention so if they didn't override autopilot it's obvious they weren't paying attention. Really I'd like to see the govern…

I couldn’t agree more. It baffles me how Tesla can get away with such blatant false advertising (it’s anything but “autopilot” in any layman sense), especially in light of there being multiple incidents of bad accidents which showed them at fault.

And yet when we get stuck in thought and don’t think about where we’re going and drive to our office on the weekend by accident we say “oh, I got stuck in autopilot”

These accidents are not people mistaking the purpose of autopilot, they are people slipping into false confidence that the car will handle the driving for them because it has in the past.

Re: Tesla ‘on Autopilot’ slams into parked fire truck on freeway

#74

Post by justasitsounds » Tue, Jan 23, 2018, 2:45 AM UTC

taneq wrote: post #64

justasitsounds wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bets the driver was voluntarily impaired?

Are you implying they may not have been sober? (Which is a fair guess if they can afford a Tesla but want to avoid a medical examination, I guess.)

That is what I was implying - but people do act irrationally in the aftermath of a traumatic event like that

Re: Tesla ‘on Autopilot’ slams into parked fire truck on freeway

#75

Post by kelnos » Tue, Jan 23, 2018, 2:45 AM UTC

steve_adams_86 wrote: post #59

sathackr wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> Autopilot used incorrectly can kill people. Sorry, I don't get it. How do you use something incorrectly when by definition you aren't really using it at all? It seems like an oxymoron.

Using Autopilot while not being alert and engaged would be "using it incorrectly".

Re: Tesla ‘on Autopilot’ slams into parked fire truck on freeway

#76

Post by spraak » Tue, Jan 23, 2018, 2:45 AM UTC

Just the other day I was using the Tesloop [1] service from near LAX and the driver was praising the autopilot feature. I thought it was really neat at the time, but I would be much more hesitant about it now :/

[1] https://tesloop.com/

Re: Tesla ‘on Autopilot’ slams into parked fire truck on freeway

#77

Post by typicalbender » Tue, Jan 23, 2018, 2:47 AM UTC

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #27

CPLX wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 believe your definition of keeping everyone safe differs from the common usage.

I believe parent is referring to the survivability of a 65 MPH head on crash into a heavy object.

Correct, "safe" was a poor choice of word. Alive and relatively unscathed according to the article is what I was going for. Thanks for the clarification.

Re: Tesla ‘on Autopilot’ slams into parked fire truck on freeway

#78

Post by FireBeyond » Tue, Jan 23, 2018, 2:48 AM UTC

drtz wrote: post #67

A Tesla slammed into the back of a stopped firetruck at 65mph and the driver walked away un-injured. Why am I not already driving a Tesla?

Because most modern vehicles are made to the same crash safety standards and would likely have a similar outcome?

The Tesla isn't magical, made of adamantium, or such.

Not to sound overly snarky, but as someone who has been a firefighter / paramedic for the best part of a decade, I've certainly seen my fair share of MVAs up close.

Re: Tesla ‘on Autopilot’ slams into parked fire truck on freeway

#79

Post by sjwright » Tue, Jan 23, 2018, 2:48 AM UTC

SheinhardtWigCo wrote: post #39

ProfessorLayton wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The more I think about it, the more I think that there should be an outward signal, such as a special light, that a car is in self-driving mode. We already require signals when changing lanes, reversing, and for electric cars to be audible at low speeds (starting in 2019). Those nearby shouldn’t have to guess if a car is under computer control.

What do you think human drivers should do differently when driving near a car that is under computer control?

The equally interesting question is what you think computer drivers should do differently when driving near a car that is under computer control.

For example, if your computer control car knows that the car behind is also computer controlled, it could be more aggressive on the brakes to avoid a forward collision without causing a rear collision.

Re: Tesla ‘on Autopilot’ slams into parked fire truck on freeway

#80

Post by uniformlyrandom » Tue, Jan 23, 2018, 2:49 AM UTC

sjwright wrote: post #69

SheinhardtWigCo wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you think human drivers should do differently when driving near a car that is under computer control?

Aggressively cut in whenever they want with impunity and zero consequences? Self driving cars will always avoid obstacles where possible and never suffer road rage. The only thing that keeps a check on the impulses of the most aggressive human drivers is the unpredictability of other human drivers.

Just do not do this if you drive a fire truck, obviously.