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

Tesla crash victim had complained about auto-pilot in same location

abc7news.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 348 posts

Re: Tesla crash victim had complained about auto-pilot in same location

#11

Post by asdsa5325 »

debt wrote: post #6
gowld wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The operator of a vehicle is responsible for operating it. Somewhere between 7-10 iterations of the same dangerous failure mode, it's time to stop betting your life that the failure won't repeat. > Walter complained "7-10 times the car would swivel toward that same exact barrier during auto-pilot." This still doesn't diminish Tesla's obligation to make their autopilot system behave properly.

"The operator of a vehicle is responsible for operating it." But he wasn't operating it.

But he should have been. Tesla's cars are not self-driving. The automated driving features are supposed to assist the driver, not replace.

Re: Tesla crash victim had complained about auto-pilot in same location

#12

Post by fludlight »

wjp3 wrote: post #9

It'll be interesting to see if anything comes of the issue with the already-collapsed crash barrier and what CalTrans says about it. That sort of thing is there for a reason, and to be left in a crushed state for any period of time is bad.

I wonder how fast they replace crushed barriers.

Re: Tesla crash victim had complained about auto-pilot in same location

#13

Post by cornholio »

ucaetano wrote: post #3
MBCook wrote: post #2

If he had seen this issue multiple times before why would he keep using autopilot in that area? That seems like a very odd decision.

True, but let's not blame the victim.

It's not blame, he was simply dealing with a bug that was hard to reproduce in a production environment.

Re: Tesla crash victim had complained about auto-pilot in same location

#14

Post by totalZero »

gowld wrote: post #5
ucaetano wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True, but let's not blame the victim.

The operator of a vehicle is responsible for operating it. Somewhere between 7-10 iterations of the same dangerous failure mode, it's time to stop betting your life that the failure won't repeat. > Walter complained "7-10 times the car would swivel toward that same exact barrier during auto-pilot." This still doesn't diminish Tesla's obligation to make their autopilot system behave properly.

I think the point is that the guy passed away, and we gain nothing by asserting (based on our limited knowledge) that he lacked common sense.

Tesla should improve its systems regardless of whether it was the first such error, the seventh, or the tenth.

Re: Tesla crash victim had complained about auto-pilot in same location

#15

Post by barrkel »

ucaetano wrote: post #3
MBCook wrote: post #2

If he had seen this issue multiple times before why would he keep using autopilot in that area? That seems like a very odd decision.

True, but let's not blame the victim.

Rightness is defined with respect to a system of rules. If being "right" leaves you dead, were you really right? Maybe in a legal sense, but is that the system that matters?

Re: Tesla crash victim had complained about auto-pilot in same location

#16

Post by sixothree »

gowld wrote: post #5
ucaetano wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True, but let's not blame the victim.

The operator of a vehicle is responsible for operating it. Somewhere between 7-10 iterations of the same dangerous failure mode, it's time to stop betting your life that the failure won't repeat. > Walter complained "7-10 times the car would swivel toward that same exact barrier during auto-pilot." This still doesn't diminish Tesla's obligation to make their autopilot system behave properly.

The lesson here is that Tesla does not take complaints seriously and someone died as a result. It sounds just as likely to me that another person using autopilot would have had the same issue at that location.

Re: Tesla crash victim had complained about auto-pilot in same location

#17

Post by iaabtpbtpnn »

fludlight wrote: post #12
wjp3 wrote: post #9

It'll be interesting to see if anything comes of the issue with the already-collapsed crash barrier and what CalTrans says about it. That sort of thing is there for a reason, and to be left in a crushed state for any period of time is bad.

I wonder how fast they replace crushed barriers.

The crash was at the 101 and 85 flyover for the carpool lane. Next to that lane there is a sign warning of upcoming construction closures... in fall 2017. Does that answer your question?

Re: Tesla crash victim had complained about auto-pilot in same location

#18

Post by ForHackernews »

asdsa5325 wrote: post #11
debt wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"The operator of a vehicle is responsible for operating it." But he wasn't operating it.

But he should have been. Tesla's cars are not self-driving. The automated driving features are supposed to assist the driver, not replace.

Yeah! Isn't it obvious that a feature named "autopilot" means you have to watch it like a hawk, keep your eyes on the road and your hands on the wheel?

Re: Tesla crash victim had complained about auto-pilot in same location

#19

Post by segmondy »

One of the things you learn in flying is not to force it. If conditions are not safe. Just forget about it. It almost seems the same type of judgement needs to be made for auto-pilot. If your auto-pilot acts up at all. Just turn it off and don't use it till it's resolved. All you need is one incident to be dead, so if you get a chance to observe any abnormalities, consider it a blessing.

Something that will also be great will be a sort of "crash dump/bug report" button for these cars. If at any time your car does something unsafe, you can hit that button. The car will save the last 60 seconds so the manufacturer can analyze it to debug and figure out what went wrong.

I was so excited about auto-pilot and dreamed of getting in my car and sleeping while it made cross-country trips. So much for that, that seems way far out.

Post reply on HN