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

21–30 of 348 posts

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

#21

Post by literallycancer »

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.

Holding the passenger responsible for what the car does sure won't be good for adoption.

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

#22

Post by forgotmysn »

sixothree wrote: post #16
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 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.

While that might be the case, I'm not sure we have enough information yet to assume that's true.

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

#23

Post by rdiddly »

barrkel wrote: post #15
ucaetano wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

It's the one that matters for the rest of us who aren't dead!

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

#24

Post by herbst »

segmondy wrote: post #19

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 g…

> 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.

This is more a hijack than a direct critique but I think the general issue is the assumption that we need a private vehicle for that.

Trains are perfectly capable for bringing me from A to B while I am sleeping for years now.

Edit:// with years I mean years. Before that pressure made longer rides usually more uncomfortable than they are now with modern trains. Probably only because my area has plenty of mountain tho.

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

#25

Post by Angostura »

sixothree wrote: post #16
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 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.

Or they had a team investigating why this combination of road features caused problems.

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

#26

Post by fludlight »

iaabtpbtpnn wrote: post #17
fludlight wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

I would hope that removing a outdated construction sign is lower priority than replacing a spent crash barrier.

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

#27

Post by MBCook »

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.

I honestly worried about that when writing the comment. The car should have avoided it (based on Tesla’s usual claims).

But Tesla and everyone else says the owner is still ultimately responsible because AutoPilot isn’t a 100% situation.

If my car did something funky like randomly accelerate or turn hard at a given intersection and the manufacturer refused to fix it I’d stop driving through there.

Why push your luck?

I truly don’t like blaming the victim. I’ve been very critical of Tesla lately for their claims and safety issues.

But I don’t understand this man’s decision at all. It doesn’t seem reasonable.

I wish I knew why he kept using the system in that area.

The ONLY idea I can think of is when the car got an update he would try again to see if it was fixed and of the tries was sadly the last.

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

#28

Post by vvanders »

segmondy wrote: post #19

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 g…

> If at any time your car does something unsafe, you can hit that button.

Tesla actually has that, it's not widely documented but you can do a voice command of "Report bug" followed by a brief audio description and it's uploaded to Tesla.

No idea how it gets triaged but I wish more products had a similar feature.

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

#29

Post by Piskvorrr »

ForHackernews wrote: post #18
asdsa5325 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

Should be. Obviously people get their notion of "autopilot" from science fiction, not from aviation.

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

#30

Post by MBCook »

totalZero wrote: post #14
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.

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.

It’s a mitigating factor is Tesla’s favor.

But mostly... I just don’t understand it. It seems like such an odd decision by the driver I don’t know what to make of it.

It’s very unfortunate that he died, but that doesn’t mean we can’t ask questions/criticize what may have gone on.

Post reply on HN