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

An Update on Last Week’s Accident

tesla.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 447 posts

Re: An Update on Last Week’s Accident

#21

Post by andrewprock »

1123581321 wrote: post #17
andrewprock wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This feels particularly evasive. If you want to claim that your technology is 10x safer, you should be able to back that up with self-insurance, and not try to put the blame on the driver. If the autopilot does not think it is capable of driving safely, it should pull over to the shoulder of the road, not beep and flash.

It doesn't seem like pulling to the right would be safe in this situation. I think that automatically slowing down would be, though. Even slowing at a rate similar to a human letting their foot off the gas (to avoid unexpected behavior) would reduce the chance of fatality in a crash.

People pull over to the shoulder safely everyday. If an autopilot car cannot do this, it should not be on the road.

Re: An Update on Last Week’s Accident

#22

Post by danso »

1123581321 wrote: post #15
empath75 wrote: post #3

> Tesla Autopilot does not prevent all accidents – such a standard would be impossible – but it makes them much less likely to occur. It unequivocally makes the world safer for the vehicle occupants, pedestrians and cyclists. These kinds of unequivocal statements are just begging for a lawsuit, imo. They simply don't know that this is true.

Are you saying that the two paragraphs before this quote are inaccurate?

Consider this graf:

> In the US, there is one automotive fatality every 86 million miles across all vehicles from all manufacturers. For Tesla, there is one fatality, including known pedestrian fatalities, every 320 million miles in vehicles equipped with Autopilot hardware. If you are driving a Tesla equipped with Autopilot hardware, you are 3.7 times less likely to be involved in a fatal accident.

Let's put aside the consideration of how the average Tesla driver differs compared to the average American driver, or how the average mile driven by Autopilot differs compared to the average mile driven by all human drivers; I'm a little bit bothered by the language here:

> If you are driving a Tesla equipped with Autopilot hardware...

> every 320 million miles in vehicles equipped with Autopilot hardware...

Why is the language "equipped with Autopilot hardware" used? Tesla isn't able to give an estimation of when Autopilot was equipped and engaged?

Re: An Update on Last Week’s Accident

#23

Post by domevent »

This is 100% anecdote: A friend of mine test drove a Tesla, and said that when he was in the far right lane on a highway, the autopilot would get a little sketchy at off ramps. It didn’t ever off or anything, he described it as “jiggling” like it wasn’t sure what do when the right lane marker disappeared. He found that less than inspiring, although he did find the acceleration intoxicating.

Re: An Update on Last Week’s Accident

#24

Post by loeg »

incadenza wrote: post #20
leftistcensor03 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it's a mistake that healthy humans make all the time, which is why those crash barriers exist in the first place, and why that particular crash barrier was damaged by a previous crash.

You’re missing the point. The crucial fact according to OP is that the car did something that a fully aware driver would not ever do. It’s at least worth acknowledging that.

"Fully aware" drivers (true Scotsmen) as proposed here statistically do not exist, or at least do not compose the vast majority of drivers. So it is kind of a meaningless comparison to draw.

Re: An Update on Last Week’s Accident

#25

Post by jijojv »

hcnews wrote: post #7

> In the moments before the collision, which occurred at 9:27 a.m. on Friday, March 23rd, Autopilot was engaged with the adaptive cruise control follow-distance set to minimum. Would've loved to know the exact moments we are talking about here. Is it 5 seconds or 5 minutes? > The driver had received several visual and one audible hands-on warning earlier in the drive and the driver’s hands were not detected on the wh…

> I hope they aren't just saying that because the driver's hands were off the steering wheel, the crash occurred and is his fault for not obeying the agreement.

That's exactly Tesla's official stance - if you crash you're SOL and at fault, Autopilot or Auto Emergency Braking be damned.

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/31/apples-steve-wozniak-doesnt-... "Man you have got to be ready — it makes mistakes, it loses track of the lane lines. You have to be on your toes all the time," says Wozniak. "All Tesla did is say, 'It is beta so we are not responsible. It doesn't necessarily work, so you have to be in control.'

"Well you that is kinda a cheap way out of it."

Re: An Update on Last Week’s Accident

#26

Post by 1123581321 »

andrewprock wrote: post #21
1123581321 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't seem like pulling to the right would be safe in this situation. I think that automatically slowing down would be, though. Even slowing at a rate similar to a human letting their foot off the gas (to avoid unexpected behavior) would reduce the chance of fatality in a crash.

People pull over to the shoulder safely everyday. If an autopilot car cannot do this, it should not be on the road.

People do not pull over to the shoulder when they are between lanes in (presumably) busy traffic, which is where you have to be to hit a median.

I am not sure if Tesla's current system, which is still just cruise control with steering, should ever be changing lanes unprompted. I don't have a Tesla but I would not want my car's cruise control to do that right now. I do think that pulling over in safe conditions is something that a self-driving system needs to be able to do at some point on the path to full autonomy.

Re: An Update on Last Week’s Accident

#27

Post by bladers »

very deceptively crafted sentence. if i drove on AP for 15 minutes and i was alerted to put my hands on the wheel 2 minutes in.

It would fit tesla's specially crafted statement.

It makes it look like user was warned and didn't respond by putting their hands on the wheel but its completely false. The AP drove him straight into the barrier with no warning.

Re: An Update on Last Week’s Accident

#28

Post by jijojv »

bladers wrote: post #27

very deceptively crafted sentence. if i drove on AP for 15 minutes and i was alerted to put my hands on the wheel 2 minutes in. It would fit tesla's specially crafted statement. It makes it look like user was warned and didn't respond by putting their hands on the wheel but its completely false. The AP drove him straight into the barrier with no warning.

https://www.tesla.com/blog/update-last-week%E2%80%99s-accide...

>very deceptively crafted sentence. >The AP drove him straight into the barrier with no warning.

Exactly - anyone who owns autopilot knows this.

Re: An Update on Last Week’s Accident

#30

Post by incadenza »

loeg wrote: post #24
incadenza wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’re missing the point. The crucial fact according to OP is that the car did something that a fully aware driver would not ever do. It’s at least worth acknowledging that.

"Fully aware" drivers (true Scotsmen) as proposed here statistically do not exist, or at least do not compose the vast majority of drivers. So it is kind of a meaningless comparison to draw.

It's not a True Scotsman in this context. The point is that humans tend to crash into things they're not fully aware of, short of self-harm.

Either:

A) The autopilot could not see a concrete barrier in its path. B) More likely, and as the story reports, it WAS aware of the danger but didn't do anything.

Either case is at least worth discussing, no?

Post reply on HN