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

41–50 of 447 posts

Re: An Update on Last Week’s Accident

#41

Post by sp332 »

tuna-piano wrote: post #37

Their statement blames: -The driver -The crushed barrier -Statistics But they do not take responsibility themselves. It's apparent and in my opinion shameful. If Tesla's goal of this is to just share the facts, why didn't they state what AutoPilot did? In addition to statements like "...the driver’s hands were not detected on the wheel for six seconds prior to the collision.", wouldn't it make sense to have a stateme…

It was a median in the middle of the highway. The car probably continued in a straight line instead of "steering into" a barrier. https://imgur.com/a/iMY1x

Re: An Update on Last Week’s Accident

#42

Post by lopmotr »

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.

It sounds like peering into the black box of autopilot and anthropomorphising some parts of it but not others. Why not say "autopilot sometimes drives into barriers and also humans sometimes drive into barriers."? In both cases the driver/autopilot failed for whatever reason.

Re: An Update on Last Week’s Accident

#43

Post by [deleted] »

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.

[deleted]

Re: An Update on Last Week’s Accident

#44

Post by subinsebastien »

sp332 wrote: post #41
tuna-piano wrote: post #37

Their statement blames: -The driver -The crushed barrier -Statistics But they do not take responsibility themselves. It's apparent and in my opinion shameful. If Tesla's goal of this is to just share the facts, why didn't they state what AutoPilot did? In addition to statements like "...the driver’s hands were not detected on the wheel for six seconds prior to the collision.", wouldn't it make sense to have a stateme…

It was a median in the middle of the highway. The car probably continued in a straight line instead of "steering into" a barrier. https://imgur.com/a/iMY1x

Why the car was not able to detect and avoid the collision in such a simple situation (from a human POV)? We have seen Tesla's autopilot performing very well in a much more complex scenario than this. Ref:- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FadR7ETT_1k

Re: An Update on Last Week’s Accident

#45

Post by jijojv »

sp332 wrote: post #41
tuna-piano wrote: post #37

Their statement blames: -The driver -The crushed barrier -Statistics But they do not take responsibility themselves. It's apparent and in my opinion shameful. If Tesla's goal of this is to just share the facts, why didn't they state what AutoPilot did? In addition to statements like "...the driver’s hands were not detected on the wheel for six seconds prior to the collision.", wouldn't it make sense to have a stateme…

It was a median in the middle of the highway. The car probably continued in a straight line instead of "steering into" a barrier. https://imgur.com/a/iMY1x

No it's autopilot steered into the median lane in the first place where it diverges from the HOV lane.

Re: An Update on Last Week’s Accident

#46

Post by tuna-piano »

sp332 wrote: post #41
tuna-piano wrote: post #37

Their statement blames: -The driver -The crushed barrier -Statistics But they do not take responsibility themselves. It's apparent and in my opinion shameful. If Tesla's goal of this is to just share the facts, why didn't they state what AutoPilot did? In addition to statements like "...the driver’s hands were not detected on the wheel for six seconds prior to the collision.", wouldn't it make sense to have a stateme…

It was a median in the middle of the highway. The car probably continued in a straight line instead of "steering into" a barrier. https://imgur.com/a/iMY1x

Fair. Could be rewritten as "AutoPilot seems to have made a grave error here, and drove the car into the barrier. AutoPilot should have either avoided the barrier or disengaged."

Re: An Update on Last Week’s Accident

#47

Post by bladers »

I repeat.

This is a 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.

But this deceptive statement worked as Tesla carefully planned. look at Jalopink title "Tesla Says Autopilot Was On Before Fatal Model X Crash, But That Driver Didn’t Abide Warnings"

Re: An Update on Last Week’s Accident

#48

Post by duxup »

IncRnd wrote: post #14
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.

Exactly. They are taking both sides of the an argument to get credit but not take blame. They want credit for allegedly reducing crashes, but they don't want to be held responsible for driving into a wall.

Even if it was us... it probabbly wasn't!

Re: An Update on Last Week’s Accident

#49

Post by 1123581321 »

jijojv wrote: post #36
1123581321 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's an interesting question. Similarly, one could ask why the focus on fatalities rather than crashes as Tesla's superior traditional safety rating means fewer crashes should be fatal, all else equal. However, these questions don't lead anywhere interesting. Model S and X cars were driven before and after Autopilot was activated (no hardware change), and the crash rate was reduced after activation. This is the "40…

This 40% has nothing to do with Autopilot and applies to any cars with auto braking. The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety says automatic braking — which can bring the car to a stop if it senses an imminent collision — can reduce rear-end crashes by 40 percent.

My bad -- I thought that was one of the features of Autopilot. It still looks like the safety improved after the Autopilot rollout, but hopefully some public numbers with more granularity in regards to these software features can be released.

Re: An Update on Last Week’s Accident

#50

Post by Tempest1981 »

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.

Here is the confusing sentence: (dots added)

"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 wheel for six seconds prior to the collision."

https://www.tesla.com/blog/update-last-week’s-accident

Post reply on HN