An Update on Last Week’s Accident • Hacker News Board

Re: An Update on Last Week’s Accident

#51

Post by bladers » Sat, Mar 31, 2018, 3:49 AM UTC

nafizh wrote: post #2

"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." Shouldn't you have more audible warnings than visual if you are aware that not complying will lead to an accident?

Actually the warning had nothing to do with the crash. 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.

making it look like user was warned and didn't respond by putting their hands on the wheel but like i previously said, its completely false.

Re: An Update on Last Week’s Accident

#52

Post by octorian » Sat, Mar 31, 2018, 3:51 AM UTC

matte_black wrote: post #12

Personally I would only use a self drive feature on the middle lanes of a highway if I was going to be distracted with something else, there’s too much bullshit going on at the edges for it to be safe.

As someone who drives this exact stretch of road every day, in a Tesla, I agree. This lane is the end of a long stretch of road with either zero or minimal shoulder, where even the slightest glitch could cause a scrape on the side of your car. I'm always paranoid driving this stretch.

This concrete barrier is also quite a distance past where this left exit lane starts to separate from the rest of US-101, so there are really only two ways you'd risk hitting it. First, and probably most common, is people who change their minds last-second about taking that exit. Second, would be a serious AP screw-up (like what might have happened here).

FWIW, I've never had AP engaged when driving through this spot, and almost instinctively disable it when taking a highway off-ramp/change-over.

Re: An Update on Last Week’s Accident

#53

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Mar 31, 2018, 3:51 AM UTC

jijojv wrote: post #28

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.

[deleted]

Re: An Update on Last Week’s Accident

#54

Post by userbinator » Sat, Mar 31, 2018, 3:51 AM UTC

imh wrote: post #33

>semiautonomous Autopilot Seems like an oxymoron that's getting drivers into danger. >Tesla said its vehicle logs show the driver’s hands weren’t detected on the wheel for six seconds before the collision, and he took no action despite having five seconds and about 500 feet of unobstructed view of a concrete highway divider. And it's not the first time.

and he took no action despite having five seconds and about 500 feet of unobstructed view of a concrete highway divider.

I suspect he may have been distracted or otherwise not paying direct attention, thinking "the car will drive itself, I know I need to watch it but I'll probably be fine if I don't watch it all the time"... and just happened to pick a very wrong time to not pay attention.

...and even when he did realise he was going to crash, there might've been a very strong https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buridan%27s_ass effect which prevented him from quickly deciding which way to turn the wheel.

Re: An Update on Last Week’s Accident

#55

Post by na85 » Sat, Mar 31, 2018, 3:52 AM UTC

lopmotr wrote: post #42

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.

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.

That's disingenuous.

The only reason a human drives into that barrier is if they swerve to avoid something or are otherwise not properly paying attention (texting, etc.).

There's no good reason for the autopilot to have hit that barrier.

The mental gymnastics going on in these comments attempting to absolve Tesla of any responsibility are truly next-level.

Re: An Update on Last Week’s Accident

#56

Post by mirimir » Sat, Mar 31, 2018, 3:53 AM UTC

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…

Indeed.

But maybe this is just a variant on https://www.wired.com/story/tesla-autopilot-why-crash-radar/ That is, maybe Mr. Huang was following another vehicle, which merged out of the way, and his Tesla ignored the stationary object.

If that's so, Tesla ought to emphasize the failure mode.

Re: An Update on Last Week’s Accident

#57

Post by Proven » Sat, Mar 31, 2018, 3:54 AM UTC

Tesla’s faith has been sealed. Bankruptcy in late 2018.

> No one knows about the accidents that didn’t happen, only the ones that did.

The same applies to jobs, and yet Obama’s “jobs saved” were cited as major accomplishment of QA. lol...

Re: An Update on Last Week’s Accident

#58

Post by RayVR » Sat, Mar 31, 2018, 3:54 AM UTC

PLEASE stop comparing crash statistics for a car with MSRP $80-150k to the general population. Sample bias (among other basic problems) is such a basic consideration that Tesla ignoring it makes me sick. This company will do/say anything to manipulate public perception. People on HN should at least attempt to see through this rather than buying it because Tesla gives them the warm fuzzies.

https://www.technologyreview.com/s/601849/teslas-dubious-cla...

Re: An Update on Last Week’s Accident

#59

Post by Tempest1981 » Sat, Mar 31, 2018, 3:55 AM UTC

The other factor is:

At 9:30 am, the left lane (lane #2, that stays on 101) is usually packed. He may not have been able to merge in from the #1 lane (HOV-to-Hwy85-flyover lane) into that left lane. Especially if there was a big speed differential.

Although 150 meters is plenty to stop in the median.

(Do we know which lane he was in before hitting the divider?)

Re: An Update on Last Week’s Accident

#60

Post by dang » Sat, Mar 31, 2018, 4:00 AM UTC

bladers wrote: post #47

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 Tesl…

Please don't post duplicate comments to HN. It lowers signal-noise ratio and makes it hard to merge threads.