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

Re: An Update on Last Week’s Accident

#151

Post by komali2 » Sat, Mar 31, 2018, 7:21 AM UTC

DrScump wrote: post #126

Robotbeat wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the answer is that the path into the barrier looks just like an actual lane, and that this was enough confusion that a human driver apparently had made the same exact mistake a week earlier. https://imgur.com/a/iMY1x https://techcrunch.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/screen-sho...

Except those solid white lines delimit an uncrossable barrier delimiting the HOV-specific (during commute hours) flyover from the 101 lane, which is well documented for nearly a mile preceding that point.

Reasonable, lawful, absolutely. People break the law, people get drunk, people get sleepy.

There's a spot just like this in Houston on 610 East. HUUUUUUGE flyover as the HOV lane spends about a half mile merging into the left lane of 610 (nice fat fast freeway, they need the runway). A guy had thought the flyway would be a safe place to park his car and wait for a tow. Safe enough that he was sitting on the hood of his car. Sure as shit the Challenger in front of me got confused, cut into the flyaway thinking it was a lane, hit the disabled car, and sent the guy flipping up into the air a good 10, 15 fit. Fucked up accident.

Anyway point is after the accident I was talking to the driver of the Challenger, trying to calm him down (kept saying "holy shit I fucking killed that guy!") and other that shock he was sober as a duck. He got bloodtested and everything, clean. In court he said he just got confused and thought it was a lane.

LONG STORY SHORT human error mang, human error. Still not sure why a car was able to do it.

They have those same white lines leading into intersections and people cross that shit all the time. People speed.

Re: An Update on Last Week’s Accident

#152

Post by yani » Sat, Mar 31, 2018, 7:32 AM UTC

voxadam wrote: post #119

praptak wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This divider looks rather unforgiving. Is it common for dividers in US to be just plain concrete blocks without anything to prevent rapid deceleration?

If you look at the imgur link you'll see a impact barrier that had previously been crushed and not reset or repaired.

I dont see it

Re: An Update on Last Week’s Accident

#153

Post by rco8786 » Sat, Mar 31, 2018, 7:37 AM UTC

andrewstuart2 wrote: post #5

Really not much additional info here aside from the number of warnings the driver had. Also, the standard "Tesla is 10x safer" metrics that get pulled out each time a crash gets sensationalized. What I think they fail to address, especially in this case, is that the autopilot did something a human driver who was paying attention would never do. Autopilot does a great job of saving people from things even a wary drive…

I’m not sure I agree. Humans run into highly visible barriers all the time.

Re: An Update on Last Week’s Accident

#154

Post by tstrimple » Sat, Mar 31, 2018, 7:40 AM UTC

yani wrote: post #152

voxadam wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you look at the imgur link you'll see a impact barrier that had previously been crushed and not reset or repaired.

I dont see it

It's in the techcrunch image, not the imgur. The barrier with the yellow face is designed to collapse.

https://techcrunch.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/screen-sho...

Re: An Update on Last Week’s Accident

#155

Post by mruniverse » Sat, Mar 31, 2018, 7:43 AM UTC

Robotbeat wrote: post #79

andrewstuart2 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm obviously not privy to the details of the prior crash, but I'm pretty sure any healthy human would not deliberately drive into the barrier. The most likely scenarios I can think of would be not paying attention and drifting into the barrier, attempting to avoid a car merging into the lane (and not paying enough attention), or being struck by another car and being forced into the barrier.

I think the answer is that the path into the barrier looks just like an actual lane, and that this was enough confusion that a human driver apparently had made the same exact mistake a week earlier. https://imgur.com/a/iMY1x https://techcrunch.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/screen-sho...

You would think they would at least add pylons leading up to the divider: https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/fhwahop13007/images/fi...

The divider is from the fast lane no less.

Re: An Update on Last Week’s Accident

#156

Post by simion314 » Sat, Mar 31, 2018, 7:45 AM UTC

I am wondering if 100 Tesla would have passed that spot at that time would all 100 hit the barrier? Tesla should reveal why they can't detect solid objects and hit into them.

Re: An Update on Last Week’s Accident

#157

Post by SomewhatLikely » Sat, Mar 31, 2018, 7:56 AM UTC

rgbrenner wrote: post #72

hourislate wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought the auto pilot warned the driver to take control of the vehicle or is that incorrect? There is probably a lot more we don't know and it would be premature to place the blame on the auto pilot and Tesla. This isn't a lvl 5 system. It still requires the drivers attention and that is something we need to consider ( he obviously didn't have his hands on the wheel).

Technically tesla's statement says he was warned at some point to take control during his drive. That could have been 5 seconds into his commute, or it could have been 5 seconds before he hit the barrier. He may have taken control at that time, and then reengaged it later. He may or may not have been warned to take control before hitting the barrier. Tesla's statement is not clear on this at all.

The statement mentions "hands on warning" which just means you need to keep your hands on the wheel. That's very different than giving control back to the driver.

Re: An Update on Last Week’s Accident

#158

Post by robbiep » Sat, Mar 31, 2018, 8:13 AM UTC

Robotbeat wrote: post #79

andrewstuart2 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm obviously not privy to the details of the prior crash, but I'm pretty sure any healthy human would not deliberately drive into the barrier. The most likely scenarios I can think of would be not paying attention and drifting into the barrier, attempting to avoid a car merging into the lane (and not paying enough attention), or being struck by another car and being forced into the barrier.

I think the answer is that the path into the barrier looks just like an actual lane, and that this was enough confusion that a human driver apparently had made the same exact mistake a week earlier. https://imgur.com/a/iMY1x https://techcrunch.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/screen-sho...

Does seem like a problem that a LIDAR based system would have been less likely to make, compared to AI on video classification

Re: An Update on Last Week’s Accident

#159

Post by jVinc » Sat, Mar 31, 2018, 8:14 AM UTC

I really hate the whole Tesla angle of "technically we are not lying but we know people are going to mis-remember and misrepresent what we are writing".

Take for instance: > The driver had received several visual and one audible hands-on warning earlier in the drive...

What this means is that during this incident there were No visual or audible clues that a crash was about to happen

What they are saying is that while he was driving there was an earlier point at which the car did not crash, where the car gave a visual and audible clues. And you have to ask? Why the hell is that relevant? It isn't. They are stating it as a fact because they know some people will incorrectly claim that the car warned the driver prior to the crash.

With their eager to try to explain what happened why aren't they talking about what actually went wrong? Why did the car drive straight into a barrier. If their claim is that it was cased by the driver not having his hands on the wheel for 5 seconds, then they need to fold the company and give up trying to create self driving cars. That is Not acceptable of a self driving system.

The fact that the barrier was damaged intensified the accident, but that does not in any way excuse their system driving straight into it. And no, you can't get out of culpability by claiming statistical superiority. That's like a gang-member drying to get out of jail after killing a rival gang member because his gang statistically kills fewer people. Tesla has put a product in the hands of consumers, when it kills those consumers they need to step up to the plate and be honest about their fuckups, not just blame the drivers, blame the infrastructure and point to statistics.

Re: An Update on Last Week’s Accident

#160

Post by mrb » Sat, Mar 31, 2018, 8:28 AM UTC

andrewstuart2 wrote: post #5

Really not much additional info here aside from the number of warnings the driver had. Also, the standard "Tesla is 10x safer" metrics that get pulled out each time a crash gets sensationalized. What I think they fail to address, especially in this case, is that the autopilot did something a human driver who was paying attention would never do. Autopilot does a great job of saving people from things even a wary drive…

«the autopilot did something a human driver who was paying attention would never do»

I'm sure that out of the 1.25 million annual automobile-related deaths, plenty of drivers were paying attention and still did stupid things similar to this accident.