21–30 of 113 posts
I wouldn’t be surprised if the chevrons which are pretty worn down would be low priority on the maintenance list given how obvious it is and how annoying work there would be.
I really dislike the marketing around "autopilot." The common defense of Tesla's autopilot is that there are disclaimers, and the driver should always be at 100% attention. Well, look at this, copied from Tesla's website: > Full Self-Driving Hardware on All Cars > All Tesla vehicles produced in our factory, including Model 3, have the hardware needed for full self-driving capability at a safety level substantially gr…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Does it matter? Do cars act differently depending on which state they are in? Seems like a similar situation to the crash in California.
It does matter when the article title claims that it's a reproduction of the accident. If it's not the same location, it's not really a reproduction, even if the cause/effect is the same.
But I still think it's fair to call it a reproduction since he showed that the car did try to steer him into the barrier. Which is a problem that the owner who died in the crash had reported to Tesla.
This (video) is another instance where the lanes split apart but the part in the middle has absolutely no markings to indicate that you shouldn't drive there. This (photograph) is what it should look like: http://s0.geograph.org.uk/geophotos/02/24/67/2246762_3a6ea81... Is this (bad line painting) common in the US? Edit: on a second viewing, I think it actually does have some chevrons, but they're very faint.
There is a solid white line. It's forbidden to cross a solid while line on the freeway. What does a solid white line mean to you (in your country)? The linked video is a different story, but the image you linked makes it quite clear not to drive there.
That kind of lane marking (or lack thereof) seems very unsafe. I realize that often this is due to construction / etc but the immediately-to-the-left lane's marker was Very Clear, and didn't have a visible split in it. I had to watch it a second time to make sure that I didn't miss the indications that the lane was splitting away (other than the highway signs). This kind of thing (lack of clear markings) can be reall…
The car would’ve been destroyed and the driver injured. In this case, autopilot should’ve not just been better it should’ve actually worked. It didn’t even stop the car.
Autopilot marketing is bad and Elon deserves a lot of the blame, but do we still expect to be able to trust these systems enough to not put hands on the wheel and look at the road? IMO we are still in the very early stages of this work in the industry. Personally I think bugs and flaws in systems like this are normal at this stage. I would expect the same with GM Super Cruise and I wouldn't trust that either to let g…
I don't think you should be able to license a vehicle to drive on public roads with such "bugs and flaws".
I don't have a choice, I have to interact with public roads. My local, state, and national government owes it to me to keep experimentation off of public roads that modern life is impossible without.
The problem with robot cars is they fail in very alien ways. They will be made illegal after a small number of horrific incidents where a car will kill people in ways a licensed human never would.
I think the usage of the phrase "intelligence" in "Artificial Intelligence" needs to stop. It was cute in the 90s but today people are starting to actually believe it when it's really a vulnerable shallow approximation that is vulnerable to profoundly unintelligent failures and it will continue to be until there starts to be a debate on if a synthetic system is actually sentient.
Really sad to see Autopilot is a joke and nothing more than adaptive cruise control found in common cars, despite Musk claming it was a year ago [1] Any one who owns Autopilot knows the warning at :20 is NOT a crash warning at all and is just the usual warning every minute to jiggle the wheel if you don't hold the wheel firmly enough when it can't detect you holding it. 1. https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/82363259…
I really dislike the marketing around "autopilot." The common defense of Tesla's autopilot is that there are disclaimers, and the driver should always be at 100% attention. Well, look at this, copied from Tesla's website: > Full Self-Driving Hardware on All Cars > All Tesla vehicles produced in our factory, including Model 3, have the hardware needed for full self-driving capability at a safety level substantially gr…
And I mean this without any gratuitous negativity about Tesla or Elon... but branding lane-following/collision warning/adaptive-cruise control as "AutoPilot" is far more dangerous and has far more serious real-world consequences than Apple calling their backup application "Time Machine."
I know we're supposed to be focusing on building systems that are as capable as humans are as drivers. However, if we approached the problem from changing the roads with some kind of guide beacons, it would probably be really trivial to detect them and improve trustworthiness a lot more.
We already have lane markers and chevrons and all sorts of things for humans to interpret and react to. What if self driving systems got guides that were optimized to them? Instead of having really luminescent paint, they would be radio noisey or have some other electronic fingerprint that's just as "loud" as visual and audible markers are for humans.
At some point, if we want self driving cars to be the real future, we should start working the problem from both ends. When properly implemented, self driving technology is safer than normal humans -- and if we can accelerate that by adding stupid easy electronic markers to some roads, then why not?