Tesla crash in September showed similarities to fatal Mountain View accident • Hacker News Board

Re: Tesla crash in September showed similarities to fatal Mountain View accident

#171

Post by usrusr » Thu, Apr 05, 2018, 8:00 AM UTC

m_mueller wrote: post #130

0xB31B1B wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Biggest factor to control for is drunk driving, which is ~30% of all deaths IIRC.

Good point. I wonder whether the ratio of drunks behind autopilot wheels is different than average. Could be lower (because richer) or higher (because richer).

There could easily be more than just a wealth differential, e.g. people who are more are of their emissions impact might also be be more aware of intoxication impact.

I'm any case, "statistically more safe" is a weak argument, e.g. we would be terrified of boarding a plane if they were merely statistically more safe than driving (by a small margin).

Re: Tesla crash in September showed similarities to fatal Mountain View accident

#172

Post by nbdev » Thu, Apr 05, 2018, 8:01 AM UTC

z6 wrote: post #7

bobsil1 wrote: post #3

Gore point stripe faded: https://imgur.com/a/xHq57 Street View: https://www.google.com/maps/@37.6346515,-122.104109,3a,75y,8...

No real excuse for Tesla, but seriously why are our roads so bad. This is one of the wealthiest areas in the world and a busy stretch of road.

Gas taxes have been diverted away from roads by the California government. Recently, a new per gallon tax was added and roads are finally being improved after a long spell of neglect. California already had the highest per gallon taxes in the nation.

So then the question is to where did the original money get diverted? A big part of the answer seems to be Education, which is still some of the worst in the nation.

How can that work? The highest taxes with the lowest outcome? Many people blame the millions of illegal aliens for that.

Re: Tesla crash in September showed similarities to fatal Mountain View accident

#173

Post by totalZero » Thu, Apr 05, 2018, 8:05 AM UTC

icc97 wrote: post #160

sho_hn wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would not be surprised if Musk coldly responded that this is a known problem with no solution, but autopilot still lowers the death rate on average. In other words, for the proponents it's a trade-off. And also the idea that an automatic driver is easier to improve over time (skewing the trade-off better and better) than human drivers. Which of course will snowball when reliance on automation keeps making drivers w…

At the moment Tesla haven't shown that auto-pilot does lower the death rate. They've only released statistics about auto-pilot enabled cars rather than statistics for when auto-pilot was in control. Any statistics released by Tesla should be compared against similar statistics from say modern Audis with lane-assist and collision detection.

Also, the cohort that purchases Tesla vehicles may be a lower-risk group of drivers than average.

This could happen because Tesla vehicles are more expensive than comparable conventional vehicles, less attractive to those with risky lifestyles, inconvenient for people who don't have regular driving patterns that allow charging to be planned, or more attractive to older consumers who wish to signal different markers of status than the young go-fast crowd.

You'd possibly want to compare versus non-auto-pilot Tesla drivers on the same roads in similar conditions, but the problem remains that the situations where auto-pilot is engaged may be different from those when the driver maintains control.

In sum, it's hard to mitigate the potential confounding variables.

Re: Tesla crash in September showed similarities to fatal Mountain View accident

#174

Post by kalal » Thu, Apr 05, 2018, 8:08 AM UTC

When the self driving revolution started, conservative people claimed that one accident would stop the whole business. Well there are many accidents already and people are still willing to risk. One reason may be our tendency to trust something which we do not understand. We feel that if the feature is already in the car, it must be safe. Well it is not. And even worse, it is driven more by marketing and money than by safety regulations.

Re: Tesla crash in September showed similarities to fatal Mountain View accident

#175

Post by alkonaut » Thu, Apr 05, 2018, 8:10 AM UTC

omarforgotpwd wrote: post #84

danmaz74 wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It you have to pay attention as much as if you were driving, then, what's the point of autopilot?

Trust me, it's still a huge relief. A day and night difference. Try it on a long drive, like LA to San Francisco and you'll see what I mean. It kind of feels like you're in the passenger seat rather than the drivers seat, but you can still grab the controls if you need to.

If it allows the driver to e.g. reply to a text message on his phone, then it's dangerous.

Either it requires the driver to occasionally take over and handle a situation on short notice, then the driver should have hands on the wheel and eyes forward (and the car should ensure this by alerting and slowing down immediately if the driver isn't paying attention).

Or the driver isn't required to pay attention and take over occasionally, and then it's fine to reply to that email on the phone while driving. I see no future in which there is a possible middle ground between these two levels of autonomy.

Re: Tesla crash in September showed similarities to fatal Mountain View accident

#176

Post by ino » Thu, Apr 05, 2018, 8:11 AM UTC

bobsil1 wrote: post #144

Btw linked accident was for a Model S with Tesla autopilot 1. Can tell because no camera on silver blinker assembly. They're now on 2.5.

Are you talking about the second video in the story, in which the car veers towards the divider?

Re: Tesla crash in September showed similarities to fatal Mountain View accident

#177

Post by jve » Thu, Apr 05, 2018, 8:12 AM UTC

ChuckMcM wrote: post #17

I have now talked with two people who have autopilot in their model S's and both said the problem with autopilot is that it is "too good". Specifically it works completely correctly like 80 - 90% of the time and as a result, if you use it a lot, you start to expect it to be working and not fail. If it beeps then to tell you to take over, you have to mentally get back into the situational awareness of the road and the…

Are you kidding? 80-90% seems awfully low to trust it.

Re: Tesla crash in September showed similarities to fatal Mountain View accident

#178

Post by cam_l » Thu, Apr 05, 2018, 8:14 AM UTC

ChuckMcM wrote: post #17

I have now talked with two people who have autopilot in their model S's and both said the problem with autopilot is that it is "too good". Specifically it works completely correctly like 80 - 90% of the time and as a result, if you use it a lot, you start to expect it to be working and not fail. If it beeps then to tell you to take over, you have to mentally get back into the situational awareness of the road and the…

I honestly don't understand why, if the driver does not take control when the car has sensed an issue, it does not just throw on hazards and roll slow or stop. Seems like the safest way to keep people from dying.

Re: Tesla crash in September showed similarities to fatal Mountain View accident

#179

Post by Vik1ng » Thu, Apr 05, 2018, 8:14 AM UTC

Dylan16807 wrote: post #137

mirimir wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As I understand it, what's hard is determining whether that stationary object is directly in front, or off to the side. Cars are always passing stationary objects on the sides.

That doesn't really change my answer. If an object is almost directly in front of you, you either fine-tune your turning to avoid it, or you stop. There's no reason to ever ignore it.

You can't just slam the brakes on the highway. Just a question of time until you get rear ended.

Re: Tesla crash in September showed similarities to fatal Mountain View accident

#180

Post by talltimtom » Thu, Apr 05, 2018, 8:15 AM UTC

njarboe wrote: post #53

ChuckMcM wrote: post #17

I have now talked with two people who have autopilot in their model S's and both said the problem with autopilot is that it is "too good". Specifically it works completely correctly like 80 - 90% of the time and as a result, if you use it a lot, you start to expect it to be working and not fail. If it beeps then to tell you to take over, you have to mentally get back into the situational awareness of the road and the…

And in the current climate of "all new things must be super extra safe to be used, even if it displaces much worse technology", I think machine driving cars will have a hard time being accepted. Imagine the autopilot is 100 times safer than human drivers. Full implementation would mean about a fatality a day in the US. It does not seem this would be acceptable by the public even though 30,000 annual human car fatalit…

You’re arguing from a horrible stance. Autopilot isn’t 100 safer than human drivers that is why people are concerned about safety.

It’s like if you said “I don’t get why people are concerned with every kid bringing a gun to school, if that would make the schools 100 times safer then shouldn’t we do it? Even if there’s an interim “learning period” where they are much less safe, doesn’t the end justify the means?”

I really can’t fathom the mindset of people who honestly believe that the only way forwards with self-driving tech is to put it into the market prematurely and kill people. In 10-15 years we’ll have safe robust systems in either case, let’s not be lenient with companies who kill costumers by trying to move to fast and “win the race”. Arguing from statistics about deaths without taking responsibilities into account is absurd. Would it be ok for a cigarette company to sell a product that eliminated cancer risks but randomly killed costumers as long as they do the math and show that the total death count decreases? Hell no.