Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Another Tesla on autopilot steers towards a barrier

reddit.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 481 posts

Re: Another Tesla on autopilot steers towards a barrier

#241

Post by walrus01 »

lisper wrote: post #122

Here is my armchair diagnosis: right before the car veers towards the barrier it drives through a stretch of road where the only visible lane marker is on the left. Then the right lane marker comes into view at about the point where the lane starts to widen out for the lane split. The lines that will become the right and left lane markers of the split left and right lanes respectively are right next to the van in fro…

Some local knowledge: they blocked off lane to the left side is the same lane used when the express lanes are in their opposite configuration, in the morning. In the morning with the express inbound towards the city, that lane is a left-hand exit from the main flow of Interstate 5, onto the dedicated express lanes. There should be a sufficient amount of GPS data gathered from hundreds of other teslas, and camera data, that shows the same lane from an opposite perspective.

Re: Another Tesla on autopilot steers towards a barrier

#242

Post by Someone1234 »

blurbleblurble wrote: post #65
edf13 wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So your basically paying (A lot) of cash to beta test their software for them... at your own (Very personal) risk!

Not just your own risk... There are other people on the road who share that risk. It makes me angry at Elon Musk himself. First he didn't sterilize that stupid thing he sent into interplanetary space. Now he's putting peoples lives at risk.

> First he didn't sterilize that stupid thing

Huh? Isn't it better that way, we might spread [simple] life to other planets. I'm completely serious, I don't understand what the concern is?

Re: Another Tesla on autopilot steers towards a barrier

#243

Post by blurbleblurble »

ams6110 wrote: post #191
blurbleblurble wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not just your own risk... There are other people on the road who share that risk. It makes me angry at Elon Musk himself. First he didn't sterilize that stupid thing he sent into interplanetary space. Now he's putting peoples lives at risk.

Well there's plenty of unsterilized stuff in space. The early space missions just dumped the bodily waste of the astronauts overboard.

Yeah, but it's coming back to Earth, where it came from. This is an object that could land on Mars or another planet.

Great measures have been taken in the past to ensure that other planets aren't contaminated before we've had a chance to understand their existing biology. Elon Musk is the kid who comes and knocks over some other kids' block tower for his own amusement.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planetary_protection

Re: Another Tesla on autopilot steers towards a barrier

#244

Post by astura »

gormz wrote: post #179
astura wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You already don't have control over any of the other drivers on the road, some of which are unlicensed, impaired or even homicidal or suicidal. Not to mention your car already has software that can kill you, even if it doesn't steer. Even ignoring software, hardware can have "bugs" in it too that kill you. I'm not sure why you think engineering mistakes are "worse" when they are in the software vs the hardware. Basic…

Yeah there can be other bugs in my car, or other people that do something stupid, but I feel like I am more in control. It is unlikely I die from my engine blowing a gasket or my ECU completely dying. It might be a slight danger to those around me while I coast to the shoulder. But at least it's not going 60 mph into the shoulder...

You're severely underestimating danger of engineering mistakes in hardware.

Faulty Takata airbags have killed at least 20 in the US and injured over 100 since 2013. Then there was the Ford-Firestone fiasco that killed hundreds and injured thousands. The Ford Pinto ended up being a death trap. I also recall there several lawsuits around faulty guardrails that have killed. That's just off the top of my head.

The idea "software bugs kill, hardware bugs don't" is just plain wrong. I also can't even fathom an understanding of why it's "better" to be killed by someone whose overdosing on heroin behind the wheel than being killed by an engineering error. Especially given the hypothetical case that was proposed when engineering errors are less common.

Re: Another Tesla on autopilot steers towards a barrier

#246

Post by Someone1234 »

pfooti wrote: post #155
alistairSH wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. I really hate that Tesla named the feature "autopilot" as it gives the impression of being fully automatic (yes, I realize boat and airline "autopilots" aren't fully automatic - that is likely lot on most consumers). My VW has Adaptive Cruise Control (ACC) which does the normal cruise control, plus basic distance keeping (with an alarm if the closing speed changes dangerously). My parents' Subarus have ACC pl…

Yeah, I have a recent Subaru with those features. It beeps when I'm backing out of the garage and there's someone driving or biking up the road before they even come into my sight lines. It can help keep me in a lane, either by beeping or nudging the steering wheel if I drift - I only turn on active lane assist on long highway stretches, it is more of a security blanket than anything else - just in case I space out f…

Subaru's system is simply fantastic and you can tell they thought a lot about the "human condition" (human weaknesses) while designing it.

Lame keep assist is very subtle, I describe it like wind blowing on the side of the car. You can trivially over-power it and it will beep if you exit the lane (without blinker on) with or without lane keep assist active.

The whole package of safety features is wonderful and impressive for something starting at around $22K.

Re: Another Tesla on autopilot steers towards a barrier

#247

Post by blurbleblurble »

Someone1234 wrote: post #242
blurbleblurble wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not just your own risk... There are other people on the road who share that risk. It makes me angry at Elon Musk himself. First he didn't sterilize that stupid thing he sent into interplanetary space. Now he's putting peoples lives at risk.

> First he didn't sterilize that stupid thing Huh? Isn't it better that way, we might spread [simple] life to other planets. I'm completely serious, I don't understand what the concern is?

There may already be life on other planets. Whether or not it's simple is a short-sighted human judgement.

Look at the big picture. We risk denying these planets the ability to evolve in isolation. That is a decision that cannot be reversed. Do we really want to do that? Maybe so, but it ought to be a conversation. Great measures have been taken to reduce the risk of contaminating other planets with Earth based lifeforms. Then, this belligerent guy comes along and disregards all that.

Re: Another Tesla on autopilot steers towards a barrier

#248

Post by HeyLaughingBoy »

lisper wrote: post #122

Here is my armchair diagnosis: right before the car veers towards the barrier it drives through a stretch of road where the only visible lane marker is on the left. Then the right lane marker comes into view at about the point where the lane starts to widen out for the lane split. The lines that will become the right and left lane markers of the split left and right lanes respectively are right next to the van in fro…

I dubbed this property "cognizant failure"

I like that term. When I was involved in the medical instrumentation field, we had a similar concern: it was possible for an instrument to produce a measurement, e.g., the concentration of HIV in blood serum, that was completely incorrect, but plausible since it's within the expected clinical range. This is the worst-case scenario: a result that is wrong, but looks OK. This could lead to the patient receiving the wrong treatment or no treatment at all.

As much as possible, we had to be able to detect when we produced an incorrect measurement.

This meant that all the steps during the analyte's processing were monitored. If one of those steps went out of its expected range we could use that knowledge to inform the final result. So the clinician would get a test report that basically says, "here's the HIV level, but the incubation temperature went slightly out of range when I was processing it, so use caution interpreting it."

Like most software, the "happy path" was easy. The bulk of the work we did on those instruments was oriented towards the goal of detecting when something went wrong and either recovering in a clinically safe manner or refusing to continue.

With all the research into safety-critical systems over decades, it's hard to see how Tesla could not be aware of the standard practices.

Re: Another Tesla on autopilot steers towards a barrier

#249

Post by banku_brougham »

dlisboa wrote: post #215
e1ven wrote: post #67

> Previous autopilot versions didn't do this. 10.4 and 12 do this 90% of the time. I didn't post it until I got .12 and it did it a few times in case it was a bug in 10.4. This is why the idea of self-updating cars terrifies me. I'd never allow autopatching on a production server - Why would I allow it on hardware I'm betting my life on?

"Move fast and break things". Taken literally.

“Move fast and break humans.”

Re: Another Tesla on autopilot steers towards a barrier

#250

Post by banku_brougham »

buvanshak wrote: post #194
jacquesm wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What would it take to get Tesla to admit the product is unsafe and should be disabled until they get it right? Or will they simply plow on until a regulator steps in?

> What would it take to get Tesla to admit the product is unsafe... People should start to vote with their purse. In other words, stop buying these cars, or start selling their stocks.

This philosophy, though admirable in support of personal liberty, ignores that a commons exists.
Post reply on HN