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

291–300 of 481 posts

Re: Another Tesla on autopilot steers towards a barrier

#291

Post by [deleted] »

Tloewald wrote: post #271
lisper wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This seems to me to be a clearly incorrect (and self-contradictory) claim. I guess that means I was able to pull the wool over the eyes of all five members of my thesis committee because none of them thought so. > It entirely depends on your definition of failure. Well, yeah, of course. So? There is some subset of states of the world that you label "failure". The guarantee is not that the system never enters one of…

Arguing that it's possible to build an autonomous that is sometimes wrong but always knows when it's wrong seems like a stretch to me.

[deleted]

Re: Another Tesla on autopilot steers towards a barrier

#292

Post by lisper »

mturmon wrote: post #287
Tloewald wrote: post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Arguing that it's possible to build an autonomous that is sometimes wrong but always knows when it's wrong seems like a stretch to me.

A system that can sense when it is in a failure mode is analogous to a “detector” in the Neyman-Pearson sense. A detector that says it is OK when it is actually in a failure condition is said to have a missed detection (MD). OTOH, if you say you’ve failed when you haven’t, that’s a false alarm (FA). In general, there is a trade-off between MD and FA. You can drive MD probability to near-zero, but typically at a cost…

You've done a great job of describing the problem. It is manifestly possible to drive missed detection rates very close to zero without too many false alarms because humans are capable of driving safely.

Re: Another Tesla on autopilot steers towards a barrier

#293

Post by reaperducer »

ams6110 wrote: post #183
jacquesm wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I drive a lot with my GPS (TomTom) on and it rarely gets the lane I'm in wrong, usually that only happens in construction zones. So even if the error can be large in practice it often works very well. It would be very interesting to see the input data streams these self driving systems rely on in case of errors, and in the case of accidents there might even be a legal reason to obtain them (for liability purposes).

Counterpoint, my Lenovo tablet running google maps often seems to get confused about lanes. E.g. it will think I'm taking an exit ramp when I am still on the main road. Once the ramp and the road diverge enough it will recover, but not before going into it's "rerouting" mode and sometimes even starting directions to get back on the road I'm already on.

My FIATChrysler Uconnect system will sometimes think I'm on the road above when driving under a bridge.

Sometimes it'll shout "The speed limit is 35 miles an hour!" when I go under a bridge carrying a 35MPH road, even though the road I'm on has a limit of 65.

Re: Another Tesla on autopilot steers towards a barrier

#294

Post by overcast »

patcheudor wrote: post #263
overcast wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I drive a manual transmission BMW. The shifting, and speed control can be as smooth as glass. It's the driver not the machine. Take consideration for your passenger, and everyone else on the road.

Yes, but its not a 577 HP track-tuned roadster. I can drive my 320 HP manual sedan quite smoothly as well. There are some cars where: a) you don't want to drive them smoothing because that's no fun - even for just the exhaust note & b) It's actually difficult to drive them smoothly because of the torque/HP. It doesn't mean you are a bad driver, it simply means you've adjusted your driving style to match the car you a…

I DOUBT OP was taking a six hour road trip with his friend in a 577 HP track car. Which is the point here. It's awesome that you have a race car, but comparing that to the rest of our daily drivers makes no sense.

Re: Another Tesla on autopilot steers towards a barrier

#295

Post by jerrycruncher »

maxerickson wrote: post #84
Cthulhu_ wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nobody's forcing autopilot on anyone. I think instead, tesla will / should opt to disable autopilot earlier in non-ideal conditions like this - that way they won't be held liable either. ATM it really feels like they're being put on trial here.

It's not any different than the situation with bad human drivers, but anyone on the same road is exposed to these systems.

It is different, though.

You can't push an update to stop humans from endangering themselves and/or others.

Tesla, however, is able to do exactly that with their cars.

That they haven't, when their technology has been proven to be fatally dangerous, is unconscionable.

Re: Another Tesla on autopilot steers towards a barrier

#296

Post by freerobby »

rectang wrote: post #89

The ability to discern when the car needs to stop for a stationary object right in front of it needs to be an ironclad requirement for self-driving. It seems that sophisticated LIDAR is currently the best way to achieve this, but LIDAR is expensive. So companies like Uber and Tesla skimp on the LIDAR, and build self-driving cars that can more or less follow lanes but plow right into obstacles ? Whoa. The feasibility…

Lidar isn't reliable in conditions that are less than ideal (rain, fog, snow, etc). If you build a car that is dependent on real-time lidar observations, it is worthless much of the time in some climates and some of the time in all climates.

Most companies are pursuing a Lidar approach because dev_speed(Lidar approach) > dev_speed(camera approach). Tesla is pursuing a camera approach because max(camera approach) > max(lidar approach).

Re: Another Tesla on autopilot steers towards a barrier

#297

Post by hw »

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 think more people need to embrace and understand the fact that we are a long way from having fully autonomous vehicles that you can just give the steering reins to from start to finish. The term 'Autopilot' gives off the wrong idea that the driver can sit back and relax while the car brings you from point A to point B safely.

The same is happening with chatbots - more and more businesses think they can put a chatbot on their site and assume it'll handle everything when in fact it's meant to assist you rather than take over things for you.

Re: Another Tesla on autopilot steers towards a barrier

#298

Post by mjrpes »

lisper wrote: post #232
Tloewald wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's not possible to engineer an autonomous system that never fails, but it is possible to engineer one in such a way that it never fails to detect that it has failed This seems to me to be a clearly incorrect (and self-contradictory) claim. It entirely depends on your definition of failure. Your analysis seems fine. The big problem is that the "autonomous" driver is using one signal (where are the lines on the edg…

> This seems to me to be a clearly incorrect (and self-contradictory) claim. I guess that means I was able to pull the wool over the eyes of all five members of my thesis committee because none of them thought so. > It entirely depends on your definition of failure. Well, yeah, of course. So? There is some subset of states of the world that you label "failure". The guarantee is not that the system never enters one of…

Humans have moments like this too. I remember suddenly driving into dense fog on the freeway and not able to see more than 20 feet in front of me. I had a definite "failure mode" where I slowed down and freaked out because all my previous driving experience was "failing" me on how to avoid a potential accident.

Re: Another Tesla on autopilot steers towards a barrier

#299

Post by jiveturkey »

bufferoverflow wrote: post #94
gormz wrote: post #40

You can pry the steering wheel out of my cold dead hands. Might be true that on paper these things cause less accidents and less deaths, but I want to be in control of my life. If I die in a car I don't want it to be because of a software bug.

Most modern cars are drive-by-wire, entirely relying on computers and the software. And their software is huge blobs of proprietary compiled code. It's guaranteed to have bugs.

1. It's more than most, it's almost all modern passenger cars that are drive-by-wire. But drive-by-wire is a term of art that specifically means that the throttle is not a direct mechanical linkage. Very, very few cars are steer-by-wire and even fewer are brake-by-wire.

2. You're using "proprietary" as a pejorative. It's not proprietary, compiled code that has bugs. All software is guaranteed to have bugs.

3. An entirely insignificant number of accidents are caused by bugs in the drive-by-wire control system. (Even taking into account that an insignificant fraction of cars on the road are drive-by-wire as you mean it.)

Re: Another Tesla on autopilot steers towards a barrier

#300

Post by ucaetano »

hw wrote: post #297
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 think more people need to embrace and understand the fact that we are a long way from having fully autonomous vehicles that you can just give the steering reins to from start to finish. The term 'Autopilot' gives off the wrong idea that the driver can sit back and relax while the car brings you from point A to point B safely. The same is happening with chatbots - more and more businesses think they can put a chatbo…

> I think more people need to embrace and understand the fact that we are a long way from having fully autonomous vehicles that you can just give the steering reins to from start to finish

Apparently, we're not, as Waymo has shown.

> The term 'Autopilot' gives off the wrong idea that the driver can sit back and relax while the car brings you from point A to point B safely.

Agreed, the "but that's not how autopilots work in airplanes" canned response is irrelevant.

Post reply on HN