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

Tesla issues strongest statement yet blaming driver for deadly crash

abc7news.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 850 posts

Re: Tesla issues strongest statement yet blaming driver for deadly crash

#231

Post by brewdad »

DavidAdams wrote: post #158
Dwolb wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tesla need to stop calling it 'Autopilot'. The name implies drivers don't need to drive and is most likely a big reason drivers are lured into a false sense of security.

Volvo's messaging is less reckless than Tesla's. They call their similar feature "Pilot assist." It's also always been stricter about trying to make sure the driver is engaged when it's enabled. As a Volvo owner, I'll admit I find it annoying at times, but I think it's also helped drill into me that I shouldn't trust Pilot Asssist not to drive me into a barrier. It's amazing at keeping me in my lane when I'm fiddling…

I have a Volvo as well and it is annoying when the dashboard goes nuts warning of impending doom when experience tells me that the vehicle/obstacle ahead isn't actually an issue. That said, it has saved my bacon at least once at an unfamiliar highway exit in rush hour when traffic went from 40mph to a dead stop almost immediately.

Lane assist has also led me to be much better about always signaling lane changes lest the steering try to fight me.

Re: Tesla issues strongest statement yet blaming driver for deadly crash

#232

Post by z3t4 »

skrause wrote: post #209
Gerardo1 wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This same thing can be said of auto-pilot in planes. Not saying it invalidates your argument, just that there are pretty wide-reaching consequences to that idea.

Planes don't suddenly crash into a mountain because you have looked away for two seconds, there is much more time to react in case the autopilot doesn't behave correctly.

once you see the mountain it will be too late. think of big airplannes as trains.

Re: Tesla issues strongest statement yet blaming driver for deadly crash

#233

Post by danso »

Phrodo_00 wrote: post #193
tathastu wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tesla's autopilot page ( https://www.tesla.com/autopilot ) says (as of today): 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 greater than that of a human driver.

While it might imply otherwise, the message is clear about the _hardware_ being ready for self-driving. That doesn't mean the car is capable of self-driving in general.

How many non-programmers do you think recognize that Tesla is telling a half-truth here?

Re: Tesla issues strongest statement yet blaming driver for deadly crash

#234

Post by sabareesh »

I am not sure why there is so much anti Tesla sentiment here in HackerNews. I am a new model 3 owner and very well informed so many times that "Enhanced Autopilot" is nothing other than advanced cruise control and my attention is always on the road. This is a great technology but someone cannot be more obvious than this on how to use it responsibly.

Re: Tesla issues strongest statement yet blaming driver for deadly crash

#235

Post by greglindahl »

debt wrote: post #225
greglindahl wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Compare that with the message displayed each time the driver turns on Autopilot. Is there any evidence that Tesla drivers are more influenced by marketing or by the message that they see every day?

Also does Tesla have numbers to show that autopilot has actually been safer than a normal human driver?

I'm willing to bet that the NTSA report on this accident will explore that issue. The one number that Tesla has given included the effect of automatic emergency braking, so it's not a pure autopilot number.

Re: Tesla issues strongest statement yet blaming driver for deadly crash

#236

Post by mulmen »

mannykannot wrote: post #167
Johnny555 wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just like Tesla's auto pilot? Drivers are supposed to be "flying", scanning gauges and the road ahead to ensure the autopilot is doing what they expect... I think people that say that "autopilot" is a bad name for this feature don't really understand what an "autopilot" does.

An airplane under autopilot is not a second or two away from a fatal crash.

The fatal impact may not be seconds away but the event that sets in motion the series of actions that results in that fatal impact may take only seconds.

Re: Tesla issues strongest statement yet blaming driver for deadly crash

#237

Post by enduser »

“NHTSA found that even the early version of Tesla Autopilot resulted in 40% fewer crashes ...”

True

“... and it has improved substantially since then.”

Non-specific to the point of being subjective. Untrue according to many HW2 users.

Bad logic.

Re: Tesla issues strongest statement yet blaming driver for deadly crash

#238

Post by chaostheory »

patcheudor wrote: post #107
tc wrote: post #18

Tesla probably shouldn't be saying anything about this at all, even just to avoid giving it more news cycles. But if they were going to say something, here's what they should have said the first time. ---- We take great care in building our cars to save lives. Forty thousands Americans die on the roads each year. That's a statistic. But even a single death of a Tesla driver or passenger is a tragedy. This has affecte…

>t's a tool to help attentive drivers avoid accidents that might have otherwise occurred. This needs far more discussion. I just don't buy it. I don't believe that you can have a car engaged in auto-drive mode and remain attentive. I think our psychology won't allow it. When driving, I find that I must be engaged and on long trips I don't even enable cruise control because taking the accelerator input away from me is…

> This needs far more discussion. I just don't buy it. I don't believe that you can have a car engaged in auto-drive mode and remain attentive. I think our psychology won't allow it.

Does anyone know of psychology studies that measure human reaction time and skill when sometime like autopilot is engaged most of the time? I remember taking part in a similar study at Georgia Tech that involved firing at a target using a joystick. It was also simultaneously a contest because only the top scorer would get prize money. The study was conducted in two parts. In the 1st phase, the system had autotargeting engaged. All subjects had to do was press a button when the reticle was on the target in order to score. In the 2nd phase, which was a surprise, autotargetting was turned off. I won the contest and my score was miles ahead of anyone. I can't fully confirm it but I feel this happened because I was still actively aiming for the target even when autotargetting was active.

Re: Tesla issues strongest statement yet blaming driver for deadly crash

#240

Post by mjamesaustin »

Johnny555 wrote: post #149
mjamesaustin wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What a stark difference in tone this kind of statement would have made. Tesla's statement reeks of a desire to protect themselves from liability or a potential lawsuit. It's very sad to see them adopting such language in the face of such a tragedy.

What company can afford to embrace a wrongful-death lawsuit? And it's not just this one, it's all the others that they'll suddenly be accepting liability for.

Not Tesla, but they can afford to pay someone to write a thoughtful and sympathetic response to a tragedy in a way that also protects them from a lawsuit.

This sample statement makes it very clear that the user was misusing autopilot and trusting it beyond its intended function, but also shows sympathy for the family's situation.

Post reply on HN