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

261–270 of 850 posts

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

#261

Post by greglindahl »

cdancette wrote: post #248
patcheudor wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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…

For me it's the opposite. I feel like with cruise control on, I'm much more attentive to the road and the surroundings and feel much safer. It really annoys me when I have to constantly look at the speed to avoid getting above the limit and it is very tiring for long drives.

I totally agree with this sentiment -- the only reason I drive a safe speed is that I use cruise control constantly. Then I don't have to think about speed, and I can focus on everything else.

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

#262

Post by greglindahl »

brewdad wrote: post #250
greglindahl wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there any evidence that this is an actual problem?

You don't think there's an implied difference between Autopilot vs a name like Driver Assist? Even Co-pilot would be be a better name as it implies an expectation that the driver is still ultimately responsible.

I'm asking for data. The data doesn't care what you and I think. And the data will reflect what Tesla drivers think, as opposed to people who've only heard Tesla's marketing. Tesla drivers get reminded about the limitations of the autopilot system each time they enable it.

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

#263

Post by flokie »

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…

That news footage in the linked article looks exactly like this scenario: https://www.reddit.com/r/teslamotors/comments/8a0jfh/autopil...

Should a product that flawed really be deployed on an honor system basis?

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

#264

Post by cmurf »

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.

Sure. But this is the sort of thing that is in my view an instigator of escalating adversarialism. I recognize this kind of cagey language, but I also recognize that most people don't and I think it's absurd to demand that they do understand it. I put this in the category of false advertising and I think a jury of random people will side with the dead. Hence the defense's job will be to disqualify ordinary people who will go for connotation over denotation.

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

#265

Post by bunderbunder »

Johnny555 wrote: post #145
mrguyorama wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which is why pilots are still in control of the plane while autopilot is active. Even while active, there is still a "pilot flying" and pilots are still responsible for scanning gauges and readouts and verifying the autopilot is doing what they expect. They do not just turn on autopilot and goof off

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.

This isn't a debate about dictionary definitions, it's a debate about human behavior.

People who say that "Autopilot" is a bad name for this feature aren't basing it on an imperfect understanding of what autopilot does in airplanes. They're basing it on how they believe people in general will interpret the term.

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

#266

Post by cyberferret »

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…

I agree with the psychology aspect of driving. I've seen it mentioned many times that a large majority of auto accidents occur a few minutes from the driver's home, and usually on their way home. Apparently, being close to their neighbourhood and in familiar surrounds, the driver's attention tends to wane as they get distracted with other things that they have to do when they get to their house.

Racing drivers have also reported that when they are not driving at 100%, they are more prone to make mistakes or crash. Most famously, Ayrton Senna's infamous crash at Monaco when he was leading the field by a LONG way. When he was asked why he crashed at a fairly innocuous slow corner, he said that his engineer had asked him over the radio to 'take it easy' as there was no chance he would be challenged for 1st place before the finish line, so he relaxed a fraction and started thinking about the victory celebrations. And crashed.

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

#267

Post by Fricken »

Robotbeat wrote: post #196
Fricken wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The name is irrelevant. What's relevant is that 56% of commercial pilots have admitted to falling asleep while flying[1]. People suck at remaining alert and attentive when doing boring shit. So when autopilot was all over the road and screwing up every 30 seconds, it wasn't much of a problem. Now that it can navigate highways for an hour or more without needing a safety critical intervention, we have a problem. [1] h…

What percent of commercial pilots also fly with a copilot? Additionally, I'm not a professional driver, I don't have any autopilot on my car, but I've definitely briefly fell asleep while driving late at night. What do you think rumble strips are for? Such an extremely low number of (but extremely highly publicized) fatality is not reason enough to say autopilot is a net negative. In fact, the extreme media focus tha…

In the article I posted it mentions that of the 56% of pilots who admitted falling asleep, 29% also admitted to having woken up to a sleeping copilot.

There is no path from Autopilot as it is to full autonomy without doing a major shift in strategy. Google figured out very early on that the incremental approach is unfeasible. Most of the other big car companies at the outset were intending to develop autonomy incrementally as well, but then they thought about it for a few minutes.

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

#268

Post by CPLX »

lorenzorhoades wrote: post #260
almost_usual wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I have to preface my post to say that I think developing self-driving automobiles is so important that it's worth the implied cost of potentially tens of thousands of lives in order to perfect the technology, because that's what people do; make sacrifices to improve the world we live in so that future generations don't have to know the same problem. I generally agree with this philosophy but this is very optimistic…

I think there is a key point that will result in the freedom of being able to drive being stripped long before assault rifles. Imagine if i create a private road from SF to LA and say that only self driving cars can drive on it. The vehicles on this road are all inter-connected, allowing them to travel at speeds in excess of 150+ MPH, and since the road that i've created is completely flat it still allows it to be a…

The thing you're describing is called a train.

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

#269

Post by watsocd »

neolefty wrote: post #26
TAForObvReasons wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is Silicon Valley. "move fast and break things"

Common in early car and aircraft cultures as well. Always a tension between innovation and safety. I don't mean that as a cop-out. Rather that there's no single "right answer". We are choosing something on a spectrum of risk vs reward. Personally, although I have no direct experience, it's starting to look like Tesla is being too risky. Yes, they're safer than human-only drivers, but the mistakes they're making are t…

32,000 people die every year in car accidents in the US alone.

If automation reduces that by only half, that's 80,000 lives saved.

The real problem in the press is that these crashes are like plane crashes; rare but catastrophic.

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

#270

Post by loceng »

BeetleB wrote: post #87
tshannon wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

See my comment here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16814565 Doesn't your statement admit that Tesla is at least partially at fault? Something their lawyers would probably never allow.

>Doesn't your statement admit that Tesla is at least partially at fault? Something their lawyers would probably never allow. IANAL so take with a grain of salt. I once talked to a lawyer who used to work for a big hospital and handled the malpractice lawsuits against them. Three takeaways from the discussion: 1. Implying that a possibility exists that the hospital was at fault has no legal ramifications whatsoever. 2…

Trust is the final layer of competition, trust comes with accountability, taking responsibility. If Tesla et al don't have this fear driving them to do right, then they will lose our respect and our hearts.
Post reply on HN