Live data from Hacker News

Tesla issues strongest statement yet blaming driver for deadly crash

abc7news.com

561–570 of 850 posts

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

#561

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Systems that are semi autonomous where there's some expectation of intervention work well in those scenarios, keep the car in lane markers on the highway, etc. Make sure the users hands are on the wheel but for fully autonomous even if your hands are on the wheel, how does it know your paying attention?

Just turn off autopilot if no human input is detected. Hands on the wheel may not be enough input but some other combination may be enough.

maybe don’t call it autopilot then. call it “driver assistance”?.. or something that doesn’t make it sound like “autopilot”.

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

#562
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…

They’re really digging themselves a hole. Can you imagine explaining to a jury that your “autopilot” isn’t “fully-autonomous” and trying to justify that as not misleading by pointing to “autopilots in aviation?”

It's called a 'brand name' and people are surrounded by them. I can't eat my Apple MacBook, despite the fact it is misleadingly branded as fruit. Everyone in this thread seems perfectly capable of understanding that 'autopilot' doesn't mean 'fully autonomous', and they got to that understanding through the fairly mundane and routine method of thinking about it.

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

#563

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Economic incentives and competition will eventually cause it to happen regardless of sentiment. First, insurance rates for manually driven cars will shoot through the roof as less risky drivers moving to self driving cars decimate that risk pool (like if gun owners were required insurance for misuse). Second, cities that go to self driving only will have a huge advantage in infrastructure utilization and costs as roa…

> First, insurance rates for manually driven cars will shoot through the roof as less risky drivers moving to self driving cars decimate that risk pool (like if gun owners were required insurance for misuse). Why would the less-risky drivers move to self-driving cars first? Wouldn't some of the higher-risk demographics (e.g. the elderly) make the move first since they have more incentive to do so? > Second, cities th…

> Wouldn't some of the higher-risk demographics (e.g. the elderly)

Elderly aren't usually considered higher risk. The young kids are, enthusiasts are, people who drive red sports cars are.

> Unless a critical mass switches to car-sharing, autonomous cars and no parking will make rush hour worse because now each car will make the round trip to work twice a day instead of just once.

Autonomous cars should be mostly fleet vehicles (otherwise you have to park it at home).

Isn't that just like in most of the major world cities where taxis are the norm rather than the exception? It isn't weird for a taxi in Beijing to make 5-6 morning commute rounds. But even then, there are a lot of reverse commutes to consider.

> The financially sound thing to do will probably be converting these lots to more offices/condos/malls.

While density can increase, convenient affordable personal transportation also allows the opposite to occur. Parks, nice places, and niche destinations, are also possible.

Think of it this way, once traffic is mitigated, urban planning can apply more balance to eliminate uneven reverse commute problems. There will still be an incentive to not move, but movement in itself wouldn't be that expensive (only 40 kuai to get to work in Beijing ~15km, I'm sure given the negligible labor costs, autonomous cars can manage that in the states).

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

#564

Tesla's system demands more from drivers than manual driving. The driver has to detect automation failures after they occur, but before a crash. This requires faster reaction time than merely avoiding obstacles. Here's a good example - a Tesla on autopilot crashing into a temporary road barrier which required a lane change.[1] This is a view from the dashcam of the vehicle behind the Tesla. At 00:21, things look norm…

> Tesla's system demands more from drivers than manual driving.

This is a great point. With regular cars, drivers can reliably predict where the car will be after 5 seconds. However, with Tesla, there is really no way to know what the auto-driver will do, and so the driver has to stay even more attentive to ensure that it does not do something wrong. It's like driving a car that is not under your control, and may go in random directions.

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

#565

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. But I think you're right. I think the "best" way to move forward unt…

People love their cars too much. Cars should just be phased out in favor of mass transit everywhere. Yes, you can live without the convenience of your car. No really, you can. Now think about how you would enable that to happen. What local politicians are you willing to write to, or support, in order to enable a better mass transit option for you? And how would you enable more people to support those local politician…

> Yes, you can live without the convenience of your car. No really, you can.

No, I can't. Don't presume to tell other people what they need to live their lives.

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

#566

I used to be in awe of Teslas and I have always been a big fan of Musk, and even after the crash I still imagined myself one day buying a Tesla. But after this response, I've completely lost respect for the company, for Musk, and I don't think I'll ever buy one or advocate for someone buying one. The driver had previously reported to Tesla 7 to 10 times that there was an issue with autopilot, but Tesla told him "no t…

> The driver had previously reported to Tesla 7 to 10 times I understand this is not a popular opinion on news forums anywhere nor do I write this to absolve in my view Tesla of their poor response nor of their poor choice in naming the system 'autopilot' to start. But at what point does corporate or government responsibility end and personal responsibility start? If I knew something didn't work and that something co…

I realize we're talking about Teslas, but still, how many people can just stop using their car when they need to go to work or pick up kids?

The airbag recall affected millions and millions of cars. How many of those people were able to not drive their car until the problem was resolved?

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

#567
Maybe the cost of improvement is failure in this case. For Tesla to fix the issue of a crossing tractor trailer not being positively detected there had to be an instance of a Tesla hitting a crossing tractor trailer. Maybe for road work barriers that change position as the road work progresses to be avoided there needs to be an impetus for Tesla engineers to build in detection of these cases.

This is all a way of saying that I reject the notion that autonomous vehicles are more unsafe as compared to manually driven vehicles. This isn't an impulsive reaction either; data compiled by the NHTSA has proven this out.

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

#568
post #117
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…

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.

I wonder if Tesla decided they want to own the term 'autopilot' at a short term expense, forcing other manufacturers to use less obvious names down the track. Cause it seems strange they would stick with a term that could encourage lawsuits and frivolous behaviour by drivers.

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

#569
post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you believe Tesla bears the burden of maintaining its own homepage? tesla.com/autopilot currently has "Full Self-Driving Hardware on All Cars" as its top headline and has had that for awhile now.

Well, they do have the hardware, that isn't the issue. The cars simply lack the software to enable a fully autonomous vehicle. The phrasing indicates that if/when the software becomes available, the car would be theoretically capable of driving itself. It's just a typical misleading marketing blurb; nothing more.

In a sense though, without the software the hardware isn't self-driving, at least enough to be misleading. If you saw "Full Voice-Recognition Hardware on All Computers", you would expect it to actually recognise voices, not just come with a microphone.

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

#570

Maybe the cost of improvement is failure in this case. For Tesla to fix the issue of a crossing tractor trailer not being positively detected there had to be an instance of a Tesla hitting a crossing tractor trailer. Maybe for road work barriers that change position as the road work progresses to be avoided there needs to be an impetus for Tesla engineers to build in detection of these cases. This is all a way of say…

no, this isn't how you train computer vision algorithms.
Post reply on HN