Live data from Hacker News

Tesla issues strongest statement yet blaming driver for deadly crash

abc7news.com

641–650 of 850 posts

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

#641

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…

>obvious orange obstacle

Apparently they loose the colour info and process black and white because it is easier. https://electrek.co/2017/05/16/tesla-autopilot-2-0-can-see/

This seems to have been an issue in some of the crashes and maybe was a mistake. See also for example the trailer an earlier Tesla crashed into https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/06/20/tesla_death_crash_a...

Kind of obvious in colour but at the time it was probably a grey shape against a similar brightness grey sky

Also the big red fire truck http://autoweek.com/article/technology/ntsb-probe-autopilot-...

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

#642
post #2

Full statement: "We are very sorry for the family's loss. According to the family, Mr. Huang was well aware that Autopilot was not perfect and, specifically, he told them it was not reliable in that exact location, yet he nonetheless engaged Autopilot at that location. The crash happened on a clear day with several hundred feet of visibility ahead, which means that the only way for this accident to have occurred is i…

> Autopilot was not perfect and, specifically, he told them it was not reliable in that exact location, yet he nonetheless engaged Autopilot at that location

> Tesla is extremely clear that Autopilot requires the driver to be alert and have hands on the wheel

> the false impression that Autopilot is unsafe will cause harm to others on the road

"Autopilot is not perfect and you need to continually monitor and second guess what it's doing.... but it's not unsafe!"

Sounds like some really mixed messages here.

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

#643
post #599

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> Tesla's system demands more from drivers than manual driving. If this was true, wouldn't Tesla vehicles have a higher rate of crashes, all things being equal? Is there any evidence that this is the case?

>Is there any evidence that this is the case? Yes. >the Model S had higher claim frequencies, higher claim severities and higher overall losses than other large luxury cars. Under collision coverage, for example, analysts estimated that the Model S's mileage-adjusted claim frequency was 37 percent higher than the comparison group, claim severity was 64 percent higher, and overall losses were 124 percent higher. http:…

Wow, surprised that I’ve never seen this come up in any Tesla discussion before.

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

#644
post #572

This is so frustrating to me. 50 years ago we had the ability to fly to the moon. A played out trope, sure. But today we can't even do a basic 'dont run into shit' on a perfectly clear day. Physics in this way is and has been a solved problem for decades. The fact that people are dying from hitting stationary objects should be criminal. At lightest, they should bar these companies from even participating.

This isn't "physics in this way" - it's a computation and machine learning problem that still has not been solved with purely visual sensors.

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

#645
post #641

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…

>obvious orange obstacle Apparently they loose the colour info and process black and white because it is easier. https://electrek.co/2017/05/16/tesla-autopilot-2-0-can-see/ This seems to have been an issue in some of the crashes and maybe was a mistake. See also for example the trailer an earlier Tesla crashed into https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/06/20/tesla_death_crash_a... Kind of obvious in colour but at the ti…

Note that it's not (only) about colors... Human vision has trouble picking out colors in the dark, yet it still allows us to process world around us to a surprising degree. However until the "brain" of the car is good enough, it is simply irresponsible of Tesla not to use all the data available, from as many different sensors as possible. Testa should use color. And they should use Lidar.

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

#646
post #621

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you not trusting the engineers who manufactured your cars internal computer system, brakes, etc? What about bridges or elevators? Tesla markets their vehicles are self-driving cars that are safer than humans, this is dishonest.

It is honest in aggregate. It has statistics to prove that. However, it does make mistakes. But so do humans.

Genuinely curious about the statistics: does it count human corrections as if they would have resulted in the crash? Because if not, they are simply not valid.

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

#647
post #645
post #641

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>obvious orange obstacle Apparently they loose the colour info and process black and white because it is easier. https://electrek.co/2017/05/16/tesla-autopilot-2-0-can-see/ This seems to have been an issue in some of the crashes and maybe was a mistake. See also for example the trailer an earlier Tesla crashed into https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/06/20/tesla_death_crash_a... Kind of obvious in colour but at the ti…

Note that it's not (only) about colors... Human vision has trouble picking out colors in the dark, yet it still allows us to process world around us to a surprising degree. However until the "brain" of the car is good enough, it is simply irresponsible of Tesla not to use all the data available, from as many different sensors as possible. Testa should use color. And they should use Lidar.

Yeah I guess the perception has to be good enough to not crash in situations where humans wouldn't. It seems not quite there with tesla. Waymo seems to be better in that regard.

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

#648

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

No - this is not a fair comparison. Tesla, without the autodrive feature, functions like a regular car. It is upto you if you want to turn on the autodrive or not.

We are discussing the use of Autopilot, so it is a fair comparison. Nobody is worried about the safety of a Tesla with autopilot off.

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

#649

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…

I don't buy this either nor should we it's not how the feature is marketed. "The system is designed to be able to conduct short and long distance trips with no action required by the person in the driver’s seat." The result of this statement and the functionality that matches it is it creates a re-enforced false sense of security. Does it matter whether the driver of the model X whose auto pilot drove straight into a…

Which is, by the way, part of why I love the marketing for Mobileye (at least in Israel, haven't seen e.g. American ads). It's marketed not as driving the car, but as stepping in when the human misses something. Including one adorable TV spot starring an argumentative couple who used to argue about who's a better driver, and now uses the frequency of Mobileye interventions as a scoring system. Kind of like autonomous car disengagement numbers :-P

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

#650
post #572

This is so frustrating to me. 50 years ago we had the ability to fly to the moon. A played out trope, sure. But today we can't even do a basic 'dont run into shit' on a perfectly clear day. Physics in this way is and has been a solved problem for decades. The fact that people are dying from hitting stationary objects should be criminal. At lightest, they should bar these companies from even participating.

This isn't "physics in this way" - it's a computation and machine learning problem that still has not been solved with purely visual sensors.

> ... with purely visual sensors

So maybe they shouldn't use purely visual sensors until the problem is solved? It's not like they don't have any other option.

Post reply on HN