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

651–660 of 850 posts

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

#651

Post by buvanshak »

pstuart wrote: post #532
buvanshak wrote: post #522

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>There's so much money involved here and so much initial traction that it is indeed reasonable to think that tech can surpass a "normal" driver. I don't think it is reasonable at all to reach that conclusion based on the money involved...You just can't force progress/breakthrough just by throwing money at all problem.. >I'm also biased against human drivers, plenty of whom should not be behind the wheel. So I think i…

Money absolutely matters. If there's no money, there's no development. And vice versa. That funded development isn't a guarantee of success, but it raises the odds to be non-zero. You're also ignoring a key point: we have "self-driving" cars right now, but they're not good enough yet. Computer hardware is getting cheaper day by day, and right now the limiting factor appears to be the cost of sensors.

>Money absolutely matters. If there's no money, there's no development. And vice versa.

Both are not true. It does not need money for a man to have a great breakthrough idea. It is also not possible to guarantee generation a great idea by just throwing more and more money at researchers...

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

#652

Post by danmaz74 »

tim333 wrote: post #641
Animats wrote: post #552

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…

> 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/

If that's true, it looks like a very big mistake to me, considering that we use distinguishable color a lot to signal risks.

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

#653

Post by dclowd9901 »

tjomk wrote: post #581
axaxs wrote: post #576

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't beta test with human lives.

Or you don't use beta features where the ultimate mistake can cost you your life.

People don’t get this when you call the feature “Autopilot”.

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

#654

Post by sunstone »

The self driving tech is trying to do everything 'by itself' in that it's trying to drive perfectly without help but in the ends roads will probably have to meet the tech part way. That is, the roads will need some (hopefully not to expensive) adjustments or additions to make the self driving tech more reliable.

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

#655

Post by sschueller »

abalone wrote: post #626

Tesla is recklessly using its own customers to train their fleet for level 5. AT BEST their response is, drivers need to be 100% as attentive as they would without autopilot. What then is the point of autopilot, except to train the fleet? They are in complete denial that autosteering can seduce reasonable people into lowering their guard and mentally relaxing. Again, what other immediate user benefit would it provide…

Why are Tesla's permitted on European roads with the autopilot feature? Roads are quite different compared to the US.

Additionaly I am very concerned about the OTA autopilot updates which do not go through any government or 3rd party certification. In fact I have read on hacker news that Tesla will sometimes push code changes to cars on the same day.

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

#657

Post by buvanshak »

supernovae wrote: post #514
skywhopper wrote: post #480

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I agree with your conclusion, the opening line strikes me as silly. Why is it "so important" to have self-driving cars? These cars that can't detect stationary objects directly in front of them are nowhere close to the self-driving pipe dream that's been around for a century. Maybe by 2118 we'll be making more progress.

It won't take that long. Also, people are terrible at detecting objects directly in front of them and just like computers, the human brain can be cheated, overloaded, inept or inexperienced leading to an accident. Now we have cars with lane assist, smart breaking, auto pilot features and that's only in the past 5-10 years. Of all the places where technology can save lives, its definitely in vehicles/transportation.

> Also, people are terrible at detecting objects directly in front of them and just like computers, the human brain can be cheated, overloaded, inept or inexperienced leading to an accident.

How many optical illusions do you usually see in the roads while driving, that can result in an accident?

I am not even talking about the "people are terrible at detecting objects directly in front of them" part.

I mean, how can you be a human being and say this? If we were "terrible at detecting objects directly in front of us", we would have been predated out of existence a long time ago..

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

#658

Post by dewski »

FireBeyond wrote: post #432
dewski wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Based on his complaints I don’t see how we can infer it gave him added security which would warrant continued use. If I knew a tool I used around the house wasn’t working completely as advertised I wouldn’t continue using the feature that wasn’t working for me. As a beta user of bank software where clicking transfer money ended up sending twice as much, wouldn’t it be my fault if I did it 7 more times when I acknowle…

> As a beta user of bank software where clicking transfer money ended up sending twice as much, wouldn’t it be my fault if I did it 7 more times when I acknowledged its behavior even if it wasn’t as advertised? Bad example. "Hey, this is broken, it did this." You say. They say "Nope, no problem/ fixed." You do it again. "Still broken!" "All good!". Again...

I think it’s a fine example when applied to 7 different times. That’s past a reasonable amount of times to place your trust in a system at that point. You’re just self inflicting pain if you do the same thing over and over again and expect different results.

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

#659

Post by dewski »

factsaresacred wrote: post #632
dewski wrote: post #360

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nowhere do I say there is no problem so I’m not sure why you’re quoting that. I acknowledge there may be a problem since he shouldn’t have been using autopilot on that known problematic strip of road.

> he shouldn’t have been using autopilot on that known problematic strip of road. Tesla don't make preconditions on where to use their autopilot. How many Tesla's discover a new 'problematic' strip of road each day? Is every first Tesla to drive down a new road to become a crash-test dummy when it turns out the autopilot just can't handle that next bend in the road? It's absurd to think so. The product is not fit for…

Sure they do, it isn’t enabled 100% of the time. It only enables it when it has the confidence it can perform its task. There are plenty of times where it wouldn’t be available to me for various reasons, either road conditions or weather conditions.

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

#660

Post by lowkeyokay »

kgwgk wrote: post #629
tjomk wrote: post #597

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is exactly the point why I will never understand people in US and the sort of thing with labels and warnings. You don't microwave a cat just because there is no warning label saying you cannot do that. You do not dry your hair submerged in a bath just because there's no warning label. And knowing how imperfect and faulty this system is (which is what the family says the driver told them), I would avoid engaging…

> You don't microwave a cat just because there is no warning label saying you cannot do that. And why don’t you that, precisely? If you don’t understand the physics of the thing how are you supossed to know that using it on low power is different that bathing the cat on warm water, for example?

Because it is for cooking
Post reply on HN