151–160 of 488 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Some of them can. Others are no more than a gyroscope linked to the rudder.
Sure, but that's like pointing out that Toyota Corollas exist.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you go look at IIHS, they have tests that will tell you exactly how good non-Autopilot cars are at this kind of crash avoidance: I cannot find any current (2018) car that crashes into the parked car. (I only spot-checked prior years). I found one in 2014 (audi q5) that hits the car at 1mph when going 12mph. http://www.iihs.org/iihs/ratings/vehicle/v/audi/q5-4-door-su... By contrast, the 2014 subaru outback avoids…
Their report for the Model S says it avoided the collisions. Clearly there’s more to it than that.
I can also find no data that suggests any other TACC is crashing into vehicles (no NTSB studies, investigations, etc) at all.
So yeah, i'm going to conclude, based on what i've seen so far, that autopilot is part of the problem.
If you have data that says autopilot is not worse, i'd love to see it.
I really wish all the car manufacturers would stop with this bullshit "you still have to be driving it" self driving nonsense. Claiming that the driver is still responsible for driving the car, while using a system designed to encourage the "driver" to not pay attention is a dumb idea, and all I can see is this kind of thing leading to regulations the delay actual self driving cars. I'm not a self-driving car fanboy…
> "Tesla has always been clear that Autopilot doesn't make the car impervious to all accidents, and before a driver can use Autopilot, they must accept a dialogue box which states that 'Autopilot is designed for use on highways that have a center divider and clear lane markings,'" a Tesla spokesperson said in an emailed statement.
From the picture at the top of the story, it is clear there is no divider on the stretch of road where the accident occurred.
Maybe it should detect when it is being misused, and start blaring loud noises, do its best to make the driver carsick, or simply immobilize the car.
How does Tesla fail so badly at basic collision avoidance?? Surely the LIDAR is able to detect an imminent collision, but at least in the recent fire truck and lane-split barrier incidents, the cars didn't even slow down?! That seems really fundamental. Edit: so they don't use lidar... Is this a machine vision failure, then?
My understanding is that they detect moving obstacles much more easily than stationary. This is because almost everything in the environment is stationary to the car, so it is hard to distinguish between stationary things in your way and stationary things just off to the side. So if the car in front of you slows down, it's obvious that you'll hit it if you don't slow down. A car parked partially in your lane might ju…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because it's way oversold for what it does, and even if you look at other traffic aware cruise control, all data suggests it is in fact, more dangerous than other traffic aware cruise control (probably in part because of the former) I can't find an NTSB investigation or study that pegs traffic aware cruise control as the cause of the accident in any case except in Tesla's cases. Of course, it seems to Tesla folks thi…
What data is there? I didn’t realize there was enough to reach a conclusion yet.
Also, 18 crashes so far where autopilot was enabled? vs so far, literally zero known crashes across everyone else?
Do you not find it somewhat interesting that in zero other cases has the NTSB found that TACC or the design of a TACC played a role in the crash?
I'd also point out: the supplier of their original crash tech broke up with them and ordered them to stop using it because they felt what was happening was unsafe (see Mobileye's letter to Tesla).
Tesla later tried to spin it as "they are made we are breaking up with them" but Mobileye then produced data showing tried to renew the contract and Mobileye refused.
In fact, plenty of other car companies are building self-driving tech, and currently relying on Mobileye, and Mobileye has not refused to supply them - only Tesla.
Like, i'm not sure how this set of stuff doesn't tilt a person into "hey, maybe this is something to be worried about, they should produce data why it isn't".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Blame Elon Musk. I'm serious. He's been promising "self-driving" for years, except the damn technology isn't ready/safe enough for what people are clearly using this from. The manufacturer puts a warning label, but the usage model/UI is clearly flawed. His engineers know this, which is why Tesla's self-driving group has had such a high turnover rate over the last few years. Musk keeps overriding them.
> The manufacturer puts a warning label, but the usage model/UI is clearly flawed. Not just the model/UI but the actual sensor suite. Remember, the Tesla that resulted in a decapitation had over-saturated cameras that couldn't see a tractor trailer. Of course, that's where the UI comes into play, because if the driver hadn't been watching Harry Potter, he would have seen the tractor trailer as well.
Reports at the time said he was watching it on a portable DVD player, not the Tesla screen. Not sure about the NTSB report someone just cited though. If that report really said he wasn't watching anything, I wonder how that rumor started?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's the thing, how do you make an UI that unambiguously conveys that the car hasn't seen an object in front of it, so that the driver can react to it? Maybe with AR the car could highlight the objects detected so that the driver can brake if the car doesn't see an object it knows about, but a head mounted display seems pretty clunky.
I don't think people realize that "Tesla Autopilot" will never, ever, ever stop for an object in front of it. Tesla has said repeatedly it isn't designed to do so. If you run a Tesla toward a brick wall with Autopilot on, it will crash into it 100 out of 100 times. It will hit ANYTHING in the lane ahead of you. It isn't designed to stop in such cases. So there's no need for a UI. If there's something ahead of you, yo…
See page 93 of this owner's manual, for example: https://www.tesla.com/sites/default/files/model_s_owners_man...
(What it won't do is steer around obstructions in a lane, either full or partial.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Their report for the Model S says it avoided the collisions. Clearly there’s more to it than that.
You asked about non-autopilot cars and how common it is. I gave you data. I can also find no data that suggests any other TACC is crashing into vehicles (no NTSB studies, investigations, etc) at all . So yeah, i'm going to conclude, based on what i've seen so far, that autopilot is part of the problem. If you have data that says autopilot is not worse, i'd love to see it.
Also, I wasn't asking about how Autopilot compares to similar systems from other manufacturers, I was asking how it compares to the Mark I Human, which is a driving system that crashes into stationary vehicles with distressing frequency.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Here are the easter eggs in action, on a production vehicle: https://youtu.be/1GrNv3ow9H8?t=640 Weird, the tweet was dated 2018-05-22 but the Youtube video shows easter eggs already deployed by 2018-05-23. I know all Tesla vehicles have automatic over-the-air updates but that's still surprisingly quick. Must be Musk playing around with his time machine again.
Yes, there are easter eggs. I was replying to a comment that said “video games.”
I guess you don't consider that a video game, which is a perfectly valid opinion. But I'd just wish you had made your first comment "I don't consider Tesla's interactive easter eggs to be video games" instead. That way you clearly communicate your intent and this whole needless bikeshed could have been avoided in the first place.