Tesla in autopilot mode crashes into parked Laguna Beach police cruiser

Post by deelowe » Wed, May 30, 2018, 2:32 AM UTC

ModernMech wrote: post #54

AceJohnny2 wrote: post #14

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.

Post by brett40324 » Wed, May 30, 2018, 2:34 AM UTC

King-Aaron wrote: post #69

Schwolop wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wrote the initial interface specification for the co-ordination system in Rio's open-pit mines. The mere fact that we were able to account for the state of every moving thing in the pit makes this a completely different proposition to self-driving vehicles in an uncontrolled real-world environment. At a guess it's at least ten to a hundred times easier.

Eventually this could be put into place in the broader traffic ecosystem - if all the cars on the road were required to have a transponder sort of arrangement on board, you could have a central point of control, and perhaps tie in people's phones etc to locate pedestrians. I do want to note that I am aware that there is an unfathomably large amount of complexity behind that however.

Post by mcguire » Wed, May 30, 2018, 2:38 AM UTC

hfdgiutdryg wrote: post #96

njarboe wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But not any worse than the term cruise control really.

You're getting downvoted, but I agree. A commercial pilot doesn't flip on autopilot and start browsing the internet on a phone or take a nap. And that's at 30k feet where there's little traffic to worry about. It seems like a misunderstanding of what the technology does, by consumers and the media. I'm no expert on Tesla's marketing history, but I'm of the opinion that these crashes are due to drivers misunderstandin…

Post by cmurf » Wed, May 30, 2018, 2:40 AM UTC

olliej wrote: post #6

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…

Post by ams6110 » Wed, May 30, 2018, 2:42 AM UTC

userbinator wrote: post #192

wpietri wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since circa 1968, "cruise control" has been used to refer to automatic throttle adjustment to maintain speed. [1] Is there some previous meaning that makes you think it misleading? Because I've never thought of it as meaning anything else. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cruise_control#History

From your link: The first car with Teetor's system was the 1958 Imperial (called "Auto-pilot") using a speed dial on the dashboard. More details here: http://www.imperialclub.com/Yr/1958/58AutoPilot/index.htm http://www.imperialclub.com/Articles/58AutoPilot/index.htm How ironic. I wonder how many drivers using that system crashed, thinking it would do everything for them...