Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Tesla in autopilot mode crashes into parked Laguna Beach police cruiser

latimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

461–470 of 488 posts

Re: Tesla in autopilot mode crashes into parked Laguna Beach police cruiser

#461

Post by DannyBee »

mikeash wrote: post #450
DannyBee wrote: post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm just going to leave you to your non-data driven skepticism of "everything other than tesla", because this is clearly not a useful conversation. That isn't what you originally asked (and as you see, i wasn't the only one who interpreted it this way), and imho it's not a useful comparison. I have no idea why one would ask "is autopilot worse" and then say "but only compared to humans, not taking into account the ot…

I'm not talking about people who disable collision avoidance. I'm talking about people driving cars that don't have it at all. These are, as far as I know, still the vast majority of cars out there. The data you provided is clearly not sufficient to reach conclusions about actual crash rates, so I really don't see how it's useful to present.

and again, you literally have no data at all, sufficient or not, to back up your claims. Instead, you just shit on all data that doesn't agree with your pet theory as insufficient.

I'll take insufficient data over zero data any day of the week.

Re: Tesla in autopilot mode crashes into parked Laguna Beach police cruiser

#463

Post by bobsil1 »

lagadu wrote: post #417
bobsil1 wrote: post #374

Earlier quoted context omitted.

False positives from road signs, overhead signs, radar-reflective trash. Commonly used radars have limited vertical discrimination.

Why would the radar even be pointed at areas several meters above the car? Maybe radars can't be pointed at a narrow space, if that's the case why not use lidar instead?

Most radars aren't coherent like laser, beams spread out. Also radar measures speed more accurately than location.

Lidar only used by R&D + taxi services, price not reasonable for car buyers yet.

Re: Tesla in autopilot mode crashes into parked Laguna Beach police cruiser

#464

Post by mikeash »

DannyBee wrote: post #460
mikeash wrote: post #452

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "data" you've provided so far consists of: 1) A link to IIHS crash avoidance test results. The Model S got a perfect score in those results, so those results don't at all support any claim that the Model S is worse. (I can certainly accept that the test is not definitive and the Model S could be worse than others while still getting a perfect score. My point is merely that this is not relevant data.) 2. A mention…

So, then still zero data from you to back up any of your theories up, at all, but still more skepticism and random crapping on literally the only data provided so far. Okay, i'm out.

An average of 26.6 Tesla crashes per day isn’t data? It’s more relevant or more reliable than anything you’ve given.

Re: Tesla in autopilot mode crashes into parked Laguna Beach police cruiser

#465

Post by DannyBee »

cherioo wrote: post #331
DannyBee wrote: post #307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Again, please provide any data that says otherwise. At all. Any! So far the data in this conversation has been incredibly one sided, with me providing data, and you providing skepticism. These systems exist in a lot of cars, yet nothing until Tesla suggests any issues anywhere (i'm ignoring things like news reports which are fairly biased) Therefore, the extraordinary claim is not that Tesla is worse, it's that Tesla…

A quick search gives me this http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2016/08/automatic-emergency... . In particular "At 45 mph, the crash-avoidance systems slowed the test vehicle by 74 percent, on average, and prevented collisions 40 percent of the time.", i.e. it fails 60 percent of the time. Do you really believe other cars' automatic emergency braking works 100 percent of the time with perfect reliability? They don't sh…

No, i don't believe that, i just would like this person to provide literally any data at all for their pet theories instead of just crapping on everyone else's imperfect data (which is pretty typically the way of the world)

So yeah, what i want is a citation or anything other than smug hand waving and dismissivenessm, to actually make it a useful discussion.

Re: Tesla in autopilot mode crashes into parked Laguna Beach police cruiser

#466

Post by radium3d »

abalone wrote: post #102

I keep wondering what the customer benefit of Level 2 autopilot is if not to lower your attention and relax your mind. Tesla's "out" is that drivers are supposed to retain full attention and oversight of the autopilot system -- but then if you strictly follow this rule, what is the benefit of autopilot? I can see the benefit to Tesla and future Tesla customers of essentially crowdsourced fleet learning. But what is t…

The benefit is less strain on your feet/ankles/wrists/arms/shoulders etc.

Living in a high traffic area I would appreciate the time I don't have to pump my damn foot up and down every 10 seconds for hours straight while waiting in traffic.

Re: Tesla in autopilot mode crashes into parked Laguna Beach police cruiser

#467

Post by dang »

hndamien wrote: post #407
dang wrote: post #340

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You've unfortunately contributed the most to this flamewar. We don't want those here. Please stop. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Thank you. I didn't take any offense to Humpty Dumpty, I understand his point. I'm more surprised that somebody calling me a "smug pedant" led to me being banned for what seems a simple point, Tesla never said their car was fully self driving, and went to fairly great lengths to explain and notify that it isn't. (sans the video which I agree implies a lot too much).

You weren't banned! We'd have said so if we did that.

Being called a rude name is bad (though I think the commenter edited it out?), but like every user here, you still need to follow the rules regardless of what someone else does.

The core issue is the flamewar thing—by which I mean high-quantity, low-quality controversies—which is the essence of what we're asking people to avoid in comment threads.

Re: Tesla in autopilot mode crashes into parked Laguna Beach police cruiser

#468

Post by dang »

freethought wrote: post #380
dang wrote: post #340

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You've unfortunately contributed the most to this flamewar. We don't want those here. Please stop. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

It is unfortunate that they were name called “smug pedant”.

Yes, but not relevant to the main point, which is that users need not to proliferate high-quantity-low-quality controversies (a.k.a. flamewars) on this site.

(If we saw a commenter calling another a smug pedant, of course we'd tell them not to. I didn't see it though.)

Re: Tesla in autopilot mode crashes into parked Laguna Beach police cruiser

#469

Post by calvinbhai »

abalone wrote: post #102

I keep wondering what the customer benefit of Level 2 autopilot is if not to lower your attention and relax your mind. Tesla's "out" is that drivers are supposed to retain full attention and oversight of the autopilot system -- but then if you strictly follow this rule, what is the benefit of autopilot? I can see the benefit to Tesla and future Tesla customers of essentially crowdsourced fleet learning. But what is t…

Compare the number of autopilot crashes, to the number of crashes from cars without autopilot, driven by idiots who are busy staring at the phone screen while driving, you'll realize that autopilot type systems are probably a zillion times safer.

Of course, there's zero data about how many accidents happen because drivers were staring at their phones, so you rarely see articles screaming " driven by an idiot staring at phone screen crashes ".

I was skeptical about Autopilot from day one, but one test drive convinced me that this may not lead to zero accidents, but it certainly is way way better than vehicles that crash when driven by distracted drivers

Re: Tesla in autopilot mode crashes into parked Laguna Beach police cruiser

#470

Post by confiscate »

LoSboccacc wrote: post #438
confiscate wrote: post #91

I don't get it, why is it so hard to detect stationary objects in front of you? wouldn't that be the "hello world" of any self-driving tech? Every time I ask this question, the response is "radar as a technology has too much noise, not accurate enough to detect stationary objects". But it DOES detect stationary objects. Otherwise no one would even turn on Tesla AP at all. Why is it so hard to detect stationary object…

two things to consider: as speed increase, braking distance increase squared as distance increase, the angular size of an object decreases inversely. a radar requires an increase in power both to see at a longer distance and to see a smaller object, because the signature reduces with 2*distance^4 ( this is an oversimplification to help introduce the topic, you can see the details here http://www.radartutorial.eu/01.b…

that's a very good explanation
Post reply on HN