NTSB: Autopilot steered Tesla car toward traffic barrier before deadly crash

Post by ComradeTaco » Thu, Jun 07, 2018, 5:47 PM UTC

aerovistae wrote: post #15

unethical_ban wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Without commenting on the rest of the issues with Musk/Tesla, his tweet about a news verification agency was a joke. Verifiably. It was nicknamed Pravda, and a corporation related to his tweet was registered to Musk on Oct 17 2017, the anniversery of the October Revolution.

A joke? It's verifiable because he said he might name it Pravda, and the fact that he actually registered it is further evidence that it's a joke? I'm not saying he's really going to do it, but I question your certainty here with a total lack of actual evidence.

Post by dragontamer » Thu, Jun 07, 2018, 5:49 PM UTC

jackson1way wrote: post #30

Despite the autopilot failure, I find the battery failure quite remarkable too: > The car was towed to an impound lot, but the vehicle's batteries weren't finished burning. A few hours after the crash, "the Tesla battery emanated smoke and audible venting." Five days later, the smoldering battery reignited, requiring another visit from the fire department. Where is your LiPo god now? Batteries have more energy densit…

Post by martin_bech » Thu, Jun 07, 2018, 5:49 PM UTC

Analemma_ wrote: post #45

martin_bech wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A counter argument that HUMAN DRIVERS are unsafe an fatal (let alone missing common sense and alertness). I 100% get your point, but my counterpoint, is that this is what we are going to see, in the future. Autonomous systems that by and large are way safer, than human drivers, but when they fail, the might do so, in circumstances where are human would not. Humans are good at some things, computers/ai/sensor suites a…

I shouldn't have to keep saying this in every thread about Tesla autopilot, but I guess I do: the fact that there will probably one day be autonomous driving systems that are safer than human drivers does not imply that Tesla's current system is safer than human drivers.

Post by panopticon » Thu, Jun 07, 2018, 5:51 PM UTC

zo1 wrote: post #105

raldi wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The paint on the right edge of the gore marking, as seen in Google Maps, is worn Indeed; here's a close-up of the critical area. Note that the darker stripe on the bottom of the photo is NOT the crucial one; the one that the car was supposed to follow is the much more faded one above that that you can barely see: https://www.google.com/maps/@37.410912,-122.0757037,3a,75y,2... (Note that I'm not blaming the faded pa…

Wow. The start of that concrete lane-divider looks incredibly dangerous for a highway. It pretty-much just "starts", with only some sort of object that they call a "crash attenuator" in front of it. I would imagine its purpose is to dampen/dissipate kinetic energy and maybe deflect oncoming objects from hitting the concrete slab directly. I don't even see any sort of road-bumps to warn drivers of this dangerous obsta…

Post by jakelarkin » Thu, Jun 07, 2018, 5:52 PM UTC

CydeWeys wrote: post #40

jakelarkin wrote: post #14

self driving systems cant well reason about untrained scenarios or the intent of other humans on the road. I think the people have grossly underestimated how driving in an uncontrolled environment is really a general AI problem, which we're not even close to solving.

Disagree. I think that the likes of Waymo and Cruise understand exactly how hard of a problem this is. It's only companies like Uber and Tesla that are underestimating it, and doing stupid things like disabling automatic braking (Uber) or not using LIDAR (Tesla).