NTSB: Autopilot steered Tesla car toward traffic barrier before deadly crash • Hacker News Board

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

#211

Post by ericpauley » Thu, Jun 07, 2018, 7:48 PM UTC

falcolas wrote: post #112

mymacbook wrote: post #27

Reading that initial report is terrifying. I am so glad the NTSB set the record straight that the driver had his hands on the wheel for the majority of the final minute of travel. Really makes me feel like Tesla was out to blame the driver from the get go. To be clear the driver is absolutely partially at fault, but my goodness autopilot sped up into the barrier in the final seconds — totally unexpected when the car…

> To be clear the driver is absolutely partially at fault I'm... not so certain. Why? The autopilot had likely exhibited proper behavior every time that the vehicle had passed that particular section of road prior, and if the driver was paying full attention to the behavior of the vehicle, he would only notice the problem around the 5 second mark. Five seconds, if you have no reason to be concerned about the vehicle'…

My vehicle (a Honda civic) exhibits this exact same functionality and behavior. (lane keeping, ACC, emergency braking for cars) They make it very clear the limitations of these systems. I'd say that in the 5 months I've owned it it's had this exact behavior (veering off exit ramps) 10 times. A simple jerk of the wheel puts it back on track, it's such a natural motion if you're paying even the slightest bit of attention. That being said Tesla fails to make their drivers aware of the limitations of autopilot, so I agree that this may not be in the driver.

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

#212

Post by FireBeyond » Thu, Jun 07, 2018, 7:53 PM UTC

Animats wrote: post #42

NTSB: • At 8 seconds prior to the crash, the Tesla was following a lead vehicle and was traveling about 65 mph. • At 7 seconds prior to the crash, the Tesla began a left steering movement while following a lead vehicle. • At 4 seconds prior to the crash, the Tesla was no longer following a lead vehicle. • At 3 seconds prior to the crash and up to the time of impact with the crash attenuator, the Tesla’s speed increas…

Meanwhile, Tesla is busy putting out press releases saying "We believe the driver was inattentive, and the car was warning him to put his hands on the wheel."

I am utterly, completely lacking in surprise that they didn't provide the relevant context, "... fifteen minutes prior."

This just looks... really bad for Tesla. It's more important to them to protect their poor software than drivers.

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

#213

Post by jakelarkin » Thu, Jun 07, 2018, 7:58 PM UTC

cornholio wrote: post #206

jakelarkin wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

normal driving requires anticipating the behavior of other humans who may or may not entire your path of travel or anticipating unseen obstacles. it has less to do with "reaction times" than one would think. Humans routinely over-drive their vehicles capability to safely stop for an obstacle in front or adjacent to their path of travel.

> Humans routinely over-drive their vehicles capability to safely stop for an obstacle in front or adjacent to their path of travel. Hence, the opportunity for an automated system that does not do that to be much safer, by relying on reaction times rather than strong AI. Where a human driver would use subtle cues to anticipate a slowdown of the preceding vehicle before a turn, an automated system can get by by simply…

... and that self-driving car will make its passengers car sick and get rear ended by the human driver behind it.

those types of twitchy driving mechanics aren't normal and don't share the road well with normal humans. The physics of cars and reaction times would dictate that we program a self-driving car to drive like Grandma .... always maintain safe low speeds, very long following distances and braking hard for sketchy actions by other cars or random things near the road, but we know that actually makes the road more dangerous as humans drivers will aggressively cut-off and rear end this self-driving grandma. Secondly, that type of driving creates a bad public impression of self-driving cars hurting their chances of adoption. If you read some of the earlier impressions of Google/Waymo cars its clear they went down that path initially and had to change their approach.

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

#214

Post by omgwtfbyobbq » Thu, Jun 07, 2018, 8:01 PM UTC

txcwpalpha wrote: post #146

slg wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn't an issue specific to Tesla as all automakers are now making cars that are more and more dependent on software. So what is the right way to handle these updates? You mentioned a clear flaw with OTA updates, but there are also numerous advantages. For example, the recent Tesla brake software issue was fixed with an OTA update. That immediately made cars safer. Toyota had a similar problem a few years ago and…

>This isn't an issue specific to Tesla as all automakers are now making cars that are more and more dependent on software. Cars have been dependent on software for a long time (literally decades). This isn't something new. Even combustion engine cars have had software inside of them that controls the operation of the engine, and this software is vigorously tested for safety issues (because most car manufacturers unde…

>Cars have been dependent on software for a long time (literally decades). This isn't something new. Even combustion engine cars have had software inside of them that controls the operation of the engine, and this software is vigorously tested for safety issues (because most car manufacturers understand a fault with such software could result in someone's death). Tesla seems to be the only major car manufacturer that has a problem with this.

The TACC offered by most (if not all) manufacturers can't differentiate between the surroundings and stopped vehicles. I wouldn't be surprised if their Lane Keeping Assist (LKA) systems have similar problems.

https://support.volvocars.com/en-CA/cars/Pages/owners-manual...

>WARNING When Pilot Assist follows another vehicle at speeds overapprox. 30 km/h (20 mph) and changes target vehicle – from a moving vehicle to a stationary one – Pilot Assist will ignore the stationary vehicle and instead accelerate to the stored speed.

>The driver must then intervene and apply the brakes.

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

#215

Post by FireBeyond » Thu, Jun 07, 2018, 8:02 PM UTC

ckastner wrote: post #12

> His hands were not detected on the steering wheel for the final six seconds prior to the crash. > Tesla has said that Huang received warnings to put his hands on the wheel, but according to the NTSB, these warnings came more than 15 minutes before the crash. > Tesla has emphasized that a damaged crash attenuator had contributed to the severity of the crash. These may or may not have been factors contributing to the…

They were also, as they have been on multiple occasions, more than happy to make sure the public narrative was "our system was working, warning him, not our fault!" when they absolutely, utterly, knew that those warnings were utterly irrelevant to the situation at hand.

Just as you or I as Tesla drivers need a subpoena to get access to the black box data for our own insurance or criminal claims against other drivers, but Tesla is more than happy to put out press releases on your driving telemetry if they feel it suits their narrative.

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

#216

Post by FireBeyond » Thu, Jun 07, 2018, 8:04 PM UTC

stetrain wrote: post #98

ckastner wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It must also never be worse than humans. In this case, it very clearly was.

So human drivers wouldn't crash here? Or a good, attentive, best-case human driver wouldn't crash here? Because those are not the same set, and it seems the former set has crashed into this particular barrier multiple times. I don't think it's acceptible that a vehicle with adaptive cruise, lane keeping, and emergency braking would hit this barrier without any mitigating braking or action, but the actual state of dri…

I think it's "rather unlikely" to the point of implausibility, that even the human drivers who have crashed into that barrier:

1) _aimed directly at it_ rather than glancing blows/swerving at the last moment, etc., and

2) _accelerated beyond the speed limit as they did_, rather than applying any form of braking, let alone AEB.

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

#217

Post by FireBeyond » Thu, Jun 07, 2018, 8:05 PM UTC

codeonfire wrote: post #18

gwern wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No surprise there about it steering into the barrier or Tesla not-quite-lying about him getting warnings, but I'm surprised that he apparently wasn't dead on impact but survived all the way to the hospital? So even a three-car pileup with the Tesla steering straight into a barrier at 71MPH & accelerating, with the car catching on fire & being reduced to a husk, still isn't enough to kill a driver immediately. In a wa…

A doctor has to declare a person dead, paramedics can't do it. In all cases it makes sense to transport the body to the hospital where the person is pronounced dead by the doctor. Otherwise the family may argue in court the paramedics did not try enough to save the person.

Not legally true, as a paramedic. EMTs and paramedics are able to declare people dead in certain, albeit limited, circumstances, sometimes involving telephone / radio consultation, sometimes not.

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

#218

Post by ploxiln » Thu, Jun 07, 2018, 8:09 PM UTC

txcwpalpha wrote: post #146

slg wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn't an issue specific to Tesla as all automakers are now making cars that are more and more dependent on software. So what is the right way to handle these updates? You mentioned a clear flaw with OTA updates, but there are also numerous advantages. For example, the recent Tesla brake software issue was fixed with an OTA update. That immediately made cars safer. Toyota had a similar problem a few years ago and…

>This isn't an issue specific to Tesla as all automakers are now making cars that are more and more dependent on software. Cars have been dependent on software for a long time (literally decades). This isn't something new. Even combustion engine cars have had software inside of them that controls the operation of the engine, and this software is vigorously tested for safety issues (because most car manufacturers unde…

All cars from all manufacturers are running 10s or 100s of times more code than they did 10 or 20 years ago.

https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/39559/does-the-...

This really affects the nature of the situation. 20 years ago, cars contained microcontrollers with a tiny bit of code which was thoroughly reviewed and tested by skilled professionals. Today, all cars run so much code, even outside of the entertainment system, that the review and testing just can't be the same. (And there's way more programmers, so the range of skill and care is also much wider.)

We're in a new mountain-of-flaky-software world.

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

#219

Post by Symbiote » Thu, Jun 07, 2018, 8:09 PM UTC

crote wrote: post #148

panopticon wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Out of curiosity, are you not in the U.S.? These types of lane dividers are incredibly common throughout the country. Note that I'm not defending the safety of them; I'm just surprised to see someone call them out as a hazard as they're such a common sight.

Dutch citizen here, I have never seen something like this. To compare, here's a similar situation in The Netherlands: https://www.google.nl/maps/@52.0928662,5.1734685,3a,75y,281.... Points of interest: - big solid white arrow, line-fade is nearly impossible - white-green sign indicating that the road is splitting - big shoulder in the continuation of the division - loads of grass instead of immediately using a metal…

I've tried to find something similar in an urban area in Britain, here's one in Birmingham: https://www.google.nl/maps/@52.4901761,-1.889549,3a,69.6y,5....

That fence wouldn't be fun to drive into at full speed, and the lane markings are worn, but it's still far less awful than a concrete wall.

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

#220

Post by FireBeyond » Thu, Jun 07, 2018, 8:10 PM UTC

Analemma_ wrote: post #36

gwern wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No surprise there about it steering into the barrier or Tesla not-quite-lying about him getting warnings, but I'm surprised that he apparently wasn't dead on impact but survived all the way to the hospital? So even a three-car pileup with the Tesla steering straight into a barrier at 71MPH & accelerating, with the car catching on fire & being reduced to a husk, still isn't enough to kill a driver immediately. In a wa…

Except in obvious cases like decapitation, paramedics cannot legally declare someone dead; it has to be done by an MD, and the paramedics will keep trying to revive you until you get to the hospital. So it's not necessarily true that he didn't die in the crash.

Not true at all. Paramedics can declare death (at least in most states, I cannot speak to all), and we _absolutely_ can stop resuscitation efforts using our clinical judgment, at times in concert with a physician.

I am not sure of the specifics of this case, but traumatic cardiac arrest is, as a generalization, "largely unsurvivable". An asystole EKG, in concert with the mechanism of injury, may be enough for us to do so, and we do not need to transport what is at that point a dead person (even if there is resuscitation being attempted, for a multitude of reasons - sometimes even "for the family's benefit"[1]) just to get them to a physician to declare death.

In many states, EMTs (with ~200hrs of medical training) are able to declare death legally, in the setting of evisceration of heart/brain, decapitation, "body position incompatible with life".

This is the situation to the best of my knowledge as a paramedic of nine years and a state certified EMS Instructor and Evaluator.

[1] it should be noted that this is done in a setting where its judged the "best" course of action for grief, establishing end of life directives, and the like, and _not_ as something that is intended to falsely convey hope.