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

Tesla’s Autopilot found partly to blame for 2018 crash on the 405

latimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 236 posts

Re: Tesla’s Autopilot found partly to blame for 2018 crash on the 405

#131

Post by thebruce87m »

slg wrote: post #117
c3534l wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The best way to stay attentive behind the wheel is to actually be the one driving. There's virtually no way of being both attentive and passive for long periods of time. If a driver can't check their email or whatever on their phone while autopilot is on, then autopilot is not safe to put in cars. And while I'm okay with not-exactly-safe for most things people willingly consume or use, driving is not an area where it…

>If a driver can't check their email or whatever on their phone while autopilot is on, then autopilot is not safe to put in cars. Have you ever looked at other drivers on the highway? You see people texting, emailing, eating, shaving, doing their makeup, reading a book, the list goes on and on. If there is an activity you can do while seated, odds are people are doing it while driving. That is one of the flaws with a…

The problem is that autopilot might make people even more complacent.

Re: Tesla’s Autopilot found partly to blame for 2018 crash on the 405

#132

Post by TheSpiceIsLife »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #118
TheSpiceIsLife wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The way I remember it, Telsa keeps saying something like 'Autopilot is way safer than all-other-road-vehicles-combined'. What's the point of comparing Telsa Autopilot related crashes to crashes involving at least one motorcycle? I think it's obvious the answer is: deception*.

That's one possible answer. If they're trying to make their car seem safer than other cars, it's a deceptive statistic to use. But when the argument is "using the vehicle this way is a lot safer than the minimum requirements to be on the road", it's a relevant and fair statistic.

I'm not convinced that's the right metric though.

A more fair comparison would be: other drivers of similar demography driving other vehicles of similar age and specifications.

Re: Tesla’s Autopilot found partly to blame for 2018 crash on the 405

#133

Post by kd5bjo »

NeedMoreTea wrote: post #55
matt-attack wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It only highlights how incredibly dumb these autopilots are. They’re incredibly diligent but completely fail at the necessary skill of understanding . What is the point of any of this if the car with all of its sensors knowingly plows into a stationary red 30-ton obstacle. It’s something that a 4 year old human would understand instantly as an object to be avoided at all cost. I really think folks don’t realize how c…

Except humans crash into stationary vehicles in lane all the damn time. Most highway pile ups are a simple crash lots of folks drive into the back of. Why's it hard? A vehicle coming from a side road has a lot of movement within your field of vision. When driving on a highway we're well used to the fact and expectation that stuff isn't stopped. When the vehicle ahead emergency brakes or stops you have the growth of s…

Most highway pile ups are a result of drivers following too closely and therefore being unable to stop without hitting the brand-new stationary obstacle where the car they were following used to be.

Re: Tesla’s Autopilot found partly to blame for 2018 crash on the 405

#134

Post by Isinlor »

FireBeyond wrote: post #126
NeedMoreTea wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except humans crash into stationary vehicles in lane all the damn time. Most highway pile ups are a simple crash lots of folks drive into the back of. Why's it hard? A vehicle coming from a side road has a lot of movement within your field of vision. When driving on a highway we're well used to the fact and expectation that stuff isn't stopped. When the vehicle ahead emergency brakes or stops you have the growth of s…

By the time emergency vehicles are on scene, traffic has slowed. It's not like you're driving unimpeded at 60mph until "Oh crap, stationary fire engine with lights on immediately ahead of me". > Except humans crash into stationary vehicles in lane all the damn time. And Tesla's argument is that Autopilot is far safer than humans.

https://www.tesla.com/en_CA/VehicleSafetyReport?redirect=no

In the 2nd quarter, we registered one accident for every 3.27 million miles driven in which drivers had Autopilot engaged. For those driving without Autopilot but with our active safety features, we registered one accident for every 2.19 million miles driven. For those driving without Autopilot and without our active safety features, we registered one accident for every 1.41 million miles driven. By comparison, NHTSA’s most recent data shows that in the United States there is an automobile crash every 498,000 miles.*

*Note: Since we released our last quarterly safety report, NHTSA has released new data, which we’ve referenced in this quarter’s report.

Whatever is the reason (may it be better road conditions) when you use Autopilot you are less likely to crash.

Re: Tesla’s Autopilot found partly to blame for 2018 crash on the 405

#135

Post by FireBeyond »

Isinlor wrote: post #134
FireBeyond wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By the time emergency vehicles are on scene, traffic has slowed. It's not like you're driving unimpeded at 60mph until "Oh crap, stationary fire engine with lights on immediately ahead of me". > Except humans crash into stationary vehicles in lane all the damn time. And Tesla's argument is that Autopilot is far safer than humans.

https://www.tesla.com/en_CA/VehicleSafetyReport?redirect=no In the 2nd quarter, we registered one accident for every 3.27 million miles driven in which drivers had Autopilot engaged. For those driving without Autopilot but with our active safety features, we registered one accident for every 2.19 million miles driven. For those driving without Autopilot and without our active safety features, we registered one accide…

It's still misleading, because the miles driven with Autopilot are only a subset of total possible miles, and specifically are a _smaller_ subset of total possible miles than "normal driving".

To wit, if Autopilot is unavailable or disengaged because of poor weather/road conditions, a human still has to drive those miles. Autopilot gets the _best_ conditions to show its abilities. Humans get all conditions to show their abilities.

The question is "how did human drivers do driving the same miles, at the same times, as Autopilot", which is impossible to calculate.

Re: Tesla’s Autopilot found partly to blame for 2018 crash on the 405

#136

Post by chingjun »

smt88 wrote: post #83
schiffern wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So if the crash didn't involve "the human driver of that particular Tesla" but instead was an identical incident with a different Tesla driver, we wouldn't be having this conversation? Because that seems highly improbable. This particular driver isn't what makes the story special or newsworthy. The nature of the incident is. Our choice of statistical cohort should reflect this data selection effect, ie "all Autopilot…

I disagree because we're comparing what this individual driver would have done without a feature advertised as Autopilot. I'm a partner in an auto insurance company, and most of our no-accident records will stay that way, statistically speaking. If this driver had a one in a billion miles chance of crashing and Autopilot (with an inattentve driver, as they all tend to be) had a one in a million miles chance, then Aut…

How do you know that this individual driver has a one in a billion miles chance of crashing? By statistics from other human drivers I assume?

Re: Tesla’s Autopilot found partly to blame for 2018 crash on the 405

#137

Post by Dylan16807 »

TheSpiceIsLife wrote: post #132
Dylan16807 wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's one possible answer. If they're trying to make their car seem safer than other cars, it's a deceptive statistic to use. But when the argument is "using the vehicle this way is a lot safer than the minimum requirements to be on the road", it's a relevant and fair statistic.

I'm not convinced that's the right metric though. A more fair comparison would be: other drivers of similar demography driving other vehicles of similar age and specifications.

Why, though?

I could buy a car with 3 star crash ratings, and people would be fine with that. I could get in a taxi with a mediocre driver, and people would be fine with that.

Why does the comparison have to be to me driving, in a car like this?

When I'm shopping for a car, it makes sense.

But for public policy discussions, what matters is how the safety ranks against the general population.

Re: Tesla’s Autopilot found partly to blame for 2018 crash on the 405

#138

Post by usrusr »

dahfizz wrote: post #79
matt-attack wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It only highlights how incredibly dumb these autopilots are. They’re incredibly diligent but completely fail at the necessary skill of understanding . What is the point of any of this if the car with all of its sensors knowingly plows into a stationary red 30-ton obstacle. It’s something that a 4 year old human would understand instantly as an object to be avoided at all cost. I really think folks don’t realize how c…

This is completely ridiculous. Adults drive into stationary objects all the time. 4 year olds walk into stationary objects all the time. As far as I'm concerned, there is only one criterion that matters when evaluating self driving cars: is it better than human drivers? The fact that we are still discussing this _one_ accident that happened _a year ago_ indicates to me that the answer is a resounding yes.

> As far as I'm concerned, there is only one criterion that matters when evaluating self driving cars: is it better than human drivers?

By that measure, no tech company has contributed more to self-driving than Facebook Inc, masters of distraction. Relative safety isn't a good metric.

Re: Tesla’s Autopilot found partly to blame for 2018 crash on the 405

#139

Post by Isinlor »

jmpman wrote: post #108
Gustomaximus wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why should they?

Because self driving car companies are putting a dangerous product onto the road, citing “safer than human drivers” in a disingenuous manner. Musk likes to cite autopilot as safer than human drivers, based upon accidents per miles driven. However, where are autopilot miles primarily being driven? On the highway. I expect a sober human driver to have a much lower accident rate than Tesla’s autopilot when driving the s…

> I have to ask myself if I would have been able to avoid those, and I can honestly say that I would have.

This is not the whole equation. The question is also would you be able to react to all accidents that Autopilot is avoiding? Are you 100% diligent ALL the time? Can you react in 200 ms ALL the time to someone else stupidity? Last-minute breaking for the exit, veering into your lane, speeding trough crossroad on red etc.?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P68XGJticuo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FrJ2uPRRtz0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QVdTAwU07Jc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9cFJI6Qf9GA

> I expect a sober human driver to have a much lower accident rate than Tesla’s autopilot when driving the same highway miles.

This is based on what?

What about Tesla miles without active safety features vs. Tesla miles with active safety features?

Based on Tesla safety report just having active safety features active without an autopilot is decreasing the risk of collision by 36%. As far as I know, both numbers include miles out of highways.

"For those driving without Autopilot but with our active safety features, we registered one accident for every 2.19 million miles driven. For those driving without Autopilot and without our active safety features, we registered one accident for every 1.41 million miles driven."

https://www.tesla.com/en_CA/VehicleSafetyReport?redirect=no

Re: Tesla’s Autopilot found partly to blame for 2018 crash on the 405

#140

Post by TheSpiceIsLife »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #137
TheSpiceIsLife wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not convinced that's the right metric though. A more fair comparison would be: other drivers of similar demography driving other vehicles of similar age and specifications.

Why, though? I could buy a car with 3 star crash ratings, and people would be fine with that. I could get in a taxi with a mediocre driver, and people would be fine with that. Why does the comparison have to be to me driving, in a car like this ? When I'm shopping for a car, it makes sense. But for public policy discussions, what matters is how the safety ranks against the general population.

I get where you’re coming from, and I agree there the needs of public safety policy and self interest don’t always align.

What I mean to say is, when car considering the safety data of any vehicle, it is insufficient to know that the vehicle performs better than whole-fleet.

It’s also necessary to know whether any particular vehicle outperforms others in its class.

One of those without the other is necessary but not sufficient.

Post reply on HN