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

Apple engineer killed in Tesla crash had previously complained about autopilot

kqed.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

411–420 of 919 posts

Re: Apple engineer killed in Tesla crash had previously complained about autopilot

#411

Post by greatpatton »

pja wrote: post #347
keanzu wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> dead Uber pedestrian Elaine Herzberg was in dark clothing crossing a dark street well away from any crosswalk or street lighting. Would a human driver have performed better? From the footage I saw she was nearly invisible, I would have hit her too. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ufNNuafuU7M This was not a hard fail for the AI.

The video released by Uber was extremely misleading. Here is a video on YouTube of the same stretch of road taken by someone with an ordinary phone camera shortly after Elaine’s death: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CRW0q8i3u6E It’s clear that a) the road is well lit and b) visibility is far, far better than the Uber video would suggest. An ordinary human driver would have seen Elaine & taken evasive action. This de…

"May have seen" is more appropriate as every day pedestrian get killed on well lit road by human drivers.

Re: Apple engineer killed in Tesla crash had previously complained about autopilot

#412

Post by hvidgaard »

Erlich_Bachman wrote: post #406
hvidgaard wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That squarely puts Autopilot in the "Driver Aid" category. That is fine, just don't go telling people that it can drive unassisted.

> just don't go telling people that it can drive unassisted. No one does. Literally no one. No owner, not Tesla themselves, not their website, not their sellers. Why do people keep bringing this up. Everybody knows it is not full self-driving, yes we all know, yes and? Where does this zealotry come from?

Their marketing for for a long time structured such that you got the idea that is was a literal autonomous driving ability. They've only toned it down after multiple accident, and I'm sure it's the reason so many people still believe it to this day.

Re: Apple engineer killed in Tesla crash had previously complained about autopilot

#413

Post by Erlich_Bachman »

hvidgaard wrote: post #412
Erlich_Bachman wrote: post #406

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> just don't go telling people that it can drive unassisted. No one does. Literally no one. No owner, not Tesla themselves, not their website, not their sellers. Why do people keep bringing this up. Everybody knows it is not full self-driving, yes we all know, yes and? Where does this zealotry come from?

Their marketing for for a long time structured such that you got the idea that is was a literal autonomous driving ability. They've only toned it down after multiple accident, and I'm sure it's the reason so many people still believe it to this day.

So the "problem" you referring to is solved? Their marketing is good now? I just think that there is no reason keep repeating the old things then that are not relevant anymore, that don't even refer to anything anymore and only create a lot of confusion.

(Let's just assume it was a problem, even though I don't ever remember being fooled by it or seing any commercial or anything without a disclaimer "NOT FULLY AUTONOMOUS SELF-DRIVING, REQUIRES DRIVER ATTENTION".)

Re: Apple engineer killed in Tesla crash had previously complained about autopilot

#414

Post by badpun »

ascar wrote: post #398
amanaplanacanal wrote: post #390

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That report is comparing humans driving in all conditions vs autopilot driving in only the best conditions. Humans are deciding when it is safe enough to turn autopilot on. So no, it is not less dangerous.

That's not what the report is comparing at all. The report is comparing all vehicles driving in all conditions vs Teslas driving in all conditions (separate for with and without autopilot). The numbers show that Teslas experience a lower crash rate than other vehicles. Granted, this can be to a number of reasons including the hypothesis that humans deciding to buy Teslas drive more carefully to begin with. And the nu…

There's a million hidden variables here that could explain the difference:

- The mechanical state of the car (Teslas with autopilot tend to be new/newish vehicles, and thus in excellent mechanical shape)

- The age and competence of the driver - I'm guessing people who make enough to buy a Tesla are usually not senile 80 years olds or irresponsile 18 year olds

- Other security gizmos in Teslas that cheaper cars may lack

Overall, it would be more fair to compare against cars of similar age and at similar price point.

Re: Apple engineer killed in Tesla crash had previously complained about autopilot

#415

Post by systemtest »

revscat wrote: post #182
spookthesunset wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not much of a leap between that and playing a video game with your phone, honestly.

You know, it’s almost like we’d benefit from having an autopilot system. I mean, think about it: people drive drunk, or tired, or get in fights with their mom on the phone, or have a crying baby demanding attention, or any number of other things like that. Wouldn’t it be awesome if we had something to help with that? Like, it doesn’t even have to do everything, just most of it, and keep you from running into shit. Th…

Drive drunk? Get a cab. Tired? Get a motel. Fight with your mom on the phone? Park your car and continue the conversation. Baby demanding attention? Park your car and care for the baby. Ignore it until you do.

It would be awesome if we have something for that. For now we don't, there is not a system where you can do the tasks above responsibly while in the driver seat. So park your car first.

Re: Apple engineer killed in Tesla crash had previously complained about autopilot

#416

Post by mopsi »

keanzu wrote: post #393
ben_bai wrote: post #367

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And it'll fly happily into a mountain or other plane, if unmonitored. Now the problem is streets are a little more crowded.

There are no mountains at the cruise altitude of a 747. TCAS will provide a warning 30 seconds before collision and the Airbus A380 has an autopilot with integrated TCAS avoidance. So it will hit neither mountains (too low) nor other aircraft (automatic avoidance). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traffic_collision_avoidance_sy...

It will circle the last entered waypoint and then crash once fuel is depleted. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helios_Airways_Flight_522

Re: Apple engineer killed in Tesla crash had previously complained about autopilot

#417

Post by WA »

bananabreakfast wrote: post #271
js2 wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Regardless of what autopilot means to pilots, it means something else to drivers.

Why? Autopilot is a term borrowed directly from aviation.

Because meanings of words can change depending on context.

Re: Apple engineer killed in Tesla crash had previously complained about autopilot

#418

Post by eloisant »

holstvoogd wrote: post #316
harrisonjackson wrote: post #6

Tesla says autopilot works but that driver should be ready to intervene. This is terrifying - like having a kid riding shotgun that might just reach out and turn the wheel while you are on the highway. Anyone who has driven with autopilot, how quickly might it react to a perceived obstacle? Would it take a hard turn into a median faster than a person could reasonably react if it thought there was something in the roa…

Exactly like autopilot on a plane! :o

There is a big difference between a plane (or a boat, where autopilot is also common) and a car.

A plane or a boat is roaming in a vast, mostly empty space, in a straight line. Other planes/boats are both pretty far away and also following a mostly straight line.

On the other hand a car operates in a very packed space, full of obstacles all moving in sometimes unpredictible way.

That makes a huge difference when it comes to autopilot.

Re: Apple engineer killed in Tesla crash had previously complained about autopilot

#419

Post by sam_goody »

Alupis wrote: post #388
fxtentacle wrote: post #187

I avoid new technology, exactly because I'm an engineer. I wonder if that is just me, but when new technology is introduced and hyped, I usually take a quick look at implementations, research, and talks just to get an idea of what the state of the art really is like. As a result, I have become the late adopter among my group of friends because the first iteration of any new technology usually just isn't worth the iss…

This whole self driving, fully autonomous thing has become some sort of strange faux-religion. It's followers see no other possible solution as acceptable. Instead of putting our heads together to make really good driver assistance technologies and being satisfied, the darn thing needs to also drive itself everywhere otherwise we're leaving something on the table! Untill we have zero deaths, we cannot stop demanding…

IMO, flying cars will eventually arrive.

Perhaps it will be limited to specific "lanes" (it will be much more palatable to the masses if it must (like cars) keep to a limited area). But it will not need to recognize pedestrians and bikers and human driven cars, and some standard will be introduced to allow all them self driving cars to talk to each other.

At that point, Level 5 will be much easier, even obvious. All he effort invested in assistive driving will seem silly.

Re: Apple engineer killed in Tesla crash had previously complained about autopilot

#420

Post by WA »

Erlich_Bachman wrote: post #399
bananabreakfast wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Autopilot is an appropriate term, taken from aviation. And no one calls it full self driving since that hasn't been released yet.

Seriously, what is people's problem with that word? Tesla actively explains how this works currently (both in person and also in bold font on their website) when anyone buys a car. There is no owner of this car that thinks that it has full self-driving capability. It is literally a non-existent problem.

Because nobody reads the fucking manual. It's like reading the headline only.
Post reply on HN