Tesla hacker reveals what driver-facing camera is looking for • Hacker News Board

Re: Tesla hacker reveals what driver-facing camera is looking for

#411

Post by dafoex » Tue, Oct 06, 2020, 9:49 AM UTC

echelon wrote: post #112

ogre_codes wrote: post #56

One of the reasons I would love to have autopilot is because I have a history of dozing off at the wheel. Never so much where I've had an accident, but bad enough where I've scared myself badly. I don't want autopilot so I can actually sleep at the wheel, I want it in case I do . I'd vastly prefer if the car noticed I was inattentive that it notified me. My feeling is for long drives this would be a safety feature, b…

> I don't want autopilot so I can actually sleep at the wheel, I want it in case I do. You should never get behind the wheel if there's a chance you'll fall asleep! You shouldn't be driving. Period. This is incredibly dangerous and puts innocent people at risk. No technology should compensate for this. We don't design technology to help drivers under the influence feel better about their driving. Please don't get beh…

While I on the whole agree, there are some cases where its unavoidable. You could be coming home late from work, and you can't power nap in the car park there as the lock the gates, so you need to drive to a location where its safe to park and nap. Its admittedly an edge case, but its not unlikely by any stretch of the imagination.

Re: Tesla hacker reveals what driver-facing camera is looking for

#412

Post by theshrike79 » Tue, Oct 06, 2020, 10:50 AM UTC

dafoex wrote: post #408

theshrike79 wrote: post #396

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly this. People are expecting car "autopilots" to exceed all human drivers in every situation, which is a completely silly place to move the goalpost to. I see it more as an assistant that makes us all better drivers by letting us concentrate on stuff the computer can't do. Even my Hyundai can drive automatically perfectly well at highway speeds and follow the road and even slow down with the traffic. This lets…

I agree, but I interpret the argument as such: Tesla, by using language like "your hands are only there for regulatory reasons" makes no effort to dispel the myth to the driver that the car autopilot can exceed all human drivers in every situation. It aught to be on Tesla's head to instruct the driver that they are the safety net to the computer. To use the aeroplane analogy that Tesla wants to market: the computer i…

Yea, the Tesla marketing team has gone a bit overboard and some people are taking their spiel as gospel.

On the other hand, event the new VW ID.3 can drive on regular roads, manage roundabouts and adjust speed according to speed signs, they're just not making a huge fuss about it.

Re: Tesla hacker reveals what driver-facing camera is looking for

#413

Post by hombre_fatal » Tue, Oct 06, 2020, 11:05 AM UTC

dbcurtis wrote: post #360

gravitas wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What does this mean for drivers with disabilities? You mention ADHD and Turrets; a leg-disabled person (e.g. paralyzed waste down) can still drive just fine, special hand-operated equipment is installed to a car to allow the hands to take over for the foot pedals. By design this driver may be looking down frequently at their controls (let's assume not everyone is a pro driver yet and knows them by heart) which coul…

> By design this driver may be looking down frequently at their controls Actually not, for hand controls. No more than you look at the pedals. It goes into muscle memory just as much. I have been a passenger with two different hand-control drivers. Both were as smooth as a driver using foot pedals. I once moved their car for one of them —- in a tiny town on a quiet street, for about 5 blocks at low speed. It was diff…

Besides, I don't think there's any more comfort or lessened stakes to be had knowing that the driver that t-boned your kid was looking down at their prosthetic leg or custom controls instead of a smartphone. Or in the middle of an autistic break or epileptic fit or attention deficit fugue or narcoleptic episode.

Fine, the software's enum value of "EYES_DOWN" doesn't quite capture the domain of nuance of all the reasons eyes might be down. But it doesn't necessarily matter.

Re: Tesla hacker reveals what driver-facing camera is looking for

#414

Post by ficklepickle » Tue, Oct 06, 2020, 11:14 AM UTC

fudged71 wrote: post #46

Tesla has a history of using remote diagnostics to snitch on drivers instead of allowing investigators to do their job. It’s a valid concern that your car manufacturer will use the interior cameras to blame a crime on you. These automatic tagging features also bring to question the bias in algorithms. What does this mean for drivers with disabilities? Is it possible that a safe driver with ADHD or Turrets etc might b…

This is a legit concern. There are many edge cases with humans.

I worked at a pizza place in high school. There was a delivery driver with cerebral paulsy who was constantly being accused of being drunk. Sometimes customers just called the cops on him. It was sad, he was a super nice young guy already on a short clock and he had to deal with that all the time.

Re: Tesla hacker reveals what driver-facing camera is looking for

#415

Post by gpvos » Tue, Oct 06, 2020, 11:53 AM UTC

cycrutchfield wrote: post #378

Polylactic_acid wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The don't buy it argument has never held up. Look at phones, the options for a removable battery, sd card slot, 3.5mm jack are all gone on all but the most primitive/weird models of phones. If the general public goes against your preference then your preference will no longer be an option. For cars this likely means that the only way to get a car that isn't spyware/ad tech will be buying an old car before this happen…

Better buy a bike then. I’m glad that a small minority of luddites can’t hold everybody else back from making progress.

I'd like technical progress to be in service of the user and all their rights, not of corporations that apparently value covering their asses above creating value for their clients. Legal measures ensuring the ability in all situations to physically turn off privacy-invading features, plus the right to repair and tinker, would be a good start. Forcing free software would be even better.

Re: Tesla hacker reveals what driver-facing camera is looking for

#416

Post by motohagiography » Tue, Oct 06, 2020, 12:03 PM UTC

Dylan16807 wrote: post #395

motohagiography wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A car you can drive drunk is the only meaningful definition of a self-driving car, imo. I mean both, and specifically that driver assist should be pay to use to offset usage because it is likely higher net risk for a collision than a human. Free driver-assist has a "tragedy of the commons" problem, or a moral hazard, where there is no cost to over-using it and courting a collision event, so this overall risk can be r…

> A car you can drive drunk is the only meaningful definition of a self-driving car, imo. That's kind of a messy definition. A drunk person might start messing with the controls, and a car that is perfectly able to drive itself might not be able to handle that . You could fix that with a breathalyzer but it would be ridiculous if the difference between self-driving and not-self-driving is the presence of a breathalyz…

Technically I would agree with you, but economically, why would anyone drive from the passenger seat, and almost nobody will look forward to sleeping on the road - but my drunk definition applies to everyone in the world who drinks wine, beer, or spirits.

A car you can drive drunk is the problem the tech solves, which is what makes it both viable, and provides success criteria instead of making it just about unreasonable hypothetical standards of perfect safety.

The entire ML and machine vision endeavour should be called what it is, a moonshot to create a drunk driving car.

Re: Tesla hacker reveals what driver-facing camera is looking for

#417

Post by nojvek » Tue, Oct 06, 2020, 12:16 PM UTC

mleonhard wrote: post #269

rndgermandude wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have seen drivers in huge cargo trucks read the newspaper on the autobahn (the newspaper strategically positioned over the steering wheel, of course), or watch TV. Scary shit. One guy was very interested in his porn mag, one hand holding the mag the other hand "occupied" too, so he somehow steered with his knees. One day I drove with a fellow student to some university event, and he suddenly at a red light took out…

Would you immediately report such drivers to the police?

I’d be careful reporting things to the American police. You may get the other person in a lot more trouble than they deserve depending on their skin color.

Re: Tesla hacker reveals what driver-facing camera is looking for

#418

Post by judge2020 » Tue, Oct 06, 2020, 12:43 PM UTC

dafoex wrote: post #408

theshrike79 wrote: post #396

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly this. People are expecting car "autopilots" to exceed all human drivers in every situation, which is a completely silly place to move the goalpost to. I see it more as an assistant that makes us all better drivers by letting us concentrate on stuff the computer can't do. Even my Hyundai can drive automatically perfectly well at highway speeds and follow the road and even slow down with the traffic. This lets…

I agree, but I interpret the argument as such: Tesla, by using language like "your hands are only there for regulatory reasons" makes no effort to dispel the myth to the driver that the car autopilot can exceed all human drivers in every situation. It aught to be on Tesla's head to instruct the driver that they are the safety net to the computer. To use the aeroplane analogy that Tesla wants to market: the computer i…

Do you have a source for that quote? I searched elon's tweets and Google but couldn't find anything.

Re: Tesla hacker reveals what driver-facing camera is looking for

#419

Post by marcosdumay » Tue, Oct 06, 2020, 1:43 PM UTC

nickik wrote: post #233

marcosdumay wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The human attentiveness model is very easy: `is_attentive _ = False`. Those grayboxes probably already take more lives than they save on airplanes, and will be orders of magnitude worse on cars.

> Those grayboxes probably already take more lives than they save on airplanes, and will be orders of magnitude worse on cars. All evidence so far point in the opposite direction. Airplanes are different, you have a highly trained pilot that has strict requirements for flight. Outperforming your avg human is far easier. What your evidence that these system cause more harm then good?

> What your evidence that these system cause more harm then good?

I have stopped following the accident investigations a few years ago, but that was the (very evident) trend. Most accidents tend to happen at the hand-over from the machine to the pilots when some problem appears. Among those it's very common that the both the machines and the manual procedures deal correctly with the problem, but the pilots have no chance of selecting the correct procedures. (The MAX-8 may have changed that picture all by itself, as I said, I stopped following them.)

And, yes, airplanes are different. You have pilots that are trained on getting hand-over in a bad situation, and usually have minutes to decide what to do. Car problems must be solved in a second or two, and the drivers never see a bad situation before it happens on real life.

Re: Tesla hacker reveals what driver-facing camera is looking for

#420

Post by gravitas » Tue, Oct 06, 2020, 2:48 PM UTC

hnarn wrote: post #277

gravitas wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What does this mean for drivers with disabilities? You mention ADHD and Turrets; a leg-disabled person (e.g. paralyzed waste down) can still drive just fine, special hand-operated equipment is installed to a car to allow the hands to take over for the foot pedals. By design this driver may be looking down frequently at their controls (let's assume not everyone is a pro driver yet and knows them by heart) which coul…

Since you have both now misspelled the name of the neurological disorder, I feel obliged to point out that it’s spelled Tourette's syndrome.

My apologies - I did not spell check the cut&paste as I should have done, my bad. No slight meant.