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

why we write about Tesla crashes

jalopnik.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 20 posts

Re: why we write about Tesla crashes

#11

Post by bobthepanda »

m463 wrote: post #10

I think the tesla wrecks are newsworthy, new technology is involved, and should be talked about (as they mention). What I find the media does not make any effort to do is is to communicate the level of risk. It may be an unintentional bias, but it really is there. I think they try harder when it's something like the J&J vaccine risk vs the risk of getting covid. I'm uncertain what the high road looks like.

Given that this problem has existed for decades with plane crashes I don‘t expect this to get better.

In fact US road deaths are increasing but the media has become numb to it because it‘s so routine. At best it‘s “accidents happen”, at worst it’s “that pedestrian was on their phone and should’ve worn bright reflective clothes, they had it coming”.

Re: why we write about Tesla crashes

#12

Post by ultrablack »

Seems to me that Yes, you can trick the car into thinking you are in the front seat while AP is on. But it takes some effort on your part. You could also just push the gaspedal to the floor and crash that way. Would that also be Teslas fault?

Re: why we write about Tesla crashes

#13

Post by ryzvonusef »

Quick Q: why is there such a confusion between Autopilot(Fancy ADAS/Level-2/Free on all Teslas iirc) and FSD(not yet complete/costs $10K/Many features still in access-limited beta)

iirc Tesla has been very clear to differentiate between the two; all the hands-free stuff is always linked to FSD and not Autopilot, like in the video they link on the article, the title of the video says FSD, not Autopilot.

Autopilot is a fancy cruise control, why is its abuse Tesla's headache?

If the issue was FSD related deaths, yes I would be concerned, but I feel any autopilot related deaths are like cruise control deaths; sad but ultimately something in the court of the user.

Re: why we write about Tesla crashes

#14

Post by dkdbejwi383 »

ryzvonusef wrote: post #13

Quick Q: why is there such a confusion between Autopilot(Fancy ADAS/Level-2/Free on all Teslas iirc) and FSD(not yet complete/costs $10K/Many features still in access-limited beta) iirc Tesla has been very clear to differentiate between the two; all the hands-free stuff is always linked to FSD and not Autopilot, like in the video they link on the article, the title of the video says FSD, not Autopilot. Autopilot is a…

Autopilot isn’t a very good name for a fancy driver assist system.

Most regular folk associate the term autopilot with “the plane flies itself, the pilot is just there to guide it on landing”. We’ve had decades of this use of the term and got used to the idea that “autopilot” means the vehicle is self guided and the operator can take a nap, have a meal, etc.

Re: why we write about Tesla crashes

#15

Post by dkdbejwi383 »

ultrablack wrote: post #12

Seems to me that Yes, you can trick the car into thinking you are in the front seat while AP is on. But it takes some effort on your part. You could also just push the gaspedal to the floor and crash that way. Would that also be Teslas fault?

The linked article refutes this point:

> Also, they hyperbolic analogy of the Mustang and the brick would only make sense if Ford was selling a $10,000 Mustang Brick option that they claimed would let their car just about drive itself.

Here, they are responding to someone who asks “if I put a brick on the accelerator and crashed my car, would it be the manufacturer’s fault?”

Re: why we write about Tesla crashes

#16

Post by carlivar »

mcot2 wrote: post #9
carlivar wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no data published to fully back up the claim that autopilot is safer than humans. The problem on the surface is: Autopilot is used mainly on limited access roads but safety is compared to all roads. A Tesla is an expensive, new car and is compared to all cars of all ages and maintenance. The drivers of above cars are also skewed statistically versus all drivers. It's disappointing that the same people quick…

Tesla publishes data about their own cars with autopilot engaged vs. disengaged. This should get rid of a lot of the variables that you cited.

Do they compare like-for-like driving conditions and roadways? If it's just autopilot versus not-autopilot, that's flawed. People don't turn on autopilot in urban environments, for example, where accidents are more likely.

Re: why we write about Tesla crashes

#17

Post by ryzvonusef »

dkdbejwi383 wrote: post #14
ryzvonusef wrote: post #13

Quick Q: why is there such a confusion between Autopilot(Fancy ADAS/Level-2/Free on all Teslas iirc) and FSD(not yet complete/costs $10K/Many features still in access-limited beta) iirc Tesla has been very clear to differentiate between the two; all the hands-free stuff is always linked to FSD and not Autopilot, like in the video they link on the article, the title of the video says FSD, not Autopilot. Autopilot is a…

Autopilot isn’t a very good name for a fancy driver assist system. Most regular folk associate the term autopilot with “the plane flies itself, the pilot is just there to guide it on landing”. We’ve had decades of this use of the term and got used to the idea that “autopilot” means the vehicle is self guided and the operator can take a nap, have a meal, etc.

1- would removing the word auto and just calling it "TeslaPilot"(TM) make it any better/worse? (in the same line of naming as Nissan ProPilot etc)

2-Aeroplanes famously have a co-pilot, and while one is eating/napping, the other is at the helm. Similar to a person riding shotgun, they can eat/nap while the driver drives, and then switch over after sometime. Does that make the autopilot name any better/worse?

Re: why we write about Tesla crashes

#19

Post by w0m »

dkdbejwi383 wrote: post #15
ultrablack wrote: post #12

Seems to me that Yes, you can trick the car into thinking you are in the front seat while AP is on. But it takes some effort on your part. You could also just push the gaspedal to the floor and crash that way. Would that also be Teslas fault?

The linked article refutes this point: > Also, they hyperbolic analogy of the Mustang and the brick would only make sense if Ford was selling a $10,000 Mustang Brick option that they claimed would let their car just about drive itself. Here, they are responding to someone who asks “if I put a brick on the accelerator and crashed my car, would it be the manufacturer’s fault?”

But here Tesla isn't selling a $10,000 dollar brick; they're selling a $10,000 dollar system and reviewers are bringing their own Brick to circumvent safety systems built in.

When the driver has to willfully circumvent built-in safety features to do something clearly stupid; the line comes in on the side of "That person is an idiot" not "The system is inherently broken". Example: Ford could prevent people from doing stupid burnouts leaving car shows because mustangs fly into crowds multiple times a year.

I don't see a difference, stupid driver is stupid driver.

Re: why we write about Tesla crashes

#20

Post by root_axis »

mcot2 wrote: post #9
carlivar wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no data published to fully back up the claim that autopilot is safer than humans. The problem on the surface is: Autopilot is used mainly on limited access roads but safety is compared to all roads. A Tesla is an expensive, new car and is compared to all cars of all ages and maintenance. The drivers of above cars are also skewed statistically versus all drivers. It's disappointing that the same people quick…

Tesla publishes data about their own cars with autopilot engaged vs. disengaged. This should get rid of a lot of the variables that you cited.

No it doesn't... autopilot can only be safely operated on highways, on roads with traffic lights and stop signs autopilot often times will refuse to even start, and when it does, it can only be used up until the next traffic stop, it can't be compared to a human driver under typical driving conditions.
Post reply on HN