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

Tesla is ordered to turn over Autopilot data to a federal safety agency

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 192 posts

Re: Tesla is ordered to turn over Autopilot data to a federal safety agency

#61

Post by Piskvorrr »

fallingknife wrote: post #38
galangalalgol wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mixed control between automated and human for tasks that require persistent attention is bad. We have known this for decades. The example often given in engineering textbooks is 3 mile island. I suspect that the engineers involved in self driving systems know this too, but the liability is too great to make the switch all at once. It seems better to take baby steps into self driving, but history teaches us it should…

You could say the same about airplane autopilots, but they have an amazing safety record.

Far fewer objects to hit in the air: disengagement means "keep going this way," rarely "and crash into an eventual obstacle". Plus, their early safety record is written in blood like everything else is.

Re: Tesla is ordered to turn over Autopilot data to a federal safety agency

#62

Post by duxup »

Traster wrote: post #28

Let's ignore the larger point (which is that this is just one of a million possible edge cases where autopilot could systematically fail), I could absolutely see Tesla just bodging in a "If you see emergency vehicle lights flashing disengage" - it'd perfectly reasonable to say that you shouldn't be using autopilot in that situation because you should be paying attention and ready to react to the emergency vehicle.

I don't think you're wrong policy wise specifically.

I do think that this 'auto pilot ... but you have to manage it' system is not workable for most humans. Paying attention when you sorta don't have to ... is just not paying attention for most people.

It's a space I don't think we manage well outside of say a real pilot in a plane trained to do his thing (and there's actually a lot of cases with trained airline pilots losing situational awareness and auto pilot does the wrong thing and the pilots don't notice soon enough / auto pilot makes bad choices for a surprisingly long time before anyone notices).

I think this might be a space where it is all or nothing auto pilot wise.

Ultimately a human problem.

Re: Tesla is ordered to turn over Autopilot data to a federal safety agency

#63

Post by abstractbarista »

eganist wrote: post #37
capableweb wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 12 crashes into vehicles with flashing lights on them doesn't sound like great success from Autopilot, gonna be honest. I'm sorry, but how can you form an opinion so quickly? 12 crashes out of what? Any number? 12 crashes out of 10000000 scenarios sound like a pretty good record, while 12 crashes out of 15 scenarios indeed doesn't sound like a great success. But what information do you have that the rest of us does…

"I'm sorry, but how can you form an opinion so quickly?" It doesn't really matter. They're stationary objects; there's absolutely no reason, good or bad, for the algorithm to determine that the correct trajectory change is into the stationary object. Humans crash into stationary objects because they're lacking attention almost 100% of the time, whether it's because they're half asleep, drunk, texting, or distracted b…

Does this happen more often per mile driven than human drivers?

Re: Tesla is ordered to turn over Autopilot data to a federal safety agency

#64

Post by emptybits »

I assume (?) Teslas have interior microphones. Maybe not in this case but how easily will cabin interior data be turned over to authorities to paint a picture of what goes on inside and outside a vehicle or nearby vehicles leading up to an accident?

It may be easier to just ask for and release everything. In the name of safety, of course.

Re: Tesla is ordered to turn over Autopilot data to a federal safety agency

#65

Post by Filligree »

bloqs wrote: post #29
AshamedCaptain wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I still remember the days when the SciFi of the day sold robotic drivers as "they don't get tired, they don't make mistakes, they are relentless in their pursuit". Instead of that, we got robots that are apparently unable to avoid crashing into large vehicles with flashing lights. Sometimes. As usual, the future never ceases to disappoint me.

Ah yes the 1960s. Where politics and economics were also utopian and dishonest. When your average American job could impossibly support a family of 4. 16 year olds drove dodge chargers and the economy was so strong from all of the various nefarious engineering that you could buy products that were made to last 50 years.

Stories from back then are pretty unrealistic, but that’s true for fiction in general. Dunno why we should point at that in particular.

Re: Tesla is ordered to turn over Autopilot data to a federal safety agency

#66

Post by okl »

shkkmo wrote: post #41
okl wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No offense but that is whataboutism. I think every crash, where an investigation could prevent another crash in the future, should be investigated. Shouldn't Tesla "celebrate their mistakes" (yes, morbid, sorry) and see this as an opportunity to improve their product?

It isn't whataboutism to ask that statistics include the necessary context. The person you are replying to doesn't give a full and proper context, but that doesn't make attempting to provide that context "whataboutism".

Sorry, but that - "So why is Tesla being investigated for being involved in 0.25% of these crashes when they made up 3% of car sales in 2020?" - pointing at others/numbers to detract from your own mistakes clearly is whataboutism.

Re: Tesla is ordered to turn over Autopilot data to a federal safety agency

#68

Post by flavius29663 »

hypertele-Xii wrote: post #35
fallingknife wrote: post #4

> The regulator originally said it was looking into 11 such crashes. A 12th occurred on Saturday But there are 4500 crashes every year, and that's only including ambulances ( https://www.ems.gov/pdf/GroundAmbulanceCrashesPresentation.p... pg 22). So why is Tesla being investigated for being involved in 0.25% of these crashes when they made up 3% of car sales in 2020? Also, radar ignores stationary objects on any car.…

Maybe because every other car manufacturer calls it "cruise control" and not "full self driving autopilot"?

or lane assist that protests after a few seconds of you taking the hands off the wheel

Re: Tesla is ordered to turn over Autopilot data to a federal safety agency

#69

Post by meepmorp »

fallingknife wrote: post #38
galangalalgol wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mixed control between automated and human for tasks that require persistent attention is bad. We have known this for decades. The example often given in engineering textbooks is 3 mile island. I suspect that the engineers involved in self driving systems know this too, but the liability is too great to make the switch all at once. It seems better to take baby steps into self driving, but history teaches us it should…

You could say the same about airplane autopilots, but they have an amazing safety record.

The airline autopilot doesn't have to negotiate anything like the kind of hazards that a car driving system does. Also, pilot training, the presence of a whole flight crew to monitor and catch errors make for a completely different situation.

Re: Tesla is ordered to turn over Autopilot data to a federal safety agency

#70

Post by yawaworht1978 »

The absolving argument that it's still the drivers responsibility to intervene has flown out of the window with this request. The federal safety agency is not having any of that excuse anymore.

They might find that Tesla did no wrong here, further enabling Tesla to get away with this. But this looks a lot like they want to regulate the feature a bit more. If self regulation via companies and humans does not work, the government will step in.

Curious to see the outcome, they haven't ordered the immediate disablement of the feature, they might have a neutral view.

Post reply on HN