Live data from Hacker News

A Tesla on autopilot killed two people. Is the driver guilty of manslaughter?

latimes.com

111–120 of 150 posts

Re: A Tesla on autopilot killed two people. Is the driver guilty of manslaughter?

#111
post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think an industry wide analysis of driver assist systems is likely warranted by NHTSA to form a framework for liability and communications/marketing capabilities to consumers. Think EPA emissions stickers for autos, but for driver assist. > I also think the generalized caveat that it's always the drivers fault is a dangerous one that can incentivize manufacturer's to take unnecessary risks (e.g., less testing/quali…

> If the driver is not paying attention, that is the driver's fault. No doubt. But by extension, if a safety feature did not work appropriately, that would be Tesla's fault, no? I deliberately put both root and proximate causes in my first post because there can be multiple contributors to the accident, and each may bear some responsibility. My main issue with the OP was that it lays the groundwork for absolving the…

> No doubt. But by extension, if a safety feature did not work appropriately, that would be Tesla's fault, no?

Not necessarily. Automatic Emergency Braking systems across all automakers have serious constraints [1], and are still sold with broad legal disclaimers. They will attempt to stop you in the event an object is in the vehicle path, but importantly, there are no guarantees (and this is made clear in each vehicle's user manual). At the time of this accident, Tesla had no safety system for detecting red lights or stop signs, therefore no safety system to fail (when Autopilot is active, the vehicle has a "dead man switch" that commands you to torque the steering wheel and provide other input to ensure you're still alive and attentive every 10-30 seconds, depending on a variety of factors [speed, road curvature, visibility, path planning confidence, etc]).

This idea that these safety systems are foolproof and manufacturers are liable versus the driver are bizarre to say the least, but as I mention in another comment, it speaks to the broad lack of understanding and personal responsibility that has permeated society. People get in and drive, and it's someone else's problem if an adverse event occurs.

> I don't want a system where that professional standard is eroded because it's easier to push the risk down to the end user with a simple clause in a manual/contract that may never be read.

I agree with this position, and that engineering in general should be held to a high standard. If manufacturers have built what the industry has determined is industry standard, and regulators sign off (NHTSA has made no attempt to instruct Tesla to disable Autopilot fleet wide with an OTA software update), I'm unsure there's much more to do when the human pushes beyond system limits.

[1] https://www.caranddriver.com/features/a24511826/safety-featu...

> To understand the strengths and weaknesses of these systems and how they differ, we piloted a Cadillac CT6, a Subaru Impreza, a Tesla Model S, and a Toyota Camry through four tests at FT Techno of America's Fowlerville, Michigan, proving ground. The balloon car is built like a bounce house but with the radar reflectivity of a real car, along with a five-figure price and a Volks­wagen wrapper. For the tests with a moving target, a heavy-duty pickup tows the balloon car on 42-foot rails, which allow it to slide forward after impact.

> The car companies don't hide the fact that today's AEB systems have blind spots. It's all there in the owner's manuals, typically covered by both an all-encompassing legal disclaimer and explicit examples of why the systems might fail to intervene. For instance, the Camry's AEB system may not work when you're driving on a hill. It might not spot vehicles with high ground clearance or those with low rear ends. It may not work if a wiper blade blocks the camera. Toyota says the system could also fail if the vehicle is wobbling, whatever that means. It may not function when the sun shines directly on the vehicle ahead or into the camera mounted near the rearview mirror.

> There's truth in these legal warnings. AEB isn't intended to address low-visibility conditions or a car that suddenly swerves into your path. These systems do their best work preventing the kind of crashes that are easily avoided by an attentive driver.

Re: A Tesla on autopilot killed two people. Is the driver guilty of manslaughter?

#112
post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you explain how Tesla is liable? It is made clear to the driver (both in the manual and at activation of Autopilot) that they remain the final authority in control of the vehicle, and at the time of the accident, the Tesla software build did not support detection and actioning of stop lights nor stop signs. Are folks going to sue GM and Ford when people don't pay attention when their versions of driver assist don…

Tesla markets their software as "full self-driving". Their page on their own website[1] for the autopilot has a video which starts with the words "The person in the driver's seat is only there for legal reasons. He is not doing anything. The car is driving itself." Followed by a video of a tesla driving itself on public roads with other cars around while the person's hands are not on the wheel. While they have those…

There is no confusion in this case, though. Full Self Driving costs extra, currently $12K. If you don't pay the extra money, you don't get full self driving, you only get a fancy cruise control.

Re: A Tesla on autopilot killed two people. Is the driver guilty of manslaughter?

#113
post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All new Tesla cars have the hardware needed in the future for full self-driving in almost all circumstances. The system is designed to be able to conduct short and long distance trips with no action required by the person in the driver’s seat. The future use of these features without supervision is dependent on achieving reliability far in excess of human drivers as demonstrated by billions of miles of experience, as…

Are you a bot? This literally reads like Tesla PR.

[deleted]

Re: A Tesla on autopilot killed two people. Is the driver guilty of manslaughter?

#114
post #9

> realizes, ‘Hey, I’m the one that’s responsible,’” Kornhauser said. “Just like when I was driving a ’55 Chevy” Um, no shit the driver’s responsible. This seems like a weird question to be confused about prior to level 5, which Tesla’s 2022 “full self-driving” isn’t and 2019 wasn’t either.

> which Tesla’s 2022 “full self-driving” isn’t and 2019 wasn’t either And yet, since 2017, there's a video on the Tesla website that says "The driver is only in the seat for legal reasons. The car is driving itself."

That would only lead to a possible cause of action for the driver (or regulators) against Tesla, but of the two cars in that crash, I doubt there's any way the outcome will be other than "the operator of the Tesla is the one legally responsible for the crash" (which I think is the correct outcome as well as the most likely outcome).

Re: A Tesla on autopilot killed two people. Is the driver guilty of manslaughter?

#115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a kid, do you even have consent when your parents tell you to hop in the car cause you're going somewhere? As a passenger, isn't consent of trusting the driver inherent when you get in the car willfully ride somewhere? Could a passenger not interject and say, hey I don't feel comfortable riding with you if you enable autopilot?

These are good questions. The first example I think is same in a Tesla or a Toyota. Still interesting to ponder, I think there is still some ethical questions left. The second example requires a bit of nuance, I trust the driver to operate a vehicle, not necessarily the vehicle itself. Does my trust extend to their decision whether or not to turn on autopilot? You might argue yes, but you also might not be informed e…

In the last example, if you're riding with a driver and not paying attention and they are texting or reading a newspaper and get into a crash, then the liability would be on the driver. Not the cell phone company or newpaper company. I think the same for autopilot. If a warning displays to the driver that they are still liable for controlling the vehicle, and they ignore it then the driver would be liable to the passenger, not the car.

Re: A Tesla on autopilot killed two people. Is the driver guilty of manslaughter?

#116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tesla gives out conflicting messages. For years, and even today, there are Tesla-produced videos that say: > The driver is only in the seat for legal reasons. The car is driving itself. So while there is a disclaimer, there's also Tesla's not so subtle nudge nudge wink wink implications. They did the same with Summon. While the fine print said "Do not use while distracted. Pay attention to the vehicle at all times",…

The driver is still constantly reminded to stay in control, and you even have to agree this to before enabling Autopilot. Tesla never said Autopilot is autonomous.

If they'd only called it "advanced cruise control with lane assist" instead, they sure as hell would have improved things.

The Autopilot in Tesla is more like the one you'd find in an A-10C (three options: hold this current level vertical path; hold this heading and altitude, or hold this altitude) than how I guess most people perceive Autopilot to work (like in what Airbus is actually developing now, ie https://www.businessinsider.com.au/airbus-completes-autonomo... - that article talks to how people incorrectly perceive autopilot to do everything in a plane, for now at least ).

Ie it's a really useful tool, but it's in no way to be confused with FSD.

Re: A Tesla on autopilot killed two people. Is the driver guilty of manslaughter?

#117
post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a huge difference between criminal guilt (as in the article) versus civil liability (as in your example). Those are not at all equivalent. After the criminal case is resolved, the victims or their next-of-kin will probably try to sue the driver and Tesla in civil court for wrongful death.

According to the article, they already have. The articles kinda vague on why exactly the driver is being charged, though. Reading between the lines, I suspect its not just because he had the autopilot engaged, but was engaged in some form of gross negligence at the same time (sleeping, playing videogames on his phone, etc).

Isn't blowing through a red light directly resulting in the deaths of two people typically going to result in vehicular manslaughter charges? In other words, blowing through a red light is a sufficient amount of negligence in my mind for vehicular manslaughter.

Re: A Tesla on autopilot killed two people. Is the driver guilty of manslaughter?

#118
post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If the driver is not paying attention, that is the driver's fault. No doubt. But by extension, if a safety feature did not work appropriately, that would be Tesla's fault, no? I deliberately put both root and proximate causes in my first post because there can be multiple contributors to the accident, and each may bear some responsibility. My main issue with the OP was that it lays the groundwork for absolving the…

> No doubt. But by extension, if a safety feature did not work appropriately, that would be Tesla's fault, no? Not necessarily. Automatic Emergency Braking systems across all automakers have serious constraints [1], and are still sold with broad legal disclaimers. They will attempt to stop you in the event an object is in the vehicle path, but importantly, there are no guarantees (and this is made clear in each vehic…

I don't disagree with you and you make some good points. But I don't think it's fair to assume I'm claiming the safety systems are foolproof. I've worked on safety-critical systems in automotive, healthcare, and aerospace so I know better.

I think it may ultimately come down to the way Tesla's marketing is perceived. If it's found that a reasonable person would insinuate that Tesla implied their system had capabilities it did not, that gets into ethical/legal trouble and speaks to what I meant about working "appropriately". But I think we agree on this based on your previous comment about creation of a regulatory framework for communication.

As far as the personal responsibility goes, I also agree on that point. But in an immensely complex and interconnected society, this has limits because humans don't have the bandwidth to make risk-informed decisions on everything. As I mentioned in a separate comment, there are certain professions (namely: engineer, lawyer, doctor) who have obligations/responsibilities to public safety. (Hence the term "profession" which comes from professing an oath of ethics). I think it's a bad precedent to push the responsibility away from these professions. The talking point about personal responsibility seems to only go one way, and it (unsurprisingly) is the direction that allows corporations to maximize profits while also absolving themselves of risk.

If you drive over a bridge and it collapses because of a bad design, I don't think this gets chalked up to "welp, you needed to take personal responsibility for deciding on that route". If you buy flooring for your home that makes your kids sick, I wouldn't blame you for not doing due diligence on the manufacturing or chemical process. In both cases, the end-user has a reasonable expectation of safety and the professional who designed it would usually be held responsible. Maybe, as you said, the AV world needs some more oversight and regulation to communicate those risks.

Re: A Tesla on autopilot killed two people. Is the driver guilty of manslaughter?

#119
post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If the driver is not paying attention, that is the driver's fault. No doubt. But by extension, if a safety feature did not work appropriately, that would be Tesla's fault, no? I deliberately put both root and proximate causes in my first post because there can be multiple contributors to the accident, and each may bear some responsibility. My main issue with the OP was that it lays the groundwork for absolving the…

> No doubt. But by extension, if a safety feature did not work appropriately, that would be Tesla's fault, no? Not necessarily. Automatic Emergency Braking systems across all automakers have serious constraints [1], and are still sold with broad legal disclaimers. They will attempt to stop you in the event an object is in the vehicle path, but importantly, there are no guarantees (and this is made clear in each vehic…

The Mazda 3 Astina 2014's Radar Cruise Control had clear warnings that it would not detect motorcycle riders. Yet not once did it fail to actually do so ..

I guess they just weren't confident enough, and that I hadn't been behind behind the required number.

I was very impressed by that system, very simple yet solid. By always using radar cruise control you'd kind of take away the need to go into AEB territory, which never happened (activated) for me outside of when I tested the system using cardboard boxes.

(I want to know how my stuff works - 2/3 times came to a full stop from 30kmh just in time, third time it put 10cm into them ; I concluded this is extremely good technology that should be made mandatory everywhere).

Re: A Tesla on autopilot killed two people. Is the driver guilty of manslaughter?

#120

Short answer is “yes”. It’s the same way a homeowner can be responsible if they negligently leave some issues on their property and a person falls to their death. The ultimate responsibility is the person behind the wheel. That said, I’d argue Tesla is also liable. To what extent I don’t know, but it was clearly a contributing factor.

Can you explain how Tesla is liable? It is made clear to the driver (both in the manual and at activation of Autopilot) that they remain the final authority in control of the vehicle, and at the time of the accident, the Tesla software build did not support detection and actioning of stop lights nor stop signs. Are folks going to sue GM and Ford when people don't pay attention when their versions of driver assist don…

I think Ford and GM will share a lower percentage of responsibility, if any, because they actively configure their service to prevent this. Tesla tends to wink and nod.
Post reply on HN