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

Tesla Recalls 2M Cars to Fix Autopilot Safety Flaws

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 237 posts

Re: Tesla Recalls 2M Cars to Fix Autopilot Safety Flaws

#171

Post by _ea1k »

enragedcacti wrote: post #168
_ea1k wrote: post #161

This includes Mobileye cars without driver monitoring. I wonder if they will take similar action against various other Mobileye cars? My Nissan Propilot behaves very similarly to AP, just with less capability and even less alertness monitoring. Surely it would be affected by the same recall? Along with a lot of other cars using similar systems? Or maybe there is some subtle difference, but the article doesn't really…

I'm not sure what to make of it from a legal perspective, but from an automation safety perspective the difference is the "Valley of Degraded Supervision"[1]. A very simple automated system that makes a lot of mistakes will make a driver more alert than baseline, but as the automation improves drivers will quickly start to trust the system too much and lose alertness. There is a huge gulf where the system is good eno…

I think so too. TBH, the Propilot system rarely got activated, because of how ineffective it was. But if they are left out of a recall like this, that would mean that we are penalizing systems for being more effective.

I'm not sure how I feel about that, especially if the boundaries aren't well defined.

Re: Tesla Recalls 2M Cars to Fix Autopilot Safety Flaws

#172

Post by Der_Einzige »

MattRix wrote: post #57
freedomben wrote: post #28

I really wonder where we're headed (in general, not specifically with Teslas) regarding technologies requirements to "do enough to prevent misuse." These requirements are already a major thorn in my side. My car has sensors to detect when a passenger isn't wearing a seat belt and to blast an ear-hurting alarm directly at the driver. It's so loud that it's actually a safety issue in itself because it's hard to focus o…

I feel like all of these are minor annoyances compared to the more serious safety issues they are trying to prevent. I feel like you are underestimating how stupid the average user is… and especially how stupid the most stupid users are.

What's wrong with letting people win darwin awards?

Re: Tesla Recalls 2M Cars to Fix Autopilot Safety Flaws

#173

Post by haswell »

ceejayoz wrote: post #129
haswell wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s an oversimplification to conclude that the drop in deaths is just from “nannyifying” cars. There have been major improvements to vehicle frames, roll safety, crumple zones, etc that all play a major role in that graph. And adding safety features to cars is one thing. Indiscriminately slamming on the brakes without context is another. A feature has to actually lead to safer outcomes. Braking hard when opening the…

> There have been major improvements to vehicle frames, roll safety, crumple zones, etc that all play a major role in that graph. The people who decry the "nanny state" tend to oppose requirements for these, as well. You'll find plenty of people moaning about how they don't make cars like they used to, that bumpers require expensive replacement in low-speed impacts, that all this extra metal is expensive, etc. > Indi…

> The people who decry the "nanny state" tend to oppose requirements for these, as well.

I’m sure you can find some people who find safer crumple zones unreasonable, but I don’t think most people fit into this category.

Automatic braking is far less clear cut, and as someone who prefers cars with safe frames, I don’t yet trust the car to know when it’s the right time to brake (some collision avoidance features are getting way better).

> I wouldn't call "when the driver door opens at speed" to be "indiscriminate".

I would. The car doesn’t know why the door was opened at speed, or what the consequences of braking in that moment might be.

The driver has a better chance of knowing these thing.

Furthermore, if the driver isn’t prepared for this behavior, the car has now created a dangerous situation for the driver, regardless of who is at fault if it causes a rear-end collision. A collision that would not have happened if not for the automatic behavior.

I have a friend who is allergic to bees. While driving one day (they were in the passenger seat), a bee made an appearance. It must have flown in through the sunroof at some point, and started flying around in a rather agitated fashion. When it landed on the edge of the driver door, I opened it slightly (at speed) and let the wind carry it away.

I think this is the only time I’ve ever opened the door while driving, but the one thing I did not need at that moment was my car thinking it knew better than me.

Until self driving tech has truly arrived, I’d argue this kind of automatic behavior is pretty indiscriminate. This is not the same as a collision avoidance sensor that knows the car is about to hit something.

Maybe I’m wrong and most people who open the door while driving are trying to escape the car and would benefit from slower speed. I doubt it. And if this is the case, one wonders if braking would work anyway (why else is someone trying to exit the car while moving?).

Re: Tesla Recalls 2M Cars to Fix Autopilot Safety Flaws

#174

Post by enragedcacti »

_ea1k wrote: post #171
enragedcacti wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure what to make of it from a legal perspective, but from an automation safety perspective the difference is the "Valley of Degraded Supervision"[1]. A very simple automated system that makes a lot of mistakes will make a driver more alert than baseline, but as the automation improves drivers will quickly start to trust the system too much and lose alertness. There is a huge gulf where the system is good eno…

I think so too. TBH, the Propilot system rarely got activated, because of how ineffective it was. But if they are left out of a recall like this, that would mean that we are penalizing systems for being more effective. I'm not sure how I feel about that, especially if the boundaries aren't well defined.

Agreed, I find it concerning that even the basic system in my recent Ford feels like its edging into degraded supervision territory under certain circumstances despite only having steering based attention monitoring. Regulators/congress should be much more proactive about defining what constitutes proper driver monitoring.

I think the big issue is that the NHTSA is fundamentally a reactive organization. Automakers self-certify compliance with the regulations, then at some point later the NHTSA may investigate and take action against a specific product or manufacturer if there are enough complaints. Legally I'm not sure that they are allowed to make broad recalls even if its the logical thing to do.

Re: Tesla Recalls 2M Cars to Fix Autopilot Safety Flaws

#175

Post by gambiting »

Der_Einzige wrote: post #172
MattRix wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel like all of these are minor annoyances compared to the more serious safety issues they are trying to prevent. I feel like you are underestimating how stupid the average user is… and especially how stupid the most stupid users are.

What's wrong with letting people win darwin awards?

Nothing. The problem starts when they kill other people doing it, which is unfortunately very common with automotive collisions. It's like when someone gets in my car, sits behind me and says they won't put a seatbelt on, they are fine with taking the risk - to which my reply is that it's fine, but I'm not fine with taking that risk, because in a collision your limp body will go directly through my seat and kill me, even though I have my seatbelt on. So yes, kill yourself if you wish, but don't take others with you.

Re: Tesla Recalls 2M Cars to Fix Autopilot Safety Flaws

#176

Post by MarkusWandel »

badpun wrote: post #144
MarkusWandel wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My car's gone the opposite way. When trying to find it in the parking lot, with the old one, you just pushed "lock" on the keyfob twice and listened for the horn honk. The new one makes a nice, elegant but not very loud "beep" sound. Useless for this purpose. They also got the seat belt warning right. At startup it displays a map of the seats, green if occupied and buckled, red if not, grey if unoccupied. Good for ch…

> My car's gone the opposite way. When trying to find it in the parking lot, with the old one, you just pushed "lock" on the keyfob twice and listened for the horn honk. The new one makes a nice, elegant but not very loud "beep" sound. Useless for this purpose. Good for everyone around though, because you're not polluting the soundscape with a completely unncessary honk. Where I live, honking within cities is allowed…

The car also has the modern low beams, with a very sharp dividing line between "light" and "no light". That's one feature I wish "everyone around" had...

Re: Tesla Recalls 2M Cars to Fix Autopilot Safety Flaws

#177

Post by gambiting »

TacticalCoder wrote: post #140
braunshedd wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just disabled all of these warnings on my Toyota with a third party OBDII reader and the Carista app, which also comes with lots of other fun options to fiddle with. Only thing I haven't figured out is how to disable the chime on startup!

> I just disabled all of these warnings on my Toyota with a third party OBDII reader... I'd do it too but... My car (not a Toyota), although 11 years old, is still on an extended manufacturer warranty (which I pay to renew each year) but if I modify the system, I void the warranty. I'm just pointing out that out because Toyota have great warranties AFAIK and can be extended up to at least 7 years old? (if you do the…

Both in EU and US you have laws that say the manufacturer isn't allowed to deny you a warranty repair because of a mod unless they can undeniably prove that the issue was caused by the mod. I know of several cases where the manufacturer had to be taken to court over this but the consumer ultimately won because no manufacturer can demonstrate how using OBD reader to change your seatbelt settings can cause the transmission to fail.

Re: Tesla Recalls 2M Cars to Fix Autopilot Safety Flaws

#178

Post by lillecarl »

Closi wrote: post #14
obtino wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tesla shouldn't call their driver assist system "Autopilot" either, but here we are.

By the same logic you could say that airplanes shouldn't call their pilot assist system "Autopilot" either, because it requires monitoring and input from pilots who will need to disengage the system and intervene/fly manually in certain scenarios. Autopilot is probably actually quite a good term for it if you actually compare it to a plane Autopilot - you don't expect pilots to be inattentive or away from the control…

Are you aware of how much pilots do once autopilot is engaged? They do some checklists, then they sit on their arse, eat food, watch something. While being responsible for 100's of peoples lives. They only intervene in start, landing and if something really goes south.

Calling something an autopilot implies you can do essentially whatever you want while the machine operates itself.

Re: Tesla Recalls 2M Cars to Fix Autopilot Safety Flaws

#179

Post by lawn »

ryanklee wrote: post #115
mensetmanusman wrote: post #46

Still calling over the air software updates recalls?

The number of people in this comment section that are getting hung up on the word recall without looking into established usage and legal definitions of the word is nuts.

Most people commenting on HN don't even read the article.

Re: Tesla Recalls 2M Cars to Fix Autopilot Safety Flaws

#180

Post by Closi »

alistairSH wrote: post #162
Closi wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And we don't expect drivers to be adequately trained and get a licence? I disagree with calling the top level of Autopilot "FSD" by the way - I think that is misleading. But Autopilot - I think that's a fair term personally considering the context and historical use.

And we don't expect drivers to be adequately trained and get a licence? In the US? No, we don't. Even ignoring that a driver's license is treated more as a right than a perk... Consumers are absolutely NOT trained on the nuances of any particular car's UI, systems, etc. An airline pilot absolutely IS trained on those nuances and can ONLY operate planes in which they've trained. And they get periodic check-rides from…

Well again, Autopilot probably is an accurate word then - because consumers should clearly know the limitations and nuances of Autopilot to safely operate it, and a failure to understand those limitations can clearly have deadly consequences.

Is the argument "You can't call it Autopilot because Autopilot refers to a complex system that requires a skilled operator and needs people to pay constant attention"?

Post reply on HN