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

Tesla's 2M car Autopilot recall is now under federal scrutiny

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 90 posts

Re: Tesla's 2M car Autopilot recall is now under federal scrutiny

#41

Post by grecy »

LeafItAlone wrote: post #6
drcode wrote: post #2

Amusing that they went with a photo from 2014 to illustrate the article

It says > A 2014 Tesla Model S the vehicle is a 2014. The photo is of a Jan 2018 crash https://www.ocregister.com/2019/09/04/ntsb-tesla-autopilot-l...

> The photo is of a Jan 2018 crash

So still more than 5 years out of date.

Would you accept a photo of a 5 year old iPhone on an article about some iPhone limitation?

Would you accept a photo of a 5 year old version of Uber on an article about some Uber limitation?

Would you accept a photo of a 5 year old robot vaccum on an article about some robot vac limitation?

These things all change drastically each year. Five years ago is ancient history, and it's kind of silly to think "evidence" that is more than 5 years old has any bearing on how things perform now.

Re: Tesla's 2M car Autopilot recall is now under federal scrutiny

#42

Post by flandish »

bottlepalm wrote: post #23

I'd rather be driving on the road with Autopilot cars than the impatient drivers, road ragers, distracted people on their phone, and people who drive like they're in a video game. I drive with it on 95% on the time, and I really only need to interrupt when it's too slow and too cautious.

For sure but also consider those autopilot apis are written by impatient coders, distracted proj managers, and with crappy specs.

Re: Tesla's 2M car Autopilot recall is now under federal scrutiny

#43

Post by bangaladore »

jeffbee wrote: post #33
psunavy03 wrote: post #8

At some point, I just don't get how a lot of this is Tesla's problem. I'll buy that they should have called it something other than "Autopilot" and "Full Self Driving." But ultimately if it's in the manual saying "this is not fully automated and you must pay attention to the road," it should be on the driver to be held liable for abusing the system. Sure, go after Tesla if the system endangers people via spurious inp…

> it's also not Tesla's responsibility to nanny people Yes, it is. An L2 driver assist system must ensure that the driver is always actively supervising, and Tesla's systems failed to do that. That's why they recalled 2 million cars.

It seems to me that there are 10s of millions of "L2 driver assist" as defined by synopsys that have zero driver supervising checks such as most cars out there with lane-keep and cruise control.

Re: Tesla's 2M car Autopilot recall is now under federal scrutiny

#44

Post by londons_explore »

bangaladore wrote: post #38
londons_explore wrote: post #32

> , it only records an accident if the airbags deploy, I've often wondered if Tesla is gaming the figures by only deploying the airbags in really bad crashes, whereas other manufacturers might deploy the airbags for pretty minor bumps. This in turn makes them look really good on 'number of accidents where airbags deploy'.

The IIHS has repeatedly shown that Tesla airbags are the best in class. Deploying airbags when not needed can do significant harm to occupants. Not to mention total vehicles for no good reason. There isn't a need to wonder when independent data gatherers have already answered the question.

It can be best in class, yet still rarely deploy...

It can even be best in class when tested, rarely deploy, and save more lives than competitors. It just needs to correctly detect cases like this[1].

[1]: https://youtu.be/MTX0MvqBqL0?t=10

Re: Tesla's 2M car Autopilot recall is now under federal scrutiny

#45

Post by Someone »

d_theorist wrote: post #25

The relevant metric should be accident rate per million miles driven. What is the rate with autopilot vs without autopilot.

On similar roads, in similar traffic, in similar weather.

If you look at fatalities or define “accident” as cases where somebody had to visit a doctor or something like that, you also need to compare to similar cars. Most self-driving cars are relatively new and relatively large, and both decrease those (probably even accident rate because they statistically have newer brakes and tires and have more active safety features)

It’s far from trivial to decide whether some program is a better driver than the average human driver if the program gets the newer bigger car and can decide to cop out in cases where we do not expect humans to do so.

Re: Tesla's 2M car Autopilot recall is now under federal scrutiny

#46

Post by bangaladore »

londons_explore wrote: post #44
bangaladore wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The IIHS has repeatedly shown that Tesla airbags are the best in class. Deploying airbags when not needed can do significant harm to occupants. Not to mention total vehicles for no good reason. There isn't a need to wonder when independent data gatherers have already answered the question.

It can be best in class, yet still rarely deploy... It can even be best in class when tested, rarely deploy, and save more lives than competitors. It just needs to correctly detect cases like this[1]. [1]: https://youtu.be/MTX0MvqBqL0?t=10

You claim that Tesla is gaming the system.

I'm not aware of a definition of gaming in which the system is overall safer or equivalently safer than other top-tier competitors. That seems objectively better than deploying airbags when they will harm the occupants or total the vehicle when not-needed.

Re: Tesla's 2M car Autopilot recall is now under federal scrutiny

#47

Post by furyofantares »

londons_explore wrote: post #32

> , it only records an accident if the airbags deploy, I've often wondered if Tesla is gaming the figures by only deploying the airbags in really bad crashes, whereas other manufacturers might deploy the airbags for pretty minor bumps. This in turn makes them look really good on 'number of accidents where airbags deploy'.

I have no knowledge or opinion about what thresholds various auto makers have relative to each other, beyond the fact that they probably all meet regulations.

But I do want to point out that ~nobody would buy a car that deploys airbags for "pretty minor bumps". Airbag deployment is a serious event, it can injur or in rare cases kill a person itself.

Re: Tesla's 2M car Autopilot recall is now under federal scrutiny

#48

Post by Dylan16807 »

grecy wrote: post #41
LeafItAlone wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It says > A 2014 Tesla Model S the vehicle is a 2014. The photo is of a Jan 2018 crash https://www.ocregister.com/2019/09/04/ntsb-tesla-autopilot-l...

> The photo is of a Jan 2018 crash So still more than 5 years out of date. Would you accept a photo of a 5 year old iPhone on an article about some iPhone limitation? Would you accept a photo of a 5 year old version of Uber on an article about some Uber limitation? Would you accept a photo of a 5 year old robot vaccum on an article about some robot vac limitation? These things all change drastically each year. Five y…

It's a picture of a crashed car.

Unless you're claiming the system doesn't crash now, a picture from 2018 is just as good as a picture from last week.

It's not a main piece of evidence, it's an example. The evidence is in the text of the article where it talks about hundreds of crashes.

As to your questions, as long as the issue in the article applies to the model in the picture, all of those are fine. I'd want a newer picture for phones because they cycle so fast but it wouldn't be a big deal. A crashed 4 year old 2014 model and a crashed 10 year old 2014 model look the same.

Re: Tesla's 2M car Autopilot recall is now under federal scrutiny

#49

Post by Veserv »

tgma wrote: post #30
FireBeyond wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, except of those people who have bought (at a significant price) those features, and understand that they're nowhere near their "aspirational" goals (When Tesla has been called out by the SEC and DMVs for some of Musk's more absurd statements, the company has quietly whispered to them "these are aspirational goals", and in one case, to the California DMV, "Musk's visionary statements are not reflective of engine…

The aspirational claims are not about Autopilot, but FSD (and I agree that having people pay for FSD in 2015 is borderline fraudulent. It is a consumer protection matter, not a safety matter.) Again, the statements to California DMV or SEC or Congress is one thing. Whether the owner is confused by the abilities of their vehicle post purchase and driving for a week is a distinct matter. > Those drivers are "it's okay…

They are objectively, literally fatally confused as to the abilities of their vehicles.

Tesla's systems, or any other ADAS for that matter, can not be safely used without a fully attentive driver and Tesla's system in particular further demands that you must keep your hands on the steering wheel at all times. Deliberately and intentionally operating such a system without your full attention because you think it will safely drive you without your attention is like shoving your hand into a spinning saw blade.

That is not to say that everybody who is injured by a spinning saw blade or by inattentive use indicates a product is fundamentally unsafe. Many people just inherently display inappropriate caution and most become complacent with dangerous devices through repeated "safe use". For a spinning saw blade, they miscalculate the risk and overestimate the safety mechanism, but they are not confused about that fact that inserting their hand into a spinning saw blade is a very bad idea.

If Tesla ADAS operators only overestimated their attention then it would be comparable to a spinning saw blade, useful but dangerous. However, Tesla marketing aggressively misrepresents the capabilities of their systems and the Tesla ADAS operators routinely believe the marketing that it can safely drive without their attention; they believe you should insert your hand into a spinning saw blade and many people have literally died as a result. That is textbook fatal confusion about the abilities of their vehicles.

Re: Tesla's 2M car Autopilot recall is now under federal scrutiny

#50

Post by d_theorist »

Someone wrote: post #45
d_theorist wrote: post #25

The relevant metric should be accident rate per million miles driven. What is the rate with autopilot vs without autopilot.

On similar roads, in similar traffic, in similar weather. If you look at fatalities or define “accident” as cases where somebody had to visit a doctor or something like that, you also need to compare to similar cars. Most self-driving cars are relatively new and relatively large, and both decrease those (probably even accident rate because they statistically have newer brakes and tires and have more active safety fea…

I agree you need to control for other factors. But I don't think that is particularly beyond the wit of man.
Post reply on HN