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

New video of Tesla crash demonstrates the problem of semi-automated driving

theautopian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 714 posts

Re: New video of Tesla crash demonstrates the problem of semi-automated driving

#131

Post by epivosism »

ClumsyPilot wrote: post #126
epivosism wrote: post #35

The question that is never answered in this kind of story is: 1. How many fatalities per mile does tesla FSD have, compared to its best alternative if we ban it? 2. Focusing on specific failure cases is not relevant since the political decision to allow it is all or nothing. 3. It'd be perfectly logical to accept road testing FSD, even if it's significantly worse in some areas, as long as this is not exploitable, AND…

> It'd be perfectly logical to accept road testing FSD, even if it's significantly worse in some areas, as long as this is not exploitable, AND the net gain from allowing it is still overall positive So are all 20 manufacturers going to get the right to endanger my life just so they can train their self-driving? Or is this spesific to Tesla? Do I and my family get some compensation for this danger, or in case we are…

It hinges on whether you think it's net safe/unsafe today. if unsafe, I'd support not allowing it, of course. If on net safer, BUT with a different distribution of harm, I think it's quite hard to make a decision. That is what most discussion is about.

Re: New video of Tesla crash demonstrates the problem of semi-automated driving

#132

Post by [deleted] »

kiratp wrote: post #25

This looks like the vehicle tried and failed to get the driver to engage and pulled over best it could. There is no shoulder there so… Let’s wait to get more info as to what the driver was doing and if they were incapacitated. The FSD beta is pretty aggressive on making sure the driver is paying attention via both steering sensors, the in-cabin camera and the touch screen.

[deleted]

Re: New video of Tesla crash demonstrates the problem of semi-automated driving

#133

Post by [deleted] »

leaving wrote: post #105

This mirrors my experience of driving in America. People do not adjust their speed or following distance to the conditions. They drive like they have some sort of right to a road free of obstructions and to drive at the speed limit or above, no matter the circumstances. It's as if they expect the speed limit sign to adapt to the circumstances. They have the attitude, "Well if I need to slow down, why does the sign sa…

[deleted]

Re: New video of Tesla crash demonstrates the problem of semi-automated driving

#134

Post by ClumsyPilot »

epivosism wrote: post #74
remarkEon wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Other people have said it before, but the issue is that the Tesla crashes we are seeing are ones that a human would trivially avoid. Most people, especially non technical people, aren’t going to care about numbers that say it’s safer or better on net when the car still occasionally does things that humans view as crazy or stupid.

I'm interested in understanding why you would want every subdivision of "type of crash" to strictly improve, rather than being content that the combined crash rate goes down? i.e. if Tesla causes 100 new crashes of type A but saves 200 of type B, isn't that a gain? Even if type A crashes are one which humans don't normally make. A way in which I agree with you is if type B crashes are more avoidable by conscientious…

> i.e. if Tesla causes 100 new crashes of type A but saves 200 of type B, isn't that a gain? Even if type A crashes are one which humans don't normally make

By that logic proffeshional racing drivers should be allowed to drive drunk and stoned

Re: New video of Tesla crash demonstrates the problem of semi-automated driving

#136

Post by cameldrv »

ASalazarMX wrote: post #69
threeseed wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> pulled over best it could If that is its best then FSD has no business being on the road. It was erratic and didn't give clear intent to other cars what it was trying to do.

IMO the car signaled, changed lane and stopped without slamming the brakes. It didn't collide with anything, the pileup was formed by human drivers driving too close and too fast for their reaction time. If it had been a human driver that saw a kitten or a rock in the road, it would probably slam the brakes. I'm not defending Tesla's FSD, which I think is inferior for Tesla's reluctance to use LIDAR in addition to ca…

Stopping in the left lane of the Bay Bridge where the lanes are narrow and there is no shoulder is extremely dangerous. You can see the predictable results.

If the sole problem was that the driver wasn't paying attention, the least it could have done would have been to put on the hazards and very slowly come to a stop. It would have been even better if it simply continued until there was a safe shoulder to stop on. The chance of having an accident by stopping on the bridge is much higher than just driving on autopilot to the end of the bridge and then pulling over.

If the problem is that this would create a moral hazard where drivers stopped holding onto the steering wheel when on bridges with no shoulder, the car could play loud obnoxious noises inside the car when this happened.

Re: New video of Tesla crash demonstrates the problem of semi-automated driving

#137

Post by Johnny555 »

btilly wrote: post #77
Johnny555 wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn't his car have ABS? Even under heavy braking, the car's wheels shouldn't lock up and lead to swerving. Did the trailer have its own brakes?

As everyone is pointing out to you, ABS solves the problem of your car's wheels skidding, leading to loss of control. It doesn't help with the trailer that you're towing failing to stop as fast as you do, trying to run into you, and trying to turn to the side when it can't. The solution to the latter problem is to be aware that you have the trailer, and to not brake faster than it can handle. The fact that the traile…

If ACC speed adjustment let to the trailer losing traction and swerving behind him, then there's something not right with his towing setup, even in a panic stop, I've never had my trailer swerve behind me. That's a serious hazard, ACC speed adjustment braking should not cause any loss of control.

I've seen pickups with too little weight on the rear axle lock up the wheels and get pushed around by the trailer especially when the trailer braking is adjusted too light, but with the advent of ABS, that's not nearly as common.

The problem here isn't the ACC braking (even though many car markers will tell you not to use it while towing), it's trailer setup.

Re: New video of Tesla crash demonstrates the problem of semi-automated driving

#138

Post by int_19h »

sokoloff wrote: post #107
Alex3917 wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think what's interesting here is it's likely the first instance where Tesla FSD has been involved in an accident which affected other drivers. In a pileup like this it's basically never the fault of the front car, unless maybe if they are purposely causing the accident for insurance fraud or something. Maybe the driver will get cited for failing to maintain the minimum speed, but legally this isn't much different…

If I brake check someone on the highway, causing an accident, and it’s discovered that that’s what happened, I’d be pretty shocked* if the trailing driver was found responsible. That video looks like a combined lane change and brake check on the part of the Tesla. * and disappointed

Why would you be shocked and disappointed? It is the obligation of the driver trailing you to maintain enough distance to be able to stop safely if the car in front of them has to brake hard for whatever reason. The fact that your hard braking wasn't actually necessary may mean that you're also responsible, but it doesn't absolve the other driver.

Re: New video of Tesla crash demonstrates the problem of semi-automated driving

#139

Post by waste_monk »

amf12 wrote: post #124
jayd16 wrote: post #82

This is an honest question here but why is the pile up so bad if driving conditions were ideal? The next 6 drivers were not keeping a safe distance or paying attention?

Honestly, when you're driving, you sometimes only see the car in front of you. You might see it slowing down first, and you start slowing down, or continue because there is enough distance anyway. Then the car in front of you stops abruptly or crashes. Now you panic and brake hard. Maybe you still crash into the car in front. Even if you stop before crashing, this hard braking causes the car behind you to crash into…

>TL;DR - Sometimes the 3 second following distance is just not enough even if someone is paying attention because they can only see the car in front of them.

Yep... the usual advice locally is 5 to 7 seconds gap for freeways and similar, before accounting for weather and other conditions. Of course, that assumes you can leave a gap without some bastard deciding to sneak in and occupy it.

Re: New video of Tesla crash demonstrates the problem of semi-automated driving

#140

Post by roguecoder »

Video understanding engineer here.

Tunnels and underpasses are the worst. They are a pain in the ass, because shadows mess with all the edge detection and motion models and anything else visual. Humans compensate by thinking "I'm in a tunnel: things are weird." But without a reasoning model that can take context into account, the computer is stuck.

In the video from behind, you can see the shadow ahead of the car on the floor of the tunnel that it carefully stops just before it would hit. A person would notice that EVERY OTHER car had driven straight through the thing it thought was an obstacle, but that is also context this car isn't going to take into account.

Post reply on HN