Live data from Hacker News

A Tragic Loss

teslamotors.com

151–160 of 511 posts

Re: A Tragic Loss

#151
"What we know is that the vehicle was on a divided highway with Autopilot engaged when a tractor trailer drove across the highway perpendicular to the Model S. Neither Autopilot nor the driver noticed the white side of the tractor trailer against a brightly lit sky, so the brake was not applied."

That's really disingenuous. There's no way to know for certain what the driver did or didn't see, but there are a lot more salient features for them to go by other than the white trailer, like the fact that the cabin has driven across the road or that the wheels of the trailer were square in the driver's lane. A much more likely explanation is that the autopilot set expectations too high, the driver was not paying attention (like in all the youtube videos of the system in action), and the autopilot failed and crashed into the truck.

Re: A Tragic Loss

#152
After reading a lot of the comments here it's obvious that the best thing Tesla could do for the safety of this feature is to simply rename it "Magic Cruise Control" or "CoPilot" or something to that effect.

Re: A Tragic Loss

#154

Neither Autopilot nor the driver noticed the white side of the tractor trailer against a brightly lit sky, I'm intrigued that the color is relevant in the car's case - wouldn't it be using some sort of radar to detect and map objects rather than vision? I appreciate I am probably missing something.

Well it certainly makes me wonder how well it will do in snowy conditions, let alone any low sight conditions.

I'm not sure what the claims are about autopilot, but I would currently only use it in situations similar to those I would use cruise control.

It's going to get better, but it's crazy to assume it's currently much more than a highly-assistive cruise control.

Re: A Tragic Loss

#155

I mean I understand Tesla has to make a statement here and I understand they want to ensure everyone that it's not really their fault but to title a post "A Tragic Loss" and then spend the majority of the post discussing all of your car's safety features and how it wasn't your fault just seems tone deaf and distasteful to me. Maybe they had to do it for legal reasons I don't know (I'm certainly not a lawyer) and I'd…

Reminds me of their complaint blog post why the German government initiative is capped at 60k where it seems like half the point was to advertise a new lease deal.

https://www.teslamotors.com/de_DE/blog/teslas-antwort-auf-da...

Re: A Tragic Loss

#156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree. I'm starting to get really weirded out by Tesla's immediate "not our fault!" blog posts every time a Tesla is involved in any kind of accident. I could see the necessity the first few times back when it was new technology to a lot of people (and Top Gear had it in for them), but with it happening over and over it seems whiny and a bit callous. How long to they plan to keep doing this?

How long are people like you going to keep speaking dissonance for others every time a Black Swan happens?

[deleted]

Re: A Tragic Loss

#157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Autopilot engaged when a tractor trailer drove across the highway perpendicular to the Model S. Neither Autopilot nor the driver noticed the white side of the tractor trailer against a brightly lit sky, so the brake was not applied. How is this not an "Autopilot did something very very wrong" story? Tesla autopilot drove the vehicle full-speed into a tractor-trailer, which wasn't registered by its sensor systems. It'…

The autopilot doesn't drive the car, the driver does. The autopilot is a help just like cruise control. Tesla are very clear (apart from the naming of the feature) that the driver must still drive the car. The autopilot will avoid obstacles it can detect and the driver is expected to avoid others (since he has eyes on the wheel and eyes on the road the whole time). I think they misleading thing about Teslas Autopilot…

That's some PR firm-level explaining. First, autopilot is not just lane assist, it's lane assist + adaptive cruise control + additional features (it can change lanes if you tell it to). Other OEMs have purposely shied away from enabling an autopilot-like feature set together, even though it's technically possible, because they are absolutely terrified of something exactly like this situation happening.

Second, you're completely ignoring that autopilot will very much entirely drive the car by itself for minutes at a time (reports are anywhere from 5 to 15 depending on software version), which will obviously encourage drivers to not pay attention to the road. I don't care about disclaimers, I don't care about nag screens or chimes, and I definitely don't care about some warranty text that flashes on the screen. If you make a car that can drive itself you encourage drivers to let it do just that and you should be prepared for that eventuality. Period.

Re: A Tragic Loss

#159
post #123

I mean I understand Tesla has to make a statement here and I understand they want to ensure everyone that it's not really their fault but to title a post "A Tragic Loss" and then spend the majority of the post discussing all of your car's safety features and how it wasn't your fault just seems tone deaf and distasteful to me. Maybe they had to do it for legal reasons I don't know (I'm certainly not a lawyer) and I'd…

It's not just about Tesla though. They have to defend autopilot not only to protect the brand but to protect the public's perception of autonomous vehicles in general. Self driving tech is poised to save many many lives. So from a utilitarian perspective, it's probably justified to take extraordinary measures to make sure reactionary media and public whim doesn't kill it off, however uncomfortable that might seem in…

They could defend the public's perception of autonomous vehicles in general by not rushing to market a beta that is less technically capable then other autonomous systems being worked on by their competitors.

Re: A Tragic Loss

#160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Autopilot engaged when a tractor trailer drove across the highway perpendicular to the Model S. Neither Autopilot nor the driver noticed the white side of the tractor trailer against a brightly lit sky, so the brake was not applied. How is this not an "Autopilot did something very very wrong" story? Tesla autopilot drove the vehicle full-speed into a tractor-trailer, which wasn't registered by its sensor systems. It'…

The autopilot doesn't drive the car, the driver does. The autopilot is a help just like cruise control. Tesla are very clear (apart from the naming of the feature) that the driver must still drive the car. The autopilot will avoid obstacles it can detect and the driver is expected to avoid others (since he has eyes on the wheel and eyes on the road the whole time). I think they misleading thing about Teslas Autopilot…

> The autopilot doesn't drive the car, the driver does. The autopilot is a help just like cruise control. Tesla are very clear (apart from the naming of the feature) that the driver must still drive the car.

I'm sorry, but that's a cop-out. What's the point of an autopilot if you have to avoid every single obstacle and react to every single thing as if the auto-pilot didn't exist? You can't say "autopilot is safer than normal humans" (heavily implied by the blog post) and then turn around and say "but it's really the driver who's responsible for everything!" anytime there's an accident.

Unlike autopilot, cruise control has very limited functionality. No driver expects it to do anything other than keep their speed, so they are still actively engaged with the road to respond to anything that takes place.

Post reply on HN