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

Tesla on autopilot rear ends motorcycle on freeway, killing rider

ksl.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 201 posts

Re: Tesla on autopilot rear ends motorcycle on freeway, killing rider

#171

Post by 93po »

mwint wrote: post #84
rvz wrote: post #11

Oh dear. It's getting really hard for anyone to defend this contraption. Perhaps that explains the silence from the Tesla autopilot crowd shocked by the news of this yet another collision from an unsafe piece of 'safety critical' software. Both Autopilot and FSD (Fools Self Driving) needs to be investigated urgently.

The "silence from the Tesla autopilot crowd" may be related to the fact that Tesla accident stories tend to be quietly corrected three months later. For example "Self-Driving Tesla runs into tree, kills occupants" turns into "Guy shows off and floors car into tree, car obeys"

Or that these stories are boring, repetitive, and insignificant. I'm sure a Honda Civic on cruise control killed a motorcyclist today - where's the outrage and headlines articles on that? People are equally responsible for the car on FSD as they are for a car on cruise control.

Re: Tesla on autopilot rear ends motorcycle on freeway, killing rider

#172

Post by 93po »

rvz wrote: post #78
influxmoment wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So we ban all drivers assistance so it can't be misused? What's your point?

No one said 'ban'. Perhaps Tesla should have a proper driver monitoring system to determine that the driver has their eyes on the road at all times whilst having autopilot or FSD when driving? In the article: [0] > "Just because your vehicle may be equipped with driver-assisted settings or auto-pilot features, all the vehicles still require the operator of that vehicle to still be attentive and still be watching the…

>So it's really no surprise why they are getting lots of investigations by regulators over their contraption.

There's only one investigation, not lots. And they're only investigating whether FSD is "exacerbating human factors or behavioral safety risks by undermining the effectiveness of the driver’s supervision". They aren't even saying FSD is bad, or should be recalled. They're only saying that it needs to not alleviate the driver from their responsibility to watch the road, and they haven't even determined if that's the case.

Re: Tesla on autopilot rear ends motorcycle on freeway, killing rider

#173

Post by skybrian »

ncmncm wrote: post #160
skybrian wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, I ignored that on purpose because it doesn't make sense. I'm reminded of Abraham Lincoln's joke: "How many legs does a dog have, if you count the tail as a leg?" The money counts as spending, even if you say it doesn't.

It is not spent on transportation, it is spent on something else, and deducted from the transportation budget. If somebody steals your wallet and uses your card to buy an NFT, did you spend that? It came from your account.

Governments spent huge amounts of money on what they at least thought were public transportation projects. In California, the public voted for propositions approving this spending. This shows that spending on public transit is popular. The will is there. It's fairly conventional wisdom that improving public transit is important.

The execution of these plans is often pretty bad. This shows that something is going wrong other than having public support.

Re: Tesla on autopilot rear ends motorcycle on freeway, killing rider

#174

Post by Karrot_Kream »

mwint wrote: post #128
Karrot_Kream wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Look at [1] and you see it's the average across the US. It's more expensive than that in many states. Unless you're discounting the purchase price/monthly loan payment/lease price. [1]: https://www.move.org/average-cost-owning-a-car/#data

Key word there is probably average. Median would be more interesting.

New Mexico is sitting at the median (spot 25, so not quite, need to average out the two middles) at $5,063.78.

Re: Tesla on autopilot rear ends motorcycle on freeway, killing rider

#175

Post by Karrot_Kream »

pandaman wrote: post #134
Karrot_Kream wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You buy adjacent property instead of insisting that everyone does the same thing with their property as the homeowner growing things? Invoking "externalities" as if everyone wants to do the same thing (growing things) on their property is exactly how you end up with America's suburban monoculture.

No, invoking externalities as they exist and affect people around you. If your neighbors don't grow things and don't mind your building a high-rise then they will let you rezone. I am not sure if you had been outside or only get your information from HN's strongtowns and notjustbikes fans but IME there are apartment complexes and mixed use buildings (apartments and retail) everywhere in the US. Nobody forbids buildin…

> No, invoking externalities as they exist and affect people around you. If your neighbors don't grow things and don't mind your building a high-rise then they will let you rezone.

You're prioritizing existing neighbors and uses over new ones. You didn't mention that in your previous post. That's different. Now you're saying that buying property gives you implicit rights over light on your property. Does that mean if flight traffic blocks the light on your property for a few minutes a day that it's not allowed? How many minutes is allowed? What other implicit rights are granted with your property? See how this is a minefield?

> I am not sure if you had been outside or only get your information from HN's strongtowns and notjustbikes fans but IME there are apartment complexes and mixed use buildings (apartments and retail) everywhere in the US. Nobody forbids building those on principle.

... They do? Look at your town's zoning map. I'm looking at mine, and the vast majority of it is zoned for SFH. "on principle" is meaningless, to abide by zoning code you can only build up to what zoning code allows. In my town it's almost completely single family. "had been outside", strongtowns, or notjustbikes are immaterial here, the zoning code is what matters and is enforced. If I wanted to build multifamily housing that would be illegal here.

Re: Tesla on autopilot rear ends motorcycle on freeway, killing rider

#176

Post by josephcsible »

Karrot_Kream wrote: post #175
pandaman wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, invoking externalities as they exist and affect people around you. If your neighbors don't grow things and don't mind your building a high-rise then they will let you rezone. I am not sure if you had been outside or only get your information from HN's strongtowns and notjustbikes fans but IME there are apartment complexes and mixed use buildings (apartments and retail) everywhere in the US. Nobody forbids buildin…

> No, invoking externalities as they exist and affect people around you. If your neighbors don't grow things and don't mind your building a high-rise then they will let you rezone. You're prioritizing existing neighbors and uses over new ones. You didn't mention that in your previous post. That's different. Now you're saying that buying property gives you implicit rights over light on your property. Does that mean if…

> Does that mean if flight traffic blocks the light on your property for a few minutes a day that it's not allowed? How many minutes is allowed?

Even if you had a 24/7 stream of airplanes, as close together as the FAA allows them to fly, wouldn't that still only cast a shadow on your property for a miniscule fraction of the time?

Re: Tesla on autopilot rear ends motorcycle on freeway, killing rider

#177

Post by Karrot_Kream »

decafninja wrote: post #149
woodruffw wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The drunk guy about to T-bone you is more difficult to encounter in the first place than the drunk guy about to stab you on the subway. Statistically, he isn't. If drunks stabbed people on subways at the rate that drunks killed people with their cars, around 46 people would be stabbed on the US's subways each day. And that's killed with cars, not "permanently disabled or disfigured"; that rate is even higher. The p…

Unfortunately, you're not going to convince people by laying out statistics, otherwise you'd (you as in transit advocates, not you specifically) would have succeeded already. What you need to do is address how people feel , and transit advocates have been doing a poor job at that in the US. People feel safe in their cars. People feel unsafe on transit. I don't know why this perception deviates from reality, but it do…

> I love taking the subways in Seoul, Tokyo, Hong Kong, and other cities where subways are ultraclean and nearly devoid of potentially dangerous individuals.

Most Asian cities have horrendous track records on dealing with mentally ill and homeless, that's why. They're frequently driven out, dumped into homeless ghettos, incarcerated, or dumped into the countryside. Western society has higher expectations of their marginalized, for better or for worse. This is why US planners look to Europe for models to emulate instead of Asia.

> Address this, and you will win over many people to transit. But again - I feel like most transit advocates are highly resistant to doing what needs to be done.

Most advantages surrounding driving cars in the US are based around culture and perception. The mythos of the car in the US is huge and many parts of car culture is based around the mythos. Transit advocates by nature of not buying into the mythos are going to be types that are hard to sway through feelings and perception. I agree that transit has a perception problem that needs to be fixed in US big cities. The reason why this disconnect exists is because transit fans are by nature more driven by data and less driven by mythos or narrative. That doesn't mean this isn't a problem.

Re: Tesla on autopilot rear ends motorcycle on freeway, killing rider

#178

Post by Gordonjcp »

herewulf wrote: post #120
Gordonjcp wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've never seen Tesla's "autopilot" avoid an accident that a human driver wouldn't have reacted to sooner. Maybe the standard of driving in the US is very low, or something.

It actually is. Some states are far worse than others. In my state, a learning permit can be obtained at the age of 15. Not exactly a good age for handling grave responsibility.

I mean I grew up in a part of the world where if you can't drive and maintain a tractor and a fair selection of implements at the age of 12 they start phoning special schools and highly qualified educational psychologists, but I get that this is very much the exception. It's weird like that even down south here at 56°N.

Re: Tesla on autopilot rear ends motorcycle on freeway, killing rider

#179

Post by Gordonjcp »

shepherdjerred wrote: post #163
Gordonjcp wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nope. Never. Are you sure you should be driving?

That's great for you!

And literally everyone else I know. Seriously, it's basic basic stuff. How the hell can you go the wrong way down a one-way street? Don't you have a driving licence?

Re: Tesla on autopilot rear ends motorcycle on freeway, killing rider

#180

Post by Karrot_Kream »

josephcsible wrote: post #176
Karrot_Kream wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No, invoking externalities as they exist and affect people around you. If your neighbors don't grow things and don't mind your building a high-rise then they will let you rezone. You're prioritizing existing neighbors and uses over new ones. You didn't mention that in your previous post. That's different. Now you're saying that buying property gives you implicit rights over light on your property. Does that mean if…

> Does that mean if flight traffic blocks the light on your property for a few minutes a day that it's not allowed? How many minutes is allowed? Even if you had a 24/7 stream of airplanes, as close together as the FAA allows them to fly, wouldn't that still only cast a shadow on your property for a miniscule fraction of the time?

Right so what's the amount? What guidelines are there? Can people fly drones over your property? You see what I'm getting at? Implicit rights associated with your property are at best implicit. When I walk outside I'm not entitled to good smelling air or having a bug-free sphere surrounding myself. Relying on these implicit rights is fraught in a zone with frequent conflict (aka neighbors or developers willing to build other things.) Either codify what property rights entail or don't reach for a right that you only dubiously have. We're seeing this play out throughout the US right now as people litigate to figure out what explicit property rights are actually granted.
Post reply on HN