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

Tesla’s Autopilot found partly to blame for 2018 crash on the 405

latimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 236 posts

Re: Tesla’s Autopilot found partly to blame for 2018 crash on the 405

#21

Post by olliej »

danhak wrote: post #12
vkou wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is the point of a self-driving system where you need to stay attentive behind the wheel? The physical act of turning a wheel isn't the hard part of driving. Paying attention is.

> The physical act of turning a wheel isn't the hard part of driving. Paying attention is. As an avid user of Tesla Autopilot I'll disagree with this. On a long road trip, monitoring my surroundings and making sure everything is generally ok is far less fatiguing than making constant microadjustments to steering, speed and following distance. Even while paying close attention to the ride, long trips (especially in st…

This isn’t a matter of whether you think you’re paying attention.

It’s whether you actually are - and that’s very different from what you perceive. For example i would be curious to see how eye movement of regular autopilot users differs when they are using autopilot vs when they aren’t.

Based on all prior studies of attentiveness I suspect you’d find dramatic reduction in active scanning, etc.

Part of the reason for the many curves in I280 in the sf peninsula was apparently to ensure drivers had to actually do something while driving. I’m tempted to investigate whether that’s a myth or fact, but the nature of the internet means I’ll probably just find that i280 gave me cancer :)

Re: Tesla’s Autopilot found partly to blame for 2018 crash on the 405

#23

Post by olliej »

kazinator wrote: post #16

> The vehicle’s design “permitted the driver to disengage from the driving task” Which vehicle's design does not permit a driver to disengage from the driving task?

Autopilot. By design it encourages drivers to stop paying any attention - the fact that it has a “signal the driver” to try and maintain driver focus indicates that the core design produces this behavior.

If the core design produces the same behavior, in a large enough portion of the user base to require such a feature, that’s a fairly good indication that the core design is causing a problem.

Re: Tesla’s Autopilot found partly to blame for 2018 crash on the 405

#24

Post by kemitche »

macintux wrote: post #15
diminoten wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is certainly okay when the rates at which these things happen is lower than the rates at which non-self driving cars have accidents. A 0% accident rate is unrealistic and unfair.

Statistics makes for a tough sell to the survivors. “Yes, this autonomous vehicle killed your son who just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, but someone else’s son would have died in an unrelated accident somewhere else were it not for autonomy.”

Assume for a moment that vaccines could actually cause autism at a small rate.

Your argument applies there. "Yes your son became autistic, but someone else's son somewhere else didn't get measles and die."

I understand there are human emotions involved, but my opinion is that significantly reducing death count is still a better outcome. If we can't accept that noticeably better systems will still have faults, and that those faults will result in a different, but smaller number of deaths, then we're content asking for more deaths than necessary.

Re: Tesla’s Autopilot found partly to blame for 2018 crash on the 405

#25

Post by AndrewBissell »

diminoten wrote: post #8
c3534l wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The best way to stay attentive behind the wheel is to actually be the one driving. There's virtually no way of being both attentive and passive for long periods of time. If a driver can't check their email or whatever on their phone while autopilot is on, then autopilot is not safe to put in cars. And while I'm okay with not-exactly-safe for most things people willingly consume or use, driving is not an area where it…

It is certainly okay when the rates at which these things happen is lower than the rates at which non-self driving cars have accidents. A 0% accident rate is unrealistic and unfair.

> It is certainly okay when the rates at which these things happen is lower than the rates at which non-self driving cars have accidents.

Eh, Tesla likes to point to this statistic every time the safety of Autopilot comes into question, but it is an apples-to-oranges comparison because AP is only used on highways where traffic incidents are already far less common per mile driven.

Detailed data is hard to come by, but more nuanced studies have been far from conclusive in favor of the "Autopilot is safer than human drivers" thesis.

Re: Tesla’s Autopilot found partly to blame for 2018 crash on the 405

#26

Post by kazinator »

olliej wrote: post #23
kazinator wrote: post #16

> The vehicle’s design “permitted the driver to disengage from the driving task” Which vehicle's design does not permit a driver to disengage from the driving task?

Autopilot. By design it encourages drivers to stop paying any attention - the fact that it has a “signal the driver” to try and maintain driver focus indicates that the core design produces this behavior. If the core design produces the same behavior, in a large enough portion of the user base to require such a feature, that’s a fairly good indication that the core design is causing a problem.

Every car has a measure of "autopilot" called "wheel alignment".

The car was built before Alta Vista was eaten by Google, yet goes dead straight on the freeway while you rummage through the glove compartment for your second favorite CD.

Maybe cars should have wacky alignment that pulls randomly left and right; that would teach drivers to keep their hands on the wheel and pay attention at all times.

Re: Tesla’s Autopilot found partly to blame for 2018 crash on the 405

#27

Post by TheSpiceIsLife »

dreamcompiler wrote: post #9

Fire truck driver here: People crash into parked fire trucks and ambulances and cop cars all the damn time . That's why we park the Big Red Truck at an angle behind the accident -- so that when the 2-ton car crashes into the 30-ton truck, the car will bounce off and the people behind the truck (us) won't be injured. I don't disagree that Tesla's software is partly to blame here, but the null experiment also has a lou…

This one time I go stopped at a fruit fly control point on the border between South Australia and Victoria, near Bordertown.

The person staffing the control point indicated with hand signals for me to stop on the highway in the lane I was in.

So I slowed down to walking speed and pulled off the highway into the car park next to the office.

The agent then lectured me about not following instructions and that she could fine me for disobeying.

I then calmly explained to the agent the reason I didn't stop in the lane on the highway: drivers of cars and heavy vehicles are known to have a terrible habit of not seeing other vehicles stopped on the road.

Re: Tesla’s Autopilot found partly to blame for 2018 crash on the 405

#28

Post by ipython »

kemitche wrote: post #24
macintux wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Statistics makes for a tough sell to the survivors. “Yes, this autonomous vehicle killed your son who just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, but someone else’s son would have died in an unrelated accident somewhere else were it not for autonomy.”

Assume for a moment that vaccines could actually cause autism at a small rate. Your argument applies there. "Yes your son became autistic, but someone else's son somewhere else didn't get measles and die." I understand there are human emotions involved, but my opinion is that significantly reducing death count is still a better outcome. If we can't accept that noticeably better systems will still have faults, and tha…

You don’t need to assume. With any medical procedure, there is risk involved. Including routine vaccination. That’s why there is a dedicated program to both report and compensate people who suffer adverse reactions from vaccines. See https://www.hrsa.gov/vaccine-compensation/index.html

Re: Tesla’s Autopilot found partly to blame for 2018 crash on the 405

#29

Post by chrisseaton »

olliej wrote: post #23
kazinator wrote: post #16

> The vehicle’s design “permitted the driver to disengage from the driving task” Which vehicle's design does not permit a driver to disengage from the driving task?

Autopilot. By design it encourages drivers to stop paying any attention - the fact that it has a “signal the driver” to try and maintain driver focus indicates that the core design produces this behavior. If the core design produces the same behavior, in a large enough portion of the user base to require such a feature, that’s a fairly good indication that the core design is causing a problem.

So are you saying Autopilot does or doesn’t allow you to disengage?

Because you said it didn’t then argued it did...

Re: Tesla’s Autopilot found partly to blame for 2018 crash on the 405

#30

Post by chrisseaton »

c3534l wrote: post #7
Confusedcius wrote: post #2

The driver was found using his phone, over-relied on the autopilot system, and lied about what he was doing when being questioned. Sadly, we can't 100% trust these automated driving systems yet so folks need to stay attentive behind the wheel. The more accidents like this will cause lawmakers to create laws that can potentially slow down automated driving development.

The best way to stay attentive behind the wheel is to actually be the one driving. There's virtually no way of being both attentive and passive for long periods of time. If a driver can't check their email or whatever on their phone while autopilot is on, then autopilot is not safe to put in cars. And while I'm okay with not-exactly-safe for most things people willingly consume or use, driving is not an area where it…

> There's virtually no way of being both attentive and passive for long periods of time.

How do aircraft pilots manage it?

Post reply on HN