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

261–270 of 714 posts

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

#261

Post by somethoughts »

toast0 wrote: post #240
somethoughts wrote: post #65

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. [Edit] From the video the Tesla is making a lane change and stopping simultaneously which means there could be a case of the Tesla FSD/driver doing a unsafe lane change.[1] Most of the time FSD just wrecks the Tesla itself or injures the driver of the Tesla (i.e. running int…

> It will be interesting if Tesla comes in to provide monetary support for proving the legal case that Tesla FSD is not at fault or the Tesla driver (and his insurance) will be left to fend for themselves. > In the short term I could see Tesla not supporting the driver and absolving themselves via fine line/TOS, etc. > But the long term effects of not legally supporting any driver with Tesla FSD accidents will be tha…

Agreed. It seems like a great short term strategy to get out of trouble quickly but long term it doesn't seem smart to use the most ardent Tesla evangelists who are literally willing to put their lives on the line as scapegoats.

It seems the take rate of FSD for new Tesla purchases is not as high as it used to be - perhaps due to the increase in price and other Autopilot-FSD bundling/unbundling aspects - but also perhaps due to negative press from the accidents thus far. [1] Definitely something to watch as/if the accident incidents accumulate.

[1] https://twitter.com/troyteslike/status/1586356451639189504?

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

#262

Post by toast0 »

komali2 wrote: post #34
MBCook wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s very useful on long drives since you don’t have to constantly adjust your speed by little bits (manually or adjusting the cruise control setting). Takes a moment to moment mental load off so you can focus on the other cars around you better. If the cars ahead of me are slowing down significantly I disengage and go manual until I have a better idea what’s going on. My car can supposedly stop completely that way.…

I wonder why this is preferable to just taking the train for longer trips? Wouldn't it be nicer to sit back and let someone else do all the driving for however many hundred of you are all going to the same place anyway? Once you get past the long part of the trip you could always rent a car if it's rural or whatever.

The train would be nice if it was a reasonable alternative, but in the US outside of very specific trips, it's usually at least twice the travel time as a car, door to door, with two drivers and maybe 10-12 hours of daily driving.

And then you've still got to manage ground transportation from wherever the train station is to wherever you want to go.

It's great if you're a container though.

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

#263

Post by nlowell »

barbazoo wrote: post #155
katbyte wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> . The Tesla indicated for a very long time 3 seconds is a very long time? Also: 3 seconds of turn signal is a clear indication of "i am going to change lanes and fully come to a stop"? And then turning off all signals and coming to a full stop without hazards on is a clear indication of "i am stopping"?

Indicating to change lanes and changing lanes should have been enough for the traffic behind to slow down and create a safe distance between each other. People just drove too close to each other.

I wouldn't expect any normal car to behave like this, but the drivers following should have recognized it was a Tesla

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

#264

Post by doctorwho42 »

robflynn wrote: post #256
Gustomaximus wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't as trains don't have the convenience of your own car where the stops are. If you had a train you could drive your car onto it would be more equivalent. Also train lines have far less coverage than highways.

Not to mention, with a car you get to decide your own schedule. If I want to take the train where I am, I have to be there at 4:30am or... well, that's it. That's the only time.

Poor argument for underfunded and purposefully stymied train development in the early to mid 20th century.

Just look to Europe for what a large swath of the US could have if it invested in train infrastructure.

Train good, car bad.

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

#265

Post by TheCleric »

modeless wrote: post #241
paulryanrogers wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When responsible for overseeing a multi-ton vehicle, I like to know how it will behave. Cruise control and lane assist I understand. I need to know which one is in control and how it will behave if they can respond differently.

There is no difference in behavior when switching from FSD to Autopilot or vice versa. And there is never any ambiguity about which is active because it is completely determined by road type which you're obviously aware of while driving.

Then, other than pedantry, is their a meaningful difference?

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

#266

Post by vkou »

shepherdjerred wrote: post #255
sfmike wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Makes sense. We have HOV lanes which reward for being good for the environment. Even better is an autonomous lane that rewards not adding latency to the prisoners dilemna, seems the ultimate altruistic move, someone wanting to not impede or slow others.

Isn't the primary motivation of HOV lanes to reduce traffic, not help the environment?

It's both. Single-person EVs could use HOV lanes in some locales until they've reached proliferation numbers.

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

#267

Post by doctorwho42 »

shepherdjerred wrote: post #253
axelfontaine wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We have this technology today. It's called trains.

Trains aren't really comparable to autonomous lanes. An autonomous car can travel on both normal roads, and in an autonomous lane. Roads are everywhere -- there's a road leading up to most people's place of residence. Trains rely on tracks which are not as common as roads. Trains are also not owned by individuals. Most people do not have a train station outside of their house.

Perhaps we could dedicate the right most lane on every highway to becoming a train line instead of an autonomous vehicle lane?

A train can move more tonnage (see people) per unit of energy (kWhr/gallon of diesel/etc.) Than almost any other mode of transportation (gosh darn sailboats and barges being so efficient!) .

So why have 100's of electric motors and separate batteries to move people, when you can skip the batteries and have an electrified third rail and just an engine or two running a train for those hundreds of people.

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

#268

Post by Faark »

scotty79 wrote: post #181
abduhl wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tesla’s FSD/autopilot does not act with intention as we understand it.

No intention, no fault. But definitely unsafe lane change, I think.

I agree with your original example ("good reason => OK", "bad reason => BAD"). But for the in-between we should default to "not OK" as well, since stopping on a highway is just dangerous.

But damn, I really have little sympathy for all the inattentive drivers not being able to stop in time for the pileup (and hope damages have to be payed accordingly). Maybe, Tesla FSD does not make the streets more dangerous than they already are, after all.

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

#269

Post by rblatz »

somethoughts wrote: post #239
modeless wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wrong. You can plainly see in the video (and the hundreds of others) that as soon as the car enters the freeway it switches to Autopilot automatically. The easiest way to tell is the red lines in the FSD visualization disappear when it switches to Autopilot. The transition is completely smooth and the driver doesn't have to know or care at all, so it's not surprising that they were mistaken. But it's relevant here be…

My take is that you are probably right in that it is pretty easy for Tesla to place all the blame on the driver of the Tesla and weasel out of any legally required support for the driver via TOS fine legal print in the short term. But after the 10th (or maybe 100th) scenario where Tesla FSD is at fault but Tesla scapegoats responsibility onto the driver who is branded by Tesla's legal team as a dumb/irresponsible/clu…

It’s too late, the Tesla fanboy subreddit has been on the FSD hate train for a while now. I’m shocked at how bad autopilot is on my Tesla, my wife’s 2018 Honda CR-V has better “autopilot” in the form of lane keep assist and adaptive cruise control, it can drive the car just like the tesla, but it’s less finicky and operates much closer to the way the writer describes a better level 2 system that monitors you instead of you monitoring it.

The tesla demands you pay attention and drive but penalizes you by disengaging if you so much as try to take a slightly different line around a curve. Meanwhile the Honda just bides it’s time until you let go and seamlessly takes control keeping you in the middle of the lane.

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

#270

Post by doctorwho42 »

a_bonobo wrote: post #248
Eisenstein wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All of Elon Musk's grand ideas for revolutionizing terrestrial transportation (that aren't laughably unworkable like miles long vacuum enclosures) are just 'trains but much smaller and with tires so that we lose all efficiencies and gain all of the drawbacks'. So this fits perfectly.

The difference to trains in Musk (and Silicon Valley's overall view) is that with automated cars, you don't have to share your personal space with other people (the poors!). It's easy to make fun of the overall project but there's elitism behind it - have your private space at the cost of the public.

Well it's fun to make fun of Mr. Musk (and his fake physics credentials) for more or less copying a 100 year old idea and design, and making it flashy again.

Yes the hyperloop is just a rebranded vacuum train/atmospheric railway... Patented in 1799 in London... Yup... Let that sink in.

Post reply on HN