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

281–290 of 714 posts

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

#281

Post by Guthur »

doctorwho42 wrote: post #270
a_bonobo wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

It's really quite amazing how similar things are today, to 200 years ago. I've been reading some philosophical literature from 19th century and if just change a few key words you'd imagine it was written today.

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

#282

Post by dantheman »

doctorwho42 wrote: post #264
robflynn wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Europe has cars and highways.

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

#283

Post by smileysteve »

ClumsyPilot wrote: post #110
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…

> In the short term I could see Tesla not supporting the driver and absolving themselves via fine line/TOS, etc Imagine there is an 'autopilot' gun, you buy it, and it comes with the contract that says you take full responsibility got the gun. Then it shoots me and kills me before you have a chance to react. The prosecutor will go after the manufacturer. If manufacturer wrote code that kills me, you and any contract…

Unless there is precedent and tort "reform" by the given lobby.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protection_of_Lawful_Commerc...

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

#284

Post by darknavi »

nanidin wrote: post #76
judge2020 wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

another angle: https://twitter.com/kenklippenstein/status/16128488720611287... The driver was on I-80. Unless this is a Tesla employee, Tesla FSD is not enabled on interstate highways at this time; when you're on a major no-stops no-traffic-light highway, it defaults to Autosteer+TACC, with his subscription likely only enabling the auto-lane-change feature. All this means is that the likely culprits are either TACC s…

FSD vs navigate on autopilot is a pretty small technical detail on the highway. Once you turn on FSD beta, from the driver's perspective FSD and autopilot are the same thing - turned on with the same input (double tap on the right stalk), with the same stuff shown on the display. Navigate on autopilot can change lanes on the highway and follow highway exits without user intervention. IMO when someone says they're usi…

> turned on with the same input (double tap on the right stalk), with the same stuff shown on the display.

Small nit but this isn't true. FSD will show the newer, much more detailed preview. When switching to highway mode it will revert to the old, plane grey lines preview.

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

#286

Post by modeless »

TheCleric wrote: post #265
modeless wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

Yes, FSD is essentially a complete rewrite of Autopilot which will soon replace it for freeway driving too. Autopilot has been available for many years and FSD is new. This accident could have happened years ago and is not evidence of any issue with the new FSD stuff.

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

#287

Post by Johnny555 »

DangitBobby wrote: post #251
mypalmike wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some percentage of people (probably well into double digits) don't know about the up and down speed adjustment buttons.

I do. They aren't responsive enough and the people in front of me aren't maintaining a consistent speed, so I just switch back to the pedal unless I'm pretty much by myself. I rented a car with adaptive cruise control and really loved it.

In my case, the car without ACC is an RV and since driving it is like trying to push a small house through the air, it responds pretty quickly to speed reductions. Plus I tend to keep a pretty long distance from the car in front of me, so I have more time to respond. I like to pick a truck to pace behind since a lot of people don't want to get stuck behind a truck so they don't pass me then pull in behind the truck, even with 5 or 10 seconds of following distance. Another advantage of pacing a truck is that they usually keep a pretty steady speed unless they are going up a hill, but then on the hill I can usually find a truck that's light enough to keep a pretty steady speed uphill.

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

#288

Post by darknavi »

threeseed wrote: post #60
Sophistifunk wrote: post #11

This is a bug in the meat, and is not going away. The problems are well understood, thanks to decades of examples in semi-automated trains, boats, airplanes, and industrial monitoring systems. Until "self driving" is good enough that you're legally allowed to ride it drunk, it should not be allowed to do anything more complicated than radar cruise and lane-keeping.

This is a bug in Tesla's specific meat. Other self driving implementations e.g. Cruise, Waymo have LiDAR which is an additional and in my opinion necessary sensor for detecting objects. Because in this case it sure looks like a phantom breaking issue.

Is it really a Tesla specific issue? Tesla's definitely phantom brake quite a bit, but it seems like many automated cruise control implementations do this today.

https://www.motorsafety.org/us-government-investigates-1-7-m...

https://www.macheforum.com/site/threads/phantom-braking-expe...

https://www.chevybolt.org/threads/ok-lets-talk-phantom-braki...

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

#289

Post by darknavi »

pensatoio wrote: post #173
whatever1 wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well it’s the only company that charges 20k for “full self driving capability”

Since it's a highway, the car would have been operating on autopilot, not FSD. The two stacks had not, and I think still have not been merged.

In fact all Tesla's sold today come with basic lane keeping (but not auto change lane).

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

#290

Post by sokoloff »

smileysteve wrote: post #276
sokoloff wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a matter of pragmatism, the person intentionally putting other drivers at unnecessary risk by being an asshole should bear the responsibility for the outcomes of that intentional and unnecessary risk they elected to subject roadway users to.

our auto laws are founded from a time when catastrophic failure happened much more often. If a suspension bushing randomly disconnects, or a wheel hub disintegrates, or a differential grenades, who is the asshole? That's right, it's the person following too closely

No blame for the person driving unsafe equipment on a public highway?
Post reply on HN