New video of Tesla crash demonstrates the problem of semi-automated driving • Hacker News Board

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

#291

Post by bambax » Thu, Jan 12, 2023, 6:05 AM UTC

> You can’t program your way out of the problem with Level 2; in fact, the better the Level 2 system seems to be, the worse the problem gets. That problem is that human beings are simply no good at monitoring systems that do most of the work of a task and remaining ready to take over that task with minimal to no warning.

This is incredibly true and obvious.

It's likely people monitoring their car aren't doing anything at all: sleeping, reading a book, whatever.

But if anything, actual monitoring is harder than doing: it means actively watching what the machine does, understanding it, thinking about what one would have done, doing a diff and analyzing it, all in real time, all the time. It's exhausting.

That a situation like this is even legal is amazing.

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

#292

Post by stkdump » Thu, Jan 12, 2023, 6:06 AM UTC

MBCook wrote: post #117

epivosism wrote: post #35

The question that is never answered in this kind of story is: 1. How many fatalities per mile does tesla FSD have, compared to its best alternative if we ban it? 2. Focusing on specific failure cases is not relevant since the political decision to allow it is all or nothing. 3. It'd be perfectly logical to accept road testing FSD, even if it's significantly worse in some areas, as long as this is not exploitable, AND…

So if an automaker can make a system that is capable of handling any driving task safely but occasionally ran itself off the road on purpose for no reason, as long as it’s a net positive in lives saved it should be allowed? I don’t agree with that assessment. It needs to make fewer mistakes than humans at all times , not just most of the time. Great with a disaster here and there is terrible.

I heard an interesting philosophical discussion many years back, where it was stated that we are morally obligated to outlaw non-self-driving cars as soon as it is proven that self-driving cars kill fewer people. It is not so easy to argue against that, because if you do, you rate your own right to choose higher than another persons right to live.

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

#293

Post by DesiLurker » Thu, Jan 12, 2023, 6:07 AM UTC

Just ignore the name Tesla and think for a minute how would you feel if this were any Japanese or Korean automaker's car. would NHTSA be still as forgiving? we should feel exactly the same as in that case.

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

#294

Post by klyrs » Thu, Jan 12, 2023, 6:09 AM UTC

abduhl wrote: post #182

scotty79 wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

How convenient for Tesla. I doubt we would think this way if your wheel flew off your civic because of a design flaw in the axle.

That's because we'd fully expect them to recall the effected models and fix the design flaw. Since Tesla knows about erratic lane-changes and phantom braking, and has for years, why haven't they recalled the vehicles and fixed the design flaw or at least disabled the feature?

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

#295

Post by DesiLurker » Thu, Jan 12, 2023, 6:09 AM UTC

kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #122

Hopefully Tesla will be paying out 7 digit settlements for their grossly negligent behavior in exposing the public to this broken technology.

whatever they pay they'll likely do out of court settlement and make people sign a NDA, they do this for simple repairs you can bet it would be the case for more serious offenses.

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

#296

Post by ckolkey » Thu, Jan 12, 2023, 6:11 AM UTC

dantheman wrote: post #282

doctorwho42 wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Sure, we do, but taking the train into copenhagen for work is a far better option for most here. Thing is, when you invest in rails instead of parking, you change the math more than "europe has cars and highways" could describe.

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

#297

Post by sangnoir » Thu, Jan 12, 2023, 6:11 AM UTC

throwaway892238 wrote: post #200

I'm still waiting for autonomous-only lanes. For extremely long and boring highways (usually full of trucks), this just seems like the logical conclusion of all self-driving tech to me. Dedicate one lane to self-driving, have the vehicles all on autonomous mode, and have them keep enough distance so their braking performance prevents them from crashing in an unexpected stop. You should be able to literally just sleep…

> I'm still waiting for autonomous-only lanes.

Lanes are really expensive, it's unreasobable to have an autonomous-only lane, so a shared lane is base. I propose that vehicles in autonomous node be restricted to the slow(est) lane, where it's safer to come to a sudden stop, and the driver, manufacturer and insurer have to contend with the probability of being flattened by an 18-wheeler.

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

#298

Post by adwn » Thu, Jan 12, 2023, 6:12 AM UTC

axelfontaine wrote: post #205

throwaway892238 wrote: post #200

I'm still waiting for autonomous-only lanes. For extremely long and boring highways (usually full of trucks), this just seems like the logical conclusion of all self-driving tech to me. Dedicate one lane to self-driving, have the vehicles all on autonomous mode, and have them keep enough distance so their braking performance prevents them from crashing in an unexpected stop. You should be able to literally just sleep…

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

Can a train pick me up directly at my home, and drop me off at pretty much any destination, with more luggage than I can carry at once, at any time of the day, at the exact moment I want to leave? No? Then trains are an alternative to self-driving cars, not a replacement.

Public transport is great, but you aren't going to convince others to support it by pretending it doesn't have any drawbacks compared to private transport.

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

#299

Post by quink » Thu, Jan 12, 2023, 6:12 AM UTC

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.

> Trains are also not owned by individuals.

Planes aren't either, what's your point? That people who need to go somewhere should be priced out of using _public_ infrastructure and require a personal investment currently in the tens of thousands for the cheapest autonomous cars?

> Most people do not have a train station outside of their house.

People have feet or a wheelchair, bicycles are a thing, trams and buses exist have you ever even been outside of suburbia?

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

#300

Post by TylerE » Thu, Jan 12, 2023, 6:15 AM UTC

doctorwho42 wrote: post #267

shepherdjerred wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 batt…

The nearest thing that might be described as “highway” is 20 miles from my house. It’s the last (few dozen) mile problem passenger trains in the US have always faced for everyone who doesn’t live in the Northeast or SoCal.

Guess where the two passenger lines that come even vaguely to profitability are?

The population of the US is very coastal, which doesn’t map well to a hub and spoke system like rail. Contrast with Western Europe where A -> Paris/Berlin -> B is probably reasonably close to a straight line.