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

Introducing Navigate on Autopilot

tesla.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 56 posts

Re: Introducing Navigate on Autopilot

#31

Post by FPGAhacker »

Gys wrote: post #3

> While initially the feature will require drivers to confirm lane changes [...], future versions of Navigate on Autopilot will allow customers to waive the confirmation requirement if they choose to. So at least technology wise my dream becomes true: a car that takes care of the biggest and most boring part of long drives, the highways. Hopefully legislation will follow soon...

You don't think your drive will become even more boring when your car is "doing everything" but you are required to "pay attention and be ready to take over at all times?"

I'd agree if you could trust it and didn't have to be actively involved in watching your car drive for you. Sounds pretty boring as is though. Sleep inducing.

It'd be like having a normally very reliable chauffeur that would occasionally get horribly confused and do something very wrong, and you had to watch their every move, most of which are perfect, for the remote chance of terrible confusion and be ready to grab the wheel.

Re: Introducing Navigate on Autopilot

#32

Post by stephengillie »

nathantotten wrote: post #10
amluto wrote: post #8

> Navigate on Autopilot can be customized to a driver’s preferences, including four settings for speed-based lane changes (Disabled, Mild, Average, or Mad Max). Mad Max is definitely a feature I want self-driving cars to have.

No kidding. This does not inspire confidence. v9 already does weird things like show stopped cars bouncing around randomly. This kind of thing along with crazy branding really makes it feel unsafe. It’s one thing that the stereo goes to 11, that’s funny. But I’m not going to die if the stereo has a bug.

The stereo only goes to 11? The stereo in my previous car went to 60.

What's with all the pop culture references in this car? Is this the Ready Tesla One trim package?

Re: Introducing Navigate on Autopilot

#33

Post by RayVR »

wffurr wrote: post #14
RayVR wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In what way are they “objectively substantially more lethal?”

Double the deaths per VMT. https://www.newsweek.com/2014/04/04/you-drive-american-24806...

I think attributing that to the design of the roads is kinda silly. We have very low standards when it comes to acquiring a license to operate a vehicle.

Re: Introducing Navigate on Autopilot

#34

Post by userbinator »

shiftpgdn wrote: post #21
aerovistae wrote: post #11

I'd be more impressed by this if they had fixed the problem where the car crashes into barriers at lane divergences. Kind of a turn-off to the whole thing until that's fixed, to be honest. Frankly I don't understand how the company hasn't been buried in lawsuits for this. https://www.reddit.com/r/teslamotors/comments/9pkvy0/psa_v9_...

Maybe the state should take responsibility and realize that poorly maintained and marked roads lead to accidents that cause injury, including death. The Model X that hit the barriers in the Bay Area would not have happened if A. Lane marker painting had been kept under maintenance. They were mostly missing. B. The crash barrier had been in place, instead it was missing from an earlier crash. The missing arresting sys…

It also would not have happened if a human was driving.

Re: Introducing Navigate on Autopilot

#35

Post by omarforgotpwd »

amluto wrote: post #8

> Navigate on Autopilot can be customized to a driver’s preferences, including four settings for speed-based lane changes (Disabled, Mild, Average, or Mad Max). Mad Max is definitely a feature I want self-driving cars to have.

Thoughtless criticism like this, even as a joke, is what will prevent us from getting any self driving cars.

There are three modes for how aggressive to be with lane changes. A least aggressive mode, a most aggressive mode, and a middle setting. You can also turn it off completely.

Naming the highest setting Mad Max mode doesn't make that setting more dangerous -- it makes the average car less aggressive by discouraging people from selecting that option. Contrast that with if they called the options "drive super slow", "drive slow" and "normal" without changing the behavior of each setting.

Re: Introducing Navigate on Autopilot

#36

Post by omarforgotpwd »

FPGAhacker wrote: post #31
Gys wrote: post #3

> While initially the feature will require drivers to confirm lane changes [...], future versions of Navigate on Autopilot will allow customers to waive the confirmation requirement if they choose to. So at least technology wise my dream becomes true: a car that takes care of the biggest and most boring part of long drives, the highways. Hopefully legislation will follow soon...

You don't think your drive will become even more boring when your car is "doing everything" but you are required to "pay attention and be ready to take over at all times?" I'd agree if you could trust it and didn't have to be actively involved in watching your car drive for you. Sounds pretty boring as is though. Sleep inducing. It'd be like having a normally very reliable chauffeur that would occasionally get horrib…

No, it doesn't get more boring. It is very relaxing and leads to less stress. I use it almost every day, including driving from LA to San Francisco on Friday.

Re: Introducing Navigate on Autopilot

#37

Post by sowbug »

userbinator wrote: post #34
shiftpgdn wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe the state should take responsibility and realize that poorly maintained and marked roads lead to accidents that cause injury, including death. The Model X that hit the barriers in the Bay Area would not have happened if A. Lane marker painting had been kept under maintenance. They were mostly missing. B. The crash barrier had been in place, instead it was missing from an earlier crash. The missing arresting sys…

It also would not have happened if a human was driving.

Do you mean except for the crash barrier that the earlier crash destroyed?

Re: Introducing Navigate on Autopilot

#38

Post by omarforgotpwd »

y0ghur7_xxx wrote: post #16

> In both of these scenarios, until truly driverless cars are validated and approved by regulators, drivers are responsible for and must remain in control of their car at all times. This makes it sound like it's just a problem with evil legislators not making it legal for Tesla drivers to drive without paying attention. Is this the case?

It doesn't sound like that to me. It sounds like they are saying that this is NOT a driverless car and you need to pay attention. However, it is a little bit misleading in that this is all Tesla's software can do right now. Even if the regulatory framework was in place, they couldn't just enable it instantly. They have a lot of dev / testing work to do before that happens. But they do have stuff working in the lab that is more capable than what they've released publicly.

Re: Introducing Navigate on Autopilot

#39

Post by [deleted] »

dkoston wrote: post #26
rohit2412 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> All self driving cars and driver assistance tools will be imperfect. The question is whether or not they are statistically safer than the average human I disagree. If you're arguiung for driverless cars, the comparison should be with the average driver aided by a driver assistance system.

I don’t understand what you disagree with. I’m not arguing for or against driverless cars. I’m saying that our basis right now is whether or not driver assistance systems are making driving safer or less safe. Driverless cars are currently only used in specific areas under tight regulation. They are not generally available and this article is about Teslas which are not self-driving, they have driver assistance featur…

[deleted]

Re: Introducing Navigate on Autopilot

#40

Post by rohit2412 »

dkoston wrote: post #26
rohit2412 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> All self driving cars and driver assistance tools will be imperfect. The question is whether or not they are statistically safer than the average human I disagree. If you're arguiung for driverless cars, the comparison should be with the average driver aided by a driver assistance system.

I don’t understand what you disagree with. I’m not arguing for or against driverless cars. I’m saying that our basis right now is whether or not driver assistance systems are making driving safer or less safe. Driverless cars are currently only used in specific areas under tight regulation. They are not generally available and this article is about Teslas which are not self-driving, they have driver assistance featur…

Sure then I agree with you.

I want to make clear the difference between driverless and autonomous/self-driving/assistance. The difference is frequently muddled by Tesla and Elon musk with false marketing.

Post reply on HN