Since ModelX incident I have made sure not to drive on first lane. I always drive on the 2nd lane and it is much better.
Where I live, that's not legal.
After 6 months of working fine, Tesla software update drives at barriers again
311–320 of 351 posts
Re: After 6 months of working fine, Tesla software update drives at barriers again
#312Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's because -in general- marketing material doesn't tell the whole truth, just the selected bit that sounds impressive.
Yeah and the auto dealer industry is notoriously deceptive too. Telsa told us they'd be different. Well they're not selling cars through dealers, that much is true, but it seems clear the deception is still in force.
That's probably very true but this isn't about the dealer as much as the manufacturer. When one says they have 4 crumple zones to absorb the energy of an impact and you later find out that the passengers were those crumple zones, someone goes to prison. When Tesla claims that their system is fully self driving at a level safer than a human driver they're doing the same. Because they know very well that system is just a glorified driver assist that can do any kind of driving only in the most narrow and perfect of conditions. Take it out of that narrow Autopilot "comfort zone" and you have plain old driver assist.
Re: After 6 months of working fine, Tesla software update drives at barriers again
#313Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wouldn't trust my life to proprietary software, because its makers' motives obviously don't align with my own. If my safety was really paramount, they'd open their software to scrutiny. It's unethical to leave life-and-death decisions to a black-box algorithm, when I know it was written for the primary purpose of gathering more money. Safety is a constraint, not their goal.
You already do that right now and basically have done it every day of your life. The power grid, railway, traffic lights, elevators, etc. all these systems are critical and closed source, and you don't see them killing people on a wide scale nor even on a small scale but regular basis.
Yep. Add the code which controls ABS and ESP in modern cars.
Re: After 6 months of working fine, Tesla software update drives at barriers again
#314Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't want to dismiss your whole point, because it is certainly valid, but that isn't really the issue here. It is entirely possible for bugs like this to exist in the self driving tech and for Tesla to be correct in their claims that Autopilot is on average safer than a human driver. It is obviously troubling to see self driving cars run into solid and stationary objects, but human drivers do that all the time too…
I think you're missing the forest for the trees. We're not even at the point where we're comparing safety rates. Can a Model Y drive through DC? Can it ignore traffic signals in favor of following hand signals from a uniformed traffic officer, or follow the directions of a construction worker having traffic in turns through a road that they've decided to turn into one lane? Can it deal with an unannounced presidentia…
Furthermore, the demarcation between what it can handle and what it cannot is neither simple nor clear. As this case shows, you can be bowling down the sort of highway it is supposedly suitable for, yet suddenly come across something it cannot deal with - and maybe something it did negotiate successfully in the past.
As long as Tesla says that driver vigilance is required at all times, while simultaneously promoting it as if it were true automation, the risk to third parties, from Tesla autopilot users who don't understand what's going on here, is unacceptable.
Re: After 6 months of working fine, Tesla software update drives at barriers again
#315Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't want to dismiss your whole point, because it is certainly valid, but that isn't really the issue here. It is entirely possible for bugs like this to exist in the self driving tech and for Tesla to be correct in their claims that Autopilot is on average safer than a human driver. It is obviously troubling to see self driving cars run into solid and stationary objects, but human drivers do that all the time too…
> It is obviously troubling to see self driving cars run into solid and stationary objects, but human drivers do that all the time too. The question shouldn't be whether this technology is perfect, it should be whether this technology is safer than humans. You and I certainly don't have enough data to say one way or another on that. I would bet even Tesla doesn't have enough data to say definitively. However writing…
The last time anyone tried to make that case statistically, it turned out to be bogus [1].
Bizarrely, this report was from the NHTSA, raising the sort of regulatory capture issues that have surfaced between Boeing and the FAA.
Also, when such a study is performed, we must be careful that technologies are not conflated to claim more than properly can be. The effectiveness of less powerful technologies such as lane-keeping assist and automatic emergency braking tells us nothing about the safety of full-authority automated driving.
[1] https://arstechnica.com/cars/2019/02/in-2017-the-feds-said-t...
Re: After 6 months of working fine, Tesla software update drives at barriers again
#316Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, it's still the issue. If there's a bug in the software code for a programmable pacemaker, it doesn't matter if the fundamental design is flawed. For governmental regulators, it's the actual implimentation and real world performance that matters. Sure, a bug fix for a routine being called is maybe easier to fix, but the real world performance is still the important metric to track.
Ok, but a lot of people are arguing something along the lines of "there is a bug in the pacemaker, let's take take out everyone's pacemakers". I am not saying we shouldn't be critical of Tesla or hold them accountable for their product. My point is simply that their product doesn't have to be infallible for it to still be an improvement over the current solution.
Another reason pacemakers are not comparable is that pacemakers do not present anything like the potential threat to third parties that self-driving cars do. Two reasons we can say that with confidence is that, with pacemakers, the scenarios are simpler and we have good statistical data.
Re: After 6 months of working fine, Tesla software update drives at barriers again
#317Earlier quoted context omitted.
They do have stereo cameras and sensor fusing, as well as detecting more than just the lines in the road. Here is what the camera sees: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rACZACXgreQ
What in that video suggests sensor and/or stereo fusion to you? I notice that the temporal coherence is pretty bad-- Pedestrians pop out of recognition when they go behind trees; lane/exit boundaries wiggle all over the place and occasionally frame-pop into different configurations. A kalman filter, for example, is a state estimator which maintains temporal coherence, and makes heavy use of previous estimates/sensor…
To be fair, it could be that this is what the camera segmentation does before it is combined with other sensors, and before it is used to update the word model (which then has temporal information)
Re: After 6 months of working fine, Tesla software update drives at barriers again
#318Earlier quoted context omitted.
If my anecdote is useful for anything, my car drives about 90% of my 25mi commute today on its own, including leaving one highway and going over a ramp to then merge into another highway. Needless to say that I’m extremely happy with what has been delivered so far.
I think a careful interpretation shows how far that is. A self-driving system ought not be considered reliable until it can drive O(100 million miles) without disconnecting once, in order to match human reliability (that's about the distance between fatal accidents currently). A guaranteed disconnect within 25 miles is many zeros of missing reliability. A Disney park engineer once relayed to me the philosophy for des…
I don't know many humans that drive 100 million miles without disconnecting. The disconnect thing is more analogous to pulling over to check the map for which 5000 miles might be ok.
Re: After 6 months of working fine, Tesla software update drives at barriers again
#319Earlier quoted context omitted.
> late 2020 for sleep while the car drives Musk is often overly optimistic and he keeps underestimating the problem at hand. I call BS on this, it won't be ready in 5 or even 10 years. And then there is a regulatory approval.
Indeed though he's delivered some stuff. It'll be interesting to see how it goes.
Though the 2017 LA to NYC drive is behind schedule. (https://www.theverge.com/2016/10/19/13341100/tesla-self-driv...)
Re: After 6 months of working fine, Tesla software update drives at barriers again
#320Earlier quoted context omitted.
Inside view not required, self-awareness of users should suffice to come to that conclusion (i.e. "I know nothing of the inner workings of this system, so my judgement has to be worse than that of the ones who designed it.").
Maybe you can tell Elon musk to be more self aware too. https://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-breaks-tesla-autop...
Someone should tell him, but maybe parent doesn't want to get fired?