Tesla Autopilot • Hacker News Board

Re: Tesla Autopilot

#341

Post by slededit » Mon, Jun 19, 2017, 11:14 PM UTC

prostoalex wrote: post #126

ljf wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the USA are there not rules about which lanes you use? Various dash cam videos from the US seem to show drivers choosing any lane, though I could viewing then wrong. In the UK you use the outside lane if you are a slower vehicle and use the inside lane(s) as overtaking lanes, with the inside for the fastest speeds (within the limit) . If you are using one of the inside lane and are travelling slower that traffic i…

The dash cam videos would be correct, outside of high-occupancy lane (2+ people) there are no lane speed restrictions, and if someone feels like getting into the left-most lane and driving 5 miles below the speed limit, they most certainly act on that impulse. As you can imagine, anybody intending to use the left-most lane for high-speed driving is now forced to use the brakes, execute a [rarely safe] lane merge to t…

> The dash cam videos would be correct, outside of high-occupancy lane (2+ people) there are no lane speed restrictions, and if someone feels like getting into the left-most lane and driving 5 miles below the speed limit, they most certainly act on that impulse.

Depending on state there are laws about using left lanes only for passing, which implies you must be travelling faster than the lane to your right. Those laws are rarely enforced though.

Re: Tesla Autopilot

#342

Post by dzhiurgis » Mon, Jun 19, 2017, 11:51 PM UTC

Reason077 wrote: post #339

dzhiurgis wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We need transmitters in licence plates and on street signs too.

Why? So they can be "seen" through rain, fog and snow? Reading road signs optically is a solved problem. Mobileye and similar systems have been doing this for a decade or more.

Well you answered your question.

Further, it would help learning in limited visibility, although they can already do it by remembering locations of signs (people do that, do autonomous cars store city/state/worldwide road data?)

Re: Tesla Autopilot

#343

Post by amatus » Tue, Jun 20, 2017, 7:22 PM UTC

bubblethink wrote: post #211

boramalper wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's hope for someone to initiate GNU/Tesla hehe.

Unfortunately, such a thing will never exist, at least in a road legal sense. No government is going to approve it if it can be modified by the user. At best, you can have "look but don't touch" kind of open backed by some company if it has to be road legal. We aren't even fully over wifi router firmware yet.

Are we heading toward a future where it's illegal to drive your car on the road if you have modified its software?

Re: Tesla Autopilot

#344

Post by grkvlt » Wed, Jun 21, 2017, 12:57 AM UTC

bubblethink wrote: post #335

grkvlt wrote: post #323

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It sort of does hold for current cars. Generally a driver (in most cases, a human) must obtain a further license or some form of government permission/authorization to drive a vehicle for commercial purposes like a taxi or other passenger carrying service. This seems to be simply pointing out that the same restriction will apply to the software-based driver in a Tesla...?

There is no legislation about ride sharing/taxi with self driving cars. So whether or not an extra authorization is needed by the owner of the car is a different issue. Here Tesla is asking you to not engage in ride sharing unless Tesla gets a cut. i.e., Even if the government and insurance companies allow you to do so, Tesla won't unless you hand over your cut to them. Is there more to it than that ? Tesla is gettin…

Because Tesla is assuming responsibility (that is, guaranteeing fitness for purpose, and all the ramifications that come with that) for the car being able to drive you under the same circumstances as any other private person driving. They would be taking on much more (legal, insurance, etc.) risk if they were to allow the car to drive as a passenger carrying, fare accepting, commercial entity, therefore it seems fair that they require you to use their managed system to (I assume) mitigate and/or manage that risk. I would guess that it would also be possible, eventually, to license the autopilot software for your own arbitrary commercial use.

Re: Tesla Autopilot

#345

Post by bubblethink » Wed, Jun 21, 2017, 5:41 AM UTC

djloche wrote: post #340

bubblethink wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>what happens when there is no driver? well, my guess is that TSLA the manufacturer of the auto-driving software is going to be liable in place of the driver, and as such, they have every right to say, nope, no using our auto-pilot for commercial activity unless it is on our own network Why does this argument hold true only for self-driving cars, and not current cars ? As such, self-driving cars are just a point in c…

The line is "software provided by the manufacturer is driving" vs "person is driving". When you cede control of the steering, braking, acceleration, and even watching the road to software, you are no longer driving.

This has been happening slowly in a lot of areas already. We went from manual transmission to automatic transmission without much fanfare. Even with the current self-driving trend, it is happening pretty slowly with various assisted technologies. I doubt things will change overnight.

Re: Tesla Autopilot

#346

Post by beaconstudios » Wed, Jun 21, 2017, 10:37 AM UTC

tptacek wrote: post #287

beaconstudios wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that with tesla's wireless software updating capabilities they'll continue to improve the software over time after you buy the car.

So we're just waiting for Sufficiently Smart Car Software, is what you're saying? That sounds speculative.

it certainly is, but that's my read on the situation.

Re: Tesla Autopilot

#347

Post by keymone » Tue, Jun 27, 2017, 6:06 AM UTC

TeMPOraL wrote: post #189

keymone wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You don't switch from seeing cars to seeing nothing to seeing an elephant just because the input got a little noisy yeah, instead you get hallucinations, muscle twitches, seizures, mental breaks and many more ways a brain can fail to do it's job.

Sure, but a) we have thousands of years of experience with those, and b) none of those are caused by little random noise in the visual input. Brains are incredibly robust against noisy data.

a) well, no. we only have about 100 years dealing with these problems in context of driving cars and we're really bad at it; b) that seems like shifting goalposts, what we care about is whether driver's picture of the world is correct and actions are sensible with respect to that picture, it just so happens that driverless cars' picture is visual (or close to visual), but if you're judging them on entirety of input and side-effects it's only fair to judge our brains by the same standard.