After 6 months of working fine, Tesla software update drives at barriers again

Post by lisper » Fri, Mar 22, 2019, 6:08 AM UTC

Karunamon wrote: post #341

lisper wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Your hands. Sure, if you react fast enough. Let's not lose the plot here. The original claim was: "The AP can only kill you if you're distracted/asleep at the wheel and not paying attention." (Emphasis added.) And that's not true. It can kill you, quite simply, by producing the wrong control input in a situation where the available recovery time is less than your reaction time. If you doubt this, then I challenge y…

What I'm trying to imply is that "not paying attention" is exactly what happened here. The "attention checking" has a delay of a few seconds on it before it'll start warning you to grip the wheel. If your hands were on the wheel, and you were paying attention, there's no reaction time, since the erroneous control input would be overridden by your hands keeping you in your lane. Put simply, if your grip on the wheel w…

Post by cameldrv » Fri, Mar 22, 2019, 7:11 PM UTC

fmpwizard wrote: post #268

slg wrote: post #106

Earlier 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…

> see self driving cars run into solid and stationary objects, but human drivers do that all the time too. Human drivers who are distracted do that all the time, AP is supposed to avoid that, it is supposed to be alert all the time, but when it sees a stationary object, the result of their algo is, "it must be a sign we can somehow go through" We need to make it very clear that self driving cars are better than drivi…

Post by perl4ever » Sat, Mar 23, 2019, 2:43 AM UTC

Scoundreller wrote: post #337

salawat wrote: post #332

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So... Two planes falling out of the sky, killing 400 shouldn't be taken as proving anything? Or how about 1 stupid decision by a radiotherapy machine? Ever heard of THERAC-25? In each case, it was just 1 stupid decision by a machine. The entire reason Engineering as a practice is a thing is because when you implement the capacity for a stupid decision into a system that is then mass produced, dire consequences can re…

And people have died and been paralyzed as a direct result of the flu vaccine. Death and paralyses that would not have occurred had they not received that vaccine. Does that mean the flu vaccine should get dumped in the refuse bin? Similarly, some other aircraft flying today/tomorrow has automation with an unknown bug/issue that will cause loss of life. Should we disable everything except the 6-pack and stick and rud…

Post by perl4ever » Sat, Mar 23, 2019, 2:57 AM UTC

MSM wrote: post #221

erobbins wrote: post #138

I think Tesla eventually has a catastrophic accident and is sued and/or criminally prosecuted into oblivion. I feel sorry for the people who are going to have to die for this to happen. This trope that humans are bad drivers is, in general, crap. Humans are very good drivers. The US has 7.3 deaths per billion km driven. This means if you drive 50km a day, every day, you are (essentially) guaranteed to die... after 75…

You're looking at it strictly from a safety perspective which is a small part of the whole picture. If we looked at transportation from a safety perspective throughout history, we'd still be walking everywhere. What's the risk of crashing and dying while walking? Zero; it's fully optimized for safety. We rode horses and now drive cars to save time. Driving to work is unquestionably a better experience than riding a h…

Post by perl4ever » Sat, Mar 23, 2019, 3:07 AM UTC

Bluestrike2 wrote: post #226

DarmokJalad1701 wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> apparently change their handling and driving profile overnight at the whim of the software engineers at Tesla, without even telling the drivers OTA updates only happen after confirmed by the users. Where did you hear that it happens without user intervention?

You're right. The owner/driver has to approve the update, if I recall. But putting responsibility to review and understand release notes on the car's owner seems kind of absurd. And that's assuming that you have accurate and descriptive release notes, which was most certainly not the case for the described instance. In any case, clicking "update" is such a rote behavior for users on computers, phones, and now their T…