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

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

theautopian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–390 of 714 posts

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

#381

Post by Gordonjcp »

paulryanrogers wrote: post #232
modeless wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Automatic switching between FSD and Autopilot is not any kind of UX problem. There is no reason the driver needs to be aware of it. The driver does not need to take any action at all. The only difference is the type of road. But which software was in use is relevant here because people are trying to blame this on FSD. Whenever you're on a freeway, Autopilot is used automatically instead of FSD, so FSD had nothing to…

When responsible for overseeing a multi-ton vehicle, I like to know how it will behave. Cruise control and lane assist I understand. I need to know which one is in control and how it will behave if they can respond differently.

I like how my 25-year-old Range Rover has neither of those. Power steering and ABS is all you get.

Technically it does have cruise control, but I've never worked out what kind of road conditions it would be useful for and until I replace a 25-year-old dry-rotted vacuum hose under the bonnet it's not going to control a damn thing.

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

#382

Post by haspok »

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…

Easy solution: just use the truck lane.

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

#383

Post by abigail95 »

witheld wrote: post #378
mschuster91 wrote: post #370

There is one additional part in play: the drivers following the Tesla clearly didn't keep their distance. Normally, at least here in Germany, drivers are supposed to keep enough distance from those driving in front of them that, even in the situation that something like a brake defect forcing the car in front to a complete stop or a truck blowing a tire, they do not crash into it.

They weren’t following the tesla, it moved into their lane.

There are 6 other cars that crashed, each into the one infront of it, it looks like nobody was paying attention.

If the Tesla was at the back or the middle I think it's highly likely it would have outperformed the other drivers and stopped faster or kept a safe distance.

A series of problems lead to this accident, FSD Beta gets 5% of the blame here for stopping on the highway, which isn't an exclusive feature to Tesla - cars stop on roads all the time.

What this demonstrates is 7/8 or 8/8 drivers here were driving unsafely.

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

#384

Post by tempestn »

mtsr wrote: post #369
tempestn wrote: post #304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. Watching the second video, you can see the second car's brake lights come on quite quickly, given the Tesla's actions were completely strange and unexpected. Less than a second from when the Tesla cuts in front and starts braking to the vehicle behind hitting the brakes. They're definitely not at fault. Some of the cars that piled in behind were a different matter though. Some were able to stop while others didn…

They didn't actually stop their car, though. And it really looks like they could have, had they braked a little bit harder. But that may be due to the unexpected nature of the Tesla coming to a full stop.

Yeah, it's possible they didn't fully slam on the brakes immediately. But you don't expect the car in front of you to do so for no reason either, so I still wouldn't consider the second car at fault.

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

#385

Post by cm2187 »

From what I can tell, the car behind the tesla didn't crash into the tesla but stopped before. And so did the car behind that one. It is the cars after that that crashed into each others.

While automatic cars doing random things is certainly problematic, clearly the cause of the crash here isn't the tesla, it is other cars not respecting minimum safety distances and not able to stop when there is a traffic jam ahead.

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

#386

Post by Gordonjcp »

scotty79 wrote: post #177
denimnerd42 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do love the ACC on my car. One of the worst parts of road trips is following cars you don't want to or can't pass. The ACC totally solves it. I don't see how you were really able to use cruise to follow another car at all before? Even 1mph too slow is not great and if the car in front isn't using any cruise control at all it could be 5mph too slow and then 5mph too fast.

If you don't want to pass a car you just drop down the speed on cruise control and widen the gap between the car you don't want to pass and you. It really doesn't matter if you are 10m or 100m behind him if you are not going to pass it. And if you get too far behind him you might bump up the speed a notch. And if somebody gets in the gap it's even better because they are going to eventually overtake him just like the…

I can't say I've ever seen a disadvantage in leaving "too big" a gap between me and the car in front.

If someone wants to pass me and then sit up the other guy's arse, fine. I guarantee I'll be ten seconds behind them at the next road junction, or not much more. I don't think people realise that the relationship between road speed and journey time isn't linear - doing 90mph won't get you there appreciably faster than doing 60mph unless you're on a very long perfectly straight road with no junctions to turn off at.

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

#387

Post by janalsncm »

suslik wrote: post #368
MengerSponge wrote: post #320

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But motorcyclists rank just above bicyclists, and just below deer. Nobody actually gets in trouble for hitting them on the road. I would love to see manslaughter charges for more accidents. If I do a whoopsie and stab someone in my home, I'm not going to get off with a "oh my god I'm so sorry! I was tired and it was foggy." People driving should be extended the same courtesy.

Or just solve the problem by banning motorcycles. Motorcycles should stay on race tracks where they belong, not on foggy roads with tired commuters. Same with normal bikes, by the way: cycling on the same road with fast-driving cars should not be an actual phenomenon. I cycle to work every day, and love it, but would never do it if there wasn't a separate bike lane.

I don’t bike to work for the reason you mentioned, even in the bike lane. The health benefits aren’t worth the amortized risk. Cars treat bike lanes as passing lanes way too often. If it’s not physically separated it’s not for me.

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

#388

Post by iainmerrick »

cm2187 wrote: post #385

From what I can tell, the car behind the tesla didn't crash into the tesla but stopped before. And so did the car behind that one. It is the cars after that that crashed into each others. While automatic cars doing random things is certainly problematic, clearly the cause of the crash here isn't the tesla, it is other cars not respecting minimum safety distances and not able to stop when there is a traffic jam ahead.

I was thinking the same. One earlier article about this had a rather inflammatory photo of some twisted-up cars next to an empty baby buggy. But if you watch the video, that’s clearly where some human drivers ploughed straight into the back of the pile-up.

The Tesla autopilot failure is really bad, for sure, but those human drivers should be banned for life. There’s no excuse for ramming into a traffic jam because you weren’t paying attention.

Edit: occurs to me that possibly I’m being overly harsh here. Is there something about the dynamics of traffic that puts the cars three or four slots back at greater risk when somebody unexpectedly stops? I would assume that the immediately following car is at the greatest risk, but after that everybody is at successively less risk as they should all be slowing and should all see each others’ brake lights.

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

#389

Post by darkwater »

scotty79 wrote: post #177
denimnerd42 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do love the ACC on my car. One of the worst parts of road trips is following cars you don't want to or can't pass. The ACC totally solves it. I don't see how you were really able to use cruise to follow another car at all before? Even 1mph too slow is not great and if the car in front isn't using any cruise control at all it could be 5mph too slow and then 5mph too fast.

If you don't want to pass a car you just drop down the speed on cruise control and widen the gap between the car you don't want to pass and you. It really doesn't matter if you are 10m or 100m behind him if you are not going to pass it. And if you get too far behind him you might bump up the speed a notch. And if somebody gets in the gap it's even better because they are going to eventually overtake him just like the…

So basically doing manually what ACC does automatically for you

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

#390

Post by jacquesm »

marktolson wrote: post #29
herodotus wrote: post #2

I have a VW Golf and it has what it calls "adaptive cruise control". What makes it different from my older (simple) cruise control is that it will slow down and speed up again as necessary without my intervention. For example, if I set the speed to 70 mph and it gets close to a car ahead that is only going 65 mph, it will slow down and maintain what the software believes is a safe distance. Similarly, if a car in an…

My friend was using adaptive cruise control while towing a caravan. A car merged in front of him, his car applied heavy braking to maintain the desired distance (not necessarily to avoid a crash) but didn't compensate for the weight of the caravan. Almost lost traction, lead to heavy swerving. He's vowed to never use it again.

Trailers normally have back-up brakes that engage as soon as there is pressure rather than tension on the tow bar. To allow reversing they also have a block that allows you to disable the backup brake (usually a lever that moves in to avoid the compression of the tow bar). I wonder if your friend had accidentally forgotten to re-enable the automatic brake after getting ready for the trip.
Post reply on HN