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

431–440 of 714 posts

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

#431

Post by AmericanChopper »

dmitriid wrote: post #397
jiriro wrote: post #392

Earlier quoted context omitted.

5 seconds is nonsense. The average driver’s reaction time is 0.2 to 0.3 seconds. This is before the driver’s foot moves. Then there is approx 1 second before the brakes take effect (foot movement, applying the force, brakes responding) So 1.5 second before the car starts breaking. There is a rule of “be at least 2 seconds behind the car in front” which gives a safe distance to handle any emergency braking. Of course…

Sweden has the rule of "at least 3 seconds". Because you keep ignoring the speed, and the braking distance as well. Edit: and assuming perfect conditions when the driver is perfectly alert and looking ahead. And is young and healthy. And... However you count, if Tesla did a dangerous lane change and started braking, how is this the fault if the driver behind?

You seem to be missing a couple of point here.

1. Fault in an accident can be spread across every party that was involved, and no matter how negligent one part was, that has no influence over how negligent every other party also potentially was.

2. A driver is typically responsible for being aware of all potential hazards on the road, not just the ones immediately ahead in the same lane. For instance a car that has started indicating to move into their lane from another lane (as this Tesla did ~7 seconds before the collision), and a car in their lane that is coming to a stop (this Tesla had completed the lane change pretty much 3 seconds before the collision).

Obviously the Tesla is really pushing the limits of what would be considered a safe gap, and coming to a stop in that location without a proper reason is obviously negligently dangerous. But the negligence of both parties contributed to this accident, regardless of who was most at fault.

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

#432

Post by aembleton »

r0m4n0 wrote: post #187
jayd16 wrote: post #82

This is an honest question here but why is the pile up so bad if driving conditions were ideal? The next 6 drivers were not keeping a safe distance or paying attention?

I think it’s mostly caused by the folks making abrupt lane changes as the Tesla slows down. You can see people start to swerve into other lanes instead of just slowing down (they are looking in their side mirrors to avoid the slow car and sometimes even accelerate). I’ve had this happen where you are cruising at a speed and the person in front of you serves to avoid a slow car and now you lose all of the time to reac…

> I’ve had this happen where you are cruising at a speed and the person in front of you serves to avoid a slow car and now you lose all of the time to react by changing lanes as well

It's worth anticipating this by watching the other lanes and what drivers are doing. If you can see a slow down happening in an adjacent lane then you might reasonably expect at least one of the drivers approaching to pull over in front of you.

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

#433

Post by trabant00 »

bagels wrote: post #424
trabant00 wrote: post #402

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> clearly the cause of the crash here isn't the tesla, it is other cars not respecting minimum safety distances The cause of the crash is the Tesla. You are not allowed to stop on bridges, in tunnels and several other places. The crashes starting with the Nth car and not the 1st is normal. Reaction time of the first car eats into the reaction of the second and so on until there's no more time to stop. Understand that…

It's not illegal to stop on a bridge or tunnel if required to not crash, surely?

Of course not, but the Tesla was not about to crash, so I don't understand your point.

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

#434

Post by BuckyBeaver »

cm2187 wrote: post #407
amelius wrote: post #394

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a case of phantom braking, which is illegal. People often forget about the most important traffic rule: it is not allowed to cause an unsafe situation.

If you crash into the car in front of you in your lane, the responsibility is yours both morally and legally. The only car which has a valid excuse is the car immediately following the tesla since the tesla inserted itself into its lane then immediately stopped, not allowing it to build a safety distance.

The video does indeed show that this happened.

The driver's account, as quoted here, doesn't even make sense. In the first sentence it says he was driving along in lane 1, the car slowed, and he "felt an impact."

The next part is contradictory, citing a different lane (2), a different cruising speed, and then a lane change... and no impact. WTH?

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

#435

Post by iainmerrick »

brewdad wrote: post #348
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…

I have to do the drive from Portland to Seattle about once a month. ACC makes the drive so much more enjoyable. I can pretty much zone out until it is time to pass someone. Then, depending on speed differences, I move over and pass without intervention or I press the throttle a bit to pass more quickly. When I get to the inevitable slowdowns, my car just slows without me having to think much about it unless it’s a su…

I can pretty much zone out

That seems bad!

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

#436

Post by trabant00 »

cm2187 wrote: post #414
trabant00 wrote: post #402

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> clearly the cause of the crash here isn't the tesla, it is other cars not respecting minimum safety distances The cause of the crash is the Tesla. You are not allowed to stop on bridges, in tunnels and several other places. The crashes starting with the Nth car and not the 1st is normal. Reaction time of the first car eats into the reaction of the second and so on until there's no more time to stop. Understand that…

Not sure I understand your reasoning. The further you are from the first car, the more warning you get on what's going on, not the other way round. I typically watch not just the car in front of me but 1 or 2 cars ahead. If I see those cars braking, I start breaking. It's the car immediately following the tesla that got the least warning.

It is not always possible to see 1 or 2 cars ahead, that can not be the standard for who is at fault.

edit: to make it clear, we are debating whether the Tesla is at fault, not whether the other could have avoided it. Creating a dangerous situation still puts you at fault, you can not be allowed to do so at any time on the grounds that everybody else should avoid you.

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

#437

Post by cm2187 »

jsiepkes wrote: post #428
cm2187 wrote: post #407

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you crash into the car in front of you in your lane, the responsibility is yours both morally and legally. The only car which has a valid excuse is the car immediately following the tesla since the tesla inserted itself into its lane then immediately stopped, not allowing it to build a safety distance.

> If you crash into the car in front of you in your lane, the responsibility is yours both morally and legally. It's not that simple. If it was it would be legal to break check someone and it would be that persons fault for crashing in to you.

The cars stopping because there is an accident ahead aren’t doing something unsafe. You running into them is your fault.

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

#438

Post by apigalore »

cm2187 wrote: post #407
amelius wrote: post #394

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a case of phantom braking, which is illegal. People often forget about the most important traffic rule: it is not allowed to cause an unsafe situation.

If you crash into the car in front of you in your lane, the responsibility is yours both morally and legally. The only car which has a valid excuse is the car immediately following the tesla since the tesla inserted itself into its lane then immediately stopped, not allowing it to build a safety distance.

I had an accident exactly like that. Car in front of me fully stopped all of a sudden as I was accelerating. This was right passed the lights. No traffic or anything in front him. I don't know why he stopped. My insurance told me he was 100% at fault.

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

#439

Post by [deleted] »

abigail95 wrote: post #383
witheld wrote: post #378

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 Tesl…

[deleted]

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

#440

Post by progman32 »

misnome wrote: post #403
AmericanChopper wrote: post #367

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s almost impossible to rear-end another car without being at least partially at fault. The lane change from the Tesla was obviously dangerous, but the first car to collide with it had sufficient warning and time to react. You can see that they did react, but they obviously didn’t expect the Tesla to come to a full stop, which is why the first collision took place. I believe the legal term for this is contributory…

I overtake you, the instant my car is 1m in front of yours I switch into your lane and hard break. Who is at fault for you crashing into the back of me?

Key word is "almost". Perhaps this is a situation where the fault is primarily with the overtaking car. However, an attentive driver should have started braking as soon as the illegal lane change was started.
Post reply on HN