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

531–540 of 714 posts

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

#531

Post by rjmunro »

Kon-Peki wrote: post #159
thaumasiotes wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem isn't that disengaging the system is difficult. The problem is that deciding whether to disengage is difficult. If you're catching up to a slower car, maybe you should disengage the cruise control. Or maybe you shouldn't. You can't tell. This means that cruise control goes from being something that relieves stress on you to something that causes additional stress.

Every single adaptive cruise control system I've seen allows the driver to set a follow distance that is far too short. For example, on my Subaru, 4 bars is really the minimum "comfortable, relaxing" amount. But if traffic starts to get a little heavy, 3 bars works a little better, but you do have to be more vigilant. If you are down to using 2 bars or a single bar, you had better be hyper vigilant. I can't imagine a…

I found in a Tesla model 3 that I borrowed that even the maximum follow distance was closer that I would normally drive. It didn't feel dangerously close, just slightly uncomfortable - closer than I would have liked for a maximum.

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

#532

Post by ClumsyPilot »

darkwater wrote: post #391
ClumsyPilot wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> this seems like an extreme edge case Most ships don't sink, but we still have lifeboats. Most jet engines don't fail, but we still train pilots to land without them. Its edgecases that kill.

In this particular edge-case, it's the user fault for using a technology not supposed to be used when towing.

Manufacturer could include a sensor in the towbar.

Did the manufacturer think about this and include a warning? If not, how should the user know?

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

#533

Post by EL_Loco »

foepys wrote: post #417
Schroedingersat wrote: post #409

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You'd be surprised. They're woefully unaerodynamic, and emissions standards are pretty lax for them. Something like a CBR300F is about half the emissions of a hybrid and a grom can get lower, but plenty of motorbikes are actually worse than a compact car and getting close to SUV territory.

You can buy electric scooters nowadays that can drive a lot farther than any car with the same battery. If one was big on emission reduction, one would ban all cars and only allow scooters.

With streets crowded with scooters during rush hour I think we'd have a lot more minor accidents/injuries, but far, far fewer deaths, right? What could be done to avoid the minor accidents?

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

#534

Post by mclightning »

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…

This is the exact subject of the book; The Glass Cage by Nicholas Carr. Airline industry avoids too much automation for this very reason.

Vigilance is hard to moderate when you start automating too much.

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

#535

Post by SyzygistSix »

MengerSponge wrote: post #320
kart23 wrote: post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> think what's interesting here is it's likely the first instance where Tesla FSD has been involved in an accident which affected other drivers. Autopilot has killed multiple motorcyclists, and is suspected in many other cases, totaling 19 fatalities. This isn't the first, our regulatory bodies are just incredibly slow at this. https://arstechnica.com/cars/2022/08/tesla-faces-new-probes-... https://www.theverge.com/2…

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 at least take their license once they have proven they are a hazard to others.

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

#536

Post by rjmunro »

__alexs wrote: post #448
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.

Suddenly stopping at high speed is generally considered (at least in the UK) dangerous driving and will get you prosecuted and probably mean you lose your license at the very least. If it results in a death then you can get a life sentence in prison for it. Intentionally stopping inside a tunnel is a pretty clear cut case of dangerous driving over here.

Do you have a citation for that? I have always understood the rules to be that you should always remember the car in front of you can make an emergency stop at any time for any reason, and it is always your fault if you hit them (unless they just moved into your lane).

Conversely if you need to stop suddenly, e.g. something has crossed the road in front of you (or you think it has), you don't worry about the vehicles behind, you just stop.

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

#537

Post by SyzygistSix »

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…

You might like J.G. Ballard then.

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

#538

Post by SyzygistSix »

darknavi wrote: post #288
threeseed wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a bug in Tesla's specific meat. Other self driving implementations e.g. Cruise, Waymo have LiDAR which is an additional and in my opinion necessary sensor for detecting objects. Because in this case it sure looks like a phantom breaking issue.

Is it really a Tesla specific issue? Tesla's definitely phantom brake quite a bit, but it seems like many automated cruise control implementations do this today. https://www.motorsafety.org/us-government-investigates-1-7-m... https://www.macheforum.com/site/threads/phantom-braking-expe... https://www.chevybolt.org/threads/ok-lets-talk-phantom-braki...

And to me the crux of the matter is whether the systems are safer despite any phantom braking.

The focus on perfection rather than improvement is surprising to see on HN.

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

#539

Post by dotancohen »

Schroedingersat wrote: post #409
mschuster91 wrote: post #373

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's just further entrenching car dominance. Every mode of transport should be allowed to safely use the roads, and for what it's worth motorcycles are way better for the climate as a mode of individual transport because they weigh maybe 10% of your average modern car.

You'd be surprised. They're woefully unaerodynamic, and emissions standards are pretty lax for them. Something like a CBR300F is about half the emissions of a hybrid and a grom can get lower, but plenty of motorbikes are actually worse than a compact car and getting close to SUV territory.

Aerodynamic drag is cD multiplied by cross section. By virtue of about a quarter the cross section of an average passenger vehicle, motorcycles are far more efficient. Don't even get me started on road wear being a function of weight to the fourth power, thus motorcycles effectively cause negligible road wear.

For what it's worth, I've never driven a motorcycle and probably never will, for danger.

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

#540

Post by moduspol »

watwut wrote: post #357
moduspol wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think every discussion like this should start with each commenter counting verbally to 3,700. That's the number of people killed on roadways worldwide every single day. [1] And that's daily. It's only every few months that we see a story like this, and this one had no fatalities. It's totally fair to criticize Tesla, Autopilot, and/or FSD, but these discussions always implicitly accept that the status quo is accept…

> Delaying self-driving cars by one year comes at a cost of up to 1.35 million human lives [1]. That doesn't excuse failures like these, but the context should be understood. Citation needed. There is nothing so far proving that self driving cars currently have less crashes then humans in comparable conditions. And they disengage in difficult conditions when most crashes happen. Dont just start with assumption "self…

> Dont just start with assumption "self driving is currently safer" and then go on blame people for not trusting it.

My claim doesn't depend on that assumption. My claim depends on it being the case someday.

If the US tightens regulations on ADAS today, and that results in the day self-driving cars fully replace human-driven ones being 11 years away instead of 10, it has been delayed one year, at a cost of up to 1.35 million human lives.

Post reply on HN