New video of Tesla crash demonstrates the problem of semi-automated driving • Hacker News Board

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

#561

Post by jejeyyy77 » Thu, Jan 12, 2023, 1:44 PM UTC

sokoloff wrote: post #107

Alex3917 wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I 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. In a pileup like this it's basically never the fault of the front car, unless maybe if they are purposely causing the accident for insurance fraud or something. Maybe the driver will get cited for failing to maintain the minimum speed, but legally this isn't much different…

If I brake check someone on the highway, causing an accident, and it’s discovered that that’s what happened, I’d be pretty shocked* if the trailing driver was found responsible. That video looks like a combined lane change and brake check on the part of the Tesla. * and disappointed

That would still be your fault for following too closely.

Basically if you hit a car from behind, it’s your fault, every time.

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

#562

Post by masswerk » Thu, Jan 12, 2023, 1:45 PM UTC

capableweb wrote: post #551

Besides the fact that you shouldn't just flat out stop on the highway, how are 8 drivers stupid enough to be close enough to not be able to stop in time? Is there no limit on how close people drive to the car in front of them in the US? Defensive driving was one of the first thing I learned, before even getting my drivers license, how come others seem to flat out ignore things like that, even for their own safety?

I guess, this is the vigilance problem cascading. Drivers just don't expect cars in a straight and clear lane in a tunnel to stop at random. (At least, not without warning lights and other signs of alarm.) It's not in the expected range of behavior and nobody is prepared for it, as they follow the dull and monotone flow of traffic.

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

#563

Post by mensetmanusman » Thu, Jan 12, 2023, 1:46 PM UTC

sokoloff wrote: post #290

smileysteve wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

our auto laws are founded from a time when catastrophic failure happened much more often. If a suspension bushing randomly disconnects, or a wheel hub disintegrates, or a differential grenades, who is the asshole? That's right, it's the person following too closely

No blame for the person driving unsafe equipment on a public highway?

Some failures are sudden and unexpected.

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

#564

Post by capableweb » Thu, Jan 12, 2023, 1:48 PM UTC

masswerk wrote: post #562

capableweb wrote: post #551

Besides the fact that you shouldn't just flat out stop on the highway, how are 8 drivers stupid enough to be close enough to not be able to stop in time? Is there no limit on how close people drive to the car in front of them in the US? Defensive driving was one of the first thing I learned, before even getting my drivers license, how come others seem to flat out ignore things like that, even for their own safety?

I guess, this is the vigilance problem cascading. Drivers just don't expect cars in a straight and clear lane in a tunnel to stop at random. (At least, not without warning lights and other signs of alarm.) It's not in the expected range of behavior and nobody is prepared for it, as they follow the dull and monotone flow of traffic.

> Drivers just don't expect cars in a straight and clear lane in a tunnel to stop at random

That's just it, why not? I always have the expectation that some unexpected can happen around me in traffic, at any time, and position myself accordingly. If I'm too close to the one in front of me so I can't handle them braking suddenly, then that's telling me I'm too close.

I've been close to a lot of accidents, but never actually in one. Being vigilant at all times when driving and taking breaks when I stop being vigilant, I'm sure have played a huge role in being able to avoid these accidents.

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

#565

Post by masswerk » Thu, Jan 12, 2023, 1:51 PM UTC

capableweb wrote: post #564

masswerk wrote: post #562

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess, this is the vigilance problem cascading. Drivers just don't expect cars in a straight and clear lane in a tunnel to stop at random. (At least, not without warning lights and other signs of alarm.) It's not in the expected range of behavior and nobody is prepared for it, as they follow the dull and monotone flow of traffic.

> Drivers just don't expect cars in a straight and clear lane in a tunnel to stop at random That's just it, why not? I always have the expectation that some unexpected can happen around me in traffic, at any time, and position myself accordingly. If I'm too close to the one in front of me so I can't handle them braking suddenly, then that's telling me I'm too close. I've been close to a lot of accidents, but never ac…

> Being vigilant at all times when driving and taking breaks when I stop being vigilant

I guess, you're not part of the target audience. :-)

(More seriously, congratulations and many thanks for being a responsible adult.)

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

#566

Post by krisroadruck » Thu, Jan 12, 2023, 1:53 PM UTC

tass wrote: post #559

jackmott wrote: post #522

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a Tesla, when using just cruise control it has slammed the brakes: because of shadows that confused it because of concern about cars crossing the intersection ahead where there is only the need to gently slow because of a car crossing an intersection ahead that has already crossed! because of a steep bridge that confused it we can’t use cruise control in the car basically, we decided it is too dangerous at wor…

I don’t think CV is good enough to rely on for self driving features. My 6 year old car uses radar for adaptive cruise control and has only tried to (arguably) improperly stop or slow when someone crept over the line into the lane I was driving in. I have no issue turning it on and leaving it for hours at a time.

Have a 3 year old Jeep Cherokee Trailhawk, and before that was exact same model but older by 4 years. On any sufficiently long road trip (800 miles+) a minimum of one time, and sometimes more adaptive cruise control will randomly SLAM the brakes and beep wildly during the day, on a freeway going 60+ with literally nothing in front of me but empty road. Was true with the older one as well and I've never been able to figure out why. It's never done anything more than scare me, no close calls with a vehicle behind me or anything but yeah... all these systems have a ways to go.

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

#567

Post by soraminazuki » Thu, Jan 12, 2023, 1:55 PM UTC

sfmike wrote: post #246

soraminazuki wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reminds me of how I used to build railways everywhere instead of roads in Sim City. But surely that wouldn't work out in real life?

In Tokyo at least in the proper city it's easy to feel you're fine with just JR + subways.

It is possible to move around Tokyo without cars to some extent, but there are still far more roads than there are railways. It’s nowhere near being a car-free zone, and many people who don’t drive would still need buses or taxis to get to the train station.

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

#568

Post by throwaway894345 » Thu, Jan 12, 2023, 1:55 PM UTC

r_hoods_ghost wrote: post #398

suslik wrote: post #368

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Or you could prosecute dangerous drivers who hit pedestrians for manslaughter / attempted manslaughter and work on the assumption that the person I charge of the most dangerous vehicle has a duty of care towards other road users and if they don't discharge that duty they shouldn't be allowed to drive.

If harsher punishments don’t deter intentional violent crime, why do people expect them to deter accidents?

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

#569

Post by AmericanChopper » Thu, Jan 12, 2023, 1:57 PM UTC

sumeno wrote: post #556

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…

Changing lanes and then slamming on the brakes means you are 100% at fault (assuming there is evidence). It's the most common car insurance scam and it is completely indistinguishable from what the Tesla did in this case

Breaking down is also completely indistinguishable from what the Tesla did in this case. The breaks weren’t slammed on either, 7 seconds elapsed between the Tesla indicating for the turn and the collision. It’s very obvious that every participant in the pile up was at least partially at fault. The only confounding factor in this case seems to be that many HN commenters lose a handful of IQ points when any topic relating to Elon Musk comes up.

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

#570

Post by alistairSH » Thu, Jan 12, 2023, 2:02 PM UTC

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.

Or, you know, hold drivers accountable for the carnage they cause. This is much less a problem in Western Europe. It's almost wholly cultural in the US...

We build shit transportation infrastructure, force everybody to drive, don't build enough housing (forcing longer commutes), and then people like you complain that cars aren't given enough leeway?