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

571–580 of 714 posts

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

#571

Post by tyingq »

capableweb wrote: post #558
tyingq wrote: post #554

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is maddening, and puts the burden on people who do try to maintain a reasonable following distance. If you leave sufficient room, there's an endless line of cars that will pop into that space, and now you're adjusting again...in a loop.

So what? If you happen to go faster than the cars that go into the space between you and the one in front, change one lane to the left to pass them. If there is someone in front of you even in that lane, continue at the speed they are driving, leave space in front. Someone goes into the space? Adjust again. Are you seriously avoiding to leave any sort of space in front of you just because other cars might go into tha…

Just making an observation about the group dynamics in play. I was not trying to rationalize anything about me personally.

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

#572

Post by [deleted] »

jackmott wrote: post #522
maury91 wrote: post #492

I'm trying to reason "why the Tesla did stop?", in the second video on TheIntercept website, I can notice a left exit before the point where the Tesla stopped. Something I noticed with Google maps ( I don't have a Tesla, and maybe the navigation system of the Tesla is similar ), is that sometimes thinks tunnels can access the road above them ( in a tunnel near my home Google maps always tells me "turn right" in the m…

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…

[deleted]

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

#573

Post by liotier »

jackmott wrote: post #522
maury91 wrote: post #492

I'm trying to reason "why the Tesla did stop?", in the second video on TheIntercept website, I can notice a left exit before the point where the Tesla stopped. Something I noticed with Google maps ( I don't have a Tesla, and maybe the navigation system of the Tesla is similar ), is that sometimes thinks tunnels can access the road above them ( in a tunnel near my home Google maps always tells me "turn right" in the m…

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…

> because of shadows that confused it > ...

After all, a Tesla is a pretty good substitute for a horse !

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

#574

Post by throwaway894345 »

mschuster91 wrote: post #373
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.

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.

Motorcycles aren’t viable in many places due to weather, and they aren’t practical for most people (people with kids, pets, large items, etc to transport).

I don’t think “everyone should be allowed to use the road safely” is a statement anyone disagrees with, but the laws of physics make this very difficult to implement in any practical way. Pretty sure that even in Europe, cycling and motorcycling are far more dangerous than driving.

Electric cars are the only viable, general purpose solve for climate change as it pertains to personal transit. We aren’t going to get everyone to start (motor)cycling or taking public transit over the coming decades, but EVs are a drop-in replacement for most personal transit use cases.

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

#575

Post by throwaway894345 »

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.

You can drive 350+ miles on a single scooter charge? Also, I have a hard time imagining anyone taking 400+ mile road trips on a scooter.

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

#576

Post by mhb »

Gordonjcp wrote: post #371
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…

At least in the UK, it would very much be the fault of the driver in front, especially if there was that much CCTV footage available (there won't be, which is why dashcams are important - the US's obsession with blanket CCTV coverage scores a point here). The second car had left a more than adequate stopping distance. The Tesla changed lanes close in front of it and then immediately braked as hard as possible, delibe…

the US's obsession with blanket CCTV coverage

Ha ha ha. London, UK?

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

#577

Post by gregoriol »

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #545
sebastianconcpt wrote: post #543

This blind trust in technologies is very very wrong. We are part of the system and things should always be designed to keep us as powerful fallbacks/system-degradation resource.

I'd agree, yet I proceed from green lights with little regard; I drink the water from the tap; I use Paypal; I take aspirin from a bottle from heaven-knows-where. We've entered the age of 'blind trust in technology'. We can hardly get out of bed without it.

We can't verify everything ourselves, that's why there is a framework (green lights, laws, ...) and society (others do things you can't do).

In Tesla's case, the failure is that they are testing a new way of doing things without properly saying it, Muskito is pushing for "it works" while it actually is only being in the early stages.

This is a failure to society, like the 737 Max and should be judged accordingly.

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

#578

Post by Kon-Peki »

progman32 wrote: post #473
Kon-Peki wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

In my German vehicle, ACC reverts to max distance every time it's engaged. You have to manually shorten the distance every time with the steering wheel buttons. I hope that this behavior is standard, but wouldn't be surprised at all to learn different systems have a less safety-oriented behavior.

Neither of my ACC cars have this behavior! I agree that it would be safer to do it this way.

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

#579

Post by smaudet »

jiriro wrote: post #392
dmitriid wrote: post #377

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It takes humans up to 5 seconds to even start breaking in the presence of danger. Even at 40 miles per hour your speed is 58 feet per second (or, at 60kmh you speed is 16 meters per second). So it's either "the driver had sufficient warning" or "the lane change from Tesla was dangerous". As you don't expect cars that are dangerously changing to suddenly slow down.

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…

It's absolutely not nonsense, I suggest taking some basic high-school physics. Reaction time is the time for the vehicle to come to a stop, not for the driver to first notice an issue.

At 60 mph it will take many meters and seconds to deaccelerate, assuming the driver can take exactly the correct action:

https://www.wolframalpha.com/input?i=time+to+brake+at+70+met...

Estimate here is about 4 seconds, under perfect conditions. 5 seconds is more than reasonable, considering you also need to realize the other driver is acting erroneously.

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

#580

Post by smileysteve »

userbinator wrote: post #363
smileysteve wrote: post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

or lack of intention. If an engine throws a rod, if a driveshaft pole vaults, if a wheel falls off, or a suspension component catastrophically fails. These are all realistic sudden stop issues that our laws mostly accommodate.

No, those are not "sudden stop" situations either. In fact the worst thing to do is to stop suddenly. Even if a wheel falls off, you do not slam on the brakes unless you want to lose even more control.

If a wheel falls off, the driver doesn't have to apply the brakes... A quarter of the car is digging in and melding itself to the asphalt.

If the differential fails catastrophically, it applies more braking force than the brakes do, so you'll have brief period of being airborne and then at least 1 rear wheel will sheer off (seen it).

If the driveshaft or trailing arms fail the wrong way, they result in a steel shaft digging into the roadway at a downward angle in front of the wheels and the driveshaft will stop the differential as above, until it sheers off.

Post reply on HN