581–590 of 850 posts
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/31/apples-steve-wozniak-doesnt-... "Man you have got to be ready — it makes mistakes, it loses track of the lane lines. You have to be on your toes all the time," says Wozniak. "All Tesla did is say, 'It is beta so we are not responsible. It doesn't necessarily work, so you have to be in control.'
You don't beta test with human lives.
Tesla's system demands more from drivers than manual driving. The driver has to detect automation failures after they occur, but before a crash. This requires faster reaction time than merely avoiding obstacles. Here's a good example - a Tesla on autopilot crashing into a temporary road barrier which required a lane change.[1] This is a view from the dashcam of the vehicle behind the Tesla. At 00:21, things look norm…
" Tesla's system demands more from drivers than manual driving. The driver has to detect automation failures after they occur, but before a crash. This requires faster reaction time than merely avoiding obstacles." I have been thinking that too. At what point do you decide that the autopilot is making a mistake and take over? That's an almost impossible task to perform within the available time.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>> our belief is meaningless, we have hard data that shows a net benefit to these systems. No we don't. Tesla likes to compare their deaths per mile to the national average. The problem is that their autopilot is not fit to drive everywhere or in all conditions that go into that average. There is no data to support that autopilot is safer overall. It may not even be safer in highway conditions given that we've seen i…
Specific failures are again meaningless. Computers don't fail the way people do, on the other hand people also regularly fall asleep at the wheel and do similar dumb things. And really, driving conditions are responsible for a relatively small percentage of vehicle fatalities. Most often it's people doing really dumb things like driving 100+ MPH. The only thing we actually know is these cars are safer on average than…
The US just mandated all new cars have backup cameras, but it seems like mandating AEB would make a bigger difference.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You don't beta test with human lives.
Or you don't use beta features where the ultimate mistake can cost you your life.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm asking for data. The data doesn't care what you and I think. And the data will reflect what Tesla drivers think, as opposed to people who've only heard Tesla's marketing. Tesla drivers get reminded about the limitations of the autopilot system each time they enable it.
The literally hundreds of posts on HN about it being a problem are data that it is. And that's a tech-savvy crowd that theoretically would know the limitations of the system.
This is so frustrating to me. 50 years ago we had the ability to fly to the moon. A played out trope, sure. But today we can't even do a basic 'dont run into shit' on a perfectly clear day. Physics in this way is and has been a solved problem for decades. The fact that people are dying from hitting stationary objects should be criminal. At lightest, they should bar these companies from even participating.
so,uh, the emergency braking systems on other cars...so called 'AEB' systems, or what Honda calls Collision Mitigation Braking System... would that have caught this?
I would expect this sort of thing "big object in road" to trigger the AEB system... even if it didn't stop me, I'd expect it to trigger before the collision and slow me down. Are my expectations off? or is it just that the tesla system, 'passive sensors only, with machine classification' isn't as good?
I guess people rely on the tesla system more than the honda system, due to advertising, so it could be that both systems make errors at similar rates, it's just that advertising means that the tesla system is triggered more often.
What exactly is the point of autopilot if you have to remain 100% attentive with your hands on the wheel? What is the benefit?
I get that cruise control lets you take your foot off the wheel, letting your foot physically rest. And it is my understanding that emergency braking and collision avoidance is active on Teslas at all times even without autopilot. So that basically leaves autosteering.
So, what is the benefit of autosteering when you have to have your hands on the wheel and eyes on the road with exactly the same attentiveness as you would without it? What is it doing for you, now, at level 2, apart from (a) “gee whiz look at what it can almost do” and (b) seducing you into trusting it so you can mentally relax?
This is so frustrating to me. 50 years ago we had the ability to fly to the moon. A played out trope, sure. But today we can't even do a basic 'dont run into shit' on a perfectly clear day. Physics in this way is and has been a solved problem for decades. The fact that people are dying from hitting stationary objects should be criminal. At lightest, they should bar these companies from even participating.
>But today we can't even do a basic 'dont run into shit' on a perfectly clear day. so,uh, the emergency braking systems on other cars...so called 'AEB' systems, or what Honda calls Collision Mitigation Braking System... would that have caught this? I would expect this sort of thing "big object in road" to trigger the AEB system... even if it didn't stop me, I'd expect it to trigger before the collision and slow me do…
Tesla's system demands more from drivers than manual driving. The driver has to detect automation failures after they occur, but before a crash. This requires faster reaction time than merely avoiding obstacles. Here's a good example - a Tesla on autopilot crashing into a temporary road barrier which required a lane change.[1] This is a view from the dashcam of the vehicle behind the Tesla. At 00:21, things look norm…
> Tesla's system demands more from drivers than manual driving. This is a great point. With regular cars, drivers can reliably predict where the car will be after 5 seconds. However, with Tesla, there is really no way to know what the auto-driver will do, and so the driver has to stay even more attentive to ensure that it does not do something wrong. It's like driving a car that is not under your control, and may go…
Of course if users get to used to such differences then those can become 'features' which only makes progress harder.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Here is the messy situation: maybe this system is better at avoiding accidents than 40% of the people 99.999% of the time. The best thing is to build a system to analyze your driving and figure out if you are in that 40% of people and then let it drive for you. Maybe drunk drivers, for example. It can do this per ride: “oh you’re driving recklessly, do you want me to take over?” EVERYTHING ELSE SHOULD BE A STRICT IMP…
> The argument should NOT be about playing with people’s lives now so im the future some people can have a better system. Why not? That's how pioneers make progress, in new aircraft and spacecraft. If people want to be on the bleeding edge, why not let them? How can the cars improve if they are never allowed to drive?