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

581–590 of 714 posts

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

#581

Post by sebastianconcpt »

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.

There is a "pass the test of time" factor involved. If natural selection approves, then you surely can be more confident and even pay less attention because time guaranteed that plenty of diverse cases didn't compromised the survivability of the system and the system needs you less to achieve its success rate as designed.

Then it comes innovation. Which necessarily starts with limited cases. And we use to launch business and products as soon as we can. Hence, with the minimum acceptable cases. This is fine as long as failures cause minor reparable degradations instead of catastrophic unsurvivable cases.

And still, we need systems designed with every layer having the feature of graceful degradations. That enables us to perform as Woody and Buzz Lightyear said: "Falling with style"

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

#582

Post by Schroedingersat »

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.

e-scooters, ebikes, trains and LEVs are very much the sane answer.

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

#583

Post by maury91 »

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.

Honestly it feels like a car is the perfect murder weapon, if you want to kill someone you can ran over that person, especially if that person is on a bike, and you will get a reduced sentence compared to if you did that with what is normally considered a weapon ( knife, gun, ... )

I think if you endanger someone’s life with anything, be it a car, motorcycle, knife, gun, hands; you should always get the same sentence

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

#584

Post by brookst »

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.

I think “attempted manslaughter” is just “reckless endangerment” or similar. Manslaughter means without intent; you can’t very well attempt to do something without intent.

/pedant

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

#585

Post by ericd »

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.

Have you ever ridden a motorcycle? They’re not as efficient as weight would imply, because aerodynamics dominate when you’re not speeding up/slowing down.

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

#586

Post by brookst »

throwaway894345 wrote: post #568
r_hoods_ghost wrote: post #398

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

Not the person you’re responding to, but typically this mindset is about punishment more than deterrence. It won’t reduce the incidence of bad outcomes, but some people feel better knowing that judicial vengeance will be meted out.

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

#587

Post by brookst »

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 typically get 40-50mpg. A little better than cars, but not a lot. And they transport at most two people.

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

#588

Post by rjmunro »

samwillis wrote: post #466
dkrich wrote: post #453

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This reasoning makes very little sense to me. Why drive assuming that it will be a rabbit most of the time and not a child or a deer or whatever you deem worthy of stopping for? If the possibility exists that a driver in front of you may stop suddenly why not always leave a minimum amount of space for a safe stop considering there is virtually no downside to doing so?

Thats not my point. You should, and I do, always leave enough space to stop, but not everyone does. Being a safe driver is being aware that other people, including the people behind you, may not be leaving enough space. Suddenly stopping for a rabbit, from a speed of 50mph, is f-ing stupid and massively increasing the risk of a serious accident on the road. Using a Level 2 automation that can randomly stop for no rea…

You should be able to stop at any time for any reason and not worry about the car behind crashing in to you. They should leave enough space. A rabbit is a very good reason. Maybe it's not a rabbit, maybe it's a rabbit-shaped rock that would cause serious damage to your vehicle, causing you to leave the road and die.

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

#589

Post by saalweachter »

DangitBobby wrote: post #260
saalweachter wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Saying "driving safely lowers the capacity of roads" is like saying that not jamming pennies in a fuse box lowers the capacity of the wiring.

Is it like that because it's true?

I mean, it's true until your house burns down. Then your wires stop carrying any current.

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

#590

Post by [deleted] »

Gordonjcp wrote: post #386
scotty79 wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you don't want to pass a car you just drop down the speed on cruise control and widen the gap between the car you don't want to pass and you. It really doesn't matter if you are 10m or 100m behind him if you are not going to pass it. And if you get too far behind him you might bump up the speed a notch. And if somebody gets in the gap it's even better because they are going to eventually overtake him just like the…

I can't say I've ever seen a disadvantage in leaving "too big" a gap between me and the car in front. If someone wants to pass me and then sit up the other guy's arse, fine. I guarantee I'll be ten seconds behind them at the next road junction, or not much more. I don't think people realise that the relationship between road speed and journey time isn't linear - doing 90mph won't get you there appreciably faster than…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN