Live data from Hacker News

Tesla driver who killed 2 people while using autopilot must pay $23,000, no jail

fortune.com

61–70 of 113 posts

Re: Tesla driver who killed 2 people while using autopilot must pay $23,000, no jail

#61
post #34

I don't believe that partially automated driving, as shown by Autopilot is fit for human use. People will rely on it as if it's fully automated and more accidents like this will happen. We see this same problem with face recognition software that says an innocent man's face matches a criminal. The cops just accept what the computer says and arrest people because the computer says it's a match. We can't have the machi…

> I don't believe that partially automated driving, as shown by Autopilot is fit for human use. People will rely on it as if it's fully automated and more accidents like this will happen. Keep in mind 125 people are killed on the roads every single day in the US. If all vehicles magically switched to this system overnight and the system only killed 100 people per day, that would be a huge win. The fact some people wi…

I used to agree with this, I no longer do. There was an interesting read on HN yesterday coincidentally that articulates a part of my reasoning, https://www.devever.net/~hl/ruthlessness

The difference is that machines have no agency. Imagine a scenario where on roads with 100% human driving, the most of the people that are killed are PCP addled people running naked across freeways where they aren't expected to be, but with self driving you have 50% grandmas walking with babies in a stroller across crosswalks. We don't have to say that one life is more valuable than another to come to the conclusion that the latter is worse, all we have to do is acknowledge the pedestrian's portion of the responsibility for the outcome.

With that in mind, your last sentence is false, the aggregate death count is not all that matters, what matters is the situations in which they occur.

Now let's think about the link in this comment. We begin to form the rules of crossing a street around the behaviors of machines. Not unreasonable. But then it's just a small step from there to "you should've known how the machine was going to behave because it's behavior is simple and predictable." We wind up in a situation where we absolve the self driving car of all liability when an accident occurs because the only entity involved with agency was the pedestrian. We do this already with train tracks.

So with that in mind, the machine systems killing less people is not enough, it has to be so good that the only deaths are suicides, unbelievably bad behavior by those killed, or freak accidents so unlikely that they genuinely shock everyone who learns of them. That's the only way to transition from humans to software operating the machines and be able to justify the ruthlessness with which machines operate themselves.

Re: Tesla driver who killed 2 people while using autopilot must pay $23,000, no jail

#62
post #57
post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Continuing your analysis - vehicles magically switched to this system overnight and the system only killed 100 people per day. Huge win. But then you find out that the drivers of those 100 daily accidents were all browsing their phone when the accidents happened. Would we ban phone usage while using autopilot? And if we did ban phone usage while using autopilot, and someone was using their phone… should they go to ja…

What? Phone usage is already banned while driving, period. Also, along with other Autopilot distractions, it is also detected by the cabin camera and it can kick you from using it. So I guess the answer to your questions are yes and yes?

So the goal here is not 100% full autonomy?

Re: Tesla driver who killed 2 people while using autopilot must pay $23,000, no jail

#63
post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't believe that partially automated driving, as shown by Autopilot is fit for human use. People will rely on it as if it's fully automated and more accidents like this will happen. Keep in mind 125 people are killed on the roads every single day in the US. If all vehicles magically switched to this system overnight and the system only killed 100 people per day, that would be a huge win. The fact some people wi…

I used to agree with this, I no longer do. There was an interesting read on HN yesterday coincidentally that articulates a part of my reasoning, https://www.devever.net/~hl/ruthlessness The difference is that machines have no agency . Imagine a scenario where on roads with 100% human driving, the most of the people that are killed are PCP addled people running naked across freeways where they aren't expected to be, b…

> Imagine a scenario where on roads with 100% human driving, the most of the people that are killed are PCP addled people running naked across freeways where they aren't expected to be

I don't think it's helpful to introduce this scenario that is entirely not true in the real world and therefore doesn't teach us anything. You're saying that a huge number of road deaths are people that were asking for it anyway.

Dozens and dozens of people were killed on the road today who were not drunk, who were not on drugs and were not breaking a single road rule.

This is the reality of the world. Good people are being killed every day by the way things are now.

If we can do anything to reduce that number, we should.

...

Another way I like to think about this is from the ad in Victoria where a guy has to pick which of his family members will be killed on the roads [1]. Obviously none of us want any of our family to be killed, we all choose zero.

Closer to zero is better than not closer to zero.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k2tOye9DKdQ

Re: Tesla driver who killed 2 people while using autopilot must pay $23,000, no jail

#64
> Despite facing more than seven years behind bars, a judge sentenced him to probation in June.

I assume this is the usual issue where the news looks at the maximum sentence and the legal system uses a standard formula that almost never applies the maximum?

> It was among a series of deadly crashes investigated by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration that led to this week’s recall.

Assuming the sentence actually is lighter than typical, maybe this is part of why?

Re: Tesla driver who killed 2 people while using autopilot must pay $23,000, no jail

#65
post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What? Phone usage is already banned while driving, period. Also, along with other Autopilot distractions, it is also detected by the cabin camera and it can kick you from using it. So I guess the answer to your questions are yes and yes?

So the goal here is not 100% full autonomy?

No clue what we're talking about anymore.

Re: Tesla driver who killed 2 people while using autopilot must pay $23,000, no jail

#66
post #51
post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Removing a negligent driver’s license turns their next speeding ticket or red light camera into driving on a suspended or revoked license, which in some places carries the possibility of jail time.

So how well those DUI laws work? No one is driving under influence right?

So then all crimes should carry the death penalty for maximum deterrence? Or deterrence is impossible and therefore there should be no crimes? What point are you making here?

Re: Tesla driver who killed 2 people while using autopilot must pay $23,000, no jail

#67
post #58
post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's plenty of data already though (of which a very clear LACK of signal should be a pretty obvious one). People, likely you included, discount that stuff because it doesn't confirm their priors. And so they demand new data that they believe will. And if it doesn't? Goalposts are movable for a reason. At the end of the day you either believe or you don't. But if there was an actual problem, we'd know. There are mi…

It's not a question of belief, it's a question of collecting the data. The data I mentioned is reasonable, easy to collect, and currently unavailable.

You're elsewhere in this subthread dismissing existing evidence (insurance rates) because it doesn't confirm your priors. I think we both know what would happen if this study magically appeared. "Demanding" data is a cheap evasion. The requirement for rational discourse is accepting the data you have.

Re: Tesla driver who killed 2 people while using autopilot must pay $23,000, no jail

#68
No time, even suspended time? You don't have suspended prison time in California?

I mean, i understand it's the US, but you got to at least remove the driving licence for like 5 years and add a 5-10 year suspended prison time (until his next road infraction, seems a good way to prevent him from killing people by arrogance and negligence again).

Re: Tesla driver who killed 2 people while using autopilot must pay $23,000, no jail

#69
post #27

I would like the NHTSA to gather and publish robust data on: • Crashes per mile on each manufacturer's "self-driving" systems • Crashes per mile on each manufacturer's LKAS (lane keeping assistant) systems • Crashes per mile on each manufacturer's TACC (traffic aware cruise control) • Crashes per mile on each manufacturer's regular cruise control • Crashes per mile under manual control Break each out by highway, subu…

> • Crashes per mile on each manufacturer's "self-driving" systems ...counting miles where self-driving was activated including the 5 minutes afterwards — https://www.motortrend.com/news/nhtsa-tesla-autopilot-invest... (Honi soit qui mal y pense.)

This is a silly article. The numbers Tesla releases themselves say "we count any crash in which Autopilot was deactivated within 5 seconds before impact", so Autopilot aborting less than one second before a crash would still be counted as an Autopilot crash. (I think this happens because AEB takes over.) But sure, this should obviously be accounted for in some well-run government study.

Re: Tesla driver who killed 2 people while using autopilot must pay $23,000, no jail

#70
post #39

The Tesla thing feels like a bit of a red herring. Killing anyone with a car is basically just an "oopsie" in terms of US law.

It's generally an accident.

It’s generally unintentional. It’s rarely the case that the collision would have occurred had the driver been in compliance with the law. Road design is often a factor because the biggest thing which makes it a fatality is speed, and we have many roads where the speed limit is supposed to be 20-25mph but the design is like a much faster highway, causing almost everyone to go over the limit and thus have less time to react to anyone unexpected and hit them at higher speeds.

This recent blog post was making the rounds based on Washington state data showing the speeding rate _in school zones_ was over 70%, which I think is what you’d find almost anywhere in the United States:

https://www.theurbanist.org/2023/12/12/drivers-are-speeding-...

Post reply on HN