Tesla issues strongest statement yet blaming driver for deadly crash • Hacker News Board

Re: Tesla issues strongest statement yet blaming driver for deadly crash

#601

Post by stordoff » Thu, Apr 12, 2018, 4:54 AM UTC

zaidf wrote: post #129

"The reason the other families aren't on TV are because their loved ones are still alive." Wow, this sounds like a horrible, tasteless burn to end the statement with. And I am a Tesla fan.

I can't believe anyone writing wouldn't immediately think "Anyone involved is doing to read that as 'Your loved ones are dead'" and change it. Throwing your customer under the bus (_even_ if they are 100% at fault), then ending with a statement like that, is tasteless.

I can't see why they couldn't say something like "We are proud of this record, but continue to strive to improve and save even more families from this pain" -- still supports the product (which I'm not is the right path to take, but it's clearly the path they _are_ taking), but acknowledges the grief and avoids so directly/crassly comparing to it others' happiness.

Re: Tesla issues strongest statement yet blaming driver for deadly crash

#602

Post by axaxs » Thu, Apr 12, 2018, 4:54 AM UTC

tjomk wrote: post #597

axaxs wrote: post #584

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. You don't put beta features in that have life on the line. People always laugh at ridiculous warning labels, saying not to stick a fork in a toaster, or not to do something else obvious. Funny as it is, they are there for a reason, and it's not a corporations sense of humor. Tesla is the opposite of that, more or less advertising a feature that could kill you. It should be illegal, and if not, they'll eventually…

This is exactly the point why I will never understand people in US and the sort of thing with labels and warnings. You don't microwave a cat just because there is no warning label saying you cannot do that. You do not dry your hair submerged in a bath just because there's no warning label. And knowing how imperfect and faulty this system is (which is what the family says the driver told them), I would avoid engaging…

Fair enough. But realize these things hit stationary objects. Stationary objects include, as Uber proved, you. Or your car, your worksite, etc. Drunk driving isn't illegal for the safety of the drinking driver...

Re: Tesla issues strongest statement yet blaming driver for deadly crash

#603

Post by csours » Thu, Apr 12, 2018, 4:54 AM UTC

crabasa wrote: post #580

Animats wrote: post #552

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. If this was true, wouldn't Tesla vehicles have a higher rate of crashes, all things being equal? Is there any evidence that this is the case?

Not necessarily. It would likely lead to a lower rate accidents, but with much higher severity.

An example of the inverse of this concept is the roundabout or traffic circle, which has a higher rate of much lower severity accidents than traffic lights or stop signs

- edit - Removed irrelevant edit.

Re: Tesla issues strongest statement yet blaming driver for deadly crash

#604

Post by rohit2412 » Thu, Apr 12, 2018, 4:55 AM UTC

taneq wrote: post #476

rohit2412 wrote: post #422

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn't limited to no autopilot vs full autopilot. If autopilot is so good at correcting a drunk driver's accident, then let it run in a shadow mode only making corrective actions in emergencies. Why is AEB bundled in with Autosteer in all stats? AEB is undoubtedly good, Autosteer is debatable.

> AEB is undoubtedly good, Autosteer is debatable. AEB is clearly unreliable, as it didn't automatically slow the car in any of these cases where the car was pointed directly at a significant-sized stationary solid object. I did worry about this sort of thing back when they mentioned nuisance trips of the radar-based AEB system, and that to deal with them they were basically just geotagging where these nuisance trips…

AEB is there to correct driver's mistakes, not drive the car itself.

Yes, AEB fails, but a driver + AEB is safer than a driver alone.

Re: Tesla issues strongest statement yet blaming driver for deadly crash

#605

Post by haberman » Thu, Apr 12, 2018, 4:56 AM UTC

whistlerbrk wrote: post #244

txcwpalpha wrote: post #59

I used to be in awe of Teslas and I have always been a big fan of Musk, and even after the crash I still imagined myself one day buying a Tesla. But after this response, I've completely lost respect for the company, for Musk, and I don't think I'll ever buy one or advocate for someone buying one. The driver had previously reported to Tesla 7 to 10 times that there was an issue with autopilot, but Tesla told him "no t…

> The driver had previously reported to Tesla 7 to 10 times I understand this is not a popular opinion on news forums anywhere nor do I write this to absolve in my view Tesla of their poor response nor of their poor choice in naming the system 'autopilot' to start. But at what point does corporate or government responsibility end and personal responsibility start? If I knew something didn't work and that something co…

I agree completely with you and also with grandparent. I don't think these perspectives are in conflict at all. You have to take responsibility for your own safety. But at the same time, Tesla's response makes me lose respect for them.

Re: Tesla issues strongest statement yet blaming driver for deadly crash

#606

Post by dbasedweeb » Thu, Apr 12, 2018, 4:58 AM UTC

tjomk wrote: post #597

axaxs wrote: post #584

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. You don't put beta features in that have life on the line. People always laugh at ridiculous warning labels, saying not to stick a fork in a toaster, or not to do something else obvious. Funny as it is, they are there for a reason, and it's not a corporations sense of humor. Tesla is the opposite of that, more or less advertising a feature that could kill you. It should be illegal, and if not, they'll eventually…

This is exactly the point why I will never understand people in US and the sort of thing with labels and warnings. You don't microwave a cat just because there is no warning label saying you cannot do that. You do not dry your hair submerged in a bath just because there's no warning label. And knowing how imperfect and faulty this system is (which is what the family says the driver told them), I would avoid engaging…

Lovely, and I applaud your vision of rugged individualism, right up until the moment I remember that you might not just be killing yourself. No offense, but I don’t want to be the victim of the intersection between your principles and a company’s willingness to risk lives for profit. You might not hit a barrier, you might hit a person.

It’s not just your decision when those choices impact everyone who shares your environment. If you want to beta test features on a closed course, be my guest, but on public roads you need to think of people other than yourself.

Re: Tesla issues strongest statement yet blaming driver for deadly crash

#607

Post by ryanlol » Thu, Apr 12, 2018, 5:00 AM UTC

maxxxxx wrote: post #554

Animats wrote: post #552

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.

Taking over from the autopilot is very easy unless you are deliberately risking your own life.

Re: Tesla issues strongest statement yet blaming driver for deadly crash

#608

Post by greglindahl » Thu, Apr 12, 2018, 5:01 AM UTC

chrisper wrote: post #543

greglindahl wrote: post #356

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Excessive reliance on features like autoland was actually the cause of that SFO accident, according to the NTSB.

But ILS (the autoland system on ground) was disabled that day. Are we talking about two different incidents?

No, did you read the accident report which talked about the pilots being unable to land the plane because they were used to the computer doing most of the work?

Re: Tesla issues strongest statement yet blaming driver for deadly crash

#609

Post by ryanlol » Thu, Apr 12, 2018, 5:04 AM UTC

mygo wrote: post #561

pishpash wrote: post #496

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just turn off autopilot if no human input is detected. Hands on the wheel may not be enough input but some other combination may be enough.

maybe don’t call it autopilot then. call it “driver assistance”?.. or something that doesn’t make it sound like “autopilot”.

On the other hand that is exactly what autopilot means...

Re: Tesla issues strongest statement yet blaming driver for deadly crash

#610

Post by greglindahl » Thu, Apr 12, 2018, 5:05 AM UTC

txcwpalpha wrote: post #518

greglindahl wrote: post #348

Earlier quoted context omitted.

... in a Level 2 system, that's a fine thing.

No, it is absolutely not. I'm not sure why you keep posting this as if it is definitive. Let me put it very clearly for you: it is not acceptable, in any shape or manner, to expect your users to have to "save themselves" from your product killing them every 5 seconds. If your product requires that, it is a bad product . Furthermore, your entire argument of "it's just a level 2 system..." falls apart when you consider…

Great research! Having used autopilot in my girlfriend’s car, I’m aware of the notifications when autopilot is turned on. You should check it out, instead of assuming that drivers only see the marketing materials you quote.

Also, have you used any adaptive cruise control system? Because they break your rule.