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

641–650 of 714 posts

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

#641

Post by rootusrootus »

throwawayacc3 wrote: post #314
rootusrootus wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Friend of mine was driving down the road one day, and someone in the lane next to him turned on her turn signal, then merged into him without looking. She explained the situation carefully to the adjuster, noting that "she had her turn signal on, therefore she had the right to merge." At this point, the adjuster contacted my friend and asked where to send the check. A turn signal does not give you the right to the la…

There were multiple car lengths of room when the Tesla started merging. The other car was so far back it wasn't close to the blindspot. Americans do not adjust their speed or following distance to the conditions. They drive like they have some sort of right to a road free of obstructions and to drive at the speed limit or above, no matter the circumstances.

Takes about 8 to 10 car lengths for an average car to stop from 60 mph, from the moment the brakes are activated fully. A fast human reaction time would be 150ms, but that's just to react, not to get the foot onto the brake. So add another 3 car lengths.

There were not 11-13 car lengths between the car in the left lane and the Tesla when it brake checked them.

Generalizing about Americans is tiresome, by the way. It makes you look petty and ignorant. Which might be true, but on the off chance you didn't intend to come across that way...

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

#642

Post by joenathanone »

ncr100 wrote: post #626
joenathanone wrote: post #604

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have an X and a 3, this is exactly how the car behaves when it has missed a turn because of a mismatch of map/vision data.

To confirm, when the navigation system fails, the entire call halts? That seems undesirable, since it would lead to rear-ending, in situations like this.

Correct, it behaves very stupidly when it fails, it's like the outputs from the network are directly controlling certain characteristics, things like the tires turning back and forth in place, over and over, like it is stuck in the process of trying to make a decision.

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

#643

Post by mtsr »

throwaheyy wrote: post #631
mtsr wrote: post #366

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The whole scenario would look very similar if the Tesla was a car suffering from a breakdown and moving to the safest lane it can reach safely. In such a case we would also expect other drivers to pay enough attention to prevent an accident like this...

No, it wouldn’t in a breakdown situation in any other car, the driver would try to pull over to the right. Most drivers gain an instinct to passing slower/stopped objects on the left, and a natural aversion to passing them on the right. The Tesla pulled over and stopped in the far left lane. No “space” was left to pass it.

It's either changing 3 lanes to the right or 1 to the left. In case of loss of control, in this case with the car coming to a stop very quickly, it might be better heading for the left lane, instead of getting stuck in the middle or second lane from the right.

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

#644

Post by __alexs »

N19PEDL2 wrote: post #468
__alexs wrote: post #448

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Suddenly stopping at high speed is generally considered (at least in the UK) dangerous driving and will get you prosecuted and probably mean you lose your license at the very least. If it results in a death then you can get a life sentence in prison for it. Intentionally stopping inside a tunnel is a pretty clear cut case of dangerous driving over here.

However there can be many reasons why a car has to stop suddenly: for example, a child might suddenly cross the road, or the driver might feel he or she is having a heart attack. My driving school teacher used to say: always remember that the car ahead of you could suddenly stop at any time for a reason that you might not know.

In this case the Tesla stopped because of what you might charitably call a breakdown. This would probably get you out of the dangerous driving conviction but if it happened multiple times would probably result in a recall on the vehicles to fix or disable the faulty part.

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

#645

Post by Animats »

gfodor wrote: post #57
gundmc wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe the car was in "Full Self Driving" and not "Autopilot"?

It’s unclear because FSD is supposed to switch to autopilot on highways. The driver said it was in FSD mode but they may just not realize that switchover occurs.

That this is even being discussed means it needed to be covered in ground school. Autopilot mode setting errors are a serious problem in aircraft operations. Read NTSB crash reports.

That's the trouble with this semi-automated mode. It re-creates a known problem in aircraft automation. And without the training pilots receive.

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

#646

Post by crote »

N19PEDL2 wrote: post #468
__alexs wrote: post #448

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Suddenly stopping at high speed is generally considered (at least in the UK) dangerous driving and will get you prosecuted and probably mean you lose your license at the very least. If it results in a death then you can get a life sentence in prison for it. Intentionally stopping inside a tunnel is a pretty clear cut case of dangerous driving over here.

However there can be many reasons why a car has to stop suddenly: for example, a child might suddenly cross the road, or the driver might feel he or she is having a heart attack. My driving school teacher used to say: always remember that the car ahead of you could suddenly stop at any time for a reason that you might not know.

This happend on a highway. The Tesla switched lanes into oncoming traffic moving faster than itself. It immediately started braking for no reason. On top of this, it all happened in a tunnel entrance.

Yes, you should remember that vehicles can suddenly stop. This means keeping a safe distance from the vehicle in front of you, and looking beyond that vehicle to anticipate what is going to happen. However, a vehicle illegally throwing itself in front of you and doing basically an emergency stop because it just feels like it is not something a reasonable driver is expected to predict.

If you look at the video, you can see that the first vehicle is almost at a full stop when it hits the Tesla - its driver performed as expected. The second vehicle comes to a full stop before hitting the first one, so that's also going quite well. The third vehicle (a rather large truck) doesn't brake but instead swerves into the other lane, almost hitting another car. This dooms vehicle number four, which suddenly finds itself mere feet away from a stopped vehicle. Five through seven are tailgating and never see it coming for the same reason. Number eight is able to stop in time.

The speed limit here is 50mph. Assuming they were driving the speed limit, the typical stopping distance would be 174 feet. I can assure you, nobody keeps a distance of 174 feet between them and the car in front.

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

#647

Post by Gordonjcp »

mhb wrote: post #638
Gordonjcp wrote: post #613

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No more and no fewer cameras than any city in the US.

That's just silly.

It's one of the things I found baffling about the US, is the sheer amount of cameras on everything.

People even put CCTV cameras inside their homes. What on earth?

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

#648

Post by sumeno »

AmericanChopper wrote: post #569
sumeno wrote: post #556

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Changing lanes and then slamming on the brakes means you are 100% at fault (assuming there is evidence). It's the most common car insurance scam and it is completely indistinguishable from what the Tesla did in this case

Breaking down is also completely indistinguishable from what the Tesla did in this case. The breaks weren’t slammed on either, 7 seconds elapsed between the Tesla indicating for the turn and the collision. It’s very obvious that every participant in the pile up was at least partially at fault. The only confounding factor in this case seems to be that many HN commenters lose a handful of IQ points when any topic relat…

The video of the accident[1] clearly shows the Tesla start hitting its brakes 4 seconds in, the car that eventually rearends it is a few car lengths behind and in the left lane and hits its own brakes less than a second later and the accident occurs less than 4 seconds later.

Taking into account reaction times, it takes approximately 5-6 seconds to bring a car going 60mph to a complete stop[2][3] The accident was completely unavoidable for the car that rearends the Tesla because the Tesla made an extremely dangerous maneuver

[1] https://theintercept.com/2023/01/10/tesla-crash-footage-auto... [2] https://nacto.org/docs/usdg/vehicle_stopping_distance_and_ti... [3] https://www.edmunds.com/driving-tips/keep-your-braking-dista...

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

#649

Post by smaudet »

frumper wrote: post #608
smaudet wrote: post #579

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 co…

he said 5 seconds to START braking

I did not interpret their comment that way. That would be unreasonable, however their comment included mention of physical break distance, so I'm pretty certain they didn't mean actual human response time and instead how long it takes for a human to respond and slow the car, which is the metric of interest here. Even for a robot with millisecond response times, you will be breaking in the multiples of seconds, not instantaneously. Observation "reaction time" really is completely irrelevant here.

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

#650

Post by smaudet »

jjav wrote: post #617
smaudet wrote: post #579

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 co…

> Reaction time is the time for the vehicle to come to a stop, not for the driver to first notice an issue. No, reaction time means the time from noticing the need to brake to the time brake pressue is getting applied.

I disagree - reaction time is commonly referring to the reaction time of the vehicle in these events, the propensity of software devs to treat everything like a video game non-withstanding.
Post reply on HN