New video of Tesla crash demonstrates the problem of semi-automated driving • Hacker News Board

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

#651

Post by smaudet » Thu, Jan 12, 2023, 6:20 PM UTC

mikestew wrote: post #612

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 You seem to have your terminology confused. Reaction time doesn’t even necessarily have anything to do with driving. I suggest a quick web search next time before assigning people remedial physics.

And I suggest you look into the concept of contextual terminology

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

#652

Post by enslavedrobot » Thu, Jan 12, 2023, 6:26 PM UTC

somethoughts wrote: post #65

I 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. [Edit] From the video the Tesla is making a lane change and stopping simultaneously which means there could be a case of the Tesla FSD/driver doing a unsafe lane change.[1] Most of the time FSD just wrecks the Tesla itself or injures the driver of the Tesla (i.e. running int…

FSDbeta is not enabled on highways. It's not clear to me that it's even possible to be on FSD in that tunnel.

Interestingly, the article is careful to say that the driver "claims" it was on FSDbeta.

More to this story.

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

#653

Post by nextstep » Thu, Jan 12, 2023, 6:33 PM UTC

93po wrote: post #639

nextstep wrote: post #421

This story also highlights just how little Elon Musk actually supports free speech. Since fighting for release of this video and publishing the story, Ken Klippenstein has been censored on Twitter through shadow bans and inability to find his profile through search. https://twitter.com/stevanzetti/status/1613295292283236358

Ken was deprioritized from search weeks ago. Also he wasn't shadow banned - just deprioritized (you have to type his full name to see his result). Can we please stop with the unfounded hyperbole?

Why was Klippenstein deprioritized? Elon Musk is disingenuous in his support for “free speech” if Twitter is limiting the reach of a prominent Musk critic.

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

#654

Post by 93po » Thu, Jan 12, 2023, 6:33 PM UTC

toast0 wrote: post #640

93po wrote: post #633

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> refuses to cooperate with the NTSB This is completely false. Tesla is legally required, and complies every time, to release crash data to the NTSB. This data includes whether or not self driving was enabled. > Tesla publicly disparages people Tesla refutes that self driving is enabled when people lie about it. I am sure there is an incident or two of someone being sassy about calling out these lies but there is no…

>> refuses to cooperate with the NTSB > This is completely false. https://finance.yahoo.com/news/tesla-won-apos-t-formally-140... >> Tesla publicly disparages people > Tesla refutes that self driving is enabled when people lie about it. I am sure there is an incident or two of someone being sassy about calling out these lies but there is no trend of "disparagement" Does any other car company have a habit of respondin…

> https://finance.yahoo.com/news/tesla-won-apos-t-formally-140...

You are completely misrepresenting what's happening here by saying Tesla is refusing to cooperate. NTSB is trying to pressure a gag order on Tesla that would prevent Tesla from disclosing information around a car accident to the public. NTSB deciding this is a mandatory part of the agreement is their choice. They could have chosen to go forward without this requirement - they didn't. Tesla still provided all the information they had on the situation, and still continued to provide assistance to the NTSB in their investigation. Just not as a "formal party". This is the NTSB making demands while also asking for help that Tesla isn't obligated to provide unless they want.

You're also misrepresenting the Toyota situation. Toyota actively denied fault for most of this situation, and was fined $1.2 billion for deceptive statements around it. They frequently referred to "pedal misapplication"

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

#655

Post by frumper » Thu, Jan 12, 2023, 6:36 PM UTC

smaudet wrote: post #649

frumper wrote: post #608

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 in…

> It takes humans up to 5 seconds to even start breaking in the presence of danger.

That seems pretty clear. 5 total seconds is really reasonable. 5 seconds before you start is silly.

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

#656

Post by amf12 » Thu, Jan 12, 2023, 6:37 PM UTC

waste_monk wrote: post #139

amf12 wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly, when you're driving, you sometimes only see the car in front of you. You might see it slowing down first, and you start slowing down, or continue because there is enough distance anyway. Then the car in front of you stops abruptly or crashes. Now you panic and brake hard. Maybe you still crash into the car in front. Even if you stop before crashing, this hard braking causes the car behind you to crash into…

>TL;DR - Sometimes the 3 second following distance is just not enough even if someone is paying attention because they can only see the car in front of them. Yep... the usual advice locally is 5 to 7 seconds gap for freeways and similar, before accounting for weather and other conditions. Of course, that assumes you can leave a gap without some bastard deciding to sneak in and occupy it.

> without some bastard deciding to sneak in and occupy it

Unfortunately, this. It sucks to keep a larger gap, have some idiot sneak in, and now you have to brake to maintain the distance again, repeat. FWIW, I am very careful to maintain distance just for situations like the one in this post.

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

#657

Post by amf12 » Thu, Jan 12, 2023, 6:38 PM UTC

int_19h wrote: post #150

amf12 wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly, when you're driving, you sometimes only see the car in front of you. You might see it slowing down first, and you start slowing down, or continue because there is enough distance anyway. Then the car in front of you stops abruptly or crashes. Now you panic and brake hard. Maybe you still crash into the car in front. Even if you stop before crashing, this hard braking causes the car behind you to crash into…

> You might see it slowing down first, and you start slowing down, or continue because there is enough distance anyway. That's the thing, though - if you were already at the distance limit, and the car in front of you starts slowing down, you have to also start slowing down right away to maintain said limit. If you do not, then it's already "not enough distance" by definition at that point, and you're the one respons…

> you have to also start slowing down right away to maintain said limit

Absolutely agreed. What I meant to highlight is, the reaction time can make a huge difference in situations like this.

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

#658

Post by 93po » Thu, Jan 12, 2023, 6:49 PM UTC

nextstep wrote: post #653

93po wrote: post #639

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ken was deprioritized from search weeks ago. Also he wasn't shadow banned - just deprioritized (you have to type his full name to see his result). Can we please stop with the unfounded hyperbole?

Why was Klippenstein deprioritized? Elon Musk is disingenuous in his support for “free speech” if Twitter is limiting the reach of a prominent Musk critic.

I don't work at Twitter - only someone who does would know the reason why. Being a Musk critic shouldn't give you a free pass to never be rate or search or visibility limited like anyone else when your account gets flagged for suspect behavior. His own colleague claimed it was likely due to bot-like behavior. Any speculation that it's Musk related is completely unfounded unless there's literally any evidence other than circumstantial speculation.

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

#659

Post by mschuster91 » Thu, Jan 12, 2023, 7:28 PM UTC

brookst wrote: post #587

mschuster91 wrote: post #373

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

You're outright wrong, I've detailed that here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34351151

And yes, motorcycles transport two people at the most - but for real, look outside a window and count how many car drives are made by single-occupants. In the UK, for example, it's 60% [1].

[1] https://www.statista.com/statistics/314733/single-occupant-c...

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

#660

Post by mschuster91 » Thu, Jan 12, 2023, 7:32 PM UTC

EL_Loco wrote: post #533

foepys wrote: post #417

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

With streets crowded with scooters during rush hour I think we'd have a lot more minor accidents/injuries, but far, far fewer deaths, right? What could be done to avoid the minor accidents?

> What could be done to avoid the minor accidents?

For one, more strictly enforce technical fitness and some form of age requirements. An awful lot of people don't care much about the roadworthiness of their vehicle, and many don't care about technological advances like anti brake-lock systems in newer models as well.

The other major contributor to motorcycle (or bicycle) accidents is road conditions like potholes, dirt and especially oil contamination, bumpiness in roads... a car doesn't care much (unless it's one of those super-flat sports vehicles), but a cyclist can easily lose control.