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

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

#671

Post by sokoloff » Thu, Apr 12, 2018, 6:59 AM UTC

patcheudor wrote: post #107

tc wrote: post #18

Tesla probably shouldn't be saying anything about this at all, even just to avoid giving it more news cycles. But if they were going to say something, here's what they should have said the first time. ---- We take great care in building our cars to save lives. Forty thousands Americans die on the roads each year. That's a statistic. But even a single death of a Tesla driver or passenger is a tragedy. This has affecte…

>t's a tool to help attentive drivers avoid accidents that might have otherwise occurred. This needs far more discussion. I just don't buy it. I don't believe that you can have a car engaged in auto-drive mode and remain attentive. I think our psychology won't allow it. When driving, I find that I must be engaged and on long trips I don't even enable cruise control because taking the accelerator input away from me is…

As a user of autopilot in aviation context, I do remain engaged and connected to the flight while the autopilot handles the routine course following and altitude hold/tracking responsibilities.

I don’t find that particularly challenging and in fact, when the autopilot is INOP, flights are slightly more mentally fatiguing because you have no offload and complex arrivals are much more work, but in cruise, you have to be paying attention either way. It’s not a time to read the newspaper, autopilot or not.

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

#672

Post by kgwgk » Thu, Apr 12, 2018, 6:59 AM UTC

lowkeyokay wrote: post #660

kgwgk wrote: post #629

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You don't microwave a cat just because there is no warning label saying you cannot do that. And why don’t you that, precisely? If you don’t understand the physics of the thing how are you supossed to know that using it on low power is different that bathing the cat on warm water, for example?

Because it is for cooking

Can you bath a cat in a large pot? Can you bath a cat (or a baby, for that matter) in a kitchen sink?

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

#673

Post by cm2187 » Thu, Apr 12, 2018, 7:00 AM UTC

anyzen wrote: post #645

tim333 wrote: post #641

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>obvious orange obstacle Apparently they loose the colour info and process black and white because it is easier. https://electrek.co/2017/05/16/tesla-autopilot-2-0-can-see/ This seems to have been an issue in some of the crashes and maybe was a mistake. See also for example the trailer an earlier Tesla crashed into https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/06/20/tesla_death_crash_a... Kind of obvious in colour but at the ti…

Note that it's not (only) about colors... Human vision has trouble picking out colors in the dark, yet it still allows us to process world around us to a surprising degree. However until the "brain" of the car is good enough, it is simply irresponsible of Tesla not to use all the data available, from as many different sensors as possible. Testa should use color. And they should use Lidar.

on human eyes, I was under the impression that we had a much better dynamic range than the best cameras on the market.

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

#674

Post by deepGem » Thu, Apr 12, 2018, 7:04 AM UTC

abalone wrote: post #626

Tesla is recklessly using its own customers to train their fleet for level 5. AT BEST their response is, drivers need to be 100% as attentive as they would without autopilot. What then is the point of autopilot, except to train the fleet? They are in complete denial that autosteering can seduce reasonable people into lowering their guard and mentally relaxing. Again, what other immediate user benefit would it provide…

I think the phrase 'Auto-pilot' is a misnomer. It's a lead-on phrase, confuses people to let their eyes off the road. They should have named it 'driver assist' or something mundane people shouldn't get confused by. Auto-pilot for any person means that the car will steer automatically, which it does, but also kills you. At least by now, it should be obvious that a half baked auto-steering or auto-pilot is a colossal mistake. Admit that you made a mistake and be done with it.

Tell people explicitly not to use auto pilot. Tesla can still use the onboard cameras and everything else for training the AI.

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

#675

Post by cm2187 » Thu, Apr 12, 2018, 7:09 AM UTC

ranman wrote: post #661

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…

Do you own a Tesla? I do. I’ve driven one for 3 years now. It definitely makes road trips easier and reduces fatigue. I believe it requires the same amount of attention but less physical exertion. Your polemic description of “trail of blood and death” is really based on anecdotal descriptions instead of reality. Car accidents happen and will continue to happen for a long time. The goal is to reduce the number of acci…

I have never driven a (partially) self driving car but my experience of regular cars is that I struggle to keep my attention on the road (or staying awake) in long trips as a passenger while I have no such problems as a driver. So I could imagine how the driver of a self driving car, particularly after a long time with no incident, could have low reaction times while given even less time to react than if he was driving.

In any case, self driving cars will have accidents, not the least because some accidents are unavoidable (random behaviour of other cars, animals or pedestrians, unexpected slippery roads, etc), but running heads on into a large visible static object should never happen. It’s a bug.

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

#676

Post by sakarisson » Thu, Apr 12, 2018, 7:10 AM UTC

kolpa wrote: post #302

Johnny555 wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What company can afford to embrace a wrongful-death lawsuit? And it's not just this one, it's all the others that they'll suddenly be accepting liability for.

Certainly not a company that can't even afford to embrace a 1GB Google maps download over LTE. https://forums.tesla.com/forum/forums/tesla%E2%80%99s-crazy-...

They say they can't possibly afford to have cars download the maps at the wifi of service stations, yet they don't see any issue with leeching off Starbucks' free wifi. How anyone could have written that e-mail with a straight face is beyond me.

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

#677

Post by jakobegger » Thu, Apr 12, 2018, 7:16 AM UTC

2bitencryption wrote: post #257

cmurf wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Notice in the video where the car DOESN'T head towards the divider, the Tesla autopilot dashboard shows that it can see the car ahead of it. Sorta ironic. In a sense autopilot is trusting/deferring to the judgment of the driver of the car in front of it for course determination.

I can see why that seems sensible, in a bizarre way. There's a car ahead of us. It took Path A and didn't crash into a deadly wall. Therefore, if we also take Path A, we won't crash into a deadly wall, regardless of what any paint on the ground says. but damn, tighten this stuff up when people's lives are on the line, please.

Lets just hope you aren't following another Tesla...

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

#678

Post by abalone » Thu, Apr 12, 2018, 7:20 AM UTC

deepGem wrote: post #674

abalone wrote: post #626

Tesla is recklessly using its own customers to train their fleet for level 5. AT BEST their response is, drivers need to be 100% as attentive as they would without autopilot. What then is the point of autopilot, except to train the fleet? They are in complete denial that autosteering can seduce reasonable people into lowering their guard and mentally relaxing. Again, what other immediate user benefit would it provide…

I think the phrase 'Auto-pilot' is a misnomer. It's a lead-on phrase, confuses people to let their eyes off the road. They should have named it 'driver assist' or something mundane people shouldn't get confused by. Auto-pilot for any person means that the car will steer automatically, which it does, but also kills you. At least by now, it should be obvious that a half baked auto-steering or auto-pilot is a colossal m…

Yeah, Tesla’s response to that is it’s like a plane: autopilot means you still have be at the controls.

But it’s nothing like a plane. Concrete walls don’t suddenly appear in the sky. The required reaction time to avoid an autopilot collision in some of these videos is seconds.

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

#679

Post by jakobegger » Thu, Apr 12, 2018, 7:26 AM UTC

Jemmeh wrote: post #86

redial wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Stop the car in the middle of a freeway? Yes. When the alternative is having a crash they should find a way to stop. [edit: of course I don't mean to suddenly stop. But if the system can't trust the driver is alert it should disengage or stop. As we've seen now multiple times, if it continues it will result in a crash.] The current behavior is not only dangerous to the driver of a tesla. It puts everyone in the roa…

Stopping in the middle of the road is dangerous (people will crash into you) and it would also be hard to make something have a feature to pull them off the road. If the computer reads it wrong you'll be in a ditch from the car trying to pull you off the road into something with no shoulder. The shoulder of a road is also dangerous as well even if there is a proper one because people often do not stay exactly in thei…

Just make the car turn on the warning lights and gently come to a stop when the driver lets go of the steering wheel or is otherwise not paying attention.

There are two possibilities:

1) The driver is actually incapacitated. Then slowing down and stopping is a million times safer than continuing to drive.

2) The driver was looking at his mobile phone. Then he'll probably quickly react and take control of the car again.

I don't see the scenario where continuing to drive is safe when the car knows the driver isn't paying attention.

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

#680

Post by vonseel » Thu, Apr 12, 2018, 7:27 AM UTC

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…

Does the autopiloted steering wheel turn as if piloted by a human driver?

If your hands are on a steering wheel, you’re watching the road, and autopilot begins turning towards an obstacle, you should be aware enough to grip the wheel fully and prevent the incorrect turn.

End of story.

Edit: “Autopilot” is a great brand-name for the technology, but perhaps implies too much self-driving capability. Maybe “assisted steering” is a better term for this.