Live data from Hacker News

Tesla issues strongest statement yet blaming driver for deadly crash

abc7news.com

691–700 of 850 posts

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

#691
post #648

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We are discussing the use of Autopilot, so it is a fair comparison. Nobody is worried about the safety of a Tesla with autopilot off.

Well if you are worried about safety with autopilot on don't turn it on. To expect a system to function 100% from day 1 or even on day 1000 is unreal. Look at aeroplanes - they used to be notorious with their safety records in the 50s and 60s. However, with each crash, problems were identified and improvements were made. This is what led to the current world where aeroplanes are one of the safest mode of traveling.

Sorry, comparison with airplanes is not fair in my opinion.

The purpose of the autopilot is to increase safety for drivers that are not attentive. However, it turns out that Tesla requires drivers to be even more attentive than regular vehicles. This is not a sign of progression.

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

#692
post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And Tesla is relying on Joe Sixpack's Hollywood understanding of autopilot functionality. They're very well aware of that.

So you’re saying that Tesla drivers are only educated by marketing materials and ignore what the car says every time they engage the autopilot feature?

They are saying that Tesla drivers are not super humans, and only average every day, garden variety human beings...

The funny thing is that it is the same people who are arguing for self driving tech by saying that "Humans will do dumb shit", is the same ones who justify Tesla by saying "Humans should not do stupid things (like ignoring the cars warning)"..

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

#693

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…

> This is why, as the head of Google's self driving effort once said, partial self driving "assistance" is inherently unsafe.

Sorry, but this is the exact wrong conclusion to make from the available data. Partially automated cars have been driven by average people on the public roads since 2006, when the Mercedes S class got active steering and ACC. There is no data that says that these systems, which are available on cars as affordable as e.g. a VW Polo, lead to more crashes. In fact the only data I have seen suggests that they reduce crashes and driver fatigue significantly.

The issue that such a feature is systematically crashing and even killing its users is very specific to Tesla. Tesla's system has had a tendency to run into stationary objects for as long as it has been available to the public. Teslas have a significantly higher rate of causing insurance claims. There are countless videos showing it happening, the two (possibly three) fatalities so far are just the tip of the iceberg. Tesla blamed MobilEye (their previous supplier of camera-based object detection hardware), but it seems fairly evident that Tesla's system has the exact same systemic issue even with their new in-house object detection software.

My opinion as an engineer working on this exact kind of system for one of Tesla's competitors is that Tesla's system just isn't robust enough to be allowed to be used like all other manufacturer's autosteer/ACC systems. IMO that's because their basic approach (doing simple line-following on the lane markings) is super naive. A much more intricate approach needed. One that does some level of reasoning on what is a driving surface and what isn't. This has been known in the automotive industry for over a decade. Sorry to be so absolute, but frankly it's just unnacceptable that Tesla is gambling their customer's lives on such a ridiculously half-baked implementation.

> Lane following assistance without good automatic braking kills.

Correct. It also kills when it lies to the driver about how confident it is in a given situation. Many of the crashes, instances of cars veering off into oncoming lanes etc. we have seen would not have happened, if Tesla would fall back to the driver in sketchy situations. However what it does do instead is not even notfy the driver that the system is hanging on by the barest of threads. This works out fine quite often and makes it seem like the car can detect the lanes successfully even in sketchy situations. Yet once the system (and the driver) runs out of luck, there is absolutely no chance to rectify the situation.

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

#694
Driving a Tesla in the "auto-pilot" is like taking my 16yo kid for a teaching lesson while I am in the passenger seat, sweating and sometimes hoping for the best when she makes a mistake that could be fatal. And as a software engineer, I have more faith in my daughter than Tesla's software.

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

#695
post #690

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Also, people are terrible at detecting objects directly in front of them and just like computers, the human brain can be cheated, overloaded, inept or inexperienced leading to an accident. How many optical illusions do you usually see in the roads while driving, that can result in an accident? I am not even talking about the "people are terrible at detecting objects directly in front of them" part. I mean, how can…

Humans can only look in one direction, and only from inside the car with their view obstructed, and they're only paying attention sometimes. Check out this article, it is easy to never see a bike you're on a collision course with. https://singletrackworld.com/2018/01/collision-course-why-th...

>Humans can only look in one direction..

Last time I checked, I could move my eyes, up and down, side to side. I could also rotate my whole head, that also up and down and side to side.

And I am a human being.

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

#696

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…

> That is not an accident. It follows directly from Musk's decision to cut costs by trying to do the job with inadequate sensors and processing.

Any references to support that statement?

First, how do you know it was Musk's decision? And second, when you imply that by using lower cost sensors (cameras), Tesla is cutting costs, how do you support that?

Their lower cost of sensors might be offset by having to spend more on software development for image processing, for example. When summed up, the overall cost per car may increase significantly.

At least to me, it is not clear at all whether Tesla's self-driving technology cost per car is less or more than it is e.g. for cars which use lidar sensors.

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

#697

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.

If I was driving a car like that I think I'd feel safer if there was a "confidence meter" available, I have no idea about how these auto-drive systems work but I'm guessing there's some metric for how confident the car is that it's going in the correct direction. Exposing that information as a basic percentage meter on the dash somewhere would make me feel more confident about using the auto-drive.

I can understand why this wouldn't happen from a business perspective, and it's also presumably not as simple to implement as I'm implying, but I can't think of a better way to get around the uncertainty of whether the car's operating in an expected way or not.

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

#698
post #298
post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The text at the top of the homepage for Tesla Autopilot is this: > Full Self-Driving Hardware on All Cars > All Tesla vehicles produced in our factory, including Model 3, have the hardware needed for full self-driving capability at a safety level substantially greater than that of a human driver. Whatever theory you have for Tesla's naming of their feature, it doesn't match with their marketing.

If autopilot crashes at a lower rate than the average driver, they are correct, but autopilot+attentive driver would still be better than either alone.

At what point is an attentive driver expected to notice that autopilot has silently failed? The video linked at the top of the thread has a This is actually harder to do then just driving the car.

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

#699

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 stee…

Yes, the wheel turns, and the driver can over-ride/take over from the Autopilot at any time by just turning, or resisting the auto-pilot's turning of the wheel.

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

#700

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Tesla's system demands more from drivers than manual driving. This is a great point. With regular cars, drivers can reliably predict where the car will be after 5 seconds. However, with Tesla, there is really no way to know what the auto-driver will do, and so the driver has to stay even more attentive to ensure that it does not do something wrong. It's like driving a car that is not under your control, and may go…

There seems to be a valley between the way the user expects something works and how it actually does. When users detect a difference they may compensate, if they survive long enough to learn. Of course if users get to used to such differences then those can become 'features' which only makes progress harder.

The problem is that you don't know what the car is going to do. E.g. if you see a barrier you would mentally prepare to steer. But if you trust the car you don't prepare and then suddenly have to take over at the last moment when you realize the car is doing something wrong.

That means the autopilot doesn't help at all since you would have to basically drive manually all the time anyway.

Post reply on HN