Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Tesla investigation deepens after more than a dozen US ‘Autopilot’ crashes

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 124 posts

Re: Tesla investigation deepens after more than a dozen US ‘Autopilot’ crashes

#71

Post by kube-system »

jstream67 wrote: post #69
kube-system wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The difference between Tesla's system and driver assistance features that other automakers have, is that Tesla's system encourages a lower level of driver engagement, and it will initiate larger inputs. If those inputs are not what the driver is expecting, a driver in a Tesla may have to correct a more severe failure mode and they may have to do so after being mentally disengaged for a longer period.

From watching youtube videos I got the impression that the Ford 'Blue Cruise' does not require the hands to be on the wheel. I haven't used the Ford system but I have used the Tesla system and it requires you to move the wheel at a pretty annoyingly and regular frequency to remain in autopilot mode. I believe the cabin camera can also detect when you are on your phone or looking away - but i'm not sure if this is rol…

BlueCruise has a driver facing camera, some Tesla models do not: https://youtu.be/ovc2axLmzIw?t=65

Re: Tesla investigation deepens after more than a dozen US ‘Autopilot’ crashes

#72

Post by ActorNightly »

jdsully wrote: post #21
throwaway320923 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a good question, and I'm dismayed to see the various knee-jerk reactions to it. Seems to get caught up in the pro/anti-Tesla/Musk/blah noise. No, thank you. Here's the thing - people get in accidents all the time when assistance features like ABS, lane keeping, traction control, TACC, good-old-fashioned dumb cruise control, etc. are actively altering the vehicle's performance and behavior. So when we consider Te…

Most of these other implementations have radar and LiDAR. Teslas is the inferior solution. That’s why if you order one you see a disclaimer that it is vision only.

You have no basis for saying its inferior.

Re: Tesla investigation deepens after more than a dozen US ‘Autopilot’ crashes

#73

Post by kube-system »

ActorNightly wrote: post #66
malcolmgreaves wrote: post #60

UX and interfaces are important. If it's marketed and described as "autopilot" or "full self driving," then a reasonable person expects it to automatically pilot the vehicle I'm normal driving situations. Tesla is unfortunately trapped in a all too common story of AI development: over-hype and under-deliver.

There are plenty of warnings about "keeping hands on the wheel" and "full attentiveness". Of course people are going to ignore this, just like many people chose to ignore the effects of alcohol and drive.

Imagine if Mary Barra was on TV telling everyone that you could "pretty much drive our cars drunk", and then put in fine print that drunk driving is bad and illegal.

Re: Tesla investigation deepens after more than a dozen US ‘Autopilot’ crashes

#74

Post by ActorNightly »

colinmhayes wrote: post #58
throwaway320923 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a good question, and I'm dismayed to see the various knee-jerk reactions to it. Seems to get caught up in the pro/anti-Tesla/Musk/blah noise. No, thank you. Here's the thing - people get in accidents all the time when assistance features like ABS, lane keeping, traction control, TACC, good-old-fashioned dumb cruise control, etc. are actively altering the vehicle's performance and behavior. So when we consider Te…

Tesla markets their system as autopilot and full self driving. They are misleading people into believing the car is capable of driving itself. No one reads TACC/lane keeping and thinks "cool I can just play on my phone", But tons of tesla owners think that. It's not a coincidence.

Lots of people also buy sport motorcycles, thinking that because it has traction control and ABS means its safe, but then still end up crashing them and getting seriously hurt or dying.

Should there be in investigations for motorcycle companies making unsafe bikes? Or is it more the case of certain people in general being predisposed to taking more risks and not realizing the consequences?

Re: Tesla investigation deepens after more than a dozen US ‘Autopilot’ crashes

#75

Post by cameldrv »

vjust wrote: post #59

Driver behavior on the road can be totally unpredictable. Intent versus observed motion can have divergence.. I wonder if its the algorithms or the sensors.

In the incidents I've seen it's been sensors/interpretation, things like simply not detecting a vehicle.

Re: Tesla investigation deepens after more than a dozen US ‘Autopilot’ crashes

#76

Post by dekhn »

Manuel_D wrote: post #2

I wonder how many people turn on traditional cruise control and then crash due to neglectful driving. That's what we should be comparing Tesla Autopilot against, we should compare it against the status quo.

My most recent car has adaptive cruise control (tries to keep a speed, and break/resume if it can't). And it also has some lane detector that pushes the car gently back into the lane if you don't apply pressure. I used it for about 10 minutes before I had to prevent it from making a very serious accident. I would never compare that to Autopilot, which can go many hours before making a very serious accident.

Re: Tesla investigation deepens after more than a dozen US ‘Autopilot’ crashes

#77

Post by dekhn »

Manuel_D wrote: post #28
itsoktocry wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I wonder how many people turn on traditional cruise control and then crash due to neglectful driving. That's what we should be comparing Tesla Autopilot against, we should compare it against the status quo. This is so disingenuous. Go on YouTube and search for people "self-driving" in their Teslas, then do the same for people doing anything remotely the same with standard cruise control. Tesla and its fanatics want…

Is this actually a problem with tesla marketing? Or is it a problem with people being dumb? An aircraft autopilot will happily fly you straight into a mountain. It just holds altitude and bearing. Everyone I know with a Tesla exclusively uses autopilot on the highway in between exits. I'm pretty baffled as to how some people think it's fully autonomous driving, and I'm dubious as to how culpable Tesla is for that ign…

at the time tesla announced autopilot, most people figured that meant you could press a button and it would take you safely to where you want to go. A bunch of pilots chimed in to say that wasn't a good understanding of autopilot, but remember: the people being marketed to by and large aren't pilots.

IMHO Tesla has repeatedly overmarketed their actual capabilities. It's clearly starting to catch up with them.

Re: Tesla investigation deepens after more than a dozen US ‘Autopilot’ crashes

#78

Post by lolc »

zionic wrote: post #48
mike_d wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why then is Tesla specifically being focused on? Because before Tesla launched the feature, "Autopilot" was known in the general consciousness to mean a specific thing. Autopilot is the thing on planes that lets the pilot do other tasks (like navigational routing). Other car manufactures are smart enough to not brand their cruise control as "Self Driving" or the like. If I sold a brand of drain cleaner under the na…

>Because before Tesla launched the feature, "Autopilot" was known in the general consciousness to mean a specific thing Not that I agree with your statement, but the "general consciousness" would be wrong in that case. Autopilot in most aircraft will gladly fly you into the side of a mountain or other aircraft.

The environment matters. An aircraft autopilot will allow the pilot to safely disengage while in controlled airspace. A Tesla "Autopilot" will not let the driver disengage in any situation.

Re: Tesla investigation deepens after more than a dozen US ‘Autopilot’ crashes

#79

Post by ActorNightly »

kube-system wrote: post #73
ActorNightly wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are plenty of warnings about "keeping hands on the wheel" and "full attentiveness". Of course people are going to ignore this, just like many people chose to ignore the effects of alcohol and drive.

Imagine if Mary Barra was on TV telling everyone that you could "pretty much drive our cars drunk", and then put in fine print that drunk driving is bad and illegal.

There is a big difference between claiming that "you could just go in the backseat while the car drives itself", and calling your system Autopilot, considering collision avoidance isn't anywhere in the traditional definition of autopilot as it pertains to planes.

Don't let your hate for Musk as a person cloud your judgement. These things are not comparable.

Re: Tesla investigation deepens after more than a dozen US ‘Autopilot’ crashes

#80

Post by aeternum »

PKop wrote: post #45
aeternum wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't. You rarely see crashes of other vehicles make the press, but with Teslas you do. Tesla articles get views because of both the Tesla haters and fanboys, makes financial sense for news sites to publish them. That increased press leads to increased investigations.

Tesla is building "full self driving" using a feature called "Autopilot". You're playing stupid but nobody is fooled by this sophistry.

Doesn't Ford call their version Co-pilot360 or something? What are your thoughts on that?
Post reply on HN