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

Tesla issues strongest statement yet blaming driver for deadly crash

abc7news.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

721–730 of 850 posts

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

#721

Post by avar »

namdnay wrote: post #707
avar wrote: post #684

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>Is there any evidence that this is the case? >Yes. If there is evidence for it, this isn't it. Tesla cars having higher claim frequencies compared to say the puny Fiat 500 Electric (noted in the article) could just as well be explained by people driving it dangerously because it has "Ludicrous Mode". Porsche also has 3x the accident rate of Daewoo. That doesn't mean Daewoo cars are 3x as safe, it just means that pe…

"than other large luxury cars" - seems like a fair comparison, no?

No, because as noted in my sibling comment[1] that would assume that you've got the same demographic buying a Lexus as a BMWs. That's been shown not to be the case, there's a selection bias where people who are going to drive unsafely buy higher performance vehicles.

1. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16819101

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

#722

Post by Zanni »

vonseel wrote: post #680
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 stee…

Yes. What's disconcerting, though, is that the autopilot will often take a different line through a turn than I would. Still within the lane, just not what I would do. For me that felt like I had to correct the autopilot even when I didn't, so I didn't trust it. That was on a test drive. I've never enabled autopilot on my own Tesla.

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

#723

Post by brain_dev »

Robotbeat wrote: post #45
wehadfun wrote: post #24

We need FAA style oversight on self driving cars.

This isn't self-driving, though. It isn't called self-driving.

How else would you describe an Automatically Piloted Vehicle then?

If it's not self-driving, don't call it Autopilot, and don't lull people into a false sense of security. Even with alarms to try and keep the driver engaged, people are inherently going to place more faith in 'Autopilot' than 'Enhanced Cruise Control' or something similarly named.

The marketing around this feature is reckless, and Tesla + Musk should be ashamed. To the point that I would consider working on that team to be immoral.

For what it's worth, this is coming from a big Musk fan.

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

#724

Post by aiCeivi9 »

sabareesh wrote: post #234

I am not sure why there is so much anti Tesla sentiment here in HackerNews. I am a new model 3 owner and very well informed so many times that "Enhanced Autopilot" is nothing other than advanced cruise control and my attention is always on the road. This is a great technology but someone cannot be more obvious than this on how to use it responsibly.

We hated the name as soon as it was announced, before any incident. People thought it was misleading and we have another proof it is.

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

#725

Post by michaelt »

omarforgotpwd wrote: post #711
astrodust wrote: post #709

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That crash in the video is one you'd have very little time to avoid. Recognizing that the car isn't just going a bit wide but is on a direct collision course with the barrier takes time, and then you need to determine a course of action, reacting without over-reacting. You probably have 100ms to begin your action, 500ms to complete it. Good luck with that if you're not perfectly alert.

Trust me, when the car starts doing something you wouldn't do you feel it immediately IF you're paying attention. Remember the car doesn't do anything fancy -- it's just supposed to drive straight centered in the lane

Seems to me in the video there's no intervention needed at the 21 second mark, and the car's already hit the barrier at the 22 second mark. Youtube doesn't provide sub-second time marks, but I'd estimate it's 21.5 second before I'd expect the car to start turning, giving the driver 0.5 seconds to notice the failure, take control of the vehicle, and execute the swerve required.

The Queensland government estimates it takes drivers 1.5 seconds to react to an emergency [1] (I wouldn't be surprised if that was a 99th percentile figure, of course)

The only thing we can blame the victim for here is foolishly trusting Tesla's apparently crap software.

[1] https://www.qld.gov.au/transport/safety/road-safety/driving-...

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

#726

Post by rightbyte »

Negitivefrags wrote: post #37
Diederich wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It first flashes, then beeps at you, and then disengages, so you start slowing down. I believe that if that happens, it won't re-engage again until after the car is stopped, shut off, and re-started.

To reenable autopilot you not only need to restart the car, but also go back into the car settings and turn it on again. When you do this it presents you with a window that outlines your liability that you must accept. It looks like this: https://boygeniusreport.files.wordpress.com/2016/07/autostee...

Oh ... is it real? Beta? Googleinh seems to confirm so.

Other car manufacturer use trained personel for testing.

I mean this is silly and should be illegal.

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

#727

Post by [deleted] »

abalone wrote: post #595
crabasa wrote: post #580

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> Tesla's system demands more from drivers than manual driving. If this was true, wouldn't Tesla vehicles have a higher rate of crashes, all things being equal? Is there any evidence that this is the case?

Is there any evidence it’s not? Does Tesla publish their crash rate? Also note that they are an extremely small segment of the vehicle population so it may not be a statistically valid sample yet.

[deleted]

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

#728

Post by semi-extrinsic »

michaelt wrote: post #725
omarforgotpwd wrote: post #711

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trust me, when the car starts doing something you wouldn't do you feel it immediately IF you're paying attention. Remember the car doesn't do anything fancy -- it's just supposed to drive straight centered in the lane

Seems to me in the video there's no intervention needed at the 21 second mark, and the car's already hit the barrier at the 22 second mark. Youtube doesn't provide sub-second time marks, but I'd estimate it's 21.5 second before I'd expect the car to start turning, giving the driver 0.5 seconds to notice the failure, take control of the vehicle, and execute the swerve required. The Queensland government estimates it t…

> giving the driver 0.5 seconds to notice the failure, take control of the vehicle, and execute the swerve required.

If you have to be constantly at this level of alertness, what is even the point of having an autopilot?

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

#729

Post by serpix »

corney91 wrote: post #697
maxxxxx wrote: post #554

Earlier quoted context omitted.

" 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 w…

On top of all that is going on in traffic you would add interpreting one more abstracted symbol to your cognitive load? The situation can change in milliseconds during driving, you can never ever be entirely sure nothing unexpected could happen.

Personally having tried Tesla AP1 iit was painfully clear I can never fully trust any assisted driving aid, they can fail at any point and I need to be ready to take over immediately. Particularly having to wrestle the steering wheel from AP1 as it slightly resists is reason enough to stop using it.

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

#730

Post by jackvalentine »

Double_a_92 wrote: post #700
paulryanrogers wrote: post #589

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Exactly - the only safe way to drive using autopilot assist is to keep your hands on the wheel and mime steering every corner... and at that point how is it assistance?
Post reply on HN