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

741–750 of 850 posts

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

#741

Post by kolinko »

Splines wrote: post #509
tedivm wrote: post #436

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To me beta testing should be a long period of time where the computer is running while humans are driving, with deviations between what the computer would do if it had control versus what the human actually does being recorded for future training. The value add is that the computer can still be used to alert to dangerous conditions, or potentially even overriding in certain circumstances (applying break when lidar se…

It's surprising that this isn't the standard right now. I'm certain the people at Tesla/Uber/Waymo have considered this - I'm curious why this approach isn't more common.

It was happening. Many companies, Tesla including, gathered a lot of data for training the system.

The problem is that you cna only learn so much without actual practice.

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

#742

Post by corney91 »

shawabawa3 wrote: post #731
corney91 wrote: post #697

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

If they had the ability to measure confidence in the system, they would use it to issue warnings or disable autopilot The "confidence meter" would almost certainly be 100% right up until it crashes into an obvious obstacle

> If they had the ability to measure confidence in the system, they would use it to issue warnings or disable autopilot

Yeah, that's basically what I'm asking for, maybe a warning light at a certain threshold would be a better default, personally I'd still find a number more trustworthy though.

> The "confidence meter" would almost certainly be 100% right up until it crashes into an obvious obstacle

If image recognition algorithms have associated confidence levels, I'd be surprised something more complicated like road navigation was 100% certain all the time.

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

#744

Post by gkya »

skgoa wrote: post #693
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…

> 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 o…

I don't know much about cars but I guess the point you're missing is that Tesla is the first (and only) company to market automated driving assistance as Autopilot. My first impression when I heard that first was that the car knew how to go from point A to point B with no or minimal manual intervention. With other cars it's marketed as what it is: driving tech that helps avoid accidents. But youtube is full of videos people letting go of the steering wheel on highways and stuff in Teslas.

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

#745

Post by gkya »

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…

Nope. The wheel does turn, in videos I've seen, but with this video the problem is that the vehicle moves straight ahead as the yellow wall pops up in front of it, in which case the wheel would not indicate anything too.

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

#746

Post by mamon »

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…

Yes, with Tesla you are not a driver, you are a driving teacher for Tesla autopilot. And, as anyone who ever tried to teach their own kid how to drive knows, being a teacher is inherently more difficult than simply driving.

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

#747

Post by thefounder »

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…

Once you have enough Waymo cars on the road you'll see that the Waymo way kills people too. I would put all these vehicles in karantine mode until the industry or gov develops proper regulation/tests. The car should't be able to change the direction unless it proves it can never fail identifying obstacles.

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

#748

Post by gkya »

txcwpalpha wrote: post #59

I used to be in awe of Teslas and I have always been a big fan of Musk, and even after the crash I still imagined myself one day buying a Tesla. But after this response, I've completely lost respect for the company, for Musk, and I don't think I'll ever buy one or advocate for someone buying one. The driver had previously reported to Tesla 7 to 10 times that there was an issue with autopilot, but Tesla told him "no t…

Tesla was one of the best tech I've ever watched happen, up until when they decided to introduce the Autopilot. I guess they found out they can't easily improve on the range, which was the feature, up until this mess of a branding and PR. They were the good, benevolent techies, but they became angry and arrogant rich guys just in a flash under the slightest of criticism, and when they were to blame.

What I hope now is that there come a new fresh enterprise that prioritises the range variable, and can produce serious electric alternatives to conventional buses and scooters (e.g. Vespa) too.

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

#749

Post by icc97 »

skgoa wrote: post #693
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…

> 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 o…

> Partially automated cars have been driven by average people on the public roads since 2006,

What the GP was referring to, which is what I've see it referred to in Google presentations is level 3 automation. That is what autopilot is supposed to be, where you can take you hands off the wheel and the car can drive itself but needs constant supervision.

What you're referring to is passive assistance such as collision detection which don't drive the car but provide alerts. There is nothing wrong with this technology, it works because the driver has to drive as they normally would but it provides assistance when it spots something the driver doesn't. Here humans do the object detection and the computers stay alert as a backup.

There is a problem when the car drives itself but the driver has to stay alert. This is a problem because the human is much better at object detection and the car is much better at staying alert.

Post reply on HN