Tesla issues strongest statement yet blaming driver for deadly crash

Post by ChoGGi » Thu, Apr 12, 2018, 7:56 PM UTC

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…

Post by v_lisivka » Thu, Apr 12, 2018, 8:42 PM UTC

vkou wrote: post #254

mrb wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

« When autopilot is used as required by their ToS, it is useless » Really? Having an autopilot system with an incredibly fast reaction time able brake/swerve/avoid accidents faster than humans is "useless"?

According to the TOS, and given Tesla's statements, the system needs to be supervised by a 100% attentive human 24/7. From what we know of human physiology, and what we have observed from previous self-driving crashes, this level of attentiveness is impossible to maintain... Without being the one actively driving the car.

Post by omarforgotpwd » Thu, Apr 12, 2018, 9:14 PM UTC

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…

Post by Double_a_92 » Fri, Apr 13, 2018, 6:45 AM UTC

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.

Post by vsl » Fri, Apr 13, 2018, 7:11 AM UTC

astrodust wrote: post #717

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

It drove in a straight line right into the wall. What part of that, other than hitting the wall, are you going to "feel"?