22 ms·

Tesla autopilot stops a collision [video]

275 points by MattBearman 11y ago

simfoo 11y ago
Watch Tesla's autopilot almost causing a head-on collision: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MrwxEX8qOxA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MrwxEX8qOxA
- jonawesomegreen 11y ago
  I'm fairly sure you are not supposed to be using Tesla autopilot unless you are on a highway.
  - simfoo 11y ago
    Then don't call it autopilot
    - Voloskaya 11y ago
      It's in beta for a reason, and before using it, you have to accept a disclaimer clearly stating that you should not use it on road without a concrete separation between you and the opposite traffic, and you should not use it on road with sharp turns. This guy was clearly looking for the limit of the autopilot, and found it, nearly at the expense of others.
      - speakeron 11y ago
        > It's in beta for a reason There's no place on the public roads for beta software in safety-critical sytems. In fact, it's highly irresponsible. Tesla need to verify this off-road and release a production version.
        Voloskaya 11y ago
        Do you think they didn't verified it off-road? Beta (in this case) doesn't mean faulty or half-assed, but you cannot possibly encounter all real-life situations on your off-road closed track, hence the name Beta to stress that point. As far as I know there wasn't any issue with the autopilot when respecting the limitations stated by Tesla. Now if a driver want to disregard those warnings, He is being highly irresponsible, not Tesla. It's like blaming an auto manufacturer because you are able to do 100mph with your car in 30mph zones.
        speakeron 11y ago
        > Do you think they didn't verified it off-road? Beta (in this case) doesn't mean faulty or half-assed I know what beta means: it means that it hasn't shown consistent behaviour in a production environment. It means that there are edge cases which aren't understood yet. It also means that there are desired features which haven't been implemented yet. It means a lot things, of which none give a warm feeling if you're sharing the road with said software. > As far as I know there wasn't any issue with the autopilot when respecting the limitations stated by Tesla Ok. Do you think the environment in the video is consistent with the limitations stated by Tesla? When I look at the video, I see a car driving irresponsibly fast past a queue of slow-moving or stationary vehicles which then saved its ass by slamming on the brakes. Automatic cars which drive like that should not be on the road.
        Voloskaya 11y ago
        I think we cannot agree because we don't have the same definition about who should be responsible of what. This is probably because Tesla call this feature Autopilot, while it is just an Autosteer (they also use this name sometime). Autopilot gives the impression that the car should be autonomous and be able to drive itself, while this is really not the case. The car can only do basically 4 things: -Follow the road lines -Follow the car in front (this is what happen in this video) -OCR on the road sign to adjust it speed -Emergency breaking All the rest is currently the responsibility of the driver, including reducing the speed in dangerous situations (like this one), taking the wheel in sharp turns, taking the wheel in cities, doing stops at traffic lights etc. The Tesla is NOT (yet) an autonomous car, and if you drive it with that expectation, it can be very dangerous indeed.
    - melling 11y ago
      The didn't call it self-driving, right? They called it something different told you to always keep your hands on the wheel.
    - oxplot 11y ago
      It depends how 'autopilot' is defined. There are airplanes that have autopilot but all they can do is to keep the plane level. And there are others that can take off, land and do everything in between.
      - frenchman_in_ny 11y ago
        Nitpick, but there's no autopilot for takeoffs. http://www.askthepilot.com/questionanswers/automation-myths/ http://www.askthepilot.com/questionanswers/automation-myths/
        oxplot 11y ago
        Damn it, I knew this. Thanks for spotting it. =]
    - Cshelton 11y ago
      I remember a few months ago taking a test dive and the Tesla rep was very quick to correct me when I called it "autopilot". He kept saying it is just a safety feature. This is a very important distinction because many states laws' will have problems with autonomous vehicles. Even at the municipality level; Some cities require you have one hand on the wheel at all times. The laws aren't ready for what's coming. So until then..."Safety Features"
    - zobzu 11y ago
      Tesla a calls it autosteer not auto pilot
      - speakeron 11y ago
        > Tesla a calls it autosteer not auto pilot They certainly use the term[1]: "Along with the new Autopilot feature...". [1]: http://www.teslamotors.com/presskit/autopilot http://www.teslamotors.com/presskit/autopilot
    - Crito 11y ago
      "You're not supposed to use autopilot during takeoff sir." "Then don't call it autopilot" What exactly about the term autopilot makes you think it must be for all aspects of the journey? Real autopilot does not work like that, so where did you get the idea that car autopilot does?
- jdiez17 11y ago
  It's not exactly the best road for Autopilot. >Autosteer works well on standard highways when there are clear lane markings or a car directly ahead to follow. It does not function reliably when a road has sharp turns. [...] Keep in mind, Autopilot is a (public) beta, and as such, it asks you to keep your hands on the wheel at all times.
- asdfasdfsd 11y ago
  Autopilot disengaged( with a loud beep and visual ) and the driver didn't have his hands on the wheel like he is supposed to. Consequentially the car started to drift left. In addition autopilot can only be used on a highway. Several mistakes made by driver, so the blame is on him.
- bryondowd 11y ago
  Except that's not the autopilot almost causing anything, it's the autopilot disengaging that almost causes a collision. The autopilot is disengaging because this is, in fact, not a completely autonomous vehicle, and the autopilot feature is mean to be used on a highway, which that road is not, and similarly to cruise control with the human remaining alert and ready to take over, which the guy recording obviously was not. So, good evidence that we can't go halfway with these things, and need to take humans out of the equation.
  - Too 11y ago
    This is why all other car brands with this feature automatically disengages a few seconds after you let go of the steering wheel. And no - this does not make the whole feature useless, it's both a great convenience and works as an extra safety net to keep you on the center of the road if you put your focus on adjusting the aircon temperature for a second. The disengage in the video also comes very suddenly, the steering wheel starts steering very quickly to the left before there is even any warning sound. Tesla should recall this feature as is, first of all calling it "auto pilot" invites people to trust it too much, plus not enforcing the by law required hand on the wheel is just asking for abuse. People are stupid and the scenario on the video could have killed both the negligent driver of the tesla and the innocent driver in the other vehicle.
    - bryondowd 11y ago
      You make good points. Although, disengaging when you release the wheel sounds like it could do as much harm as good. If anything, I'd rather it discourage this behavior using a nag alarm, possibly followed by automatically slowing/stopping the vehicle somewhat safely. As you say, people are stupid, and I can see some idiot trying to grab a beer out of a cooler in the back seat within the grace period (or deal with a dropped cell phone, pebble in a shoe, spider on the window, etc) and ending up careening off the road or into oncoming traffic. I agree that this feature isn't useless. I'd love to have it, myself. As you say, it does need work to idiot-proof it, and possibly a re-branding. But still, I would much much rather see full autonomy, as soon as possible. Wouldn't want to see us stay bogged down in the halfway stage. And I'm a little concerned that the first fatal accident caused by inappropriate use of driver assistance systems like this will unrightfully poison minds against fully autonomous systems, and take us a huge step back.
- fancyketchup 11y ago
  Except that you can clearly hear the autopilot disengage before the car swerves to the left. And the swerve doesn't start until it is physically impossible for a collision to happen. And the slope of the road isn't enough to make the car swerve like that. And you can't see the lower half of the steering wheel (where the driver's hands might be). And [...] ad infinitum. Just a "Youtuber" trolling for clicks.
jdiez17 11y ago
This is where autopilot (and self-driving car technology in general) really shines: faster-than-human reaction time. The driver didn't have enough time to even honk, let alone stop the car.
- wielebny 11y ago
  Maybe the driver should focus more on braking than honking?
  - DarkTree 11y ago
    He honked only after the car braked, so at that point there was no reason to focus on braking.
  - oxplot 11y ago
    Actually, I've found that my first reaction in any traffic situation is to get out of it, either by maneuvering or braking. I never seem to find time to honk (or even think about it) and I'm puzzled as to how others reach for it the first thing.
    - slayed0 11y ago
      I do both simultaneously. Both have saved me. There have been times where I immediately hit the brakes and horn when I saw someone doing something stupid (about to pull out into traffic, about to merge into me from another lane, etc) In some of these situations, the horn causes the other person to stop what they're doing and a collision that could not have been avoided solely by me braking, is avoided.
  - Chromozon 11y ago
    I have seen this with a lot of other drivers. My very first reaction is to brake. However, in all of my close calls, I have never noticed the other vehicle even attempt to slow down- they just honk their horn and continue on their way.
  - grecy 11y ago
pcunite 11y ago
Wow, very cool.
SlashmanX 11y ago
That turn the other car attempted is just insane
- maxerickson 11y ago
  You sort of hope they didn't even see the Tesla. Which is still bad, but it's not a terrible decision.
  - mindslight 11y ago
    People often let their attention be corrupted by focusing on the wrong thing. The stopped line of cars looks pretty safe to turn through, right? I wouldn't even be surprised if the stopped driver was waving the turning driver on to "be nice". Despite having set cruise control below the numeric speed limit, the Tesla is still (almost) speeding by driving too fast for the conditions (passing a line of stopped cars). I'm not a big fan of this reasoning, but there's justification for it. In this situation the turning driver should have obviously seen the oncoming car and yielded, but someone taking the same turn in the opposite direction would never have been able to see the Tesla.
    - SmellyGeekBoy 11y ago
      > I wouldn't even be surprised if the stopped driver was waving the turning driver on to "be nice". When I got my license (12 years ago, UK) my instructor very strongly warned against waving / signalling other drivers through for this very reason. I know others around the same time were warned against it too and I believe it's also part of the Highway Code over here (don't judge me, it was a while ago!). I still do it, though - it seems rude to be deliberately unhelpful or even obstructive even if it isn't 100% safe / legal for the other driver to go. Not to mention the fact that I'd still expect them to use their own judgement even if a stranger was waving them on.
      - bryondowd 11y ago
        I generally only wave people on in simple cases like two of us pulling up to a stop sign, to indicate that they can go first. For any case where they have to pay attention to other factors, I usually just stop and lift my hands up off the wheel in a sort of indication that I'm not going to make any unexpected moves.
pcunite 11y ago
It takes two people to drive a car, you and the guy coming toward you. That is one two many.
- dangerlibrary 11y ago
  one too many
roymurdock 11y ago
What kind of Uber driver owns a Tesla? Is the guy just doing it for fun/to meet people or is it actually feasible to make payments on a Tesla with an Uber driver's salary?
- cbr 11y ago
  "I drive Uber in the mornings before work" https://www.reddit.com/r/teslamotors/comments/3qkc7h/tesla_autopilot_saves_the_day/cwfxdgp https://www.reddit.com/r/teslamotors/comments/3qkc7h/tesla_a...
- boredinballard 11y ago
  This person is apparently from Washington, I've gotten the same Lyft driver that drives his Tesla. It'd be funny if it was the same guy. From my sample size of one, college kids that invested their entire savings into Tesla very early then cashed out some to buy a Tesla are the kind of Uber/Lyft driver to own a Tesla.
- Amorymeltzer 11y ago
  It's been done: http://www.marketwatch.com/story/this-uber-driver-picks-you-up-in-a-tesla-model-s-2015-09-11 http://www.marketwatch.com/story/this-uber-driver-picks-you-... Basic gist seems to be that the novelty factor of the Tesla helps, but making money can still be tricky. Still, not paying for gas helps.
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
- zardo 11y ago
  Maybe if you live in your car.
ctz 11y ago
This not the effect of Autopilot, Tesla calls it 'Automatic Emergency Braking'. Most modern cars come with similar collision avoidance systems. Volvo introduced it first(?) in 2008.
- beeboop 11y ago
  Most? Maybe on luxury brands.
  - Peroni 11y ago
    Not sure many people would consider Volvo, Audi, Fiat, Ford, Honda, Hyundai, Mazda, Mitsubishi, Nissan, Peugeot, Renault, Skoda, Subaru, Toyota and Volkswagen to be 'luxury' brands.
    - Someone1234 11y ago
      Most of the vehicles they sell don't offer CAS, only the top end trims in certain models. Many offer only CWS (no auto braking, just bleeping). The issue here is their use of the term "most." "Most" vehicles in 2015 is category untrue. Out of the top 10 most popular cars in the US, zero ship with CAS as a base feature, and half don't offer it at all. In the luxury market, it is more common/popular/standard.
      - Peroni 11y ago
        The luxury market is usually where most features now considered standard, originate. CAS is becoming significantly more common within the everyday market. Nissan's new Pulsar for example comes with CAS as standard.
  - jbuzbee 11y ago
    My wife's 2015 Mazda 3 has it. It's kind of liberating to know it's there for situations like in the video
- Someone1234 11y ago
  I think it is an over-statement to claim that "Most modern cars come with similar collision avoidance systems." Many have collision WARNING systems (i.e. no auto-braking), and even then only on the highest trims or with an expensive options package ($3K+). However collision avoidance systems do exist, and manufacturers like Subaru have made them so inexpensive that there's little excuse to not buy it (e.g. Subaru Legacy Premium W/Eyesight is $25-26K, similar to a mid Camry or Accord, and those lack CAS at that price point ($30K+ Limited trim to get CWS in other cars, let alone CAS)). Aside from the luxury market (which Tesla is in) a lot of cars lack CAS or make it so expensive that they may have well. Subaru is the only manufacturer that makes it within the realm of your average joe (e.g. sub-35K).
chinathrow 11y ago
Isn't the autopilot feature ment for highways only at this time? Edit: It's the emergency break feature - not the autopilot.
SovietDissident 11y ago
Neat. Question: what happens if there's a car in back of the Tesla? Does does the Tesla disregard him and whether or not he has time to stop as well? Edit: Certainly the top priority is avoiding the car in front of you, and you should slam on the brakes to do it. However, once you stop, the Tesla should release the brakes (if there's an imminent collision from the rear) to minimize the impact to the Tesla driver and the car slamming into the back of him. Would be cool if the Tesla engineers added this (if feasible).
- adrianN 11y ago
  It would be prudent to do so, as head-on collisions are far more dangerous.
- bryondowd 11y ago
  I would assume so. If you are following someone, it's your responsibility to have enough leeway to stop if they stop suddenly. And it's much less dangerous to be rear ended than it is to hit something head on.
- melling 11y ago
  And slam into the other car? Don't you want to stop to reduce the energy in the crash? Perhaps turn a little to avoid being hit from behind? Is that your idea? Not stopping because the driver behind you isn't safely in control of the car and hitting someone in front of you might mean that someone's insurance company might find you at fault.
- Retric 11y ago
  Fast breaking removes energy from the collision and if someone is not paying attention there going to hit you anyway. If your going to respond the the car behind you then it's much better to simply slow down if your being tailgated. Doing anything else is counter productive. PS: Even a long line of tailgating cars can stop because you can only use the space between you and the obstacle, but the car behind you get's that same distance plus the distance between you at them. This space keeps stacking as you go further back so by 10 cars or so it's a long slow break.
pivo 11y ago
Once self driving cars reach a certain penetration level I wonder how long it'll take the remaining human drivers to start taking advantage of that fact by assuming most cars will automatically stop for them when they try stupid maneuvers like this one. I commute on foot in Boston and I regularly witness pedestrians cross streets in front of traffic when they know they can get away with it, for example, when they're part of a crowd of pedestrians or the traffic is moving slowly. Every time I see that I wonder how much worse it'll be when they don't have to worry about being hit. Our sidewalks are narrow and crowded, will pedestrians just move to the streets? Based on our geography, drivers and pedestrians I fully expect my city to pioneer the field of taking advantage of self driving car's automated accident avoidance systems.
- imaginenore 11y ago
  > when they try stupid maneuvers like this one. It's called natural selection. Eventually they will meet each other.
- pavel_lishin 11y ago
  Isn't one of the ideas of self-driving cars the idea that they'll reduce overall congestion and traffic volume? It might become pretty reasonable to step off into the street, because there won't be much traffic there to inconvenience. Although it would definitely be a habit that'll end up killing someone.
  - Grue3 11y ago
    There's no way self-driving cars will reduce traffic volume. If anything, it will increase since not only you don't need to be able to drive in order to travel in a self-driving car, the car might be completely empty and driving on its own for some sort of reason. And of course people who currently drive a car will still be driving a car (which might be self-driving or not).
    - Tepix 11y ago
      There is a way: A lot of traffic these days is people looking for a parking spot. If the car leaves the area right away after dropping you off, it will be less congested there.
ohitsdom 11y ago
My car was totaled in a near identical situation last month. And this was avoided with only automatic emergency braking... I long for the day when fully self-driving cars are the norm on roadways.
thinkcontext 11y ago
I wonder what the effect on the insurance market will be. That could be a huge driver of adoption.
dang 11y ago
Url changed from http://fortune.com/2015/10/29/tesla-autopilot-uber-crash/ http://fortune.com/2015/10/29/tesla-autopilot-uber-crash/, which points to this.
shin_lao 11y ago
I know I would definitely have been unable to prevent the accident. I didn't see the car until it was on the road. Reminds me of the couple of close ones I had either in my car on motorcycle. On the moment you don't think, you just do but after it's a very chilly feeling of realizing that your life was just being played over a couple of seconds.
mirzmaster 11y ago
I'm not convinced that this is an instance of autopilot "saving the day", as the title of the driver's video would suggest. The driver states in his video description that he was "watching stopped traffic to my right". Think how you would react were you in full control of a car in that instance. You have a virtually stopped lane of traffic to your right, you see cars braking about 100 ft ahead of you. Wouldn't you start slowing down? I would, as clearly travelling as fast as the driver is where all surrounding traffic is slowing or stopped doesn't make sense, however the driver doesn't appear to slow down at all, by his own admission focused on the cars to his right. Was he legitimately distracted by cars to his right, or was he depending on the car's situational awareness? I'm leaning towards the latter, what I believe is an affordance offered by autopilot systems. I think we'll start hearing and seeing many such "success" stories of close calls involving autopilot, but I'm not sure how many of these will be incidents of autopilot truly saving an otherwise attentive driver by reacting faster/better than the attentive driver. It seems to me that autopilot is going to be both cause and saviour in far too many cases.
- zobzu 11y ago
  The advantage of the autopilot is that its reproducible, 100% of the time. When something could have been done better given a situation, the code is fixed and the autopilot will handle the situation better every single future time. Humans arent as reliable. And then of course theres perfect collision course distance calculations and millisecond reflexes.
- ensignavenger 11y ago
  Google has posted some interesting situations where their cars have predicted other driver behavior and avoided accidents in situations where it is quite possible an average human driver would not have been able to make the same prediction and avoided the accident. I agree that not every situation like this would have resulted in an accident for certain, I also strongly suspect the computers are much better at avoiding these types of accidents more consistently than humans.
- arprocter 11y ago
  I've always thought drivers of automatic transmissions seem less aware of what is happening around them, because they don't have to pay as much attention. Since joining the 3 pedal master race, going back to an auto definitely doesn't engage me as much as manual.
dschiptsov 11y ago
Indian roads, especially in towns, are where all self-driving cars will fail.) Push the horn constantly and go to opposite lane is very common strategy, for example.
- hussong 11y ago
  I wonder how self-driving cars would perform in such a more dynamic environment and how long it would take to adapt the parameters.
  - dschiptsov 11y ago
    This is the basis of irony - to find the way out of Indian traffic deadlock one has to have something more than a a* search algorithm.)
eddd 11y ago
I know it's not in HN nature, but I absolutely loved the fact one of the top comments on youtube is: "FU YEA TECHNOLOGY!". It actually means that people outside tech environment appreciate course of events that is happening in the tech industry.
mladenkovacevic 11y ago
The thing that strikes me in that video is that the Tesla is driving really fast considering the right lane is completely stopped. A human driver would never be driving that fast. Taking into account familiarity with typical human behaviour, if you're in a lane that is moving well, you will expect at least some drivers from a slow lane to try to squeeze their way into the faster moving lane. Not to mention watching out for facial expressions on drivers in the opposite moving lane, hoping to take advantage of slow traffic to make left-turns into oncoming traffic. A focused human driver will be taking all these things into consideration when operating the vehicle. I can easily imagine a scenario where a car turns into Tesla's lane and the Tesla not having enough reaction time to avoid collision. Bottom line is, what I'm seeing in this video is a Tesla autopilot not being smart enough to regulate its speed according to conditions on the road and having to resort to some emergency braking maneuver to avoid a potentially catastrophic collision.
- zzalpha 11y ago
  A human driver would never be driving that fast. Taking into account familiarity with typical human behaviour, if you're in a lane that is moving well, you will expect at least some drivers from a slow lane to try to squeeze their way into the faster moving lane. Well, I guess the devil's advocate argument is that what you say may only be true for a human driver. After all, this video demonstrates the vehicle has the ability to rapidly react to a situation like that. So maybe the vehicle is driving at a safe speed for the conditions given what a computer is capable of.
- jliptzin 11y ago
  You make an interesting point but I have to disagree. You can see at the very beginning of the video the traffic is still moving in the right lane and the buildup is just beginning. As far as we know the Tesla could have already begun decelerating to account for the change in condition in the right lane. Even if it's not, going at that speed in the left lane is not what I'd consider abnormal. Additionally, what's not safe for a human driver might be safe for an automated one which knows it can react very quickly to a dangerous situation.
- jessriedel 11y ago
jksmith 11y ago
That just took business away from the police, court system, insurance industry, auto body repair, ...
simonswords82 11y ago
It mentions in the video that the weather was dry. Is weather a variable that the autopilot system takes in to account? For example, if it was raining would the car have slowed down to a speed where it knows it can avoid obstacles taking in to account the extra stoppage distance required?
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
btilly 11y ago
Here is what I want. I want the car to avoid the collision, record the whole incident, and submit it as evidence to penalize the other driver. The penalties could take the form of a lawsuit. Or could take the form of tagging the incident, and submitting the video where the other person's insurance company can automatically pick it up, examine the evidence, and then change rates. That way we not only prevent accidents, but we start to address the minority of reckless drivers that put all of us at risk.
- tshannon 11y ago
  Or even better. Get people out of the car driving business altogether. We suck at it.
- jay-saint 11y ago
  When will insurance companies realize the risk reductions of self driving cars and begin lowering their rates and raising the rates of manually driven cars. I think that this will be the biggest market driver for this technology. Eventually insurance rates will push people into self driving smart cars.
  - austin_y 11y ago
    You may well be right, but I think it's possible that as self driving cars proliferate, insurance rates across the board may drop. It makes sense that rates would be lower for self driving vehicles than human driven, but just as each individual (no matter their vehicle) benefits from a lower incidence of accidents, they might also share the lower cost.
noipv4 11y ago
:sarcasm: Nothing to see here just some sensors, actuators and few lines of embedded code in action. Thousands of kids do it with Lego mindstorm every days.
GigabyteCoin 11y ago
I wonder if all of this tesla-autopilot hype might increase their chances of being in a collision? At least initially. I (regrettably) found myself leering over into a tesla driver's console the other day as he drove past to see if he was using autopilot or not and started to think of how dangerous it probably is to have everybody around you looking at you and not the road. I guess at the very least tesla's autopilot will have some good practice early on.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
Animats 11y ago
The NHTSA is talking about requiring at least radar-controlled braking on new cars in a few years.[1] It's been working well in high-end cars, and it's not that expensive. It can't prevent all collisions, but it will almost totally prevent rear-ending the car in front in traffic. Most of the major automakers are on board with this.[2] Earlier thinking was only to apply the brakes automatically as a collision-mitigation strategy, so that there would still be a collision, but a less severe one, after which the air bags would probably fire. But the technology got better, and now it looks reasonable to go to automatic braking sooner and prevent many collisions entirely. This will increase freeway capacity. The biggest cause of freeway delay is accidents, most of which are rear-end collisions. [1] http://www.detroitnews.com/story/business/autos/2015/06/08/ntsb-urges-us-mandate-advanced-braking/28702151/ http://www.detroitnews.com/story/business/autos/2015/06/08/n... [2] http://money.cnn.com/2015/09/11/autos/automatic-braking-nhtsa-iihs/ http://money.cnn.com/2015/09/11/autos/automatic-braking-nhts...
reagency 11y ago
Title is false. This is not autopilot.

275 points by MattBearman 11y ago

Watch Tesla's autopilot almost causing a head-on collision: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MrwxEX8qOxA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MrwxEX8qOxA

jonawesomegreen 11y ago
I'm fairly sure you are not supposed to be using Tesla autopilot unless you are on a highway.
- simfoo 11y ago
  Then don't call it autopilot
  - Voloskaya 11y ago
    It's in beta for a reason, and before using it, you have to accept a disclaimer clearly stating that you should not use it on road without a concrete separation between you and the opposite traffic, and you should not use it on road with sharp turns. This guy was clearly looking for the limit of the autopilot, and found it, nearly at the expense of others.
    - speakeron 11y ago
      > It's in beta for a reason There's no place on the public roads for beta software in safety-critical sytems. In fact, it's highly irresponsible. Tesla need to verify this off-road and release a production version.
      - Voloskaya 11y ago
        Do you think they didn't verified it off-road? Beta (in this case) doesn't mean faulty or half-assed, but you cannot possibly encounter all real-life situations on your off-road closed track, hence the name Beta to stress that point. As far as I know there wasn't any issue with the autopilot when respecting the limitations stated by Tesla. Now if a driver want to disregard those warnings, He is being highly irresponsible, not Tesla. It's like blaming an auto manufacturer because you are able to do 100mph with your car in 30mph zones.
        speakeron 11y ago
        > Do you think they didn't verified it off-road? Beta (in this case) doesn't mean faulty or half-assed I know what beta means: it means that it hasn't shown consistent behaviour in a production environment. It means that there are edge cases which aren't understood yet. It also means that there are desired features which haven't been implemented yet. It means a lot things, of which none give a warm feeling if you're sharing the road with said software. > As far as I know there wasn't any issue with the autopilot when respecting the limitations stated by Tesla Ok. Do you think the environment in the video is consistent with the limitations stated by Tesla? When I look at the video, I see a car driving irresponsibly fast past a queue of slow-moving or stationary vehicles which then saved its ass by slamming on the brakes. Automatic cars which drive like that should not be on the road.
        Voloskaya 11y ago
        I think we cannot agree because we don't have the same definition about who should be responsible of what. This is probably because Tesla call this feature Autopilot, while it is just an Autosteer (they also use this name sometime). Autopilot gives the impression that the car should be autonomous and be able to drive itself, while this is really not the case. The car can only do basically 4 things: -Follow the road lines -Follow the car in front (this is what happen in this video) -OCR on the road sign to adjust it speed -Emergency breaking All the rest is currently the responsibility of the driver, including reducing the speed in dangerous situations (like this one), taking the wheel in sharp turns, taking the wheel in cities, doing stops at traffic lights etc. The Tesla is NOT (yet) an autonomous car, and if you drive it with that expectation, it can be very dangerous indeed.
  - melling 11y ago
    The didn't call it self-driving, right? They called it something different told you to always keep your hands on the wheel.
  - oxplot 11y ago
    It depends how 'autopilot' is defined. There are airplanes that have autopilot but all they can do is to keep the plane level. And there are others that can take off, land and do everything in between.
    - frenchman_in_ny 11y ago
      Nitpick, but there's no autopilot for takeoffs. http://www.askthepilot.com/questionanswers/automation-myths/ http://www.askthepilot.com/questionanswers/automation-myths/
      - oxplot 11y ago
        Damn it, I knew this. Thanks for spotting it. =]
  - Cshelton 11y ago
    I remember a few months ago taking a test dive and the Tesla rep was very quick to correct me when I called it "autopilot". He kept saying it is just a safety feature. This is a very important distinction because many states laws' will have problems with autonomous vehicles. Even at the municipality level; Some cities require you have one hand on the wheel at all times. The laws aren't ready for what's coming. So until then..."Safety Features"
  - zobzu 11y ago
    Tesla a calls it autosteer not auto pilot
    - speakeron 11y ago
      > Tesla a calls it autosteer not auto pilot They certainly use the term[1]: "Along with the new Autopilot feature...". [1]: http://www.teslamotors.com/presskit/autopilot http://www.teslamotors.com/presskit/autopilot
  - Crito 11y ago
    "You're not supposed to use autopilot during takeoff sir." "Then don't call it autopilot" What exactly about the term autopilot makes you think it must be for all aspects of the journey? Real autopilot does not work like that, so where did you get the idea that car autopilot does?
jdiez17 11y ago
It's not exactly the best road for Autopilot. >Autosteer works well on standard highways when there are clear lane markings or a car directly ahead to follow. It does not function reliably when a road has sharp turns. [...] Keep in mind, Autopilot is a (public) beta, and as such, it asks you to keep your hands on the wheel at all times.
asdfasdfsd 11y ago
Autopilot disengaged( with a loud beep and visual ) and the driver didn't have his hands on the wheel like he is supposed to. Consequentially the car started to drift left. In addition autopilot can only be used on a highway. Several mistakes made by driver, so the blame is on him.
bryondowd 11y ago
Except that's not the autopilot almost causing anything, it's the autopilot disengaging that almost causes a collision. The autopilot is disengaging because this is, in fact, not a completely autonomous vehicle, and the autopilot feature is mean to be used on a highway, which that road is not, and similarly to cruise control with the human remaining alert and ready to take over, which the guy recording obviously was not. So, good evidence that we can't go halfway with these things, and need to take humans out of the equation.
- Too 11y ago
  This is why all other car brands with this feature automatically disengages a few seconds after you let go of the steering wheel. And no - this does not make the whole feature useless, it's both a great convenience and works as an extra safety net to keep you on the center of the road if you put your focus on adjusting the aircon temperature for a second. The disengage in the video also comes very suddenly, the steering wheel starts steering very quickly to the left before there is even any warning sound. Tesla should recall this feature as is, first of all calling it "auto pilot" invites people to trust it too much, plus not enforcing the by law required hand on the wheel is just asking for abuse. People are stupid and the scenario on the video could have killed both the negligent driver of the tesla and the innocent driver in the other vehicle.
  - bryondowd 11y ago
    You make good points. Although, disengaging when you release the wheel sounds like it could do as much harm as good. If anything, I'd rather it discourage this behavior using a nag alarm, possibly followed by automatically slowing/stopping the vehicle somewhat safely. As you say, people are stupid, and I can see some idiot trying to grab a beer out of a cooler in the back seat within the grace period (or deal with a dropped cell phone, pebble in a shoe, spider on the window, etc) and ending up careening off the road or into oncoming traffic. I agree that this feature isn't useless. I'd love to have it, myself. As you say, it does need work to idiot-proof it, and possibly a re-branding. But still, I would much much rather see full autonomy, as soon as possible. Wouldn't want to see us stay bogged down in the halfway stage. And I'm a little concerned that the first fatal accident caused by inappropriate use of driver assistance systems like this will unrightfully poison minds against fully autonomous systems, and take us a huge step back.
fancyketchup 11y ago
Except that you can clearly hear the autopilot disengage before the car swerves to the left. And the swerve doesn't start until it is physically impossible for a collision to happen. And the slope of the road isn't enough to make the car swerve like that. And you can't see the lower half of the steering wheel (where the driver's hands might be). And [...] ad infinitum. Just a "Youtuber" trolling for clicks.

jdiez17 11y ago

This is where autopilot (and self-driving car technology in general) really shines: faster-than-human reaction time. The driver didn't have enough time to even honk, let alone stop the car.

wielebny 11y ago
Maybe the driver should focus more on braking than honking?
- DarkTree 11y ago
  He honked only after the car braked, so at that point there was no reason to focus on braking.
- oxplot 11y ago
  Actually, I've found that my first reaction in any traffic situation is to get out of it, either by maneuvering or braking. I never seem to find time to honk (or even think about it) and I'm puzzled as to how others reach for it the first thing.
  - slayed0 11y ago
    I do both simultaneously. Both have saved me. There have been times where I immediately hit the brakes and horn when I saw someone doing something stupid (about to pull out into traffic, about to merge into me from another lane, etc) In some of these situations, the horn causes the other person to stop what they're doing and a collision that could not have been avoided solely by me braking, is avoided.
- Chromozon 11y ago
  I have seen this with a lot of other drivers. My very first reaction is to brake. However, in all of my close calls, I have never noticed the other vehicle even attempt to slow down- they just honk their horn and continue on their way.
- grecy 11y ago

pcunite 11y ago

Wow, very cool.

SlashmanX 11y ago

That turn the other car attempted is just insane

maxerickson 11y ago
You sort of hope they didn't even see the Tesla. Which is still bad, but it's not a terrible decision.
- mindslight 11y ago
  People often let their attention be corrupted by focusing on the wrong thing. The stopped line of cars looks pretty safe to turn through, right? I wouldn't even be surprised if the stopped driver was waving the turning driver on to "be nice". Despite having set cruise control below the numeric speed limit, the Tesla is still (almost) speeding by driving too fast for the conditions (passing a line of stopped cars). I'm not a big fan of this reasoning, but there's justification for it. In this situation the turning driver should have obviously seen the oncoming car and yielded, but someone taking the same turn in the opposite direction would never have been able to see the Tesla.
  - SmellyGeekBoy 11y ago
    > I wouldn't even be surprised if the stopped driver was waving the turning driver on to "be nice". When I got my license (12 years ago, UK) my instructor very strongly warned against waving / signalling other drivers through for this very reason. I know others around the same time were warned against it too and I believe it's also part of the Highway Code over here (don't judge me, it was a while ago!). I still do it, though - it seems rude to be deliberately unhelpful or even obstructive even if it isn't 100% safe / legal for the other driver to go. Not to mention the fact that I'd still expect them to use their own judgement even if a stranger was waving them on.
    - bryondowd 11y ago
      I generally only wave people on in simple cases like two of us pulling up to a stop sign, to indicate that they can go first. For any case where they have to pay attention to other factors, I usually just stop and lift my hands up off the wheel in a sort of indication that I'm not going to make any unexpected moves.

pcunite 11y ago

It takes two people to drive a car, you and the guy coming toward you. That is one two many.

dangerlibrary 11y ago
one too many

roymurdock 11y ago

What kind of Uber driver owns a Tesla? Is the guy just doing it for fun/to meet people or is it actually feasible to make payments on a Tesla with an Uber driver's salary?

cbr 11y ago
"I drive Uber in the mornings before work" https://www.reddit.com/r/teslamotors/comments/3qkc7h/tesla_autopilot_saves_the_day/cwfxdgp https://www.reddit.com/r/teslamotors/comments/3qkc7h/tesla_a...
boredinballard 11y ago
This person is apparently from Washington, I've gotten the same Lyft driver that drives his Tesla. It'd be funny if it was the same guy. From my sample size of one, college kids that invested their entire savings into Tesla very early then cashed out some to buy a Tesla are the kind of Uber/Lyft driver to own a Tesla.
Amorymeltzer 11y ago
It's been done: http://www.marketwatch.com/story/this-uber-driver-picks-you-up-in-a-tesla-model-s-2015-09-11 http://www.marketwatch.com/story/this-uber-driver-picks-you-... Basic gist seems to be that the novelty factor of the Tesla helps, but making money can still be tricky. Still, not paying for gas helps.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
zardo 11y ago
Maybe if you live in your car.

ctz 11y ago

This not the effect of Autopilot, Tesla calls it 'Automatic Emergency Braking'. Most modern cars come with similar collision avoidance systems. Volvo introduced it first(?) in 2008.

beeboop 11y ago
Most? Maybe on luxury brands.
- Peroni 11y ago
  Not sure many people would consider Volvo, Audi, Fiat, Ford, Honda, Hyundai, Mazda, Mitsubishi, Nissan, Peugeot, Renault, Skoda, Subaru, Toyota and Volkswagen to be 'luxury' brands.
  - Someone1234 11y ago
    Most of the vehicles they sell don't offer CAS, only the top end trims in certain models. Many offer only CWS (no auto braking, just bleeping). The issue here is their use of the term "most." "Most" vehicles in 2015 is category untrue. Out of the top 10 most popular cars in the US, zero ship with CAS as a base feature, and half don't offer it at all. In the luxury market, it is more common/popular/standard.
    - Peroni 11y ago
      The luxury market is usually where most features now considered standard, originate. CAS is becoming significantly more common within the everyday market. Nissan's new Pulsar for example comes with CAS as standard.
- jbuzbee 11y ago
  My wife's 2015 Mazda 3 has it. It's kind of liberating to know it's there for situations like in the video
Someone1234 11y ago
I think it is an over-statement to claim that "Most modern cars come with similar collision avoidance systems." Many have collision WARNING systems (i.e. no auto-braking), and even then only on the highest trims or with an expensive options package ($3K+). However collision avoidance systems do exist, and manufacturers like Subaru have made them so inexpensive that there's little excuse to not buy it (e.g. Subaru Legacy Premium W/Eyesight is $25-26K, similar to a mid Camry or Accord, and those lack CAS at that price point ($30K+ Limited trim to get CWS in other cars, let alone CAS)). Aside from the luxury market (which Tesla is in) a lot of cars lack CAS or make it so expensive that they may have well. Subaru is the only manufacturer that makes it within the realm of your average joe (e.g. sub-35K).

chinathrow 11y ago

Isn't the autopilot feature ment for highways only at this time? Edit: It's the emergency break feature - not the autopilot.

SovietDissident 11y ago

Neat. Question: what happens if there's a car in back of the Tesla? Does does the Tesla disregard him and whether or not he has time to stop as well? Edit: Certainly the top priority is avoiding the car in front of you, and you should slam on the brakes to do it. However, once you stop, the Tesla should release the brakes (if there's an imminent collision from the rear) to minimize the impact to the Tesla driver and the car slamming into the back of him. Would be cool if the Tesla engineers added this (if feasible).

adrianN 11y ago
It would be prudent to do so, as head-on collisions are far more dangerous.
bryondowd 11y ago
I would assume so. If you are following someone, it's your responsibility to have enough leeway to stop if they stop suddenly. And it's much less dangerous to be rear ended than it is to hit something head on.
melling 11y ago
And slam into the other car? Don't you want to stop to reduce the energy in the crash? Perhaps turn a little to avoid being hit from behind? Is that your idea? Not stopping because the driver behind you isn't safely in control of the car and hitting someone in front of you might mean that someone's insurance company might find you at fault.
Retric 11y ago
Fast breaking removes energy from the collision and if someone is not paying attention there going to hit you anyway. If your going to respond the the car behind you then it's much better to simply slow down if your being tailgated. Doing anything else is counter productive. PS: Even a long line of tailgating cars can stop because you can only use the space between you and the obstacle, but the car behind you get's that same distance plus the distance between you at them. This space keeps stacking as you go further back so by 10 cars or so it's a long slow break.

pivo 11y ago

Once self driving cars reach a certain penetration level I wonder how long it'll take the remaining human drivers to start taking advantage of that fact by assuming most cars will automatically stop for them when they try stupid maneuvers like this one. I commute on foot in Boston and I regularly witness pedestrians cross streets in front of traffic when they know they can get away with it, for example, when they're part of a crowd of pedestrians or the traffic is moving slowly. Every time I see that I wonder how much worse it'll be when they don't have to worry about being hit. Our sidewalks are narrow and crowded, will pedestrians just move to the streets? Based on our geography, drivers and pedestrians I fully expect my city to pioneer the field of taking advantage of self driving car's automated accident avoidance systems.

imaginenore 11y ago
> when they try stupid maneuvers like this one. It's called natural selection. Eventually they will meet each other.
pavel_lishin 11y ago
Isn't one of the ideas of self-driving cars the idea that they'll reduce overall congestion and traffic volume? It might become pretty reasonable to step off into the street, because there won't be much traffic there to inconvenience. Although it would definitely be a habit that'll end up killing someone.
- Grue3 11y ago
  There's no way self-driving cars will reduce traffic volume. If anything, it will increase since not only you don't need to be able to drive in order to travel in a self-driving car, the car might be completely empty and driving on its own for some sort of reason. And of course people who currently drive a car will still be driving a car (which might be self-driving or not).
  - Tepix 11y ago
    There is a way: A lot of traffic these days is people looking for a parking spot. If the car leaves the area right away after dropping you off, it will be less congested there.

ohitsdom 11y ago

My car was totaled in a near identical situation last month. And this was avoided with only automatic emergency braking... I long for the day when fully self-driving cars are the norm on roadways.

thinkcontext 11y ago

I wonder what the effect on the insurance market will be. That could be a huge driver of adoption.

dang 11y ago

Url changed from http://fortune.com/2015/10/29/tesla-autopilot-uber-crash/ http://fortune.com/2015/10/29/tesla-autopilot-uber-crash/, which points to this.

shin_lao 11y ago

I know I would definitely have been unable to prevent the accident. I didn't see the car until it was on the road. Reminds me of the couple of close ones I had either in my car on motorcycle. On the moment you don't think, you just do but after it's a very chilly feeling of realizing that your life was just being played over a couple of seconds.

mirzmaster 11y ago

I'm not convinced that this is an instance of autopilot "saving the day", as the title of the driver's video would suggest. The driver states in his video description that he was "watching stopped traffic to my right". Think how you would react were you in full control of a car in that instance. You have a virtually stopped lane of traffic to your right, you see cars braking about 100 ft ahead of you. Wouldn't you start slowing down? I would, as clearly travelling as fast as the driver is where all surrounding traffic is slowing or stopped doesn't make sense, however the driver doesn't appear to slow down at all, by his own admission focused on the cars to his right. Was he legitimately distracted by cars to his right, or was he depending on the car's situational awareness? I'm leaning towards the latter, what I believe is an affordance offered by autopilot systems. I think we'll start hearing and seeing many such "success" stories of close calls involving autopilot, but I'm not sure how many of these will be incidents of autopilot truly saving an otherwise attentive driver by reacting faster/better than the attentive driver. It seems to me that autopilot is going to be both cause and saviour in far too many cases.

zobzu 11y ago
The advantage of the autopilot is that its reproducible, 100% of the time. When something could have been done better given a situation, the code is fixed and the autopilot will handle the situation better every single future time. Humans arent as reliable. And then of course theres perfect collision course distance calculations and millisecond reflexes.
ensignavenger 11y ago
Google has posted some interesting situations where their cars have predicted other driver behavior and avoided accidents in situations where it is quite possible an average human driver would not have been able to make the same prediction and avoided the accident. I agree that not every situation like this would have resulted in an accident for certain, I also strongly suspect the computers are much better at avoiding these types of accidents more consistently than humans.
arprocter 11y ago
I've always thought drivers of automatic transmissions seem less aware of what is happening around them, because they don't have to pay as much attention. Since joining the 3 pedal master race, going back to an auto definitely doesn't engage me as much as manual.

dschiptsov 11y ago

Indian roads, especially in towns, are where all self-driving cars will fail.) Push the horn constantly and go to opposite lane is very common strategy, for example.

hussong 11y ago
I wonder how self-driving cars would perform in such a more dynamic environment and how long it would take to adapt the parameters.
- dschiptsov 11y ago
  This is the basis of irony - to find the way out of Indian traffic deadlock one has to have something more than a a* search algorithm.)

eddd 11y ago

I know it's not in HN nature, but I absolutely loved the fact one of the top comments on youtube is: "FU YEA TECHNOLOGY!". It actually means that people outside tech environment appreciate course of events that is happening in the tech industry.

mladenkovacevic 11y ago

The thing that strikes me in that video is that the Tesla is driving really fast considering the right lane is completely stopped. A human driver would never be driving that fast. Taking into account familiarity with typical human behaviour, if you're in a lane that is moving well, you will expect at least some drivers from a slow lane to try to squeeze their way into the faster moving lane. Not to mention watching out for facial expressions on drivers in the opposite moving lane, hoping to take advantage of slow traffic to make left-turns into oncoming traffic. A focused human driver will be taking all these things into consideration when operating the vehicle. I can easily imagine a scenario where a car turns into Tesla's lane and the Tesla not having enough reaction time to avoid collision. Bottom line is, what I'm seeing in this video is a Tesla autopilot not being smart enough to regulate its speed according to conditions on the road and having to resort to some emergency braking maneuver to avoid a potentially catastrophic collision.

zzalpha 11y ago
A human driver would never be driving that fast. Taking into account familiarity with typical human behaviour, if you're in a lane that is moving well, you will expect at least some drivers from a slow lane to try to squeeze their way into the faster moving lane. Well, I guess the devil's advocate argument is that what you say may only be true for a human driver. After all, this video demonstrates the vehicle has the ability to rapidly react to a situation like that. So maybe the vehicle is driving at a safe speed for the conditions given what a computer is capable of.
jliptzin 11y ago
You make an interesting point but I have to disagree. You can see at the very beginning of the video the traffic is still moving in the right lane and the buildup is just beginning. As far as we know the Tesla could have already begun decelerating to account for the change in condition in the right lane. Even if it's not, going at that speed in the left lane is not what I'd consider abnormal. Additionally, what's not safe for a human driver might be safe for an automated one which knows it can react very quickly to a dangerous situation.
jessriedel 11y ago

jksmith 11y ago

That just took business away from the police, court system, insurance industry, auto body repair, ...

simonswords82 11y ago

It mentions in the video that the weather was dry. Is weather a variable that the autopilot system takes in to account? For example, if it was raining would the car have slowed down to a speed where it knows it can avoid obstacles taking in to account the extra stoppage distance required?

deleted 11y ago
[deleted]

btilly 11y ago

Here is what I want. I want the car to avoid the collision, record the whole incident, and submit it as evidence to penalize the other driver. The penalties could take the form of a lawsuit. Or could take the form of tagging the incident, and submitting the video where the other person's insurance company can automatically pick it up, examine the evidence, and then change rates. That way we not only prevent accidents, but we start to address the minority of reckless drivers that put all of us at risk.

tshannon 11y ago
Or even better. Get people out of the car driving business altogether. We suck at it.
jay-saint 11y ago
When will insurance companies realize the risk reductions of self driving cars and begin lowering their rates and raising the rates of manually driven cars. I think that this will be the biggest market driver for this technology. Eventually insurance rates will push people into self driving smart cars.
- austin_y 11y ago
  You may well be right, but I think it's possible that as self driving cars proliferate, insurance rates across the board may drop. It makes sense that rates would be lower for self driving vehicles than human driven, but just as each individual (no matter their vehicle) benefits from a lower incidence of accidents, they might also share the lower cost.

noipv4 11y ago

:sarcasm: Nothing to see here just some sensors, actuators and few lines of embedded code in action. Thousands of kids do it with Lego mindstorm every days.

GigabyteCoin 11y ago

I wonder if all of this tesla-autopilot hype might increase their chances of being in a collision? At least initially. I (regrettably) found myself leering over into a tesla driver's console the other day as he drove past to see if he was using autopilot or not and started to think of how dangerous it probably is to have everybody around you looking at you and not the road. I guess at the very least tesla's autopilot will have some good practice early on.

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

Animats 11y ago

The NHTSA is talking about requiring at least radar-controlled braking on new cars in a few years.[1] It's been working well in high-end cars, and it's not that expensive. It can't prevent all collisions, but it will almost totally prevent rear-ending the car in front in traffic. Most of the major automakers are on board with this.[2] Earlier thinking was only to apply the brakes automatically as a collision-mitigation strategy, so that there would still be a collision, but a less severe one, after which the air bags would probably fire. But the technology got better, and now it looks reasonable to go to automatic braking sooner and prevent many collisions entirely. This will increase freeway capacity. The biggest cause of freeway delay is accidents, most of which are rear-end collisions. [1] http://www.detroitnews.com/story/business/autos/2015/06/08/ntsb-urges-us-mandate-advanced-braking/28702151/ http://www.detroitnews.com/story/business/autos/2015/06/08/n... [2] http://money.cnn.com/2015/09/11/autos/automatic-braking-nhtsa-iihs/ http://money.cnn.com/2015/09/11/autos/automatic-braking-nhts...

reagency 11y ago

Title is false. This is not autopilot.