5 ms·

Elon Musk says Tesla’s autopilot is already “probably” better than human drivers

31 points by ChrisCinelli 11y ago

creshal 11y ago
Looking out of my office window onto a busy intersection with bad visibility, that's easy to believe. It's insane how many accidents happen solely because drivers are unwilling to slow down for a second.
BinaryIdiot 11y ago
Hmm is he referring to the ability released to the public to date or their capability in general that isn't yet accessible by the general public? If it's the former that doesn't make sense so I'm going to assume the latter. Considering in 2014 there were 32,675 motor vehicle deaths, 2,300,000 motor vehicle related injuries and 6,100,000 reported accidents in general (which means a likely higher number of accidents though not sure by how much) [1] it would not surprise me that even buggy software could do a better job than humans who tend to become distracted with almost anything. Though I'm not sure about extreme conditions like snow, heavy fog and rain, etc. As much as I love driving (and I really do) I can't wait for autonomous vehicles. Considering it's a, if I remember correctly, a 1.7% chance in your lifetime that you'll be killed in an auto accident in the United States (and higher of a chance that you'll known someone killed) that's just way to high of a number for me (especially being a Dad). [1] http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/Pubs/812219.pdf http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/Pubs/812219.pdf
- Someone1234 11y ago
  It is worth keeping in mind that even without automatic vehicles, vehicle deaths have and will continue to fall massively. From the worst in 1937 (29.357 per 100K pop) to today (10.345 per 100K pop), and falling by on average 2%/year since 1996 (was 15.8599 in 1996). Without trying to sound melodramatic, cars built in the 1990s are "death traps" by 2015 standards (and the same is true of 19980s cars by 1990s standards). The reason we're seeing it fall slowly is as the late 1990s vehicles gradually disappear. I suspect we'll see a massive drop again in the next ten years even without fully automatic cars as systems like Eyesight auto-break to slow collision speeds. One thing which will get interesting when we do have completely automatic vehicles is: current drink driving laws (in particular in the US) aren't compatible with them. In many US states falling asleep in a parked vehicle with the keys is enough to get someone for "drink driving" (even without the driving part), so falling asleep in an automatic car could still get someone a DUI.
  - BinaryIdiot 11y ago
    > It is worth keeping in mind that even without automatic vehicles, vehicle deaths have and will continue to fall massively. Fair enough and I completely agree it's just not falling fast and far enough for me :)
  - chubot 11y ago
    Really, what has changed about cars, besides automatic breaking? I agree that that feature saves lives. But I wonder about other stuff. I have a '99 Accord :) (which I barely drive)
    - wflann 11y ago
      Switching to stronger and lighter materials has certainly helped. There's new tech like blindspot monitoring and backup cameras in almost every vehicle now, and even rather simple stuff that's been around for awhile (like daytime running lights and having a center brake light) makes a huge difference.
    - sandworm101 11y ago
      Thousands of tiny improvements to how cars crumple in crash tests. It's all incremental. One change you can see on the road: the new looong Jeeps. That's so the gas tank can be ahead of and protected in a crash by the rear axle, a safety improvement.
    - Someone1234 11y ago
      > Really, what has changed about cars, besides automatic breaking? Great question. - Electronic stability control (ESC) (required from 2009). - Anti-lock braking system (ABS) (in most cars from 2004 due to EU regs, although not required in the US until 2011). - From 2003 the IIHS started rating vehicles for: rollover risk, side impact, and frontal offset impact. So car manufacturers started improving their designs to score better in these tests. The whole "top safety pick" thing is an IIHS rating. - From 2009 the NHTSA required a greater roof-crush load (3x the vehicle's weight, from 1.5x). - Safety Cell improvements: Crumple zones are less likely to trap in the driver or front passenger's legs/feet during impact. - Anti-intrusion bars: Are more standard. The IIHS tests kind of pushed them into mainstream. - Additional air bags (side impact). - Whiplash reduction seats and headrests. Overall regulations aren't why cars are safer in 2016, consumer demand is. People decided they didn't want to compromise on safety, so as a safer and safer vehicles became available consumers flocked to them. Manufacturers had a financial interest in not only be safe but the absolute safest in the road, and that competition pushed vehicle safety forward.
sandworm101 11y ago
Better perhaps a very specific tasks. I'd still like to see them respond to someone controlling traffic with hand gestures (a routine thing) or judge how best to get out of the way of an ambulance, which occasionally means breaking laws/rules.
- pbreit 11y ago
  Yeah, I think there's more to driving than just proceeding on the correct route and obeying laws,signals & signs. So I can see autopilot coming pretty soon but I think fully autonomous is much further out.
Someone1234 11y ago
I definitely think that systems like auto pilot will be better than human drivers, but that being said, I don't believe he has enough data to make the case for it being better TODAY. Musk has a habit of going off half cocked, and I think this is one of those cases. Auto pilot is great, but you cannot say much difinitively about it because it hasn't got enough miles or road conditions under its belt. That all being said, I myself have invested in this type of technology (Subaru's Eyesight) but auto pilot claims to be able to do much more than the more stabilised technology found on mass market vehicles.
- pbreit 11y ago
  He said "probably" and he's probably right.
- Slippery_John 11y ago
  While this isn't Tesla's implementation specifically, there is indeed data that says self-driving cars are better than than human drivers. http://www.vtti.vt.edu/featured/?p=422 http://www.vtti.vt.edu/featured/?p=422
  - Someone1234 11y ago
    That data is unfair. You're comparing taking automatic vehicles out in good weather conditions to drivers who need to drive in all weather conditions. Call me when automatic vehicles get tested in a blizzard, sandstorm, or anything else that isn't an idealised Californian test track. PS - And this is someone who owns an auto-braking system vehicle, and I know first hand that it turns off when weather goes too bad.
    - JibberMeTimbers 11y ago
      Well, if that's the case, then why are humans crashing into others in prefect conditions? It's data that is fair but for certain conditions, as you said. I am interested in how they handle in extreme conditions but the reality is that it is FAR safer in mild conditions BECAUSE they aren't distracted by their cell phones or the sights or being tired/drunk, etc.
supergirl 11y ago
better in normal circumstances maybe. probably terrible in corner cases, which as he said, is where the real difficulties are and there are millions of corner cases.
- ceejayoz 11y ago
  It'd be interesting to know how many road accidents are those corner cases and how many are simple inattention. I've been in a couple accidents and each has been something I'm sure even a basic autopilot would've easily prevented.
  - supergirl 11y ago
    1. You're right but you are thinking of human corner cases. AI also has corner cases which might be trivial for humans. I'm saying these corner cases for AI are too many currently. 2. And anyway, from my point of view 'better than humans' doesn't necessarily mean 'causes fewer accidents'. If that was the goal then an auto-pilot that kept the car still (or drove very very slowly) would win.
melling 11y ago
This feature alone could change the way we build cities and our suburbs: "With the “summon” feature, a driver can tell her Tesla to park itself or pull out from a parking spot or garage." A car that can drop you off and pick you up from work means parking can be moved away from the office, or even out of a city.
- loganu 11y ago
  I was just imagining an autopilot lane with cars flying into the city to pick up their owners. You could also have parking garages with a much higher capacity per sq. foot if all the cars were smart and could work together. (Or even sections designed for this) Instead of single or double car rows, you could have them 4 or five cars deep, and self-rearranging to let each other out.
BuckRogers 11y ago
Elon Musk is wrong. As someone who has had family cars run into 3 times in 1 year at stop lights, by folks looking down at their cell phones. I'm sure that Tesla's autopilot is already better than human drivers.
stevesearer 11y ago
When they talk about "Tesla tweaks the software running its vehicles by analyzing data from the hundreds of millions of miles driven by current owners."... Does that mean that they analyze the miles driven using autopilot or the miles driven by the human driver or both? It would seem that using data from human driven miles would give them good insight into how human drivers would react in weird and non-standard situations. Also, with as many cars as Tesla has out on the road, I wonder if the amount of data they have to feed into their self-driving systems is more than Google or other players in the space.
stevenalowe 11y ago
Hey Elon, prove it: enter an autopiloted Tesla in a major car race.

31 points by ChrisCinelli 11y ago

Looking out of my office window onto a busy intersection with bad visibility, that's easy to believe. It's insane how many accidents happen solely because drivers are unwilling to slow down for a second.

BinaryIdiot 11y ago

Hmm is he referring to the ability released to the public to date or their capability in general that isn't yet accessible by the general public? If it's the former that doesn't make sense so I'm going to assume the latter. Considering in 2014 there were 32,675 motor vehicle deaths, 2,300,000 motor vehicle related injuries and 6,100,000 reported accidents in general (which means a likely higher number of accidents though not sure by how much) [1] it would not surprise me that even buggy software could do a better job than humans who tend to become distracted with almost anything. Though I'm not sure about extreme conditions like snow, heavy fog and rain, etc. As much as I love driving (and I really do) I can't wait for autonomous vehicles. Considering it's a, if I remember correctly, a 1.7% chance in your lifetime that you'll be killed in an auto accident in the United States (and higher of a chance that you'll known someone killed) that's just way to high of a number for me (especially being a Dad). [1] http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/Pubs/812219.pdf http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/Pubs/812219.pdf

Someone1234 11y ago
It is worth keeping in mind that even without automatic vehicles, vehicle deaths have and will continue to fall massively. From the worst in 1937 (29.357 per 100K pop) to today (10.345 per 100K pop), and falling by on average 2%/year since 1996 (was 15.8599 in 1996). Without trying to sound melodramatic, cars built in the 1990s are "death traps" by 2015 standards (and the same is true of 19980s cars by 1990s standards). The reason we're seeing it fall slowly is as the late 1990s vehicles gradually disappear. I suspect we'll see a massive drop again in the next ten years even without fully automatic cars as systems like Eyesight auto-break to slow collision speeds. One thing which will get interesting when we do have completely automatic vehicles is: current drink driving laws (in particular in the US) aren't compatible with them. In many US states falling asleep in a parked vehicle with the keys is enough to get someone for "drink driving" (even without the driving part), so falling asleep in an automatic car could still get someone a DUI.
- BinaryIdiot 11y ago
  > It is worth keeping in mind that even without automatic vehicles, vehicle deaths have and will continue to fall massively. Fair enough and I completely agree it's just not falling fast and far enough for me :)
- chubot 11y ago
  Really, what has changed about cars, besides automatic breaking? I agree that that feature saves lives. But I wonder about other stuff. I have a '99 Accord :) (which I barely drive)
  - wflann 11y ago
    Switching to stronger and lighter materials has certainly helped. There's new tech like blindspot monitoring and backup cameras in almost every vehicle now, and even rather simple stuff that's been around for awhile (like daytime running lights and having a center brake light) makes a huge difference.
  - sandworm101 11y ago
    Thousands of tiny improvements to how cars crumple in crash tests. It's all incremental. One change you can see on the road: the new looong Jeeps. That's so the gas tank can be ahead of and protected in a crash by the rear axle, a safety improvement.
  - Someone1234 11y ago
    > Really, what has changed about cars, besides automatic breaking? Great question. - Electronic stability control (ESC) (required from 2009). - Anti-lock braking system (ABS) (in most cars from 2004 due to EU regs, although not required in the US until 2011). - From 2003 the IIHS started rating vehicles for: rollover risk, side impact, and frontal offset impact. So car manufacturers started improving their designs to score better in these tests. The whole "top safety pick" thing is an IIHS rating. - From 2009 the NHTSA required a greater roof-crush load (3x the vehicle's weight, from 1.5x). - Safety Cell improvements: Crumple zones are less likely to trap in the driver or front passenger's legs/feet during impact. - Anti-intrusion bars: Are more standard. The IIHS tests kind of pushed them into mainstream. - Additional air bags (side impact). - Whiplash reduction seats and headrests. Overall regulations aren't why cars are safer in 2016, consumer demand is. People decided they didn't want to compromise on safety, so as a safer and safer vehicles became available consumers flocked to them. Manufacturers had a financial interest in not only be safe but the absolute safest in the road, and that competition pushed vehicle safety forward.

sandworm101 11y ago

Better perhaps a very specific tasks. I'd still like to see them respond to someone controlling traffic with hand gestures (a routine thing) or judge how best to get out of the way of an ambulance, which occasionally means breaking laws/rules.

pbreit 11y ago
Yeah, I think there's more to driving than just proceeding on the correct route and obeying laws,signals & signs. So I can see autopilot coming pretty soon but I think fully autonomous is much further out.

Someone1234 11y ago

I definitely think that systems like auto pilot will be better than human drivers, but that being said, I don't believe he has enough data to make the case for it being better TODAY. Musk has a habit of going off half cocked, and I think this is one of those cases. Auto pilot is great, but you cannot say much difinitively about it because it hasn't got enough miles or road conditions under its belt. That all being said, I myself have invested in this type of technology (Subaru's Eyesight) but auto pilot claims to be able to do much more than the more stabilised technology found on mass market vehicles.

pbreit 11y ago
He said "probably" and he's probably right.
Slippery_John 11y ago
While this isn't Tesla's implementation specifically, there is indeed data that says self-driving cars are better than than human drivers. http://www.vtti.vt.edu/featured/?p=422 http://www.vtti.vt.edu/featured/?p=422
- Someone1234 11y ago
  That data is unfair. You're comparing taking automatic vehicles out in good weather conditions to drivers who need to drive in all weather conditions. Call me when automatic vehicles get tested in a blizzard, sandstorm, or anything else that isn't an idealised Californian test track. PS - And this is someone who owns an auto-braking system vehicle, and I know first hand that it turns off when weather goes too bad.
  - JibberMeTimbers 11y ago
    Well, if that's the case, then why are humans crashing into others in prefect conditions? It's data that is fair but for certain conditions, as you said. I am interested in how they handle in extreme conditions but the reality is that it is FAR safer in mild conditions BECAUSE they aren't distracted by their cell phones or the sights or being tired/drunk, etc.

supergirl 11y ago

better in normal circumstances maybe. probably terrible in corner cases, which as he said, is where the real difficulties are and there are millions of corner cases.

ceejayoz 11y ago
It'd be interesting to know how many road accidents are those corner cases and how many are simple inattention. I've been in a couple accidents and each has been something I'm sure even a basic autopilot would've easily prevented.
- supergirl 11y ago
  1. You're right but you are thinking of human corner cases. AI also has corner cases which might be trivial for humans. I'm saying these corner cases for AI are too many currently. 2. And anyway, from my point of view 'better than humans' doesn't necessarily mean 'causes fewer accidents'. If that was the goal then an auto-pilot that kept the car still (or drove very very slowly) would win.

melling 11y ago

This feature alone could change the way we build cities and our suburbs: "With the “summon” feature, a driver can tell her Tesla to park itself or pull out from a parking spot or garage." A car that can drop you off and pick you up from work means parking can be moved away from the office, or even out of a city.

loganu 11y ago
I was just imagining an autopilot lane with cars flying into the city to pick up their owners. You could also have parking garages with a much higher capacity per sq. foot if all the cars were smart and could work together. (Or even sections designed for this) Instead of single or double car rows, you could have them 4 or five cars deep, and self-rearranging to let each other out.

BuckRogers 11y ago

Elon Musk is wrong. As someone who has had family cars run into 3 times in 1 year at stop lights, by folks looking down at their cell phones. I'm sure that Tesla's autopilot is already better than human drivers.

stevesearer 11y ago

When they talk about "Tesla tweaks the software running its vehicles by analyzing data from the hundreds of millions of miles driven by current owners."... Does that mean that they analyze the miles driven using autopilot or the miles driven by the human driver or both? It would seem that using data from human driven miles would give them good insight into how human drivers would react in weird and non-standard situations. Also, with as many cars as Tesla has out on the road, I wonder if the amount of data they have to feed into their self-driving systems is more than Google or other players in the space.

stevenalowe 11y ago

Hey Elon, prove it: enter an autopiloted Tesla in a major car race.