5 ms·

If Tesla's response to this is actually what the article says, then that's somewhat worrying. It's never a good idea to blame the user for a failing of the pro

If Tesla's response to this is actually what the article says, then that's somewhat worrying. It's never a good idea to blame the user for a failing of the product like this, especially on something like a car, beta version or not. If the car can't reliably not collide with obstacles in Summon mode, then the mode shouldn't be available to the public yet. This also points out a failing with Tesla's "we don't need LIDAR" strategy for sensors. Ultrasonic/IR sensors around the body might be reasonable for most driving situations, but clearly there are going to be incidents like this one if the car can't see at the full height of the body at close distance.

MBCook 11y ago
They have a good point that if the trailer is at windshield level then the ultrasonic/radar system can't detect it, but any vision systems should be able to (like the one I imagine is used to find lane markings). I agree completely with the Verge: this should never happen. 'Beta' is not an excuse for this kind of thing, ever. A valid excuse? The mode was activated and a small land slide caused the car to slip down the side of a hill. THAT'S a valid excuse. 'We told you to be careful' isn't.
- mdorazio 11y ago
  I'm actually not sure if the camera in the rearview mirror on the Model S is stereoscopic or not - maybe someone on HN can confirm. I know it's used for reading speed limits and helping with lane keeping, but it can be surprisingly difficult to get accurate distance information to objects from a single lens if that's all it has.
  - mediaman 11y ago
    It is not stereoscopic, so it would be difficult for it to detect closeness of an object.
    - MBCook 11y ago
      I imagine you can get some sort of rough guess with CV at how close something may be to you and if the car gets twitchy give up. I know it's not perfect, I expect it's NOT a stereoscopic camera, but it's a sensor that would have been aware of the object in some way.
    - kryptiskt 11y ago
      It's pretty easy if you compare images over time. If an object is growing in size fast it's closer.
- cookiecaper 11y ago
  Yeah, we live in a web and app world where most software guys are used to having a great deal of latitude in these types of things. It's much different when you're dealing with multi-ton death machines like cars and planes. I understand Tesla is clarifying that the driver misused the feature and that this is not normal operation, which is fine as far as it goes, but they simply shouldn't allow this to happen. If your product is not resilient against human error (or even a reasonable degree of human malice), it's not production-ready. Tesla actually takes a great attitude on this with regard to vehicle crash safety. They take minimizing fatalities super seriously. The kinds of collisions that all other automakers would've written off as "Well man, we can't stop people from driving into poles at 80 mph", Tesla notes and does everything they can to make sure the occupants can walk away. That's the kind of attitude we need here -- if your machine allows something bad to happen, you should not blame the user, but take every reasonable measure to correct the problem. This is the attitude that allowed the Model S to break the crash safety scale. You can't be perfect, but you can be pretty good. Saying "Well, don't press that button if there's a trailer in front of your car" isn't good enough.
  - FireBeyond 11y ago
    "Tesla actually takes a great attitude on this with regard to vehicle crash safety. They take minimizing fatalities super seriously. The kinds of collisions that all other automakers would've written off as "Well man, we can't stop people from driving into poles at 80 mph", Tesla notes and does everything they can to make sure the occupants can walk away." Eh. This is a bit too brown nose for me. http://www.iihs.org/iihs/ratings/TSP-List http://www.iihs.org/iihs/ratings/TSP-List Current IIHS "Top Safety Picks". There's some discussion about why Tesla isn't on the list, including that they've not submitted it - http://www.torquenews.com/1083/why-tesla-s-2014-model-s-cannot-earn-us-top-safety-rating http://www.torquenews.com/1083/why-tesla-s-2014-model-s-cann... but there are valid comments in there that even if submitted, while it would do very well, might struggle in some areas. To go from that to your "all other automakers would write off" is a generalization that frankly doesn't fit reality.
    - kalleboo 11y ago
DanFeldman 11y ago
Haven't read this article, but it was linked in the main article. Take a look: http://www.theverge.com/2016/5/11/11658226/tesla-model-s-summon-autopilot-crash-letter http://www.theverge.com/2016/5/11/11658226/tesla-model-s-sum...
vvanders 11y ago
Tesla owner w/ AP here. Honestly it's a design issue. The way that summon was activated(double tap on P) is very possible to slip and do. The screen where you cancel I've occasionally seen take 1-3s to pop up depending on what the rest of the SoC is doing. I could totally see a scenario where this happened, screen popped up while he was exiting and wasn't able to hear/notice that summon was engaged. The better fix here is to have a CONFIRM on the touchscreen rather than a CANCEL. It wouldn't hinder the experience since you already select forwards/back and catches this accident case. For the record, love the car and almost everything that Tesla does but I really hope they revisit this and design it a bit more defensively.
- toddmorey 11y ago
  That's a great design fix and I wouldn't be surprised to see them implement it.
- makomk 11y ago
  The follow-up at http://www.theverge.com/2016/5/11/11658226/tesla-model-s-summon-autopilot-crash-letter http://www.theverge.com/2016/5/11/11658226/tesla-model-s-sum... seems to confirm this, though naturally Tesla are trying to spin this as his fault: "Unfortunately, these warnings were not heeded in this incident. The vehicle logs confirm that the automatic Summon feature was initiated by a double-press of the gear selector stalk button, shifting from Drive to Park and requesting Summon activation. The driver was alerted of the Summon activation with an audible chime and a pop-up message on the center touchscreen display. At this time, the driver had the opportunity to cancel the action by pressing CANCEL on the center touchscreen display; however, the CANCEL button was not clicked by the driver. In the next second, the brake pedal was released and two seconds later, the driver exited the vehicle. Three seconds after that, the driver's door was closed, and another three seconds later, Summon activated pursuant to the driver's double-press activation request. Approximately five minutes, sixteen seconds after Summon activated, the vehicle's driver's-side front door was opened again. The vehicle's behavior was the result of the driver's own actions and as you were informed through multiple sources regarding the Summon feature, the driver is always responsible for the safe operation and for maintaining proper control of the vehicle." Basically, they designed an autonomous-operation mode that was easy to activate by accident and incapable of reliably avoiding crashing into things, it appears someone did and his shiny Tesla crashed into a trailer as a result, and they responded by accusing him of intentionally activating the feature and misusing it.

MBCook 11y ago

They have a good point that if the trailer is at windshield level then the ultrasonic/radar system can't detect it, but any vision systems should be able to (like the one I imagine is used to find lane markings). I agree completely with the Verge: this should never happen. 'Beta' is not an excuse for this kind of thing, ever. A valid excuse? The mode was activated and a small land slide caused the car to slip down the side of a hill. THAT'S a valid excuse. 'We told you to be careful' isn't.

mdorazio 11y ago
I'm actually not sure if the camera in the rearview mirror on the Model S is stereoscopic or not - maybe someone on HN can confirm. I know it's used for reading speed limits and helping with lane keeping, but it can be surprisingly difficult to get accurate distance information to objects from a single lens if that's all it has.
- mediaman 11y ago
  It is not stereoscopic, so it would be difficult for it to detect closeness of an object.
  - MBCook 11y ago
    I imagine you can get some sort of rough guess with CV at how close something may be to you and if the car gets twitchy give up. I know it's not perfect, I expect it's NOT a stereoscopic camera, but it's a sensor that would have been aware of the object in some way.
  - kryptiskt 11y ago
    It's pretty easy if you compare images over time. If an object is growing in size fast it's closer.
cookiecaper 11y ago
Yeah, we live in a web and app world where most software guys are used to having a great deal of latitude in these types of things. It's much different when you're dealing with multi-ton death machines like cars and planes. I understand Tesla is clarifying that the driver misused the feature and that this is not normal operation, which is fine as far as it goes, but they simply shouldn't allow this to happen. If your product is not resilient against human error (or even a reasonable degree of human malice), it's not production-ready. Tesla actually takes a great attitude on this with regard to vehicle crash safety. They take minimizing fatalities super seriously. The kinds of collisions that all other automakers would've written off as "Well man, we can't stop people from driving into poles at 80 mph", Tesla notes and does everything they can to make sure the occupants can walk away. That's the kind of attitude we need here -- if your machine allows something bad to happen, you should not blame the user, but take every reasonable measure to correct the problem. This is the attitude that allowed the Model S to break the crash safety scale. You can't be perfect, but you can be pretty good. Saying "Well, don't press that button if there's a trailer in front of your car" isn't good enough.
- FireBeyond 11y ago
  "Tesla actually takes a great attitude on this with regard to vehicle crash safety. They take minimizing fatalities super seriously. The kinds of collisions that all other automakers would've written off as "Well man, we can't stop people from driving into poles at 80 mph", Tesla notes and does everything they can to make sure the occupants can walk away." Eh. This is a bit too brown nose for me. http://www.iihs.org/iihs/ratings/TSP-List http://www.iihs.org/iihs/ratings/TSP-List Current IIHS "Top Safety Picks". There's some discussion about why Tesla isn't on the list, including that they've not submitted it - http://www.torquenews.com/1083/why-tesla-s-2014-model-s-cannot-earn-us-top-safety-rating http://www.torquenews.com/1083/why-tesla-s-2014-model-s-cann... but there are valid comments in there that even if submitted, while it would do very well, might struggle in some areas. To go from that to your "all other automakers would write off" is a generalization that frankly doesn't fit reality.
  - kalleboo 11y ago

DanFeldman 11y ago

Haven't read this article, but it was linked in the main article. Take a look: http://www.theverge.com/2016/5/11/11658226/tesla-model-s-summon-autopilot-crash-letter http://www.theverge.com/2016/5/11/11658226/tesla-model-s-sum...

vvanders 11y ago

Tesla owner w/ AP here. Honestly it's a design issue. The way that summon was activated(double tap on P) is very possible to slip and do. The screen where you cancel I've occasionally seen take 1-3s to pop up depending on what the rest of the SoC is doing. I could totally see a scenario where this happened, screen popped up while he was exiting and wasn't able to hear/notice that summon was engaged. The better fix here is to have a CONFIRM on the touchscreen rather than a CANCEL. It wouldn't hinder the experience since you already select forwards/back and catches this accident case. For the record, love the car and almost everything that Tesla does but I really hope they revisit this and design it a bit more defensively.

toddmorey 11y ago
That's a great design fix and I wouldn't be surprised to see them implement it.
makomk 11y ago
The follow-up at http://www.theverge.com/2016/5/11/11658226/tesla-model-s-summon-autopilot-crash-letter http://www.theverge.com/2016/5/11/11658226/tesla-model-s-sum... seems to confirm this, though naturally Tesla are trying to spin this as his fault: "Unfortunately, these warnings were not heeded in this incident. The vehicle logs confirm that the automatic Summon feature was initiated by a double-press of the gear selector stalk button, shifting from Drive to Park and requesting Summon activation. The driver was alerted of the Summon activation with an audible chime and a pop-up message on the center touchscreen display. At this time, the driver had the opportunity to cancel the action by pressing CANCEL on the center touchscreen display; however, the CANCEL button was not clicked by the driver. In the next second, the brake pedal was released and two seconds later, the driver exited the vehicle. Three seconds after that, the driver's door was closed, and another three seconds later, Summon activated pursuant to the driver's double-press activation request. Approximately five minutes, sixteen seconds after Summon activated, the vehicle's driver's-side front door was opened again. The vehicle's behavior was the result of the driver's own actions and as you were informed through multiple sources regarding the Summon feature, the driver is always responsible for the safe operation and for maintaining proper control of the vehicle." Basically, they designed an autonomous-operation mode that was easy to activate by accident and incapable of reliably avoiding crashing into things, it appears someone did and his shiny Tesla crashed into a trailer as a result, and they responded by accusing him of intentionally activating the feature and misusing it.