8 ms·

I feel 'A Tragic Loss' sets the tone for the remaining highly technical overview, instead of the technical breakdown seeming tone-deaf, it added tone until gett

by loceng 10y ago

I feel 'A Tragic Loss' sets the tone for the remaining highly technical overview, instead of the technical breakdown seeming tone-deaf, it added tone until getting to the concluding paragraph. Unfortunately, fortunately, Tesla is having to educate people and being very clear to not allow room for panic and unwarranted fear mongering. I would say it is as to the point as it can be, and that it is heartfelt.

mevile 10y ago
In addition it had important information for how other Tesla drivers can use the auto-pilot feature more safely. The article combines condolences and helpful safety information to prevent this kind of thing from happening again. Also, you don't see GM making a blog post every time someone passes away in a car they make.
- dmix 10y ago
  And regardless this was primarily an after-the-fact technical analysis with relevant information to other Tesla owners, the primary purpose was not a formal announcement of a death. The news typically handles that role.
- morsch 10y ago
  Then again, GM sells more vehicles in a week than Tesla has sold in its entire history.
  - semi-extrinsic 10y ago
    This. Notice how quick they are to bring up "this is the first fatality in 130 million miles", but AFAICT, traffic fatalities in the US occur at a frequency of around 10 per billion miles [1], which is the same. So even though this is just one data point, it's spot on the current average for fatality frequency in normal cars. Furthermore, to gather enough statistics to be able to say with confidence "semi-autonomous Teslas are/aren't safer than normal cars", Tesla either needs to increase their sales volume by several orders of magnitude, or we'll have to wait for ten years. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_motor_vehicle_deaths_in_U.S._by_year https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_motor_vehicle_deaths_i...
    - iraphael 10y ago
      Is there a statistical difference in accident rate between high and low income populations? If so, do we know what the fatality/miles rate is in the group that would be able to afford a tesla? When I read the blog post, I couldn't help but think that while tesla's rate might be smaller than the national average, it is also not a fair comparison to draw conclusions from.
      - semi-extrinsic 10y ago
        IDK about statistical difference, but the mechanical difference between a brand new high-end full-size car and a twenty year old Honda Civic is going to be massive. Just look at the downward slope of that curve of fatalities per billion miles in each year. Also remember that those numbers are averages over the entire car population in each year, so most cars in the 2015 data are quite a bit older than 2015. If we had data for the "high end modern full-size car" category, it would most definitely be lower than 10 fatalities per billion miles.
    - xiphias 10y ago
      Having the same fatality statistic was not enough for Google to bring autonomous driving into production. Many people think that it should be at least an order of magnitude safer than manual driving
      - semi-extrinsic 10y ago
        Sure. The problem with this is statistics: you need to have your autonomous cars travel at least 100 billion miles before you can confidently say they're an order of magnitude safer. A normal car drives about 100 000 miles in 10 years. You then need one million autonomous cars driving around for a decade before you even know whether they're safer!
        jgalt212 10y ago
        That's very true, but if you know your product well enough, and you perform well conducted experiments, you can come up with a good estimate for this without actually having your cars travel 100 billion miles.
- sliverstorm 10y ago
  GM's cars don't have autopilot driving their passengers into a semi (that I know of)
  - ams6110 10y ago
    I had posted the same comment before I saw this one (I deleted mine). I would assume that the higher-end GM cars do have an automatic braking collision avoidance system by now, since that's a pretty standard feature above a certain price point. And I would assume it's not foolproof either, but at least it doesn't lead the driver to think he can take his hands off the wheel and not pay attention to what's happening on the road.
    - viraptor 10y ago
      > at least it doesn't lead the driver to think he can take his hands off the wheel and not pay attention Tesla reiterates every time and makes you confirm you understand that this is not the case. If the driver did it, that's completely on them being irresponsible.
      - fucking_tragedy 10y ago
        It's called Autopilot™.
        manicdee 10y ago
        The autopilot in planes works the same way: pilot is strongly recommended to keep hands on the controls, autopilot will release control if any conditions fall outside the autopilot's functional envelope.
        fucking_tragedy 10y ago
        Pilots are trained professionals in the field where autopilot is relevant, consumers are not.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- rasz_pl 10y ago
  > auto-pilot feature there is no such feature, there is a MobilEye _lane following_ system Tesla repackaged under Autopilot(TM) brand. Say it out loud - lane following. Mercedes sold this same tech almost 10 years ago, difference is Tesla felt pressure and started believing their own marketing lies about autonomous driving.
  - ams6110 10y ago
    They call it autopilot. Words mean things. That word creates an impression that it is more capable than it really is.
  - ec109685 10y ago
    The hardware might be the same but the compute has evolved.
- Dr_tldr 10y ago
  Yeah, but that's not how people's emotions usually work. Although US foreign policy and intelligence decisions were more or less directly responsible for 9/11, you don't lecture people at Ground Zero about the dangers of blowback and not being aware of your government's activities. There's no such thing as "condolences, but...", and Elon Musk has shown a pattern of this kind of tone-deafness before. Not to say he's not brilliant and not to say autonomous cars won't ultimately save many lives, just that he should either listen to his PR department if he overruled them, or fire his PR department if they did this without him.
  - copperred 10y ago
    "There's no such thing as "condolences, but...", and Elon Musk has shown a pattern of this kind of tone-deafness before. Not to say he's not brilliant and not to say autonomous cars won't ultimately save many lives, just that he should either listen to his PR department if he overruled them, or fire his PR department if they did this without him." Excellent, Doc. Further to the point about these statements and Musk's leadership: not too long ago Tesla would include the fact that nobody has been killed in a Tesla in their public statements. I found it completely inappropriate since we all knew it was just a matter of time, sadly. Again they play with fire, as another death with autopilot will really wreck their statistics.
- lttlrck 10y ago
  They should not be using a blog post to convey critical safety information to their customers.
  - ringwalt 10y ago
    There's a warning that makes it clear that you need to maintain your full attention on the road, when you enable Autopilot and every single time you take your hands off the wheel. If anything, giving users specific scenarios where Autopilot may fail would take away from that fact, and make it seem like there are other cases where it's ok to take your eyes off the road.
Shivetya 10y ago
All that matters is, did the technology fail. I don't care about crash rates in other cars, if the impact had been different, the only fact that matters in this case is, did the tech fail. If so then is it safe to leave on or should it be disabled across the board until it cannot fail this scenario again. one failure and they will take a minor publicity and money hit, two and its going to devastating
- cloakandswagger 10y ago
  Whether it performed as designed or not really isn't relevant. The salient point here is Tesla's promotion of an "auto-pilot" system that encourages users to take their attention off of the road and put too much faith in a glorified lane-following system. Now, this is pure speculation, but I really can't imagine running into the side of an 18-wheeler crossing the highway unless A) I was traveling at a reckless speed (unlikely given that "auto-pilot" was on) or B) I wasn't paying attention to the road.
- iofj 10y ago
  For one thing, it lookslike the car kept driving after the crash, hit 2 fences and a pole, then tried to get back on the road before it shut down. Sounds like pretty big screwup. https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/files/2016/06/Teslareconstruction.jpg https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/files/2016/0...
  - informatimago 10y ago
    Well again, the Tesla autopilot is not a google car AI pilot system. IMO, human (customers') expectations require more than a mere autopilot.

by loceng 10y ago

mevile 10y ago

In addition it had important information for how other Tesla drivers can use the auto-pilot feature more safely. The article combines condolences and helpful safety information to prevent this kind of thing from happening again. Also, you don't see GM making a blog post every time someone passes away in a car they make.

dmix 10y ago
And regardless this was primarily an after-the-fact technical analysis with relevant information to other Tesla owners, the primary purpose was not a formal announcement of a death. The news typically handles that role.
morsch 10y ago
Then again, GM sells more vehicles in a week than Tesla has sold in its entire history.
- semi-extrinsic 10y ago
  This. Notice how quick they are to bring up "this is the first fatality in 130 million miles", but AFAICT, traffic fatalities in the US occur at a frequency of around 10 per billion miles [1], which is the same. So even though this is just one data point, it's spot on the current average for fatality frequency in normal cars. Furthermore, to gather enough statistics to be able to say with confidence "semi-autonomous Teslas are/aren't safer than normal cars", Tesla either needs to increase their sales volume by several orders of magnitude, or we'll have to wait for ten years. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_motor_vehicle_deaths_in_U.S._by_year https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_motor_vehicle_deaths_i...
  - iraphael 10y ago
    Is there a statistical difference in accident rate between high and low income populations? If so, do we know what the fatality/miles rate is in the group that would be able to afford a tesla? When I read the blog post, I couldn't help but think that while tesla's rate might be smaller than the national average, it is also not a fair comparison to draw conclusions from.
    - semi-extrinsic 10y ago
      IDK about statistical difference, but the mechanical difference between a brand new high-end full-size car and a twenty year old Honda Civic is going to be massive. Just look at the downward slope of that curve of fatalities per billion miles in each year. Also remember that those numbers are averages over the entire car population in each year, so most cars in the 2015 data are quite a bit older than 2015. If we had data for the "high end modern full-size car" category, it would most definitely be lower than 10 fatalities per billion miles.
  - xiphias 10y ago
    Having the same fatality statistic was not enough for Google to bring autonomous driving into production. Many people think that it should be at least an order of magnitude safer than manual driving
    - semi-extrinsic 10y ago
      Sure. The problem with this is statistics: you need to have your autonomous cars travel at least 100 billion miles before you can confidently say they're an order of magnitude safer. A normal car drives about 100 000 miles in 10 years. You then need one million autonomous cars driving around for a decade before you even know whether they're safer!
      - jgalt212 10y ago
        That's very true, but if you know your product well enough, and you perform well conducted experiments, you can come up with a good estimate for this without actually having your cars travel 100 billion miles.
sliverstorm 10y ago
GM's cars don't have autopilot driving their passengers into a semi (that I know of)
- ams6110 10y ago
  I had posted the same comment before I saw this one (I deleted mine). I would assume that the higher-end GM cars do have an automatic braking collision avoidance system by now, since that's a pretty standard feature above a certain price point. And I would assume it's not foolproof either, but at least it doesn't lead the driver to think he can take his hands off the wheel and not pay attention to what's happening on the road.
  - viraptor 10y ago
    > at least it doesn't lead the driver to think he can take his hands off the wheel and not pay attention Tesla reiterates every time and makes you confirm you understand that this is not the case. If the driver did it, that's completely on them being irresponsible.
    - fucking_tragedy 10y ago
      It's called Autopilot™.
      - manicdee 10y ago
        The autopilot in planes works the same way: pilot is strongly recommended to keep hands on the controls, autopilot will release control if any conditions fall outside the autopilot's functional envelope.
        fucking_tragedy 10y ago
        Pilots are trained professionals in the field where autopilot is relevant, consumers are not.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
rasz_pl 10y ago
> auto-pilot feature there is no such feature, there is a MobilEye _lane following_ system Tesla repackaged under Autopilot(TM) brand. Say it out loud - lane following. Mercedes sold this same tech almost 10 years ago, difference is Tesla felt pressure and started believing their own marketing lies about autonomous driving.
- ams6110 10y ago
  They call it autopilot. Words mean things. That word creates an impression that it is more capable than it really is.
- ec109685 10y ago
  The hardware might be the same but the compute has evolved.
Dr_tldr 10y ago
Yeah, but that's not how people's emotions usually work. Although US foreign policy and intelligence decisions were more or less directly responsible for 9/11, you don't lecture people at Ground Zero about the dangers of blowback and not being aware of your government's activities. There's no such thing as "condolences, but...", and Elon Musk has shown a pattern of this kind of tone-deafness before. Not to say he's not brilliant and not to say autonomous cars won't ultimately save many lives, just that he should either listen to his PR department if he overruled them, or fire his PR department if they did this without him.
- copperred 10y ago
  "There's no such thing as "condolences, but...", and Elon Musk has shown a pattern of this kind of tone-deafness before. Not to say he's not brilliant and not to say autonomous cars won't ultimately save many lives, just that he should either listen to his PR department if he overruled them, or fire his PR department if they did this without him." Excellent, Doc. Further to the point about these statements and Musk's leadership: not too long ago Tesla would include the fact that nobody has been killed in a Tesla in their public statements. I found it completely inappropriate since we all knew it was just a matter of time, sadly. Again they play with fire, as another death with autopilot will really wreck their statistics.
lttlrck 10y ago
They should not be using a blog post to convey critical safety information to their customers.
- ringwalt 10y ago
  There's a warning that makes it clear that you need to maintain your full attention on the road, when you enable Autopilot and every single time you take your hands off the wheel. If anything, giving users specific scenarios where Autopilot may fail would take away from that fact, and make it seem like there are other cases where it's ok to take your eyes off the road.

Shivetya 10y ago

All that matters is, did the technology fail. I don't care about crash rates in other cars, if the impact had been different, the only fact that matters in this case is, did the tech fail. If so then is it safe to leave on or should it be disabled across the board until it cannot fail this scenario again. one failure and they will take a minor publicity and money hit, two and its going to devastating

cloakandswagger 10y ago
Whether it performed as designed or not really isn't relevant. The salient point here is Tesla's promotion of an "auto-pilot" system that encourages users to take their attention off of the road and put too much faith in a glorified lane-following system. Now, this is pure speculation, but I really can't imagine running into the side of an 18-wheeler crossing the highway unless A) I was traveling at a reckless speed (unlikely given that "auto-pilot" was on) or B) I wasn't paying attention to the road.
iofj 10y ago
For one thing, it lookslike the car kept driving after the crash, hit 2 fences and a pole, then tried to get back on the road before it shut down. Sounds like pretty big screwup. https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/files/2016/06/Teslareconstruction.jpg https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/files/2016/0...
- informatimago 10y ago
  Well again, the Tesla autopilot is not a google car AI pilot system. IMO, human (customers') expectations require more than a mere autopilot.