4 ms·

I don't trust you to be able to snap out of a distracted state and take control of a car in a situation you may or may not have been paying attention to. I don'

I don't trust you to be able to snap out of a distracted state and take control of a car in a situation you may or may not have been paying attention to. I don't trust you to do that, I don't trust the driver behind me to do that, and I don't trust the drivers to the left and to the right of me to do that. I should not need to trust you -- if I trusted you, why would we need autopilot at all? Humans are either qualified to drive cars or they aren't. If they are qualified, we don't need autopilot. If they aren't qualified, autopilot should never require human intervention. What we have now is a half-measure that assumes that neither humans nor autopilots can be trusted, but that some combination of those two untrustworthy parties can somehow be trusted. It doesn't make any sense.

toomuchtodo 9y ago
1.3 million people a year die in car crashes. Humans are woefully unqualified to pilot heavy machinery on a daily basis. Tesla’s Autopilot reduces crashes by 40% according to the NHTSA, so I can’t agree with your binary argument. Whether you trust others is immaterial; statistics will be the final arbitor. If Autopilot still causes fatal accidents, but fewer fatal accidents than humans alone, how could you argue against such a safety system? What of the lives saved that wouldn’t have been if we demand an entirely fault proof system prior to implementation? Who are you (not you specially, but the aggregate) to take those lives away because of irrationality?
- Aeolun 9y ago
  I am human, and any product built for me will have to take into account my idiosyncrasies. This includes my unwillingness to drive on the same road with a car that might at any moment swerve into me because of weird software. It may be irrational, but I can forgive a human, I cannot forgive an AI.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
- cma 9y ago
  Wasn't that with the old, better, auto pilot?
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
- danso 9y ago
  > Tesla’s Autopilot reduces crashes by 40% according to the NHTSA This claim was immediately called into suspicion when it was first published, and the NHTSA is currently facing a FOIA lawsuit for refusing to release data to independent researchers. http://www.safetyresearch.net/blog/articles/quality-control-systems-corp-sues-dot-tesla-data http://www.safetyresearch.net/blog/articles/quality-control-... https://jalopnik.com/feds-cant-say-why-they-claim-teslas-autosteer-cuts-cras-1819229456 https://jalopnik.com/feds-cant-say-why-they-claim-teslas-aut...
  - toomuchtodo 9y ago
    As noted in your citation, Tesla requested the data they provided to be confidential (which is not an uncommon request), and the NHTSA granted the request. Whether the statement from the regulatory agency can be independently verified is immaterial.
    - danso 9y ago
      > Whether the statement from the regulatory agency can be independently verified is immaterial You believe independent verification of study results are "immaterial"? OK.
      - toomuchtodo 9y ago
        Because I do not have access to raw data does not make the resulting facts any less true (see: proprietary hurricane models). The NHTSA made a determination and I’m using it as a data point.
        danso 9y ago
        OK, and all I said in my comment was that the NHTSA was asked for elaboration and proof -- because its findings seemed curious with respect to other study results -- and so far they have declined further explanation. This may be relevant information for anyone who sees you using the NHTSA's claim as a premise.
- carterehsmith 9y ago
  >> Tesla’s Autopilot reduces crashes by 40% according to the NHTSA So does any car with automatic emergency braking and/or or forward collision warning (links below). The problem here is, this Tesla drove head-on into the gore point. And previously, it drove right into the side of a huge truck. So... can it be trusted? Your call. https://www.consumerreports.org/car-safety/automatic-emergency-braking-guide/ https://www.consumerreports.org/car-safety/automatic-emergen... " IIHS data show rear-end collisions are cut by 50 percent on vehicles with AEB and FCW. "
  - emiliobumachar 9y ago
    "drove head-on into the gore point" "drove right into the side of a huge truck" A lot of human-led accidents sound just as silly when stated this simply, so it's not relevant to the comparison. More to the point, I think each of the deaths would be exactly as tragic, no more no less, if the sequence of events was complicated.
omarforgotpwd 9y ago
Please. You should see me when the car isn't on AutoPilot. I speed excessively, weave through LA traffic switching lanes frequently and generally exhibit unsafe driving behavior. I can't help it, it's like I get bored or something. I'm a decent driver and have never gotten in a crash but have gotten a lot of tickets. When I use AutoPilot, the car automatically maintains a reasonable distance at a fixed speed. You need to trust people driving other cars today, just as you always have -- that hasn't changed yet. AutoPilot related accidents are new, but accidents aren't. So yes people will die using AutoPilot but the solution is to know the systems limits and also maybe enhanced attention detection systems in the car, not banning AutoPilot or anything like that. I do believe AutoPilot can already reduce the number of crashes today.
- danso 9y ago
  The 3 Autopilot deaths so far involved 3 relatively young men, both in relatively elite professions: former Navy SEAL and an Apple engineer -- the third was a son of a Chinese business owner [0]. They fit the profile of men fairly confident about driving and tech, perhaps too confident. 3 fatalities over 320 million miles for Teslas equipped with Autopilot hardware is not much better than the 1.16/100 million miles fatality rate of all American drivers and vehicles. [0] https://jalopnik.com/two-years-on-a-father-is-still-fighting-tesla-over-aut-1823189786 https://jalopnik.com/two-years-on-a-father-is-still-fighting... edit: corrected a typo
  - mschuster91 9y ago
    What about non-fatal accidents though? Where Teslas (and other assisted driving vehicles) prevent stuff like hitting pedestrians, random bikers, animals, parked cars etc.?
    - danso 9y ago
      Tesla hasn't provided those numbers.
  - omarforgotpwd 9y ago
    I know, it definitely gives me pause to see people dying and is definitely a reminder to be safe. I remember when I was using AutoPilot on the 101 in the bay area this weekend, I noticed I was in the far left lane and decided to switch to a middle lane. So it's not that I don't think AutoPilot could kill me, as a matter of fact there have been several times when AutoPilot was definitely about to kill me but I took control in time to course correct. I think I've used the system enough to get a sense of what it can and can't do and feel that I'm less likely to get in a collision due to not paying attention while AutoPilot is on than I am to get into a collision because I was driving. Also, in response to the statistics you cite: I wouldn't expect the statistics to be that far off the average because AutoPilot is limited in it's possible use cases at the moment. Even in cars equipped with AutoPilot people are always still driving the car for at least some part of the trip. Therefore I wouldn't expect the impact of AutoPilot to lead to a significant deviation from the average. Plus, I'd speculate that the crash rate per mile is probably higher on a Tesla then an average car -- I'm thinking of like a Honda Civic. Faster cars probably get in more crashes, right? Maybe not, who knows. Regardless it should be possible to control for this and assess the effect of AutoPilot on per mile crash rates by comparing rates for Teslas with and without AutoPilot. This is somewhat complicated by the fact that even Teslas without AutoPilot have automatic collision avoidance, but should shed some light on whether AutoPilot is making people crash more or less.

toomuchtodo 9y ago

1.3 million people a year die in car crashes. Humans are woefully unqualified to pilot heavy machinery on a daily basis. Tesla’s Autopilot reduces crashes by 40% according to the NHTSA, so I can’t agree with your binary argument. Whether you trust others is immaterial; statistics will be the final arbitor. If Autopilot still causes fatal accidents, but fewer fatal accidents than humans alone, how could you argue against such a safety system? What of the lives saved that wouldn’t have been if we demand an entirely fault proof system prior to implementation? Who are you (not you specially, but the aggregate) to take those lives away because of irrationality?

Aeolun 9y ago
I am human, and any product built for me will have to take into account my idiosyncrasies. This includes my unwillingness to drive on the same road with a car that might at any moment swerve into me because of weird software. It may be irrational, but I can forgive a human, I cannot forgive an AI.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
cma 9y ago
Wasn't that with the old, better, auto pilot?
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
danso 9y ago
> Tesla’s Autopilot reduces crashes by 40% according to the NHTSA This claim was immediately called into suspicion when it was first published, and the NHTSA is currently facing a FOIA lawsuit for refusing to release data to independent researchers. http://www.safetyresearch.net/blog/articles/quality-control-systems-corp-sues-dot-tesla-data http://www.safetyresearch.net/blog/articles/quality-control-... https://jalopnik.com/feds-cant-say-why-they-claim-teslas-autosteer-cuts-cras-1819229456 https://jalopnik.com/feds-cant-say-why-they-claim-teslas-aut...
- toomuchtodo 9y ago
  As noted in your citation, Tesla requested the data they provided to be confidential (which is not an uncommon request), and the NHTSA granted the request. Whether the statement from the regulatory agency can be independently verified is immaterial.
  - danso 9y ago
    > Whether the statement from the regulatory agency can be independently verified is immaterial You believe independent verification of study results are "immaterial"? OK.
    - toomuchtodo 9y ago
      Because I do not have access to raw data does not make the resulting facts any less true (see: proprietary hurricane models). The NHTSA made a determination and I’m using it as a data point.
      - danso 9y ago
        OK, and all I said in my comment was that the NHTSA was asked for elaboration and proof -- because its findings seemed curious with respect to other study results -- and so far they have declined further explanation. This may be relevant information for anyone who sees you using the NHTSA's claim as a premise.
carterehsmith 9y ago
>> Tesla’s Autopilot reduces crashes by 40% according to the NHTSA So does any car with automatic emergency braking and/or or forward collision warning (links below). The problem here is, this Tesla drove head-on into the gore point. And previously, it drove right into the side of a huge truck. So... can it be trusted? Your call. https://www.consumerreports.org/car-safety/automatic-emergency-braking-guide/ https://www.consumerreports.org/car-safety/automatic-emergen... " IIHS data show rear-end collisions are cut by 50 percent on vehicles with AEB and FCW. "
- emiliobumachar 9y ago
  "drove head-on into the gore point" "drove right into the side of a huge truck" A lot of human-led accidents sound just as silly when stated this simply, so it's not relevant to the comparison. More to the point, I think each of the deaths would be exactly as tragic, no more no less, if the sequence of events was complicated.

omarforgotpwd 9y ago

Please. You should see me when the car isn't on AutoPilot. I speed excessively, weave through LA traffic switching lanes frequently and generally exhibit unsafe driving behavior. I can't help it, it's like I get bored or something. I'm a decent driver and have never gotten in a crash but have gotten a lot of tickets. When I use AutoPilot, the car automatically maintains a reasonable distance at a fixed speed. You need to trust people driving other cars today, just as you always have -- that hasn't changed yet. AutoPilot related accidents are new, but accidents aren't. So yes people will die using AutoPilot but the solution is to know the systems limits and also maybe enhanced attention detection systems in the car, not banning AutoPilot or anything like that. I do believe AutoPilot can already reduce the number of crashes today.

danso 9y ago
The 3 Autopilot deaths so far involved 3 relatively young men, both in relatively elite professions: former Navy SEAL and an Apple engineer -- the third was a son of a Chinese business owner [0]. They fit the profile of men fairly confident about driving and tech, perhaps too confident. 3 fatalities over 320 million miles for Teslas equipped with Autopilot hardware is not much better than the 1.16/100 million miles fatality rate of all American drivers and vehicles. [0] https://jalopnik.com/two-years-on-a-father-is-still-fighting-tesla-over-aut-1823189786 https://jalopnik.com/two-years-on-a-father-is-still-fighting... edit: corrected a typo
- mschuster91 9y ago
  What about non-fatal accidents though? Where Teslas (and other assisted driving vehicles) prevent stuff like hitting pedestrians, random bikers, animals, parked cars etc.?
  - danso 9y ago
    Tesla hasn't provided those numbers.
- omarforgotpwd 9y ago
  I know, it definitely gives me pause to see people dying and is definitely a reminder to be safe. I remember when I was using AutoPilot on the 101 in the bay area this weekend, I noticed I was in the far left lane and decided to switch to a middle lane. So it's not that I don't think AutoPilot could kill me, as a matter of fact there have been several times when AutoPilot was definitely about to kill me but I took control in time to course correct. I think I've used the system enough to get a sense of what it can and can't do and feel that I'm less likely to get in a collision due to not paying attention while AutoPilot is on than I am to get into a collision because I was driving. Also, in response to the statistics you cite: I wouldn't expect the statistics to be that far off the average because AutoPilot is limited in it's possible use cases at the moment. Even in cars equipped with AutoPilot people are always still driving the car for at least some part of the trip. Therefore I wouldn't expect the impact of AutoPilot to lead to a significant deviation from the average. Plus, I'd speculate that the crash rate per mile is probably higher on a Tesla then an average car -- I'm thinking of like a Honda Civic. Faster cars probably get in more crashes, right? Maybe not, who knows. Regardless it should be possible to control for this and assess the effect of AutoPilot on per mile crash rates by comparing rates for Teslas with and without AutoPilot. This is somewhat complicated by the fact that even Teslas without AutoPilot have automatic collision avoidance, but should shed some light on whether AutoPilot is making people crash more or less.