8 ms·

You can pry the steering wheel out of my cold dead hands. Might be true that on paper these things cause less accidents and less deaths, but I want to be in con

by gormz 9y ago

You can pry the steering wheel out of my cold dead hands. Might be true that on paper these things cause less accidents and less deaths, but I want to be in control of my life. If I die in a car I don't want it to be because of a software bug.

jacquesm 9y ago
I hate to break it to you but it could still happen to you because both you and those Teslas are part of the same traffic stream. So you could easily get killed because of a software bug in someone else's vehicle.
- gormz 9y ago
  touche. seems like they're more interested in concrete barriers than other cars at the moment.
  - oldgradstudent 9y ago
    Wait for the next software update. And remember not to have an emergency requiring you to stop on the side of the road: [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fc0yYJ8-Dyo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fc0yYJ8-Dyo [2] https://www.theverge.com/2018/1/23/16923800/tesla-firetruck-crash-autopilot-investigation https://www.theverge.com/2018/1/23/16923800/tesla-firetruck-...
    - gormz 9y ago
      I honestly think the fault is in the naming conventions. when you call it "Auto Pilot" it doesn't seem like you have to drive at all. Someone like Cadillac calls it "Super Cruise". I think this makes it sound much more like what it is. It's driving assistance, not self driving.
    - jacquesm 9y ago
      That one is ugly. If AP can't even steer around huge trucks parked on the road then that's a very serious problem. Interesting how everybody claims it is 'the drivers fault' when in fact at that moment the driver is the autopilot software. It - and not the person sitting in the left hand front seat of the car - is driving the car.
bufferoverflow 9y ago
Most modern cars are drive-by-wire, entirely relying on computers and the software. And their software is huge blobs of proprietary compiled code. It's guaranteed to have bugs.
- 20after4 9y ago
  Probably not that huge, really. Embedded systems on most vehicles are fairly minimal and reliable, at least compared to modern consumer operating systems and (apparently) Tesla's systems.
  - bufferoverflow 9y ago
    Car software is huge. https://cdn-images-1.medium.com/max/2000/1*cjVl6u_s34Mqjcn68sWlkA.png https://cdn-images-1.medium.com/max/2000/1*cjVl6u_s34Mqjcn68...
- gormz 9y ago
  yeah I guess. That buggy code doesn't drive people into walls or give people the feeling they can read the newspaper while doing one of most dangerous things they do in their day.
- walrus01 9y ago
  Very few modern cars actually decouple the steering wheel from the power steering mechanism fully, like a fly by wire jet airplane no longer has cable linkages from control stick to control surfaces.
- jiveturkey 9y ago
  1. It's more than most, it's almost all modern passenger cars that are drive-by-wire. But drive-by-wire is a term of art that specifically means that the throttle is not a direct mechanical linkage. Very, very few cars are steer-by-wire and even fewer are brake-by-wire. 2. You're using "proprietary" as a pejorative. It's not proprietary, compiled code that has bugs. All software is guaranteed to have bugs. 3. An entirely insignificant number of accidents are caused by bugs in the drive-by-wire control system. (Even taking into account that an insignificant fraction of cars on the road are drive-by-wire as you mean it.)
astura 9y ago
You already don't have control over any of the other drivers on the road, some of which are unlicensed, impaired or even homicidal or suicidal. Not to mention your car already has software that can kill you, even if it doesn't steer. Even ignoring software, hardware can have "bugs" in it too that kill you. I'm not sure why you think engineering mistakes are "worse" when they are in the software vs the hardware. Basically, no matter what it "feels" like, you are subjected to many many many forces outside your personal control.
- gormz 9y ago
  Yeah there can be other bugs in my car, or other people that do something stupid, but I feel like I am more in control. It is unlikely I die from my engine blowing a gasket or my ECU completely dying. It might be a slight danger to those around me while I coast to the shoulder. But at least it's not going 60 mph into the shoulder...
  - astura 9y ago
    You're severely underestimating danger of engineering mistakes in hardware. Faulty Takata airbags have killed at least 20 in the US and injured over 100 since 2013. Then there was the Ford-Firestone fiasco that killed hundreds and injured thousands. The Ford Pinto ended up being a death trap. I also recall there several lawsuits around faulty guardrails that have killed. That's just off the top of my head. The idea "software bugs kill, hardware bugs don't" is just plain wrong. I also can't even fathom an understanding of why it's "better" to be killed by someone whose overdosing on heroin behind the wheel than being killed by an engineering error. Especially given the hypothetical case that was proposed when engineering errors are less common.
    - Piskvorrr 9y ago
      I think the idea was "why add another layer of things that might kill me on top of existing ones?" In this regard, SDVs deliver the exact opposite of their marketing pitch.
IAmEveryone 9y ago
> You can pry the steering wheel out of my cold dead hands. There's a non-neglible chance that will actually happen.
gdulli 9y ago
I wouldn't even say it's that they're safer on paper, it's that they're purely hypothetically safer. In the same manner that you're "safer" when entrusting your data to the Googles and Facebooks of the world. Smart people know what they're doing, right?
- gormz 9y ago
  I mean I don't disbelieve the figures that they reduce traffic accidents in vehicles that are using auto-pilot. It greatly reduces trivial human error. But it doesn't change the fact that it sucks when people die from beta testing a software update they didn't ask for.

by gormz 9y ago

jacquesm 9y ago

I hate to break it to you but it could still happen to you because both you and those Teslas are part of the same traffic stream. So you could easily get killed because of a software bug in someone else's vehicle.

gormz 9y ago
touche. seems like they're more interested in concrete barriers than other cars at the moment.
- oldgradstudent 9y ago
  Wait for the next software update. And remember not to have an emergency requiring you to stop on the side of the road: [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fc0yYJ8-Dyo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fc0yYJ8-Dyo [2] https://www.theverge.com/2018/1/23/16923800/tesla-firetruck-crash-autopilot-investigation https://www.theverge.com/2018/1/23/16923800/tesla-firetruck-...
  - gormz 9y ago
    I honestly think the fault is in the naming conventions. when you call it "Auto Pilot" it doesn't seem like you have to drive at all. Someone like Cadillac calls it "Super Cruise". I think this makes it sound much more like what it is. It's driving assistance, not self driving.
  - jacquesm 9y ago
    That one is ugly. If AP can't even steer around huge trucks parked on the road then that's a very serious problem. Interesting how everybody claims it is 'the drivers fault' when in fact at that moment the driver is the autopilot software. It - and not the person sitting in the left hand front seat of the car - is driving the car.

bufferoverflow 9y ago

Most modern cars are drive-by-wire, entirely relying on computers and the software. And their software is huge blobs of proprietary compiled code. It's guaranteed to have bugs.

20after4 9y ago
Probably not that huge, really. Embedded systems on most vehicles are fairly minimal and reliable, at least compared to modern consumer operating systems and (apparently) Tesla's systems.
- bufferoverflow 9y ago
  Car software is huge. https://cdn-images-1.medium.com/max/2000/1*cjVl6u_s34Mqjcn68sWlkA.png https://cdn-images-1.medium.com/max/2000/1*cjVl6u_s34Mqjcn68...
gormz 9y ago
yeah I guess. That buggy code doesn't drive people into walls or give people the feeling they can read the newspaper while doing one of most dangerous things they do in their day.
walrus01 9y ago
Very few modern cars actually decouple the steering wheel from the power steering mechanism fully, like a fly by wire jet airplane no longer has cable linkages from control stick to control surfaces.
jiveturkey 9y ago
1. It's more than most, it's almost all modern passenger cars that are drive-by-wire. But drive-by-wire is a term of art that specifically means that the throttle is not a direct mechanical linkage. Very, very few cars are steer-by-wire and even fewer are brake-by-wire. 2. You're using "proprietary" as a pejorative. It's not proprietary, compiled code that has bugs. All software is guaranteed to have bugs. 3. An entirely insignificant number of accidents are caused by bugs in the drive-by-wire control system. (Even taking into account that an insignificant fraction of cars on the road are drive-by-wire as you mean it.)

astura 9y ago

You already don't have control over any of the other drivers on the road, some of which are unlicensed, impaired or even homicidal or suicidal. Not to mention your car already has software that can kill you, even if it doesn't steer. Even ignoring software, hardware can have "bugs" in it too that kill you. I'm not sure why you think engineering mistakes are "worse" when they are in the software vs the hardware. Basically, no matter what it "feels" like, you are subjected to many many many forces outside your personal control.

gormz 9y ago
Yeah there can be other bugs in my car, or other people that do something stupid, but I feel like I am more in control. It is unlikely I die from my engine blowing a gasket or my ECU completely dying. It might be a slight danger to those around me while I coast to the shoulder. But at least it's not going 60 mph into the shoulder...
- astura 9y ago
  You're severely underestimating danger of engineering mistakes in hardware. Faulty Takata airbags have killed at least 20 in the US and injured over 100 since 2013. Then there was the Ford-Firestone fiasco that killed hundreds and injured thousands. The Ford Pinto ended up being a death trap. I also recall there several lawsuits around faulty guardrails that have killed. That's just off the top of my head. The idea "software bugs kill, hardware bugs don't" is just plain wrong. I also can't even fathom an understanding of why it's "better" to be killed by someone whose overdosing on heroin behind the wheel than being killed by an engineering error. Especially given the hypothetical case that was proposed when engineering errors are less common.
  - Piskvorrr 9y ago
    I think the idea was "why add another layer of things that might kill me on top of existing ones?" In this regard, SDVs deliver the exact opposite of their marketing pitch.

IAmEveryone 9y ago

> You can pry the steering wheel out of my cold dead hands. There's a non-neglible chance that will actually happen.

gdulli 9y ago

I wouldn't even say it's that they're safer on paper, it's that they're purely hypothetically safer. In the same manner that you're "safer" when entrusting your data to the Googles and Facebooks of the world. Smart people know what they're doing, right?

gormz 9y ago
I mean I don't disbelieve the figures that they reduce traffic accidents in vehicles that are using auto-pilot. It greatly reduces trivial human error. But it doesn't change the fact that it sucks when people die from beta testing a software update they didn't ask for.