4 ms·

So the crux here is the naming of the not-really-self-driving feature. This is not an Autopilot for cars. It "requires the driver to be alert and have hands on

by berg01 8y ago

So the crux here is the naming of the not-really-self-driving feature. This is not an Autopilot for cars. It "requires the driver to be alert and have hands on the wheel". That's a driving assist. Call it the world's best driving assist or whatever, but not Autopilot. (I have seen the usual reply from Tesla apologists that it's a good name because of its aircraft analogy. From a usability perspective that is just so... wrong.) I don't get why they continue down this path. Just rename the goddamn feature into something that actually makes sense. Tesla key people must be in some kind of Elon Musk reality distortion field.

dragonwriter 8y ago
> So the crux here is the naming of the not-really-self-driving feature It should be called, ”I’m Feeling Lucky.”
- berg01 8y ago
  Love it!
- jijojv 8y ago
  All their amazing technology is ”I’m Feeling Lucky.” https://forums.tesla.com/forum/forums/autopark-fail-dont-use-autopark-next-garage-pillars https://forums.tesla.com/forum/forums/autopark-fail-dont-use...
  - jijojv 8y ago
    Others like Bolt and Leaf give you 360 surround view parking. Tesla instead gives you Autopark but if it fails/crashes, you're at fault.
Retric 8y ago
Aircraft autopilot still require actual pilots to pay attention when flying. So really autopilot is the correct term, people are simply assuming it means a level 5 self driving car when it does not. “And really there’s a sweet spot you have to find where you use automation to relieve the pilot of some amount of workload.” http://nationalpost.com/news/world/disaster-on-autopilot-how-too-much-of-a-good-thing-can-lead-to-deadly-plane-crashes http://nationalpost.com/news/world/disaster-on-autopilot-how... 10 years ago airlines could have gone 100% automation, but a hybrid approach really has proven safer.
- berg01 8y ago
  > So really autopilot is the correct term, people are simply assuming it means a level 5 self driving car when it does not. The basics of good usability is that whatever the average person/user is likely to do is to be considered to be what the system should deal with. As you say yourself, people somehow, super mysteriously, seem to think that the feature name Autopilot implies L5 driving. That's fine. My point is that the only proper response to that kind of expectation setting is to live up to L5 autonomous driving capabilities. As we both know that is not yet available, so.. don't use that feature name until it actually is possible. Quite simple.
  - Retric 8y ago
    Ehh, no I hear Autopilot and I don't think 100% automation but then again I worked for the FAA. Even the flawed system seems to have a net safety benefit. It's one thing to say wait, it's another thing to say kill more people, because I don't like the semantics being used.
- semi-extrinsic 8y ago
  > "And really there’s a sweet spot you have to find where you use automation to relieve the pilot of some amount of workload" ... and that sweetspot, for highway driving, looks to be around the 1998 level of having automatic transmission + cruise control. As we've seen examples in two recent fatal accidents, a driver with too little to do is dangerous.
  - Retric 8y ago
    You need to look at both benefits and downsides. Tesla autopilot does seem to have net safety benefits though the data is far from conclusive. Honestly, I expect insurance companies probably have the least biased data but even then they may not have the same trade-offs in terms of damage vs fatalities as we would like.
  - ummonk 8y ago
    I'd say adaptive cruise control is actually better in the sweet-spot. I have a Subaru with adaptive cruise control and find it rather beneficial in freeing up my attention from trying to carefully micromanage the throttle / brake to actually focus on more important things. It has lane-keeping assist, too, but that is more of a backup safety feature than an autonomous feature (and indeed I wouldn't want lane-centering functionality except in really slow traffic jams).

by berg01 8y ago

dragonwriter 8y ago

> So the crux here is the naming of the not-really-self-driving feature It should be called, ”I’m Feeling Lucky.”

berg01 8y ago
Love it!
jijojv 8y ago
All their amazing technology is ”I’m Feeling Lucky.” https://forums.tesla.com/forum/forums/autopark-fail-dont-use-autopark-next-garage-pillars https://forums.tesla.com/forum/forums/autopark-fail-dont-use...
- jijojv 8y ago
  Others like Bolt and Leaf give you 360 surround view parking. Tesla instead gives you Autopark but if it fails/crashes, you're at fault.

Retric 8y ago

Aircraft autopilot still require actual pilots to pay attention when flying. So really autopilot is the correct term, people are simply assuming it means a level 5 self driving car when it does not. “And really there’s a sweet spot you have to find where you use automation to relieve the pilot of some amount of workload.” http://nationalpost.com/news/world/disaster-on-autopilot-how-too-much-of-a-good-thing-can-lead-to-deadly-plane-crashes http://nationalpost.com/news/world/disaster-on-autopilot-how... 10 years ago airlines could have gone 100% automation, but a hybrid approach really has proven safer.

berg01 8y ago
> So really autopilot is the correct term, people are simply assuming it means a level 5 self driving car when it does not. The basics of good usability is that whatever the average person/user is likely to do is to be considered to be what the system should deal with. As you say yourself, people somehow, super mysteriously, seem to think that the feature name Autopilot implies L5 driving. That's fine. My point is that the only proper response to that kind of expectation setting is to live up to L5 autonomous driving capabilities. As we both know that is not yet available, so.. don't use that feature name until it actually is possible. Quite simple.
- Retric 8y ago
  Ehh, no I hear Autopilot and I don't think 100% automation but then again I worked for the FAA. Even the flawed system seems to have a net safety benefit. It's one thing to say wait, it's another thing to say kill more people, because I don't like the semantics being used.
semi-extrinsic 8y ago
> "And really there’s a sweet spot you have to find where you use automation to relieve the pilot of some amount of workload" ... and that sweetspot, for highway driving, looks to be around the 1998 level of having automatic transmission + cruise control. As we've seen examples in two recent fatal accidents, a driver with too little to do is dangerous.
- Retric 8y ago
  You need to look at both benefits and downsides. Tesla autopilot does seem to have net safety benefits though the data is far from conclusive. Honestly, I expect insurance companies probably have the least biased data but even then they may not have the same trade-offs in terms of damage vs fatalities as we would like.
- ummonk 8y ago
  I'd say adaptive cruise control is actually better in the sweet-spot. I have a Subaru with adaptive cruise control and find it rather beneficial in freeing up my attention from trying to carefully micromanage the throttle / brake to actually focus on more important things. It has lane-keeping assist, too, but that is more of a backup safety feature than an autonomous feature (and indeed I wouldn't want lane-centering functionality except in really slow traffic jams).