4 ms·

How many non-Autopilot cars have crashed into parked vehicles? It happens a lot, to the extent that a lot of states have “move over” laws explicitly designed to

How many non-Autopilot cars have crashed into parked vehicles? It happens a lot, to the extent that a lot of states have “move over” laws explicitly designed to reduce it. Does Autopilot actually make the problem worse, or is it just more newsworthy?

mirceal 8y ago
Pardon my ignorance: what is a “move over” law? What do you need to do?
- mikeash 8y ago
  It means that when passing a stopped emergency vehicle, you need to change lanes to avoid passing right next to them (“move over”) or slow down substantially.
  - mirceal 8y ago
    Thanks. I was already doing this even though I don’t know of any law that requires it where I live. You learn something every day.
    - yason 8y ago
      I would assume they would teach you basic things like these in the driving school? I suppose that's not the case? Learning a "new" thing like that would probably make me hastily begin to wonder what else I might be missing.
      - mirceal 8y ago
        I think you need to differentiate between knowing about something and knowing about the precise label something has.
      - mikeash 8y ago
        The first move over law was enacted in 1996 and they didn’t become standard until the 2000s. Believe it or not, a lot of us went to driving school before that.
- JustSomeNobody 8y ago
  In FL, we have a law that says you either have to move over and change lanes to allow police, firefighters, tow trucks, etc enough safe room or you have to slow to 20 below the posted speed limit. A lot of police officers were being struck because you tend to steer in the direction you stare.
lopmotr 8y ago
That's a general problem with most news about accidents or deaths. They cherry pick the interesting stories, not the significant ones. The way I see news is that it's like fiction but with the extra excitement of being real, much like watching a movie that's "based on a true story". Its purpose is entertainment, not information or understanding of the world. Nobody should be making a decision to buy a Tesla or not based on stories like these. I recently mentioned self-driving cars to somebody and her response was "Oh, one killed a woman recently, didn't it?" That was about the extent of what she knew about them because she watches the news.
- mikeash 8y ago
  Yes, I say that any risk that makes the news is probably not worth worrying about. What I don’t get is all the HN commenters acting like a few crashes proves that Autopilot is irredeemably dangerous.
  - DannyBee 8y ago
    Because it's way oversold for what it does, and even if you look at other traffic aware cruise control, all data suggests it is in fact, more dangerous than other traffic aware cruise control (probably in part because of the former) I can't find an NTSB investigation or study that pegs traffic aware cruise control as the cause of the accident in any case except in Tesla's cases. Of course, it seems to Tesla folks this is just evidence they are gunning for Tesla instead of evidence that maybe it is actually worse :)
    - mikeash 8y ago
      What data is there? I didn’t realize there was enough to reach a conclusion yet.
      - DannyBee 8y ago
        Start with: https://www.ntsb.gov/news/press-releases/Pages/PR20170912.aspx https://www.ntsb.gov/news/press-releases/Pages/PR20170912.as... Also, 18 crashes so far where autopilot was enabled? vs so far, literally zero known crashes across everyone else? Do you not find it somewhat interesting that in zero other cases has the NTSB found that TACC or the design of a TACC played a role in the crash? I'd also point out: the supplier of their original crash tech broke up with them and ordered them to stop using it because they felt what was happening was unsafe (see Mobileye's letter to Tesla). Tesla later tried to spin it as "they are made we are breaking up with them" but Mobileye then produced data showing tried to renew the contract and Mobileye refused. In fact, plenty of other car companies are building self-driving tech, and currently relying on Mobileye, and Mobileye has not refused to supply them - only Tesla. Like, i'm not sure how this set of stuff doesn't tilt a person into "hey, maybe this is something to be worried about, they should produce data why it isn't".
DannyBee 8y ago
If you go look at IIHS, they have tests that will tell you exactly how good non-Autopilot cars are at this kind of crash avoidance: I cannot find any current (2018) car that crashes into the parked car. (I only spot-checked prior years). I found one in 2014 (audi q5) that hits the car at 1mph when going 12mph. http://www.iihs.org/iihs/ratings/vehicle/v/audi/q5-4-door-suv/2014 http://www.iihs.org/iihs/ratings/vehicle/v/audi/q5-4-door-su... By contrast, the 2014 subaru outback avoids collision even at 25mph. http://www.iihs.org/iihs/ratings/vehicle/v/subaru/outback-4-door-wagon/2014 http://www.iihs.org/iihs/ratings/vehicle/v/subaru/outback-4-...
- mikeash 8y ago
  Their report for the Model S says it avoided the collisions. Clearly there’s more to it than that.
  - DannyBee 8y ago
    You asked about non-autopilot cars and how common it is. I gave you data. I can also find no data that suggests any other TACC is crashing into vehicles (no NTSB studies, investigations, etc) at all. So yeah, i'm going to conclude, based on what i've seen so far, that autopilot is part of the problem. If you have data that says autopilot is not worse, i'd love to see it.
    - mikeash 8y ago
      I asked about actual crashes. You gave me info about a controlled test where the exact car discussed in this article avoided the test collision. Given that the car discussed in this article crashed in real life, the controlled test is clearly not the final word in whether these other cars are experiencing crashes like this in the real world. Also, I wasn't asking about how Autopilot compares to similar systems from other manufacturers, I was asking how it compares to the Mark I Human, which is a driving system that crashes into stationary vehicles with distressing frequency.
      - DannyBee 8y ago

mirceal 8y ago

Pardon my ignorance: what is a “move over” law? What do you need to do?

mikeash 8y ago
It means that when passing a stopped emergency vehicle, you need to change lanes to avoid passing right next to them (“move over”) or slow down substantially.
- mirceal 8y ago
  Thanks. I was already doing this even though I don’t know of any law that requires it where I live. You learn something every day.
  - yason 8y ago
    I would assume they would teach you basic things like these in the driving school? I suppose that's not the case? Learning a "new" thing like that would probably make me hastily begin to wonder what else I might be missing.
    - mirceal 8y ago
      I think you need to differentiate between knowing about something and knowing about the precise label something has.
    - mikeash 8y ago
      The first move over law was enacted in 1996 and they didn’t become standard until the 2000s. Believe it or not, a lot of us went to driving school before that.
JustSomeNobody 8y ago
In FL, we have a law that says you either have to move over and change lanes to allow police, firefighters, tow trucks, etc enough safe room or you have to slow to 20 below the posted speed limit. A lot of police officers were being struck because you tend to steer in the direction you stare.

lopmotr 8y ago

That's a general problem with most news about accidents or deaths. They cherry pick the interesting stories, not the significant ones. The way I see news is that it's like fiction but with the extra excitement of being real, much like watching a movie that's "based on a true story". Its purpose is entertainment, not information or understanding of the world. Nobody should be making a decision to buy a Tesla or not based on stories like these. I recently mentioned self-driving cars to somebody and her response was "Oh, one killed a woman recently, didn't it?" That was about the extent of what she knew about them because she watches the news.

mikeash 8y ago
Yes, I say that any risk that makes the news is probably not worth worrying about. What I don’t get is all the HN commenters acting like a few crashes proves that Autopilot is irredeemably dangerous.
- DannyBee 8y ago
  Because it's way oversold for what it does, and even if you look at other traffic aware cruise control, all data suggests it is in fact, more dangerous than other traffic aware cruise control (probably in part because of the former) I can't find an NTSB investigation or study that pegs traffic aware cruise control as the cause of the accident in any case except in Tesla's cases. Of course, it seems to Tesla folks this is just evidence they are gunning for Tesla instead of evidence that maybe it is actually worse :)
  - mikeash 8y ago
    What data is there? I didn’t realize there was enough to reach a conclusion yet.
    - DannyBee 8y ago
      Start with: https://www.ntsb.gov/news/press-releases/Pages/PR20170912.aspx https://www.ntsb.gov/news/press-releases/Pages/PR20170912.as... Also, 18 crashes so far where autopilot was enabled? vs so far, literally zero known crashes across everyone else? Do you not find it somewhat interesting that in zero other cases has the NTSB found that TACC or the design of a TACC played a role in the crash? I'd also point out: the supplier of their original crash tech broke up with them and ordered them to stop using it because they felt what was happening was unsafe (see Mobileye's letter to Tesla). Tesla later tried to spin it as "they are made we are breaking up with them" but Mobileye then produced data showing tried to renew the contract and Mobileye refused. In fact, plenty of other car companies are building self-driving tech, and currently relying on Mobileye, and Mobileye has not refused to supply them - only Tesla. Like, i'm not sure how this set of stuff doesn't tilt a person into "hey, maybe this is something to be worried about, they should produce data why it isn't".

DannyBee 8y ago

If you go look at IIHS, they have tests that will tell you exactly how good non-Autopilot cars are at this kind of crash avoidance: I cannot find any current (2018) car that crashes into the parked car. (I only spot-checked prior years). I found one in 2014 (audi q5) that hits the car at 1mph when going 12mph. http://www.iihs.org/iihs/ratings/vehicle/v/audi/q5-4-door-suv/2014 http://www.iihs.org/iihs/ratings/vehicle/v/audi/q5-4-door-su... By contrast, the 2014 subaru outback avoids collision even at 25mph. http://www.iihs.org/iihs/ratings/vehicle/v/subaru/outback-4-door-wagon/2014 http://www.iihs.org/iihs/ratings/vehicle/v/subaru/outback-4-...

mikeash 8y ago
Their report for the Model S says it avoided the collisions. Clearly there’s more to it than that.
- DannyBee 8y ago
  You asked about non-autopilot cars and how common it is. I gave you data. I can also find no data that suggests any other TACC is crashing into vehicles (no NTSB studies, investigations, etc) at all. So yeah, i'm going to conclude, based on what i've seen so far, that autopilot is part of the problem. If you have data that says autopilot is not worse, i'd love to see it.
  - mikeash 8y ago
    I asked about actual crashes. You gave me info about a controlled test where the exact car discussed in this article avoided the test collision. Given that the car discussed in this article crashed in real life, the controlled test is clearly not the final word in whether these other cars are experiencing crashes like this in the real world. Also, I wasn't asking about how Autopilot compares to similar systems from other manufacturers, I was asking how it compares to the Mark I Human, which is a driving system that crashes into stationary vehicles with distressing frequency.
    - DannyBee 8y ago