11 ms·

Motorists ‘are being misled by autonomous driving aids’ – report

46 points by sschueller 8y ago

buvanshak 8y ago
Capitalism will try to exploit every human weakness. If we have a population of people who are not aware of the intricacies involved in self driving, and the current technical state of the art, it is pretty clear there would be entities who would capitalize on it, by claiming to have implemented self driving. Now, the way they does is saying stuff that actually does not make that claim, but in effect projects it. So right now, we have Tesla people saying "We will start shipping full self driving features by august". And without no clear understanding of what comprises of "full self driving features", the stocks rise. Seriously, it is used everywhere. When a toilet cleaner that claims to kill 99.99% of bacteria, they are doing the same. They project a claim that is very hard to nullify. But that does not prevent it from boosting the sales. Car companies are particularly at fault because what they are doing can be dangerous to the users.
- sillyquiet 8y ago
  Substitute 'The Devil' for 'Capitalism' in these kinds of posts and you have a sermon for sunday school.
  - egjerlow 8y ago
    The Devil will try to exploit every human weakness. If we have a population of people who are not aware of the intricacies involved in self driving, and the current technical state of the art, it is pretty clear there would be entities who would devilize on it, by claiming to have implemented self driving. Now, the way they does is saying stuff that actually does not make that claim, but in effect projects it. So right now, we have Tesla people saying "We will start shipping full self driving features by august". And without no clear understanding of what comprises of "full self driving features", the stocks rise. Seriously, it is used everywhere. When a toilet cleaner that claims to kill 99.99% of bacteria, they are doing the same. They project a claim that is very hard to nullify. But that does not prevent it from boosting the sales. Car companies are particularly at fault because what they are doing can be dangerous to the users. .. Doesn't sound much like any sermon I've ever heard..
    - sillyquiet 8y ago
      Less the actual content and more the metaphysical dread and reductionary anthropomorphized conceptualization of fundamental economical principles
  - buvanshak 8y ago
    Devil is much better. It just wants us to sin. And it won't do nothing if we don't sin. Capitalism is much worse. It asks us to pay. It ask us to work. And if you don't yield, you are pretty much doomed, right here on earth. That is not even going into the fact the it poisons the waters and skies and ruin it for all living things....
- dalbasal 8y ago
  I'm going on a tangent (and I'm not trying to troll, I am just as "guilty" as you myself. Worse, in all likelihood)... I really think that I'm seeing a lot more of "capitalism wants to" or, "globalists are going to" or the good old "the government believes." Abstract concepts personified, deified and vilainised in the way we talk. Im not against putting things into wider contexts but I do think that this sort of language is leading us astray, more this last year or two then the few before it. Capitalism, corporatism, neoliberalism and market forces are at play here, so is regulation, centralised decision making.... But, these are abstractions and I don't think they tell us more then the specific does. Let's not just blame whatever abstractions we are used to blaming. How about (1) people bullshit, especially when they're trying to sell you stuff (2) there may be an uncanny valley type of problem somewhere between cruise control and full autonomy, a level of automation that's not good. It's no longer a driving feature and it's not yet an automated driver (3) laws, driving conventions and common sense will take some time to adapt. (4) we need to make sure we don't let the well understood "people bullshit, especially when they're trying to sell you stuff", especially when their competitors are bullshitting problem lead us into car accidents.
  - buvanshak 8y ago
    To be clear, I am not villainous capitalism. It is just an observation. One such as, "predators will single out and target the weak prey". I was trying to make it clear that people involved here are often helpless due to the pressures inherent in capitalism. I think when you start accepting investments, then you are even more helpless. But one the other hand, it helps one to justify any "evil" by delegating the blame to the investors, and how "we" have to protect "their" interests, so "we" are forced to do this bad thing. The investors are often completely oblivious to the fact, and they too are blameless. So where does the blame really lie?
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
cup-of-tea 8y ago
Cadillac now has a system called "Super Cruise" that allows you to keep your hands off the wheel indefinitely. It only works on freeways that have been specially mapped by Cadillac using LIDAR. I find this quite alarming. Are there systems in place to automatically invalidate sections of freeway when the government modifies them? Does the government even know that Cadillac is trying to maintain its own map of the freeways? This is a nightmare waiting to happen.
- rootusrootus 8y ago
  The Cadillac system requires your eyes on the road. It's harder to game than the systems which attempt to detect your hands on the steering wheel.
  - falcolas 8y ago
    Eyes being on the road doesn't mean your mind is on the road. Looking for problems is an active process, and if your brain isn't engaged it won't matter where you're looking.
    - seanmcdirmid 8y ago
      That is a problem even without this kind of technology.
      - SparkyMcUnicorn 8y ago
        This is a good point, although I do think there is an argument for a greater tendency to "mentally wander" if you aren't physically engaged somehow.
        seanmcdirmid 8y ago
        If you are long distance driving on straight empty highways, it is easy to get into the wandering state. I find these features only useful in those cases where engagement is difficult to maintain anyways.
lord_ring_11 8y ago
Can someone who uses these auto drive features comment? I would imagine it would be really hard to suddenly “take over” if u were not in full control from before in a few seconds. It would take that long to even fully understand what is really happening. When i drive normal car much of my driving is anticipating and avoiding bad situations rather than recovering from them.
- joenathanone 8y ago
  I have a Model 3 and use Autopilot on a daily basis. I think the key to using it properly is understanding its limitations. I always keep an eye on the road and traffic conditions and anticipate if Autopilot can handle a situation or not so I can be ready take over. I would say it can handle 70-80% of driving without issue, it's the last 20-30% I keep an eye out for when I am using it. It's made me a better driver, I'm no longer a speed demon or care if people cut me off or get in front of me in traffic. It's like being chauffeured, I am less emotionally involved with the driving process.
  - dm319 8y ago
    have you had a situation where you've had to take over control at short notice? if so what happened?
    - joenathanone 8y ago
      Absolutely, times where the road markings are a mess can make Autopilot go crazy where it can't decide which 'lane' to stay in, I've also experienced the whole veering toward the concrete barrier. Each time I was able to anticipate that Autopilot would have trouble with what was coming up and took over when it did, you just have to apply a bit of force to the steering wheel and Autopilot makes an auditory and visual alert and disengages. I usually reengage after the danger has passed.
- Someone1234 8y ago
  I use Subaru's system regularly. You are always in complete control, and it is easy to take over. I liken their lane keep feature to "a strong wind blowing on the side of the vehicle." You just apply a little bit more force than normal and the system immediately shuts off. I think the systems that are only lane keep/distance based cruise control aren't too bad, because you never feel like it is a fully autonomous system. It is the "uncanny valley" systems, particularly those with misleading marketing, that are getting people into trouble.
mjlee 8y ago
Tim Harford collected some good insights on this in the Automation chapter of his book "Messy: How to Be Creative and Resilient in a Tidy-Minded World". The essence of his complaint revolves around Air France Flight 447 and attributes the incident partially to the lack of experience the pilot had flying manually. Essentially, the idea is that an autonomous vehicle allows the operator to relax, right up until the point at which it fails - leaving the operator with a difficult situation and a lack of skill to deal with it. Of course it also removes a whole range of more routine errors that could have been fatal. There are a couple of ideas on how to solve the problem, but I'll let you read the excerpt yourself rather than parroting it here: https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=QPMeCgAAQBAJ&pg=PT121&lpg=PT121#v=onepage&q&f=false https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=QPMeCgAAQBAJ&pg=PT121&lp...
sideshowb 8y ago
There are probably 2 types of motorists here 1. stupid ones who genuinely fell for the marketing bs and thought these cars would drive themselves 2. clever ones who had an accident and realized they could blame the marketing bs to evade liability Oh and 3. people like me who never spent more than 2k on a car ;)
ataturk 8y ago
I still don't get how it is even possible that Tesla isn't being litigated out of business for calling their fancy cruise control system "Autopilot." I mean, really? The thing has killed numerous people now.
11thEarlOfMar 8y ago
Whether or not auto companies are liable for these accidents will be determined by the courts. So far, it appears that none of the accidents involving Tesla's auto pilot have landed on the docket[1]. Plaintiff's Attorney: "If the deceased had not been using autonomous driving, he'd be alive today." Tesla: "The deceased was informed and acknowledged his understanding that while using autonomous features, he must keep his eyes on the road and pay attention. He did not do that. Moreover, autonomous features are statistically proven to reduce accidents by 40%. These drivers report that they'd have died without autopilot as a feature: [2]. [3], [4], [5],..." [1] As of May, there were no lawsuits against Tesla for auto pilot accidents, so it would appear that this defense has held up so far. [1] https://www.reuters.com/article/us-tesla-autopilot-lawsuit/tesla-agrees-to-settle-class-action-over-autopilot-billed-as-safer-idUSKCN1IQ1SH https://www.reuters.com/article/us-tesla-autopilot-lawsuit/t... [2] https://www.cnbc.com/2016/08/05/man-says-tesla-autopilot-saved-his-life-by-driving-him-to-the-hospital.html https://www.cnbc.com/2016/08/05/man-says-tesla-autopilot-sav... [3] https://electrek.co/2018/06/01/tesla-autopilot-probably-saved-my-life-says-zedd/ https://electrek.co/2018/06/01/tesla-autopilot-probably-save... [4] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9I5rraWJq6E https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9I5rraWJq6E [5] https://cdllife.com/2018/video-tesla-driver-says-autopilot-saved-him-from-semi-truck-sideswipe/ https://cdllife.com/2018/video-tesla-driver-says-autopilot-s... etc....
- Spooky23 8y ago
  It’s amazing how bullshit stats delivered by Tesla are gospel, but when Monsanto or an oil company cook up self serving nonsense, we’re collectively outraged. There’s no litigated suit yet, but there are plenty of settlements, including the class action referenced. I’m sure Tesla has a noxious arbitration clause that makes litigation difficult. Personally, money is a truth maker in these scenarios, and the folks stuck holding the financial bag for Tesla are insurance companies, who are raising Tesla rates for a variety of reasons that are creating losses for them. As this feature is in broader use and Tesla continues to succeed in making their computer’s failures a driver responsibility, those rates will go up more.
  - icebraining 8y ago
Theodores 8y ago
Yesterday the BBC had this story with some video from Thatcham, they had the Tesla work properly, coming to a halt behind a car that braked suddenly. Then they had the car in front swerve at the last minute out of the way, rather than stop (for a 'fake' stationary vehicle). Guess what, the Tesla didn't copy the late lane change move, instead it ploughed into the back of the 'fake' car. This illustrated the problem. However this was also a rigged demo. The 'fake car' it crashed into was made of bits of plastic, not a real car. Clearly they didn't want to write off an expensive Tesla and some disposable stationary car. Yet I was wondering if the Tesla with its clever radar things that can see in front of the car in front would have fared better in a real world situation. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-44439523 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-44439523 This technology may also require different driving skills. Much like how old people cannot work mobile phones but young people take to them like ducks to water, autonomy may be one of those things. We may need a younger generation who can't be trusted with hot hatches of yesteryear to be the early adopters of autonomous-style vehicles.
- toast0 8y ago
  Why would you want to destroy a real car in this simulation? We know the system is designed to do this, we know it has done it in the real world; it's a waste to use the system to destroy a real car. Plus if you build it right, the fake car exploding into bits is probably pretty dramatic ;)
- Spooky23 8y ago
  Perhaps we need a different license system for the niche automaker whose cars are too difficult to operate. Or... perhaps the niche automaker needs to focus on user interaction design and safe operation.
- stephengillie 8y ago
  HN discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17308707 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17308707
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

46 points by sschueller 8y ago

Capitalism will try to exploit every human weakness. If we have a population of people who are not aware of the intricacies involved in self driving, and the current technical state of the art, it is pretty clear there would be entities who would capitalize on it, by claiming to have implemented self driving. Now, the way they does is saying stuff that actually does not make that claim, but in effect projects it. So right now, we have Tesla people saying "We will start shipping full self driving features by august". And without no clear understanding of what comprises of "full self driving features", the stocks rise. Seriously, it is used everywhere. When a toilet cleaner that claims to kill 99.99% of bacteria, they are doing the same. They project a claim that is very hard to nullify. But that does not prevent it from boosting the sales. Car companies are particularly at fault because what they are doing can be dangerous to the users.

sillyquiet 8y ago
Substitute 'The Devil' for 'Capitalism' in these kinds of posts and you have a sermon for sunday school.
- egjerlow 8y ago
  The Devil will try to exploit every human weakness. If we have a population of people who are not aware of the intricacies involved in self driving, and the current technical state of the art, it is pretty clear there would be entities who would devilize on it, by claiming to have implemented self driving. Now, the way they does is saying stuff that actually does not make that claim, but in effect projects it. So right now, we have Tesla people saying "We will start shipping full self driving features by august". And without no clear understanding of what comprises of "full self driving features", the stocks rise. Seriously, it is used everywhere. When a toilet cleaner that claims to kill 99.99% of bacteria, they are doing the same. They project a claim that is very hard to nullify. But that does not prevent it from boosting the sales. Car companies are particularly at fault because what they are doing can be dangerous to the users. .. Doesn't sound much like any sermon I've ever heard..
  - sillyquiet 8y ago
    Less the actual content and more the metaphysical dread and reductionary anthropomorphized conceptualization of fundamental economical principles
- buvanshak 8y ago
  Devil is much better. It just wants us to sin. And it won't do nothing if we don't sin. Capitalism is much worse. It asks us to pay. It ask us to work. And if you don't yield, you are pretty much doomed, right here on earth. That is not even going into the fact the it poisons the waters and skies and ruin it for all living things....
dalbasal 8y ago
I'm going on a tangent (and I'm not trying to troll, I am just as "guilty" as you myself. Worse, in all likelihood)... I really think that I'm seeing a lot more of "capitalism wants to" or, "globalists are going to" or the good old "the government believes." Abstract concepts personified, deified and vilainised in the way we talk. Im not against putting things into wider contexts but I do think that this sort of language is leading us astray, more this last year or two then the few before it. Capitalism, corporatism, neoliberalism and market forces are at play here, so is regulation, centralised decision making.... But, these are abstractions and I don't think they tell us more then the specific does. Let's not just blame whatever abstractions we are used to blaming. How about (1) people bullshit, especially when they're trying to sell you stuff (2) there may be an uncanny valley type of problem somewhere between cruise control and full autonomy, a level of automation that's not good. It's no longer a driving feature and it's not yet an automated driver (3) laws, driving conventions and common sense will take some time to adapt. (4) we need to make sure we don't let the well understood "people bullshit, especially when they're trying to sell you stuff", especially when their competitors are bullshitting problem lead us into car accidents.
- buvanshak 8y ago
  To be clear, I am not villainous capitalism. It is just an observation. One such as, "predators will single out and target the weak prey". I was trying to make it clear that people involved here are often helpless due to the pressures inherent in capitalism. I think when you start accepting investments, then you are even more helpless. But one the other hand, it helps one to justify any "evil" by delegating the blame to the investors, and how "we" have to protect "their" interests, so "we" are forced to do this bad thing. The investors are often completely oblivious to the fact, and they too are blameless. So where does the blame really lie?
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]

cup-of-tea 8y ago

Cadillac now has a system called "Super Cruise" that allows you to keep your hands off the wheel indefinitely. It only works on freeways that have been specially mapped by Cadillac using LIDAR. I find this quite alarming. Are there systems in place to automatically invalidate sections of freeway when the government modifies them? Does the government even know that Cadillac is trying to maintain its own map of the freeways? This is a nightmare waiting to happen.

rootusrootus 8y ago
The Cadillac system requires your eyes on the road. It's harder to game than the systems which attempt to detect your hands on the steering wheel.
- falcolas 8y ago
  Eyes being on the road doesn't mean your mind is on the road. Looking for problems is an active process, and if your brain isn't engaged it won't matter where you're looking.
  - seanmcdirmid 8y ago
    That is a problem even without this kind of technology.
    - SparkyMcUnicorn 8y ago
      This is a good point, although I do think there is an argument for a greater tendency to "mentally wander" if you aren't physically engaged somehow.
      - seanmcdirmid 8y ago
        If you are long distance driving on straight empty highways, it is easy to get into the wandering state. I find these features only useful in those cases where engagement is difficult to maintain anyways.

lord_ring_11 8y ago

Can someone who uses these auto drive features comment? I would imagine it would be really hard to suddenly “take over” if u were not in full control from before in a few seconds. It would take that long to even fully understand what is really happening. When i drive normal car much of my driving is anticipating and avoiding bad situations rather than recovering from them.

joenathanone 8y ago
I have a Model 3 and use Autopilot on a daily basis. I think the key to using it properly is understanding its limitations. I always keep an eye on the road and traffic conditions and anticipate if Autopilot can handle a situation or not so I can be ready take over. I would say it can handle 70-80% of driving without issue, it's the last 20-30% I keep an eye out for when I am using it. It's made me a better driver, I'm no longer a speed demon or care if people cut me off or get in front of me in traffic. It's like being chauffeured, I am less emotionally involved with the driving process.
- dm319 8y ago
  have you had a situation where you've had to take over control at short notice? if so what happened?
  - joenathanone 8y ago
    Absolutely, times where the road markings are a mess can make Autopilot go crazy where it can't decide which 'lane' to stay in, I've also experienced the whole veering toward the concrete barrier. Each time I was able to anticipate that Autopilot would have trouble with what was coming up and took over when it did, you just have to apply a bit of force to the steering wheel and Autopilot makes an auditory and visual alert and disengages. I usually reengage after the danger has passed.
Someone1234 8y ago
I use Subaru's system regularly. You are always in complete control, and it is easy to take over. I liken their lane keep feature to "a strong wind blowing on the side of the vehicle." You just apply a little bit more force than normal and the system immediately shuts off. I think the systems that are only lane keep/distance based cruise control aren't too bad, because you never feel like it is a fully autonomous system. It is the "uncanny valley" systems, particularly those with misleading marketing, that are getting people into trouble.

mjlee 8y ago

Tim Harford collected some good insights on this in the Automation chapter of his book "Messy: How to Be Creative and Resilient in a Tidy-Minded World". The essence of his complaint revolves around Air France Flight 447 and attributes the incident partially to the lack of experience the pilot had flying manually. Essentially, the idea is that an autonomous vehicle allows the operator to relax, right up until the point at which it fails - leaving the operator with a difficult situation and a lack of skill to deal with it. Of course it also removes a whole range of more routine errors that could have been fatal. There are a couple of ideas on how to solve the problem, but I'll let you read the excerpt yourself rather than parroting it here: https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=QPMeCgAAQBAJ&pg=PT121&lpg=PT121#v=onepage&q&f=false https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=QPMeCgAAQBAJ&pg=PT121&lp...

sideshowb 8y ago

There are probably 2 types of motorists here 1. stupid ones who genuinely fell for the marketing bs and thought these cars would drive themselves 2. clever ones who had an accident and realized they could blame the marketing bs to evade liability Oh and 3. people like me who never spent more than 2k on a car ;)

ataturk 8y ago

I still don't get how it is even possible that Tesla isn't being litigated out of business for calling their fancy cruise control system "Autopilot." I mean, really? The thing has killed numerous people now.

11thEarlOfMar 8y ago

Whether or not auto companies are liable for these accidents will be determined by the courts. So far, it appears that none of the accidents involving Tesla's auto pilot have landed on the docket[1]. Plaintiff's Attorney: "If the deceased had not been using autonomous driving, he'd be alive today." Tesla: "The deceased was informed and acknowledged his understanding that while using autonomous features, he must keep his eyes on the road and pay attention. He did not do that. Moreover, autonomous features are statistically proven to reduce accidents by 40%. These drivers report that they'd have died without autopilot as a feature: [2]. [3], [4], [5],..." [1] As of May, there were no lawsuits against Tesla for auto pilot accidents, so it would appear that this defense has held up so far. [1] https://www.reuters.com/article/us-tesla-autopilot-lawsuit/tesla-agrees-to-settle-class-action-over-autopilot-billed-as-safer-idUSKCN1IQ1SH https://www.reuters.com/article/us-tesla-autopilot-lawsuit/t... [2] https://www.cnbc.com/2016/08/05/man-says-tesla-autopilot-saved-his-life-by-driving-him-to-the-hospital.html https://www.cnbc.com/2016/08/05/man-says-tesla-autopilot-sav... [3] https://electrek.co/2018/06/01/tesla-autopilot-probably-saved-my-life-says-zedd/ https://electrek.co/2018/06/01/tesla-autopilot-probably-save... [4] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9I5rraWJq6E https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9I5rraWJq6E [5] https://cdllife.com/2018/video-tesla-driver-says-autopilot-saved-him-from-semi-truck-sideswipe/ https://cdllife.com/2018/video-tesla-driver-says-autopilot-s... etc....

Spooky23 8y ago
It’s amazing how bullshit stats delivered by Tesla are gospel, but when Monsanto or an oil company cook up self serving nonsense, we’re collectively outraged. There’s no litigated suit yet, but there are plenty of settlements, including the class action referenced. I’m sure Tesla has a noxious arbitration clause that makes litigation difficult. Personally, money is a truth maker in these scenarios, and the folks stuck holding the financial bag for Tesla are insurance companies, who are raising Tesla rates for a variety of reasons that are creating losses for them. As this feature is in broader use and Tesla continues to succeed in making their computer’s failures a driver responsibility, those rates will go up more.
- icebraining 8y ago

Theodores 8y ago

Yesterday the BBC had this story with some video from Thatcham, they had the Tesla work properly, coming to a halt behind a car that braked suddenly. Then they had the car in front swerve at the last minute out of the way, rather than stop (for a 'fake' stationary vehicle). Guess what, the Tesla didn't copy the late lane change move, instead it ploughed into the back of the 'fake' car. This illustrated the problem. However this was also a rigged demo. The 'fake car' it crashed into was made of bits of plastic, not a real car. Clearly they didn't want to write off an expensive Tesla and some disposable stationary car. Yet I was wondering if the Tesla with its clever radar things that can see in front of the car in front would have fared better in a real world situation. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-44439523 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-44439523 This technology may also require different driving skills. Much like how old people cannot work mobile phones but young people take to them like ducks to water, autonomy may be one of those things. We may need a younger generation who can't be trusted with hot hatches of yesteryear to be the early adopters of autonomous-style vehicles.

toast0 8y ago
Why would you want to destroy a real car in this simulation? We know the system is designed to do this, we know it has done it in the real world; it's a waste to use the system to destroy a real car. Plus if you build it right, the fake car exploding into bits is probably pretty dramatic ;)
Spooky23 8y ago
Perhaps we need a different license system for the niche automaker whose cars are too difficult to operate. Or... perhaps the niche automaker needs to focus on user interaction design and safe operation.
stephengillie 8y ago
HN discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17308707 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17308707

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]