3 ms·

Tesla is going a different route to full automation than any other company. They seem to think the fastest way to full automation is going to be a gradual progr

Tesla is going a different route to full automation than any other company. They seem to think the fastest way to full automation is going to be a gradual progression from where they are now (low level SAE 3) to level 4/5. Most others, and most importantly the leader Waymo (Google (Alphabet)), have decided the human society can't handle the risks of a level 3 system and won't deploy cars with those features. Waymo seems to have got to level 4 for the driving conditions around Phoenix so they are now starting to deploy the system to the public. At level 3 humans aren't driving the car but are suppose to pay attention so that they can take over if a problem arises. In general humans are not good at that task. Some of them will fail at it, the car will crash, people will get hurt/die, and maybe in this "safety first" world, automatic driving gets a bad name and is "set back" a decade. Elon Musk has stated that he believes more in a "safety third" kind of philosophy. In an interview I saw he stated that with his kids he tells them that "don't panic" is a good first principle for dealing with life and "safety" would probably go third. It's important but not the prime directive of life. What is second is still up for consideration. So the love/hate for Tesla's Autopilot strategy probably comes down to how you feel about risking people's lives to possibly save many more. Here is a question to ask yourself. If Tesla's autocar strategy causes 100 deaths of people who volunteer to take the risk before really good automation is developed, but Tesla's courage/recklessness has a 50% chance of saving a million (choose your own number) lives due to the speed-up of the implementation of self driving cars, would you support that? I would and so would many others, but many would not. This is a deep difference in values and that is why I think there is so much love/hate around the issue. Maybe Tesla wants to call it Autopilot because they hope they can incrementally improve it so that someday they get to level 4/5 and won't have the need to change the name at some arbitrary place along the way to full autopilot competency. Cruise control was a bit of a misnomer also but people seem to be fine with the word at this point.

YeGoblynQueenne 8y ago
Autopilot is level 2 autonomy. Noone has level 3 autonomy, yet. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automated_driving_system#Levels_of_automation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automated_driving_system#Level... Level 2 – Partial automation The driver must be able to control the vehicle if corrections are needed, but the driver is no longer in control of the speed and steering of the vehicle.[6] Parking assistance is an example of a system that falls into this category[7] along with Tesla's autopilot feature.[8] A system that falls into this category is the DISTRONIC PLUS system created by Mercedes-Benz.[9] It is important to note the driver must not be distracted in Level 0 to Level 2 modes.
- njarboe 8y ago
  Reading over the SAE (J3016) Automation Levels here[1] it seems to me that the Tesla Autopilot is now into level 3, especially for highway driving. If you can go exit to exit without any direction from a human, I would definitely say level 3 has been reached. Fine details of the definition between one level and another should probably only interesting to lawyers and their clients. Waymo not level 3? Seems they claim to be level 4 for their Phoenix rollout. [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-driving_car https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-driving_car
  - YeGoblynQueenne 8y ago
    Yes, they do. That's their marketing schtick. That their cars are already fully autonomous. However, that's just preposterous. It's a bit as if Boeing claimed their planes have anti-gravity because they're just better planes (I know next to nothing about planes- Boeing's name chosen completely at random). Waymo are not particularly farther than anyone else on the path to fully autonomy- they're just doing the smart thing and not trying to drive where their system can't, or leaving it to the public to test their limits.
    - njarboe 8y ago
      More like Boeing claimed to have anti-gravity that only worked in Seattle. Very exciting, really anti-gravity, but not yet useful for full scale implementation on planes that need to fly everywhere.
- pound 8y ago
  your wikipedia link 1) puts Tesla on level 2 based on an autopilot update from 2015 (check reference [8]). It's really outdated. 2) puts Google on level 4.
  - YeGoblynQueenne 8y ago
    Yes, apologies for that. The wikipedia article is not very well researched. Another article (on fatalities) states that the Uber car that killed Elaine Herzberg was level 4, which is patently absurd. The following article, in The Conversation, has a better overview: https://theconversation.com/what-are-these-levels-of-autonomous-vehicles-96396 https://theconversation.com/what-are-these-levels-of-autonom... And here's the SAE document the five levels are based on (actually from the wikipedia article's sources): https://web.archive.org/web/20161120142825/http://www.sae.org/misc/pdfs/automated_driving.pdf https://web.archive.org/web/20161120142825/http://www.sae.or... It's easy to end up splitting hairs though because level 2 and 3 are not very clearly defined, and anyway, these are very vague definitions without a hard test to check them. The vagueness allows tech companies to claim level 3 automation, but in that they're trying to push the boundaries of marketing- not of the technology.
rconti 8y ago
The difference is, Tesla is a car company and Alphabet isn't. Tesla is hoping autopilot can help them ship units, and Alphabet is hoping they can make the tech first and either build a car around it, or, more likely, license it to people who know how to make cars. I'm not sure either is altruistic.

YeGoblynQueenne 8y ago

Autopilot is level 2 autonomy. Noone has level 3 autonomy, yet. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automated_driving_system#Levels_of_automation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automated_driving_system#Level... Level 2 – Partial automation The driver must be able to control the vehicle if corrections are needed, but the driver is no longer in control of the speed and steering of the vehicle.[6] Parking assistance is an example of a system that falls into this category[7] along with Tesla's autopilot feature.[8] A system that falls into this category is the DISTRONIC PLUS system created by Mercedes-Benz.[9] It is important to note the driver must not be distracted in Level 0 to Level 2 modes.

njarboe 8y ago
Reading over the SAE (J3016) Automation Levels here[1] it seems to me that the Tesla Autopilot is now into level 3, especially for highway driving. If you can go exit to exit without any direction from a human, I would definitely say level 3 has been reached. Fine details of the definition between one level and another should probably only interesting to lawyers and their clients. Waymo not level 3? Seems they claim to be level 4 for their Phoenix rollout. [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-driving_car https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-driving_car
- YeGoblynQueenne 8y ago
  Yes, they do. That's their marketing schtick. That their cars are already fully autonomous. However, that's just preposterous. It's a bit as if Boeing claimed their planes have anti-gravity because they're just better planes (I know next to nothing about planes- Boeing's name chosen completely at random). Waymo are not particularly farther than anyone else on the path to fully autonomy- they're just doing the smart thing and not trying to drive where their system can't, or leaving it to the public to test their limits.
  - njarboe 8y ago
    More like Boeing claimed to have anti-gravity that only worked in Seattle. Very exciting, really anti-gravity, but not yet useful for full scale implementation on planes that need to fly everywhere.
pound 8y ago
your wikipedia link 1) puts Tesla on level 2 based on an autopilot update from 2015 (check reference [8]). It's really outdated. 2) puts Google on level 4.
- YeGoblynQueenne 8y ago
  Yes, apologies for that. The wikipedia article is not very well researched. Another article (on fatalities) states that the Uber car that killed Elaine Herzberg was level 4, which is patently absurd. The following article, in The Conversation, has a better overview: https://theconversation.com/what-are-these-levels-of-autonomous-vehicles-96396 https://theconversation.com/what-are-these-levels-of-autonom... And here's the SAE document the five levels are based on (actually from the wikipedia article's sources): https://web.archive.org/web/20161120142825/http://www.sae.org/misc/pdfs/automated_driving.pdf https://web.archive.org/web/20161120142825/http://www.sae.or... It's easy to end up splitting hairs though because level 2 and 3 are not very clearly defined, and anyway, these are very vague definitions without a hard test to check them. The vagueness allows tech companies to claim level 3 automation, but in that they're trying to push the boundaries of marketing- not of the technology.

rconti 8y ago

The difference is, Tesla is a car company and Alphabet isn't. Tesla is hoping autopilot can help them ship units, and Alphabet is hoping they can make the tech first and either build a car around it, or, more likely, license it to people who know how to make cars. I'm not sure either is altruistic.