3 ms·

Your hands. If you're just resting them on the wheel, that's not enough to prevent the attention monitor from working, it actually has to measure some physical

Your hands. If you're just resting them on the wheel, that's not enough to prevent the attention monitor from working, it actually has to measure some physical resistance. If you resist the automatic inputs too much, the AP cuts out. You can test this yourself in a tesla by engaging cruise control, then hitting a turn signal. This would normally initiate an automatic lane change - but keep your hands tightly on the wheel as if you wanted to stay in the lane you're in. The wheel will attempt to turn, fail as you're preventing it from turning - and the AP disables.

lisper 8y ago
> Your hands. Sure, if you react fast enough. Let's not lose the plot here. The original claim was: "The AP can only kill you if you're distracted/asleep at the wheel and not paying attention." (Emphasis added.) And that's not true. It can kill you, quite simply, by producing the wrong control input in a situation where the available recovery time is less than your reaction time. If you doubt this, then I challenge you to drive a car where the autopilot is under my control. (It will have to be remote control because no fucking way am I willing to be in the car with you when we do this experiment.)
- Domenic_S 8y ago
  This seems like a meaningless argument - we use fly-by-wire systems all the time and your point is true for most of them. Should we be suspicious of electronic throttle because it could theoretically hit the gas at a crosswalk when you tried to stop?
  - lisper 8y ago
    Should we be suspicious of any automation that can cause death and injury if it doesn't work right? Yes. Absolutely. These systems need to be very carefully vetted. When you don't do that, you end up with cars driving into cyclists [1] and barriers [2], and airplanes driving themselves into the ground [3]. Automation that puts civilian lives in danger is not something where you can "move fast and break things" because the things you end up breaking are innocent human beings. [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/19/technology/uber-driverless-fatality.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/19/technology/uber-driverles... [2] https://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/infrastructure/a21205127/ntsb-teslas-autopilot-steered-into-barrier-in-fatal-crash/ https://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/infrastructure/a... [3] https://www.aviationcv.com/aviation-blog/2019/shocking-facts-boeing-737max-crash https://www.aviationcv.com/aviation-blog/2019/shocking-facts...
- Karunamon 8y ago
  What I'm trying to imply is that "not paying attention" is exactly what happened here. The "attention checking" has a delay of a few seconds on it before it'll start warning you to grip the wheel. If your hands were on the wheel, and you were paying attention, there's no reaction time, since the erroneous control input would be overridden by your hands keeping you in your lane. Put simply, if your grip on the wheel was loose enough to where the computer-generated move could physically move the wheel, you weren't in control of the vehicle and would be generating warnings.
  - lisper 8y ago
    No, it wouldn't. Having your hands are on the wheel doesn't insure that you're paying attention. And if you need to be paying attention 100% of the time anyway, what's the point of having an autopilot?
    - Karunamon 8y ago
      But having your hands off the wheel absolutely does mean you aren't paying attention. Which is why Tesla and most other self-driving systems I'm aware of check for it. It's a negative signal, not a positive one. >And if you need to be paying attention 100% of the time anyway, what's the point of having an autopilot? The same reason cruise control is a thing on every modern car. It down on fatigue, which in turn, should improve safety and comfort. You're still required to be in control of your speed, but the vehicle manages keeping you at the set speed.

lisper 8y ago

> Your hands. Sure, if you react fast enough. Let's not lose the plot here. The original claim was: "The AP can only kill you if you're distracted/asleep at the wheel and not paying attention." (Emphasis added.) And that's not true. It can kill you, quite simply, by producing the wrong control input in a situation where the available recovery time is less than your reaction time. If you doubt this, then I challenge you to drive a car where the autopilot is under my control. (It will have to be remote control because no fucking way am I willing to be in the car with you when we do this experiment.)

Domenic_S 8y ago
This seems like a meaningless argument - we use fly-by-wire systems all the time and your point is true for most of them. Should we be suspicious of electronic throttle because it could theoretically hit the gas at a crosswalk when you tried to stop?
- lisper 8y ago
  Should we be suspicious of any automation that can cause death and injury if it doesn't work right? Yes. Absolutely. These systems need to be very carefully vetted. When you don't do that, you end up with cars driving into cyclists [1] and barriers [2], and airplanes driving themselves into the ground [3]. Automation that puts civilian lives in danger is not something where you can "move fast and break things" because the things you end up breaking are innocent human beings. [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/19/technology/uber-driverless-fatality.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/19/technology/uber-driverles... [2] https://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/infrastructure/a21205127/ntsb-teslas-autopilot-steered-into-barrier-in-fatal-crash/ https://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/infrastructure/a... [3] https://www.aviationcv.com/aviation-blog/2019/shocking-facts-boeing-737max-crash https://www.aviationcv.com/aviation-blog/2019/shocking-facts...
Karunamon 8y ago
What I'm trying to imply is that "not paying attention" is exactly what happened here. The "attention checking" has a delay of a few seconds on it before it'll start warning you to grip the wheel. If your hands were on the wheel, and you were paying attention, there's no reaction time, since the erroneous control input would be overridden by your hands keeping you in your lane. Put simply, if your grip on the wheel was loose enough to where the computer-generated move could physically move the wheel, you weren't in control of the vehicle and would be generating warnings.
- lisper 8y ago
  No, it wouldn't. Having your hands are on the wheel doesn't insure that you're paying attention. And if you need to be paying attention 100% of the time anyway, what's the point of having an autopilot?
  - Karunamon 8y ago
    But having your hands off the wheel absolutely does mean you aren't paying attention. Which is why Tesla and most other self-driving systems I'm aware of check for it. It's a negative signal, not a positive one. >And if you need to be paying attention 100% of the time anyway, what's the point of having an autopilot? The same reason cruise control is a thing on every modern car. It down on fatigue, which in turn, should improve safety and comfort. You're still required to be in control of your speed, but the vehicle manages keeping you at the set speed.