5 ms·

why are ppl blaming tesla? Isn't it in their manual to always keep hands on wheel?

admax88q 8y ago
Its much easier to get distracted or fall asleep when you're not engaged with driving the vehicle at all.
rohit2412 8y ago
And this is how the CEO advertises it https://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-breaks-tesla-autopilot-rule-2018-12 https://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-breaks-tesla-autop...
xienze 8y ago
The real problem with any self-driving system is that a good one will breed complacency. After you spend enough time seeing how well it works in practice you’ll become more and more prone to do stuff like check your phone or watch a YouTube video. I mean the car can handle itself, right? You’ve gone thousands of miles watching this thing effortlessly drive itself, why not enjoy the promise of self-driving technology, which is to free you from the tedium of driving? It’s just human nature to do so,
steelframe 8y ago
I encourage you to read the book "Thinking, Fast and Slow." This book explains how System 1 is trained with deeply-ingrained biases through repeated feedback-based experiences. Tesla then says, "But make sure your System 2 is ready to take over in an instant!" This simply isn't how the human brain works.
cromulent 8y ago
"Your Tesla will match speed to traffic conditions, keep within a lane, automatically change lanes without requiring driver input". "The person in the drivers seat is only there for legal reasons. He is not doing anything. The car is driving itself". https://www.tesla.com/autopilot?redirect=no https://www.tesla.com/autopilot?redirect=no
- sorokod 8y ago
  "The car is driving itself" - gone.
- pps 8y ago
  Quote from this site: "Current Autopilot features require active driver supervision and do not make the vehicle autonomous."
  - cromulent 8y ago
    Sure, and it had supervision. But Tesla's software made the choice, and the supervisor overrode it, but only because he fortuitously had time to do so. If a passenger aircraft has an autopilot problem that causes a crash, do you blame the manufacturer or the pilots? The pilots are always supervising the plane, and it's not autonomous, right?
    - bencoder 8y ago
      Judging by a lot of the discourse immediately following the most recent 737max incident, people were definitely blaming the pilots. Thankfully that's cleared up a bit now.
      - notahacker 8y ago
        I think that's a very relevant analogy. By the standards of the average driver, the 737 Max pilots were extraordinarily well trained and highly skilled, and they had a lot of time to correct the software error relative to most conceivable problems with a semi-autonomous vehicle. But regulators have still (reasonably) decided that their inability to cope with software quirks should be treated as a software problem and not a problem with the pilots' failure to rectify the erratic behaviour.
      - dsfyu404ed 8y ago
        You and me must have read very different discourse. Anyone suggesting that Boeing not be immediately burnt at the stake was not and is not received positively at least not on HN.
dmitriid 8y ago
That pine in the manual is an attempt to weasel out of situations like the one described. No one expects a person who’s not engaged in driving a car to keep the same level of alertness at all times as if they were driving a car.
thebruce87m 8y ago
A system that breeds complacency in a life/death activity is one that kills you.
- erikpukinskis 8y ago
  Not if it also catches fatal mistakes that you would have missed. Then you have to subtract A from B to find out if it is "a system which kills you".
  - thomastjeffery 8y ago
    A system that is capable of saving your life at one point in time, and killing you in another is still "a system which kills you". The difference between outcomes is not a valid conclusion.
    - erikpukinskis 8y ago
      So a seat belt is a system that kills you? What would be an example of a system that doesn't kill you?

Its much easier to get distracted or fall asleep when you're not engaged with driving the vehicle at all.

And this is how the CEO advertises it https://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-breaks-tesla-autopilot-rule-2018-12 https://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-breaks-tesla-autop...

xienze 8y ago

The real problem with any self-driving system is that a good one will breed complacency. After you spend enough time seeing how well it works in practice you’ll become more and more prone to do stuff like check your phone or watch a YouTube video. I mean the car can handle itself, right? You’ve gone thousands of miles watching this thing effortlessly drive itself, why not enjoy the promise of self-driving technology, which is to free you from the tedium of driving? It’s just human nature to do so,

steelframe 8y ago

I encourage you to read the book "Thinking, Fast and Slow." This book explains how System 1 is trained with deeply-ingrained biases through repeated feedback-based experiences. Tesla then says, "But make sure your System 2 is ready to take over in an instant!" This simply isn't how the human brain works.

cromulent 8y ago

"Your Tesla will match speed to traffic conditions, keep within a lane, automatically change lanes without requiring driver input". "The person in the drivers seat is only there for legal reasons. He is not doing anything. The car is driving itself". https://www.tesla.com/autopilot?redirect=no https://www.tesla.com/autopilot?redirect=no

sorokod 8y ago
"The car is driving itself" - gone.
pps 8y ago
Quote from this site: "Current Autopilot features require active driver supervision and do not make the vehicle autonomous."
- cromulent 8y ago
  Sure, and it had supervision. But Tesla's software made the choice, and the supervisor overrode it, but only because he fortuitously had time to do so. If a passenger aircraft has an autopilot problem that causes a crash, do you blame the manufacturer or the pilots? The pilots are always supervising the plane, and it's not autonomous, right?
  - bencoder 8y ago
    Judging by a lot of the discourse immediately following the most recent 737max incident, people were definitely blaming the pilots. Thankfully that's cleared up a bit now.
    - notahacker 8y ago
      I think that's a very relevant analogy. By the standards of the average driver, the 737 Max pilots were extraordinarily well trained and highly skilled, and they had a lot of time to correct the software error relative to most conceivable problems with a semi-autonomous vehicle. But regulators have still (reasonably) decided that their inability to cope with software quirks should be treated as a software problem and not a problem with the pilots' failure to rectify the erratic behaviour.
    - dsfyu404ed 8y ago
      You and me must have read very different discourse. Anyone suggesting that Boeing not be immediately burnt at the stake was not and is not received positively at least not on HN.

dmitriid 8y ago

That pine in the manual is an attempt to weasel out of situations like the one described. No one expects a person who’s not engaged in driving a car to keep the same level of alertness at all times as if they were driving a car.

thebruce87m 8y ago

A system that breeds complacency in a life/death activity is one that kills you.

erikpukinskis 8y ago
Not if it also catches fatal mistakes that you would have missed. Then you have to subtract A from B to find out if it is "a system which kills you".
- thomastjeffery 8y ago
  A system that is capable of saving your life at one point in time, and killing you in another is still "a system which kills you". The difference between outcomes is not a valid conclusion.
  - erikpukinskis 8y ago
    So a seat belt is a system that kills you? What would be an example of a system that doesn't kill you?