5 ms·

Imagine a driver driving down a parkway at speed and thinking "I'm on a parkway, so I should shift the car into Park." That's how dumb this argument is. If a

Imagine a driver driving down a parkway at speed and thinking "I'm on a parkway, so I should shift the car into Park." That's how dumb this argument is. If a driver ignores the requirements of their driver license AND the vehicle's clearly worded warnings, then the driver is entirely responsible. Claiming that the driver is not at fault because they interpreted the word "autopilot" to mean "I can disregard my responsibility as a driver and ignore the vehicle's very clear warnings" is deeply absurd.

Angostura 7y ago
> That's how dumb this argument is. So, no problem changing the name then - because in your opinion the name isn't effecting the purchaser or driver expectations.
- sjwright 7y ago
  That isn’t something you can extrapolate from what I wrote, but yes, of course they could change the name with minimal real consequences. They could name it Jeff.
obeattie 7y ago
The question of whether the driver should have had their hands on the wheel (clearly they should have) is distinct from the question of whether the Autopilot should have avoided this crash.
- mannykannot 7y ago
  In fact, the driver should have had his eyes on the road, in order to have the degree of attentiveness that Tesla always claims was missing whenever this sort of crash occurs. Tesla cars are unable to detect whether the driver is doing that, and if they did, it would make clear that this technology is nowhere near as complete as Tesla claims.
  - yeahitslikethat 7y ago
    They can drive a car automatically but not tell if a driver is awake and alert and looking at the road? Seems that would be easier to me.
    - saalweachter 7y ago
      Would you buy a car that had a camera pointed at you constantly, recording for use in an accident investigation, uploading periodic short videos to Tesla for use in their training data?
      - mannykannot 7y ago
        Firstly, no-one has a right to drive distracted, any more that they have the right to drive drunk. Secondly, monitoring the attentiveness of a driver, as a backstop for weaknesses in the automation, does not require recording. Thirdly, this might be a good point to remind ourselves that this is, according to Tesla, a beta-testing program. The goal should be to get to the point where constant driver attentiveness is not necessary, but until that is achieved, additional safety measures are justified.
      - sjwright 7y ago
        Absolutely yes, because I don't drive like a stupid idiot—and if I ever did I'm not going to deny responsibility. However I don't see why having a camera pointed at my face necessarily means that Tesla have to willingly provide information to insurance companies. As long as it is only available to law enforcement after being granted a court order, I'm fine with that. (Note: I do not live in the USA. I trust the law enforcement in my country. My answer would be very different if I were in the US resident. I've heard enough about law enforcement in the US to know that I'd never live there, and if I did, I wouldn't ever trust the police.)
- sjwright 7y ago
  I agree, the issue in this case—and indeed with most Autopilot-related incidents—wasn't anything to do with the driver taking his hands off the wheel, it was the driver taking his eyes off the road. The warning message says "Be prepared to take over at any time." That is clearly the exact opposite of "You may now focus your attention to that laptop on the passenger seat." Yes it is a concern that Autopilot is failing in some circumstances. But whatever Tesla says or does, the road rules say that the human driver is always responsible in cases like this.
navigatesol 7y ago
>Claiming that the driver is not at fault because they interpreted the word "autopilot" to mean "I can disregard my responsibility as a driver and ignore the vehicle's very clear warnings" is deeply absurd Boy are you going to be in for a shock when the investigations start. "Autopilot", with the way Elon has promoted it, shouldn't slam into stationary objects.
- sjwright 7y ago
  What investigations? Has Tesla ever said that Autopilot will stop for stationary objects? Has Tesla ever said that Autopilot is intended to allow the driver to take his focus off the road? I do think that Tesla can do more to emphasise that Autopilot isn't a synonym for full self driving, but that isn't an excuse for people who are supposed to be acting in accordance with their driver license.
  - peteradio 7y ago
    > Has Tesla ever said that Autopilot is intended to allow the driver to take his focus off the road? What the hell is the point of it then?
    - zaroth 7y ago
      I’d recommend reading some actual reviews of AutoPilot by the hundreds of thousands of people that use it every day, watch some YouTube videos or read some auto review sites explaining it. You keep your attention on the road. AutoPilot “takes the strain” off micromanaging the vehicle in the lane while you do the executive planning. It’s a supremely comfortable way to drive. But you are still responsible for driving the damn car.
      - SigmundA 7y ago
        IMO quick emergency stopping for surprise obstacles falls under "micromanagement" not "executive planning".
      - DSingularity 7y ago
rjdagost 7y ago
I would be more sympathetic to your argument if Tesla marketed Autopilot as a driver assistance feature. But that's not at all how they market it. When you go to Tesla's Autopilot page, you immediately see a video of a Tesla driving itself- the user doesn't touch the steering wheel for minutes as it navigates complicated scenarios: https://www.tesla.com/autopilot https://www.tesla.com/autopilot Tesla's own Autopilot page video has this disclaimer in bold at the very start of the video: "THE PERSON IN THE DRIVER'S SEAT IS ONLY THERE FOR LEGAL REASONS. HE IS NOT DOING ANYTHING. THE CAR IS DRIVING ITSELF". Then there are multiple videos of Elon Musk driving hands-free on Autopilot for extended periods of time, like this one: https://youtu.be/MO0vdNNzwxk?t=123 https://youtu.be/MO0vdNNzwxk?t=123 So Tesla can bury whatever carefully worded legalese they want in their terms and conditions, but they know that these videos will get shared and watched millions of times, and that they strongly convey the message that "Tesla's drive themselves on Autopilot". These videos set the expectation of how Autopilot should function, and I don't blame Autopilot users for not understanding this.
- mannykannot 7y ago
  So the driver is not there to take over if the system does something dangerous? But that's what Tesla says every driver killed in one of these crashes was not doing, and why they were at fault. This is an unambiguous case of Tesla sending a mixed message, and completely unacceptable.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
- Domenic_S 7y ago
  You really have to be intentionally unsympathetic to come to this conclusion. On the AP page you linked, you literally scrolled past this description: > All new Tesla cars come standard with advanced hardware capable of providing Autopilot features today, and full self-driving capabilities in the future What's more, when you activate AP in a Tesla, a message appears to keep your hands on the wheel and be ready to take over at any time.
close04 7y ago
While the driver is ultimately responsible, your analogy makes no sense. Auto(matic) means pretty much the same thing in most languages. Something that works without human intervention. An automatic gearbox shifts automatically, auto-shutdown shuts down automatically, and the auto pilot pilots automatically. Or that’s what many people expect: even if confined only to motorways (as opposed to everywhere) it will be able to work by itself. The park-parkway analogy is about as good as cruise control vs. cruise ship. It’s a coincidence of words that nobody will ever confuse.
peeters 7y ago
The vehicle's clearly worded warnings can be at odds with the reality of how they market their vehicles. If you don't believe me, read your car's manual some day. They go to the point of pretty much warning you to never drive. If a warning makes a feature less than advertised, or is impractical in general, the company has still come short of their duty. The problem with Autopilot is that basic human nature will make you less attentive if it's taking that level of control. You can't warn that away.
- Domenic_S 7y ago
  I have a couple cars with TACC (tesla and not-tesla) and sit in bumper-to-bumper commute traffic daily. I will admit I sometimes let my mind wander because I trust the system to stop & go correctly in this kind of traffic scenario. However, if the system stopped working and rear-ended the person in front of me with no warning, I would be 100% ready to take the blame -- I'm behind the wheel, thus I am responsible, barring some kind of freak malfunction (pedals don't respond to input or something crazy)

Angostura 7y ago

> That's how dumb this argument is. So, no problem changing the name then - because in your opinion the name isn't effecting the purchaser or driver expectations.

sjwright 7y ago
That isn’t something you can extrapolate from what I wrote, but yes, of course they could change the name with minimal real consequences. They could name it Jeff.

obeattie 7y ago

The question of whether the driver should have had their hands on the wheel (clearly they should have) is distinct from the question of whether the Autopilot should have avoided this crash.

mannykannot 7y ago
In fact, the driver should have had his eyes on the road, in order to have the degree of attentiveness that Tesla always claims was missing whenever this sort of crash occurs. Tesla cars are unable to detect whether the driver is doing that, and if they did, it would make clear that this technology is nowhere near as complete as Tesla claims.
- yeahitslikethat 7y ago
  They can drive a car automatically but not tell if a driver is awake and alert and looking at the road? Seems that would be easier to me.
  - saalweachter 7y ago
    Would you buy a car that had a camera pointed at you constantly, recording for use in an accident investigation, uploading periodic short videos to Tesla for use in their training data?
    - mannykannot 7y ago
      Firstly, no-one has a right to drive distracted, any more that they have the right to drive drunk. Secondly, monitoring the attentiveness of a driver, as a backstop for weaknesses in the automation, does not require recording. Thirdly, this might be a good point to remind ourselves that this is, according to Tesla, a beta-testing program. The goal should be to get to the point where constant driver attentiveness is not necessary, but until that is achieved, additional safety measures are justified.
    - sjwright 7y ago
      Absolutely yes, because I don't drive like a stupid idiot—and if I ever did I'm not going to deny responsibility. However I don't see why having a camera pointed at my face necessarily means that Tesla have to willingly provide information to insurance companies. As long as it is only available to law enforcement after being granted a court order, I'm fine with that. (Note: I do not live in the USA. I trust the law enforcement in my country. My answer would be very different if I were in the US resident. I've heard enough about law enforcement in the US to know that I'd never live there, and if I did, I wouldn't ever trust the police.)
sjwright 7y ago
I agree, the issue in this case—and indeed with most Autopilot-related incidents—wasn't anything to do with the driver taking his hands off the wheel, it was the driver taking his eyes off the road. The warning message says "Be prepared to take over at any time." That is clearly the exact opposite of "You may now focus your attention to that laptop on the passenger seat." Yes it is a concern that Autopilot is failing in some circumstances. But whatever Tesla says or does, the road rules say that the human driver is always responsible in cases like this.

navigatesol 7y ago

>Claiming that the driver is not at fault because they interpreted the word "autopilot" to mean "I can disregard my responsibility as a driver and ignore the vehicle's very clear warnings" is deeply absurd Boy are you going to be in for a shock when the investigations start. "Autopilot", with the way Elon has promoted it, shouldn't slam into stationary objects.

sjwright 7y ago
What investigations? Has Tesla ever said that Autopilot will stop for stationary objects? Has Tesla ever said that Autopilot is intended to allow the driver to take his focus off the road? I do think that Tesla can do more to emphasise that Autopilot isn't a synonym for full self driving, but that isn't an excuse for people who are supposed to be acting in accordance with their driver license.
- peteradio 7y ago
  > Has Tesla ever said that Autopilot is intended to allow the driver to take his focus off the road? What the hell is the point of it then?
  - zaroth 7y ago
    I’d recommend reading some actual reviews of AutoPilot by the hundreds of thousands of people that use it every day, watch some YouTube videos or read some auto review sites explaining it. You keep your attention on the road. AutoPilot “takes the strain” off micromanaging the vehicle in the lane while you do the executive planning. It’s a supremely comfortable way to drive. But you are still responsible for driving the damn car.
    - SigmundA 7y ago
      IMO quick emergency stopping for surprise obstacles falls under "micromanagement" not "executive planning".
    - DSingularity 7y ago

rjdagost 7y ago

I would be more sympathetic to your argument if Tesla marketed Autopilot as a driver assistance feature. But that's not at all how they market it. When you go to Tesla's Autopilot page, you immediately see a video of a Tesla driving itself- the user doesn't touch the steering wheel for minutes as it navigates complicated scenarios: https://www.tesla.com/autopilot https://www.tesla.com/autopilot Tesla's own Autopilot page video has this disclaimer in bold at the very start of the video: "THE PERSON IN THE DRIVER'S SEAT IS ONLY THERE FOR LEGAL REASONS. HE IS NOT DOING ANYTHING. THE CAR IS DRIVING ITSELF". Then there are multiple videos of Elon Musk driving hands-free on Autopilot for extended periods of time, like this one: https://youtu.be/MO0vdNNzwxk?t=123 https://youtu.be/MO0vdNNzwxk?t=123 So Tesla can bury whatever carefully worded legalese they want in their terms and conditions, but they know that these videos will get shared and watched millions of times, and that they strongly convey the message that "Tesla's drive themselves on Autopilot". These videos set the expectation of how Autopilot should function, and I don't blame Autopilot users for not understanding this.

mannykannot 7y ago
So the driver is not there to take over if the system does something dangerous? But that's what Tesla says every driver killed in one of these crashes was not doing, and why they were at fault. This is an unambiguous case of Tesla sending a mixed message, and completely unacceptable.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
Domenic_S 7y ago
You really have to be intentionally unsympathetic to come to this conclusion. On the AP page you linked, you literally scrolled past this description: > All new Tesla cars come standard with advanced hardware capable of providing Autopilot features today, and full self-driving capabilities in the future What's more, when you activate AP in a Tesla, a message appears to keep your hands on the wheel and be ready to take over at any time.

close04 7y ago

While the driver is ultimately responsible, your analogy makes no sense. Auto(matic) means pretty much the same thing in most languages. Something that works without human intervention. An automatic gearbox shifts automatically, auto-shutdown shuts down automatically, and the auto pilot pilots automatically. Or that’s what many people expect: even if confined only to motorways (as opposed to everywhere) it will be able to work by itself. The park-parkway analogy is about as good as cruise control vs. cruise ship. It’s a coincidence of words that nobody will ever confuse.

peeters 7y ago

The vehicle's clearly worded warnings can be at odds with the reality of how they market their vehicles. If you don't believe me, read your car's manual some day. They go to the point of pretty much warning you to never drive. If a warning makes a feature less than advertised, or is impractical in general, the company has still come short of their duty. The problem with Autopilot is that basic human nature will make you less attentive if it's taking that level of control. You can't warn that away.

Domenic_S 7y ago
I have a couple cars with TACC (tesla and not-tesla) and sit in bumper-to-bumper commute traffic daily. I will admit I sometimes let my mind wander because I trust the system to stop & go correctly in this kind of traffic scenario. However, if the system stopped working and rear-ended the person in front of me with no warning, I would be 100% ready to take the blame -- I'm behind the wheel, thus I am responsible, barring some kind of freak malfunction (pedals don't respond to input or something crazy)