6 ms·
That’s very blatant sensationalist journalism that conveniently does not mention that there is a person holding down a button the entire time that the car is be
by tdy_err 7y ago
That’s very blatant sensationalist journalism that conveniently does not mention that there is a person holding down a button the entire time that the car is being summoned.
If that’s “dangerous”, well, so is piloting it manually.
- mijamo 7y agoA person who does always what is in front of the car and what is coming behind or on the sides, and who will probably be looking at the button rather than the car while it moves. That is just as dangerous as using your smartphone while driving in a parking lot, which is forbidden for good reasons.
- magashna 7y agoDo you stare at a button when you hold it? That seems very odd. If that were true, video games wouldn't exist.
- ceejayoz 7y agoThe video shows the app with a radar-ish view of what the car is seeing of its surroundings and its planned route. It's more than just a button, and I could see why someone would be focused on the screen display instead of the car.
- boomlinde 7y agoI have a similar sentiment about nuclear weapons. What's the problem if someone needs to be pushing a button?
- pbhjpbhj 7y agoAgree, a licensed human driver is in charge of a "summoned" vehicle. Any operation you might expect from such a vehicle is on the person holding the button.
- falcolas 7y agoSo long as everything works perfectly, sure. But there's nobody in place to hit the brakes in an emergency scenario. Releasing a button as an emergency measure seems a bit unreliable, since humans tend to clench their muscles when there's an emergency.
- Piskvorrr 7y agoWorse: AT+RELEA NO CARRIER Unless the car brakes the very instant the connection drops (and not when the timeout propagates through the networking stack), now you have two problems.
- dragonwriter 7y agoHuman drivers aren't usually licensed for, and license practical tests do not cover, remote operations of the type being discussed.
- sunpar 7y agoThe linked video talks about updating laws regarding the legality of operating the smart summon feature on public roads. I don't see how that can be called "blatant sensationalism".
- mirchibajji 7y agoSomeone inside the car has a better sense of the surroundings than someone operating it from a distance. They also don't have a skin in the game, which can impact the judgement
- zip1234 7y agoIt is the same 'skin in the game' as being in the car. They are not concerned about their own safety if driving the car in a parking lot, they are concerned about their car getting into a collision. No different whether in the car or not.
- rayiner 7y agoThat’s a red herring though. It shouldn’t matter if the person is paying attention if the self driving tech is working. (As Musk likes to say, the person is just there to tick off a legal checkbox.)
- wiggles_md 7y agoAt what point do Musk’s statements represent a moderate legal risk? For the sake of argument, could Musk’s statement, along with his very public insistence of being actively engaged in the design process, demonstrate a cavalier disregard for proper safety engineering at the management level (outside acceptable industry practice) and so a defective process?
- Piskvorrr 7y agoWell, that's a big if. Moreover, an if that has "nope nope nope" written over it with literal human blood. RIP EH.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]