3 ms·

IMHO the fault ultimately lies with Caltrans. Poorly drawn lane markers resulted in a human driver hitting the barrier just days before destroying the arresting

IMHO the fault ultimately lies with Caltrans. Poorly drawn lane markers resulted in a human driver hitting the barrier just days before destroying the arresting system. If the lanes had been painted correctly and the arresting system replaced the Tesla driver would not have died.

thbr99 7y ago
Oh yeah, you should come drive on Montreal roads. Lane markers don't exist.
threeseed 7y ago
This is all conjecture. You don't know that the driver would still be alive if the lanes were painted correctly etc. Autopilot could still misidentify the barrier as we've seen it do in other situations.
- shiftpgdn 7y ago
  Five drivers hit the same barrier the year before the Tesla accident and a second human piloted vehicle fataly struck the same barrier just two months after the Tesa crash. It is absolutely a road design and maintenance issue.
  - newnewpdro 7y ago
    How many drivers didn't hit the same barrier that year? It just seems like an edge case that's catching inattentive drivers off guard, which IMHO is a category including Tesla's on autopilot. And it seems Tesla agrees here; they require drivers pay attention when using Autopilot. If your vehicle runs into a barrier on Autopilot, you weren't paying attention.
  - falcolas 7y ago
    It’s also a road design and marking issue. But poor roads and markings are normal, outside the biggest cities. For a good portion of the year, you can’t rely on being able to see any road markings in the Midwest and Pacific Northwest.
Aloha 7y ago
I think an auto driving system needs to have a higher margin of safety than a human driver, not the same or worse.
- perl4ever 7y ago
  People say a self-driving car is safer than the average person. I say, well, I'm above average, because I don't drink or text while driving, for starters. So people say "well you just think you're a better driver - everyone thinks that and on average they're wrong". And I say, assume I'm lying about not drinking or texting, it's still a lot cheaper and more efficient to stop doing that than to buy a new car with the latest tech. If a self-driving car isn't safer than a sober professional driver, then wouldn't it be logical to just have people ride the bus instead of wasting resources on tech? I knew a bus driver who went a million miles without an accident.
kdudhshdjf 7y ago
Liability should always lie with the self driving car. In the real world weird shit happens on roads, people adapt and are expected to adapt. What good is a car that I can't trust to be at least as reliable as an overly defensive version of myself?
- shiftpgdn 7y ago
  If human drivers are getting killed in the same spot the same is it still a vehicle saftey problem?
  - keanzu 7y ago
    How many Teslas on lane keep assist safely drove past that spot vs how many humans? If every million human drivers have one accident and every 1000 Teslas have a similar accident then yes, it is a vehicle safety problem. An auto driving system needs to have a higher margin of safety than a human driver not the same or worse.
  - mannykannot 7y ago
    Yes, because responsibility is not a zero-sum game. If the system cannot cope well with sub-optimal roads, it should not be in use wherever one might encounter sub-optimal roads.
    - keanzu 7y ago
      GM's Super Cruise does precisely this. It is only available on roads where GM allows it.
    - kdudhshdjf 7y ago
      Responsibility being a zero sum game is literally what a lot of these conversations and the emerging laws are about. If users are making a mistake often enough to be noticible then the system and its interface are encouraging that behavior. If the autopilot is being used in ill-advised situations then the question becomes why the system wasn't more comprehensible to the user, if it was then they wouldn't have made a bad judgement because they would have understood the limitations of the system. This is just another instance of blaming users for bad design.
koboll 7y ago
Sounds like the main problems, besides whatever was wrong with the self-driving software, were that area of the freeway being unacceptably unsafe... > which the NTSB determined had been damaged and repaired more frequently than any other left-exit in Caltrans' District 4, which includes all of the Bay Area. ...and CHP not doing their job: > The California Highway Patrol responded to the March 12 crash but did not notify Caltrans of the damage as required, the NTSB said.
zaroth 7y ago
It was literally the most dangerous left-hand ramp in the entire Bay Area, and had already killed someone within the previous year. > Huang's 2017 Tesla Model X was traveling at 71 mph when it crashed against the same attenuator, which the NTSB determined had been damaged and repaired more frequently than any other left-exit in Caltrans' District 4, which includes all of the Bay Area.

thbr99 7y ago

Oh yeah, you should come drive on Montreal roads. Lane markers don't exist.

threeseed 7y ago

This is all conjecture. You don't know that the driver would still be alive if the lanes were painted correctly etc. Autopilot could still misidentify the barrier as we've seen it do in other situations.

shiftpgdn 7y ago
Five drivers hit the same barrier the year before the Tesla accident and a second human piloted vehicle fataly struck the same barrier just two months after the Tesa crash. It is absolutely a road design and maintenance issue.
- newnewpdro 7y ago
  How many drivers didn't hit the same barrier that year? It just seems like an edge case that's catching inattentive drivers off guard, which IMHO is a category including Tesla's on autopilot. And it seems Tesla agrees here; they require drivers pay attention when using Autopilot. If your vehicle runs into a barrier on Autopilot, you weren't paying attention.
- falcolas 7y ago
  It’s also a road design and marking issue. But poor roads and markings are normal, outside the biggest cities. For a good portion of the year, you can’t rely on being able to see any road markings in the Midwest and Pacific Northwest.

Aloha 7y ago

I think an auto driving system needs to have a higher margin of safety than a human driver, not the same or worse.

perl4ever 7y ago
People say a self-driving car is safer than the average person. I say, well, I'm above average, because I don't drink or text while driving, for starters. So people say "well you just think you're a better driver - everyone thinks that and on average they're wrong". And I say, assume I'm lying about not drinking or texting, it's still a lot cheaper and more efficient to stop doing that than to buy a new car with the latest tech. If a self-driving car isn't safer than a sober professional driver, then wouldn't it be logical to just have people ride the bus instead of wasting resources on tech? I knew a bus driver who went a million miles without an accident.

kdudhshdjf 7y ago

Liability should always lie with the self driving car. In the real world weird shit happens on roads, people adapt and are expected to adapt. What good is a car that I can't trust to be at least as reliable as an overly defensive version of myself?

shiftpgdn 7y ago
If human drivers are getting killed in the same spot the same is it still a vehicle saftey problem?
- keanzu 7y ago
  How many Teslas on lane keep assist safely drove past that spot vs how many humans? If every million human drivers have one accident and every 1000 Teslas have a similar accident then yes, it is a vehicle safety problem. An auto driving system needs to have a higher margin of safety than a human driver not the same or worse.
- mannykannot 7y ago
  Yes, because responsibility is not a zero-sum game. If the system cannot cope well with sub-optimal roads, it should not be in use wherever one might encounter sub-optimal roads.
  - keanzu 7y ago
    GM's Super Cruise does precisely this. It is only available on roads where GM allows it.
  - kdudhshdjf 7y ago
    Responsibility being a zero sum game is literally what a lot of these conversations and the emerging laws are about. If users are making a mistake often enough to be noticible then the system and its interface are encouraging that behavior. If the autopilot is being used in ill-advised situations then the question becomes why the system wasn't more comprehensible to the user, if it was then they wouldn't have made a bad judgement because they would have understood the limitations of the system. This is just another instance of blaming users for bad design.

koboll 7y ago

Sounds like the main problems, besides whatever was wrong with the self-driving software, were that area of the freeway being unacceptably unsafe... > which the NTSB determined had been damaged and repaired more frequently than any other left-exit in Caltrans' District 4, which includes all of the Bay Area. ...and CHP not doing their job: > The California Highway Patrol responded to the March 12 crash but did not notify Caltrans of the damage as required, the NTSB said.

zaroth 7y ago

It was literally the most dangerous left-hand ramp in the entire Bay Area, and had already killed someone within the previous year. > Huang's 2017 Tesla Model X was traveling at 71 mph when it crashed against the same attenuator, which the NTSB determined had been damaged and repaired more frequently than any other left-exit in Caltrans' District 4, which includes all of the Bay Area.