4 ms·

> In any case the fault is most certainly not merely marketing, it's a fundamental design flaw. I was actually referring to the ruling. The court did not take

> In any case the fault is most certainly not merely marketing, it's a fundamental design flaw. I was actually referring to the ruling. The court did not take issue with the autopilot system, just with the way it's marketed. For the rest of your comment I agree and I implied something along the same lines. Tesla should have built a system that works to compensate for human failings, not take advantage of them to sell more. New roads are built to be more wavy to keep the drivers more engaged, some traffic light systems that are synchronized as a "green wave" are sometimes stunted to not create this automation of running through lights (especially true of public transport vehicles where lights sync to the vehicle, except when an emergency vehicle is coming), etc. Tesla should have installed an advanced driver attention monitoring system even before turning on the AP and they should have set very, very clear expectations from the system. In reality they did the opposite with people ending up believing that the AP can handle driving by itself so they can "disconnect", but the attention monitoring being completely unfit for the purpose of making sure the human is "connected".

richardwhiuk 6y ago
> public transport vehicles where lights sync to the vehicle This is a common rumour, but is there anywhere which actually implements this?
- iggldiggl 6y ago
  Yes. (And I can also confirm the effect that at intersections where full public transport priority usually guarantees a green some drivers do react a bit... surprised on the rare occasion when it doesn't work for whatever reasons)
  - buran77 6y ago
    > the rare occasion when it doesn't work for whatever reasons That's actually intentional (or at least I know for a fact that in some places it's by design). It keeps drivers alert and break the habit of just going ahead. Sometime for whatever reason the light has to be red and in some cases the public transport drivers were so used to just going through the intersection that they completely miss the lights. Also many of them get in their personal cars at the end of the day to the same effect. It's a known, studied effect and the solution is to "mix it up" a bit.
- buran77 6y ago
  Where I live yes. On some lines especially in the city center and more crowded intersections public transport gets priority. When they have stops before an intersection no matter how long they have to wait there for passengers to get on or off, the moment they are ready to move the light turns red for everyone else. There are also places where a special light turns red (there's no green) when they pass in order to guarantee the priority while the rest of the time traffic uses the right of way for example. This makes sense, the light sync system is already in place and they carry dozens or more passengers at once. This kind of advantage over a car carrying one person gives people more incentive to use public transport.
- catalogia 6y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traffic_signal_preemption https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traffic_signal_preemption https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bus_priority https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bus_priority
- emn13 6y ago
  Where I live, they're even rain-sensitive, giving bikers priority in rainy conditions.
  - MereInterest 6y ago
    Wow. If you don't mind me asking, where is this? I live in a city that is considered relatively bike-friendly, but the timing of the lights is maximally bad for bikers, requiring us to stop at every light.
    - emn13 6y ago
      Groningen, the Netherlands. Some other cities in the Netherlands do this too, but AFAIK it's not (yet) universal.
emn13 6y ago
> > In any case the fault is most certainly not merely marketing, it's a fundamental design flaw. > I was actually referring to the ruling. The court did not take issue with the autopilot system, just with the way it's marketed. I meant the parent post you were replying to, i.e. what I think MereInterest meant when he said "If there is a human in the control loop, then it needs to take into account human limitations", to which you replied "I am honestly not sure how to interpret your comment but I'll try to respond. The fault is not with the AP." I did not mean to imply you thought it was a fundamental design flaw - sorry!

richardwhiuk 6y ago

> public transport vehicles where lights sync to the vehicle This is a common rumour, but is there anywhere which actually implements this?

iggldiggl 6y ago
Yes. (And I can also confirm the effect that at intersections where full public transport priority usually guarantees a green some drivers do react a bit... surprised on the rare occasion when it doesn't work for whatever reasons)
- buran77 6y ago
  > the rare occasion when it doesn't work for whatever reasons That's actually intentional (or at least I know for a fact that in some places it's by design). It keeps drivers alert and break the habit of just going ahead. Sometime for whatever reason the light has to be red and in some cases the public transport drivers were so used to just going through the intersection that they completely miss the lights. Also many of them get in their personal cars at the end of the day to the same effect. It's a known, studied effect and the solution is to "mix it up" a bit.
buran77 6y ago
Where I live yes. On some lines especially in the city center and more crowded intersections public transport gets priority. When they have stops before an intersection no matter how long they have to wait there for passengers to get on or off, the moment they are ready to move the light turns red for everyone else. There are also places where a special light turns red (there's no green) when they pass in order to guarantee the priority while the rest of the time traffic uses the right of way for example. This makes sense, the light sync system is already in place and they carry dozens or more passengers at once. This kind of advantage over a car carrying one person gives people more incentive to use public transport.
catalogia 6y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traffic_signal_preemption https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traffic_signal_preemption https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bus_priority https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bus_priority
emn13 6y ago
Where I live, they're even rain-sensitive, giving bikers priority in rainy conditions.
- MereInterest 6y ago
  Wow. If you don't mind me asking, where is this? I live in a city that is considered relatively bike-friendly, but the timing of the lights is maximally bad for bikers, requiring us to stop at every light.
  - emn13 6y ago
    Groningen, the Netherlands. Some other cities in the Netherlands do this too, but AFAIK it's not (yet) universal.

emn13 6y ago

> > In any case the fault is most certainly not merely marketing, it's a fundamental design flaw. > I was actually referring to the ruling. The court did not take issue with the autopilot system, just with the way it's marketed. I meant the parent post you were replying to, i.e. what I think MereInterest meant when he said "If there is a human in the control loop, then it needs to take into account human limitations", to which you replied "I am honestly not sure how to interpret your comment but I'll try to respond. The fault is not with the AP." I did not mean to imply you thought it was a fundamental design flaw - sorry!