4 ms·

You must have missed their #1 requirement for these systems: safety. "Even after two years, Cadillac’s Super Cruise remained our top-rated system because, when

You must have missed their #1 requirement for these systems: safety. "Even after two years, Cadillac’s Super Cruise remained our top-rated system because, when turned on, it uses direct driver monitoring to warn drivers that appear to have stopped paying attention to the road." Autopilot doesn't "nanny" drivers, as you call it, and is therefore not a safe system so they ranked it lower. If you're fine with your ADAS system killing multiple people [1], this is not the ranking system for you. [1] https://apnews.com/article/ca5e62255bb87bf1b151f9bf075aaadf https://apnews.com/article/ca5e62255bb87bf1b151f9bf075aaadf

ebg13 6y ago
If your idea of safety is explicitly that it should be disabled in the places where most traffic fatalities occur (rural roads + intersections) due to rampant human negligence, then I think you should reconsider your definition of safety.
toomuchtodo 6y ago
Roughly 38k people a year die in human caused car accidents. ADAS systems will kill people, as all systems can and will fail. Six people (the number of people killed while Tesla vehicles had Autopilot engaged) seems within a tolerable amount if we expect progress to reduce human caused vehicular deaths. NHTSA and adjacent regulatory bodies allow Tesla to continue to sell Autopilot functionality, and allow it to remain active on sold vehicles. Their opinion counts far greater than that of Consumer Reports.
- beervirus 6y ago
  That's hardly a fair comparison, given how many people are driving vs. how many automated driver systems are out there.
  - toomuchtodo 6y ago
    Propose an alternative comparison that is not so outlandish as zero deaths ever. We're currently at six deaths with almost a million Tesla vehicles sold and 3+ billions of Autopilot miles travelled [1]. [1] https://electrek.co/2020/04/22/tesla-autopilot-data-3-billion-miles/ https://electrek.co/2020/04/22/tesla-autopilot-data-3-billio...
    - beervirus 6y ago
      The fair comparison would obviously look at deaths per mile traveled for each category, not total deaths.
      - Retric 6y ago
        That gets into fun with statistics. On a pure deaths per mile basis Autopilot is already safer than the average car driven by the average driver. However, people downplay that by adjusting for various things making them relatively equivalent with not enough data to really say one way or another. Basically, there is simply not enough data to be statistically significant improvement or detriment vs drivers, but there is enough data to say they are safe enough to be used.
        amanaplanacanal 6y ago
        How can you say autopilot is safer when the human driver has to take over when it sees the autopilot isn’t up to the task? Isn’t the prima fascia evidence that the human driver is safer?
        Retric 6y ago
        Different areas of expertise, a computer’s doesn’t get bored, drunk, or text people while driving. Safety is just about not crashing, actually getting somewhere is a different story. In some ways having a human take over in difficult conditions is stacking the deck, but computers are also taking over in an crash to slow down before impact and people are adjusting how much autopilot speeds. So, it’s kind of a grey area, but at a minimum we know autopilot isn’t dramatically worse than humans.
        amanaplanacanal 6y ago
        Of course it is. Count every time the human has to take over as a crash for the computer, and then see what your statistics look like. The computer is much worse.
  - vmception 6y ago
    The fair comparison will show the same thing lol. Each car in with the automated system will provide data to update all the other cars with automated systems. I trust that process way more than individual unconnected human drivers. I don't trust Elon or Tesla corporation to care about human lives but I do trust that it will eventually get better and very quickly. So, thank you for the altruism everyone, it will be fine.
  - Retric 6y ago
    6 is also a total not a rate per year like 38,000. The rate of self driving car deaths is roughly identical to the rate of non self driving car deaths. However, unlike drivers these systems can significantly improve over time.
    - roland35 6y ago
      I think drivers can improve over time as well, especially with assistive technology such as lane departure warning, blind spot detectors, etc becoming more prevalent. Luckily self driving isn't an all or nothing deal!
      - Retric 6y ago
        People are already comparing individual models with and without self driving features to adjust for things like visibility. As these cars already have those driver assist features having them become more commonplace isn’t going to change the relaxant statistics. That said, unknown future forms of driver assistance might be relevant, but I would lump that in with better cars.
- moduspol 6y ago
  This isn't even a choice we have to make. Why can't SuperCruise make sure the driver is paying attention even when it's not doing the driving? The numbers are pretty clear. If we want to save lives by making sure drivers are paying attention, it should be on the cars without Autopilot.
labcomputer 6y ago
They have a funny definition of safety. Specifically, they insist that the system should only be usable on limited-access highways. CR docked all manufacturers (except GM) 4 points for that. CR also docked 3 points from every company (except GM, again) for "unresponsive driver" without saying what, exactly, GM is doing differently from everyone else. Finally, under "keeping the driver engaged", GM somehow got 3 more points than anyone else, despite being subject to the same complaints. Sadly, CR is not the publication it used to be. While this isn't a "Tesla hit-piece", it is quite clearly a "GM submarine."
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
loudmax 6y ago
Tesla's term "Autopilot" is misleading and it's gotten people killed. Tesla and Musk deserve opprobrium for giving their driver assist system a name that implies that the car can drive without constant supervision. But Consumer Report's title isn't entirely clear either. They rank Cadillac ahead of Tesla because Super Cruise makes stronger attempts than Autopilot to make sure the driver is engaged. That isn't a bad thing, but it should be clear in the title that the "performance" they're measuring heavily weighs toward safety. It's like saying that a Volvo station wagon outperforms a Ferrari sports car because your family is safer in the Volvo. Sure, I'd rather my kids ride in a Volvo but that's not what I think of when I read the word "outperforms".
- elisharobinson 6y ago
  There exists a total of 0 pilots in the world who believe autopilot system will fly the plane without any need for intervention. If your ingnorance gives meaning to words it does not make them true.
ghaff 6y ago
>You must have missed their #1 requirement for these systems: safety. Not really surprising from CR. They've always emphasized safety--along with maintenance, cost, etc. The target audience for CR is mostly a conventional middle-class suburban family (understanding that Cadillac is still a relatively high-end car). They don't really care about car enthusiasts who are prioritizing other types of capabilities.

ebg13 6y ago

If your idea of safety is explicitly that it should be disabled in the places where most traffic fatalities occur (rural roads + intersections) due to rampant human negligence, then I think you should reconsider your definition of safety.

toomuchtodo 6y ago

Roughly 38k people a year die in human caused car accidents. ADAS systems will kill people, as all systems can and will fail. Six people (the number of people killed while Tesla vehicles had Autopilot engaged) seems within a tolerable amount if we expect progress to reduce human caused vehicular deaths. NHTSA and adjacent regulatory bodies allow Tesla to continue to sell Autopilot functionality, and allow it to remain active on sold vehicles. Their opinion counts far greater than that of Consumer Reports.

beervirus 6y ago
That's hardly a fair comparison, given how many people are driving vs. how many automated driver systems are out there.
- toomuchtodo 6y ago
  Propose an alternative comparison that is not so outlandish as zero deaths ever. We're currently at six deaths with almost a million Tesla vehicles sold and 3+ billions of Autopilot miles travelled [1]. [1] https://electrek.co/2020/04/22/tesla-autopilot-data-3-billion-miles/ https://electrek.co/2020/04/22/tesla-autopilot-data-3-billio...
  - beervirus 6y ago
    The fair comparison would obviously look at deaths per mile traveled for each category, not total deaths.
    - Retric 6y ago
      That gets into fun with statistics. On a pure deaths per mile basis Autopilot is already safer than the average car driven by the average driver. However, people downplay that by adjusting for various things making them relatively equivalent with not enough data to really say one way or another. Basically, there is simply not enough data to be statistically significant improvement or detriment vs drivers, but there is enough data to say they are safe enough to be used.
      - amanaplanacanal 6y ago
        How can you say autopilot is safer when the human driver has to take over when it sees the autopilot isn’t up to the task? Isn’t the prima fascia evidence that the human driver is safer?
        Retric 6y ago
        Different areas of expertise, a computer’s doesn’t get bored, drunk, or text people while driving. Safety is just about not crashing, actually getting somewhere is a different story. In some ways having a human take over in difficult conditions is stacking the deck, but computers are also taking over in an crash to slow down before impact and people are adjusting how much autopilot speeds. So, it’s kind of a grey area, but at a minimum we know autopilot isn’t dramatically worse than humans.
        amanaplanacanal 6y ago
        Of course it is. Count every time the human has to take over as a crash for the computer, and then see what your statistics look like. The computer is much worse.
- vmception 6y ago
  The fair comparison will show the same thing lol. Each car in with the automated system will provide data to update all the other cars with automated systems. I trust that process way more than individual unconnected human drivers. I don't trust Elon or Tesla corporation to care about human lives but I do trust that it will eventually get better and very quickly. So, thank you for the altruism everyone, it will be fine.
- Retric 6y ago
  6 is also a total not a rate per year like 38,000. The rate of self driving car deaths is roughly identical to the rate of non self driving car deaths. However, unlike drivers these systems can significantly improve over time.
  - roland35 6y ago
    I think drivers can improve over time as well, especially with assistive technology such as lane departure warning, blind spot detectors, etc becoming more prevalent. Luckily self driving isn't an all or nothing deal!
    - Retric 6y ago
      People are already comparing individual models with and without self driving features to adjust for things like visibility. As these cars already have those driver assist features having them become more commonplace isn’t going to change the relaxant statistics. That said, unknown future forms of driver assistance might be relevant, but I would lump that in with better cars.
moduspol 6y ago
This isn't even a choice we have to make. Why can't SuperCruise make sure the driver is paying attention even when it's not doing the driving? The numbers are pretty clear. If we want to save lives by making sure drivers are paying attention, it should be on the cars without Autopilot.

labcomputer 6y ago

They have a funny definition of safety. Specifically, they insist that the system should only be usable on limited-access highways. CR docked all manufacturers (except GM) 4 points for that. CR also docked 3 points from every company (except GM, again) for "unresponsive driver" without saying what, exactly, GM is doing differently from everyone else. Finally, under "keeping the driver engaged", GM somehow got 3 more points than anyone else, despite being subject to the same complaints. Sadly, CR is not the publication it used to be. While this isn't a "Tesla hit-piece", it is quite clearly a "GM submarine."

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

loudmax 6y ago

Tesla's term "Autopilot" is misleading and it's gotten people killed. Tesla and Musk deserve opprobrium for giving their driver assist system a name that implies that the car can drive without constant supervision. But Consumer Report's title isn't entirely clear either. They rank Cadillac ahead of Tesla because Super Cruise makes stronger attempts than Autopilot to make sure the driver is engaged. That isn't a bad thing, but it should be clear in the title that the "performance" they're measuring heavily weighs toward safety. It's like saying that a Volvo station wagon outperforms a Ferrari sports car because your family is safer in the Volvo. Sure, I'd rather my kids ride in a Volvo but that's not what I think of when I read the word "outperforms".

elisharobinson 6y ago
There exists a total of 0 pilots in the world who believe autopilot system will fly the plane without any need for intervention. If your ingnorance gives meaning to words it does not make them true.

ghaff 6y ago

>You must have missed their #1 requirement for these systems: safety. Not really surprising from CR. They've always emphasized safety--along with maintenance, cost, etc. The target audience for CR is mostly a conventional middle-class suburban family (understanding that Cadillac is still a relatively high-end car). They don't really care about car enthusiasts who are prioritizing other types of capabilities.