5 ms·

> “They are not self-driving systems,” said Supt. Gary Graham of Alberta RCMP Traffic Services. > “These technologies assist drivers, but do not replace them,”

> “They are not self-driving systems,” said Supt. Gary Graham of Alberta RCMP Traffic Services. > “These technologies assist drivers, but do not replace them,” said the statement from the federal institution responsible for transportation policies and programs ... > Tesla’s website states, “All new Tesla cars come standard with advanced hardware capable of providing Autopilot features today, and full self-driving capabilities in the future.” ... full self-driving capabilities in the FUTURE ... So it is a DISHONEST marketing issue that creates a wrong perception in the consumer, and that's what the government should address. Create regulation that do not allow such vehicles to be marketed as "self-driving". Create some kind of certification to earn the right to advertise a vehicle as "self-driving". And define and standardize better labels for the current technologies used, and publicize it well.

tehlike 6y ago
You think it's regulation issue. I say it's because it's overtrust for an almost working system. If something gets good enough you will rely on it more and more. It will work, until it doesn't.
- camjohnson26 6y ago
  And the systems fail in ways that a human wouldn’t which makes it more dangerous. Teslas often “shadow brake” when driving under overpasses or overhead signs because the radar system gets confused.
  - alexanderdmitri 6y ago
    This is what gets me. A big part driving safety is defensive, ie monitoring the other drivers around you. It's relatively easy to pick out distracted, erratic or risk-taking drivers from a handful of simple queues. Very much not the case with software driven autopilot routines from an increasing number of vendors. So accidents may go down where humans are at fault, but I find it more unsettling overall, as I have less control to take acceptable safety precautions.
    - webmobdev 6y ago
      Yes, defensive driving is the norm because we humans are fallible. If all the cars on the road were self-driven, then it would be a different story.
      - camjohnson26 6y ago
        Assuming self driving cars will be infallible.
  - belltaco 6y ago
    >And the systems fail in ways that a human wouldn’t which makes it more dangerous Not necessarily, because humans fail in ways that Tesla autopilot wouldn't. 1.5 million people are killed in road accidents every year. 54 million people are injured.
foepys 6y ago
> So it is a dishonest marketing issue that creates a wrong perception in the consumer German courts share this opinion and Tesla is prohibited from naming their product Autopilot or referencing any FSD.
phaemon 6y ago
So people keep claiming, but I've yet to see a single example of an actual Tesla owner who was confused about this. The person in this story wasn't confused and didn't even attempt a defense that Tesla had mislead them.
- orange_tee 6y ago
  So he and his passenger went to sleep fully knowing that Tesla's driving assist could fail at any moment? You mean, they were both suicidal? Much more plausible is that he is scared to implicate Tesla into this.
  - fiddlerwoaroof 6y ago
    Tesla marks all these features as beta on the menu where you activate them, and pops up a long warning text explicitly stating the limitations. I don’t think Tesla could do much more than they already do.
    - orange_tee 6y ago
      Describing driving assist as "beta FSD" is already grossly misleading, and still my point stands, either they were mislead or they were suicidal.
      - fiddlerwoaroof 6y ago
        I was highly skeptical of these systems too: for normal freeway driving, Tesla’s systems are much better than I expected them to be. There’s no way I would be comfortable enough to sleep in my car, as a programmer, but I could imagine someone getting overconfident. This has always been a major risk with semi-automated systems: I believe airplanes dialed back the functionality of autopilots to prevent pilot complacency.
        orange_tee 6y ago
        OK that is a good point. So you are saying, maybe the marketing wasn't what misled the driver, but the abilities of the system. A system that fails 1% of the time will give a the user overconfidence up until the first time it fails.
tintor 6y ago
Even with certification, person behind the wheel will still be responsible (as long as he / she has control over vehicle). Once vehicles ship without steering wheels / pedals, that will not be the case anymore.
- webmobdev 6y ago
  As someone else suggested, manufacturer should be made liable in case of an accident for "self-driving" vehicles.

tehlike 6y ago

You think it's regulation issue. I say it's because it's overtrust for an almost working system. If something gets good enough you will rely on it more and more. It will work, until it doesn't.

camjohnson26 6y ago
And the systems fail in ways that a human wouldn’t which makes it more dangerous. Teslas often “shadow brake” when driving under overpasses or overhead signs because the radar system gets confused.
- alexanderdmitri 6y ago
  This is what gets me. A big part driving safety is defensive, ie monitoring the other drivers around you. It's relatively easy to pick out distracted, erratic or risk-taking drivers from a handful of simple queues. Very much not the case with software driven autopilot routines from an increasing number of vendors. So accidents may go down where humans are at fault, but I find it more unsettling overall, as I have less control to take acceptable safety precautions.
  - webmobdev 6y ago
    Yes, defensive driving is the norm because we humans are fallible. If all the cars on the road were self-driven, then it would be a different story.
    - camjohnson26 6y ago
      Assuming self driving cars will be infallible.
- belltaco 6y ago
  >And the systems fail in ways that a human wouldn’t which makes it more dangerous Not necessarily, because humans fail in ways that Tesla autopilot wouldn't. 1.5 million people are killed in road accidents every year. 54 million people are injured.

foepys 6y ago

> So it is a dishonest marketing issue that creates a wrong perception in the consumer German courts share this opinion and Tesla is prohibited from naming their product Autopilot or referencing any FSD.

phaemon 6y ago

So people keep claiming, but I've yet to see a single example of an actual Tesla owner who was confused about this. The person in this story wasn't confused and didn't even attempt a defense that Tesla had mislead them.

orange_tee 6y ago
So he and his passenger went to sleep fully knowing that Tesla's driving assist could fail at any moment? You mean, they were both suicidal? Much more plausible is that he is scared to implicate Tesla into this.
- fiddlerwoaroof 6y ago
  Tesla marks all these features as beta on the menu where you activate them, and pops up a long warning text explicitly stating the limitations. I don’t think Tesla could do much more than they already do.
  - orange_tee 6y ago
    Describing driving assist as "beta FSD" is already grossly misleading, and still my point stands, either they were mislead or they were suicidal.
    - fiddlerwoaroof 6y ago
      I was highly skeptical of these systems too: for normal freeway driving, Tesla’s systems are much better than I expected them to be. There’s no way I would be comfortable enough to sleep in my car, as a programmer, but I could imagine someone getting overconfident. This has always been a major risk with semi-automated systems: I believe airplanes dialed back the functionality of autopilots to prevent pilot complacency.
      - orange_tee 6y ago
        OK that is a good point. So you are saying, maybe the marketing wasn't what misled the driver, but the abilities of the system. A system that fails 1% of the time will give a the user overconfidence up until the first time it fails.

tintor 6y ago

Even with certification, person behind the wheel will still be responsible (as long as he / she has control over vehicle). Once vehicles ship without steering wheels / pedals, that will not be the case anymore.

webmobdev 6y ago
As someone else suggested, manufacturer should be made liable in case of an accident for "self-driving" vehicles.