26 ms·

Federal investigators blast Tesla, call for stricter safety standards

202 points by AndrewDucker 6y ago

nabla9 6y ago
Tesla usually goes for most technically advanced solution. But when it comes to driver alertness monitoring they pick the easiest to fool solution. I suspect it's intentional. Eye tracking would prevent their users from misusing autopilot. It would kill the hype.
- 11thEarlOfMar 6y ago
  The latest FSD Beta monitors driver alertness with cabin camera. Tesla has rejected beta testers who did not pay enough attention: https://twitter.com/TSLAgang/status/1370524705950724097 https://twitter.com/TSLAgang/status/1370524705950724097
- mcot2 6y ago
  The latest FSD beta is now confirmed to be using the internal camera to monitor for alertness and Elon has just announced via twitter that they kicked people out of the Beta for misuse.
  - camjohnson26 6y ago
    I’m guessing “misuse” means people who posted videos on YouTube.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- threeseed 6y ago
  > Tesla usually goes for most technically advanced solution. They don't have LiDAR. So this statement is clearly false.
  - nickik 6y ago
    An easy argument can be made that advanced vision system is technologically more advanced.
11thEarlOfMar 6y ago
> Under then-President Donald Trump, NHTSA largely let automakers do what they liked when it came to advanced driver-assistance systems (ADAS) and prototype driverless vehicles. I have questions. Were the NHTSA's policies regarding ADAS different under Obama than Trump? Are they different under Biden than Trump? If so, what changed? If not, why mention it?
- Robotbeat 6y ago
  Not significantly from what I can tell.
- NoSorryCannot 6y ago
  Written policies don't change that quickly. Policing, aka the execution of those policies, can be swayed by firings, appointments, executive order, and political pressure. Trump used these avenues more than most.
- prepend 6y ago
  > If not, why mention it? More hate, more clicks. People hate Trump. Therefore editors want more clicks.
mcot2 6y ago
I don’t think the NTSB is properly weighing the safety benefits of these systems. They seem to be myopically focused on a few crashes/incidents. Cars are not planes. For better or worse we as the public have a lot more tolerance for car crashes than plane crashes. I don’t think there is enough evidence that the current ADAS systems are better or worse than human drivers at this point. I’d say the best way to improve the situation is not to have heavy handed regulation at this stage and let the technology play out.
- hahahahe 6y ago
  That’s an interesting take. So you think we shouldn’t have regulations on this new unproven technology where the government poured billions upon billions to help develop. And that’s fine. Just don’t take gov’t money then.
  - prophesi 6y ago
    Not that there shouldn't be any regulations, but that the direction regulations are going in are pretty heavy-handed when you consider how accepting as a society we are to have thousands of car accidents every single day, and thousands of car-related deaths every year (in the USA at least). Self-driving cars are already much safer than human-driven cars.
    - hahahahe 6y ago
      No they’re not safer than human-driven cars. Not enough data to claim that. And how can you even collect that data when we don’t even have fully automated cars in the wild?
      - prophesi 6y ago
        There's plenty of data on it. Safety is _the_ number one thing people are paying attention to in self-driving cars.
        6y ago
mhb 6y ago
As usual, and as exemplified by virtually every decision in the Covid handling debacle, no mention of cost/benefit tradeoffs. What number of deaths will be due to slower progress due to needing to comply with whatever the NTSB believes will save lives?
- fasteddie31003 6y ago
  It's a theme I notice across society. We no longer are consequentialists. We value the means over then ends. I believe this switch in ethics will hurt our society in the long run.
  - Guzba 6y ago
    Isn't 'The ends justify the means' the argument of every villain ever? Unrelated to this Tesla stuff, it seems reasonable to observe that the means do actually matter.
    - rhino369 6y ago
      But it shouldn't be just a villain argument. Sometimes the ends justify the means and sometimes they don't. Depends--entirety--on what the ends and the means are and the relationship between the two. But the end to Telsa throwing out unreliable Not-Even-Close-to-FULL-SELF-DRIVING is to sell cars--not to usher in a glorious era without traffic collisions.
    - hoseja 6y ago
      Villains are those the media makers want you to dislike. Try sometimes noticing how many "villains" only want to disrupt the status quo, with some murder superficially tacked on for easy moral superiority.
  - donovanian 6y ago
    > We value the means over then ends. I find this hard to square with a large segment of society just matter-of-factly espousing "equity", which is a less obvious way of saying what was expressed in the past as "equality of outcome". Of course, through societies of the past experimenting, it was largely recognized as only possible through systems that end up being miserable and authoritarian. So it's easier to push it again to a new generation under a vague, benign-sounding new term.
perardi 6y ago
On the one hand: caveat emptor, you should study the manual and docs before you engage the limited automatic driving system on your car. On the other hand: calling something “Full Self-Driving”, when it is in fact definitely not fully self-driving, kind of flies in the face of the obvious plain text reading of the phrase “Full Self-Driving”.
- airhead969 6y ago
  What is really important in the world of doublespeak [that is, marketing] is the ability to lie, whether knowingly or unconsciously, and to get away with it; and the ability to use lies and choose and shape facts selectively, blocking out those that don’t fit an agenda or program. - Edward S. Herman
- IshKebab 6y ago
  "You should study the manual before you use this potentially deadly system" is about the dumbest way to design a potentially deadly system ever. Decades of experience has repeatedly taught that people are not perfect robots that always read manuals, and if you design your system under the assumption that they are then it is you that is at fault, not them. There's a reason we have safety interlocks and dead man switches and seat belts and helmets and ... It's no use having a manual that says "do not open the microwave door while it is running".
  - sokoloff 6y ago
    > You should study the manual before you use this potentially deadly system is about the dumbest way to design a potentially deadly system ever. That’s exactly how the manual/pilot operating handbook and supplements for most airplane autopilots (and airplanes) read.
    - 6gvONxR4sf7o 6y ago
      So should we start having drivers license requirements as hard as pilot license requirements? If not, then their manuals aren’t so comparable.
CrazyCatDog 6y ago
We need an infrastructure architect here in the us. The bus I commute on went under, and I can’t be trusted to drive 120 miles a day and keep my speed in check. I started looking at the most automated rides I could find (Tesla is leagues ahead if I’m not mistaken), and I’m still... driving. I for one, would be more than happy to prolong my commute, on a dedicated, reduced speed lane, if it meant I could sit in the back seat and work. The belief that we’ll incrementally get to level 5 besides human drivers on the extant infrastructure (lanes) is very misplaced. Fingers crossed that the feds can develop a roadmap (sorry!) to support the transition from level 2 to level 5. It will not happen on open roadways—lidar or not!
- random5634 6y ago
  I've thought this would be great for longer runs. Put a wire in the road or something for the vehicles to follow. Once you are on the wire some protocol for merge points (also marked on the wire) etc.
  - CrazyCatDog 6y ago
    This is one of the options, have radar on board pointing down to follow the line, sensors are each end of the car...
- zapita 6y ago
  You’re in luck. The Democratic majority in US congress has just announced yesterday that their next priority after passing the American Rescue Act will be a national infrastructure plan. https://twitter.com/hugolowell/status/1370488211034755072 https://twitter.com/hugolowell/status/1370488211034755072
  - throwawayboise 6y ago
    Like, "shovel ready jobs" ?
    - zapita 6y ago
hartator 6y ago
Can’t help to notice the sudden hate of the administration for anything Elon Musk related since the change of administration.
- throwawaysea 6y ago
  Something strange I have noticed in the last couple years on leftist social media is the contempt harbored by some for Musk. I can’t quite place it but it feels like a mix of envy and a hatred of success, in part because he seems like proof that capitalism works. I think the emphasis on his character flaws - which we all have - is disproportionate and frankly totally irrelevant considering the scale of his achievements. But he is a centrist not a progressive, he solves problems within the framework of capitalism, and he has an aggressive disregard for the norms of society. That makes him a target for those who are ideologically committed, dislike market driven economies, and favor big government/centralized restrictions. Those sentiments have increasingly bled into the Democratic Party as it has lurched leftward. I’m not sure if this is it, but I wouldn’t be surprised to see this administration try to reign him in. And when it happens, I wonder how news media and society will perceive it. Will they compare it to the relationship between China and Jack Ma? Or will they view these actions as virtuous, moral, and therefore justified?
  - worik 6y ago
    "mix of envy and a hatred of success" No. It is distrust of such a erratic self loving obsessive fool. Yes he is very smart, and is capable of assembling teams of fantastic engineers. But he cannot shut up. If it is tweeting jokes about taking Tesla private, slandering peopel who are doing the dangerous work and do not want his foolish interference (pedo guy), advocating (Dog help us!) Bitcoin. The lawsuits against whistle blowers. And here: his tolerance of fatal failures in his technology in favour of marketing and cash flow. "aggressive disregard for the norms of society": If it were thought through and considered it would not be such a problem. If he were less intelligent, less driven, it would be less of a problem. He is a fool. But a fool with a big stick. And that is a very dangerous thing
    - 6y ago
throwawaysea 6y ago
This feels like the same flawed catastrophizing logic I see with anti-car movements like Vision Zero or discussions about coronavirus lockdowns - emphasis on negative outcomes and fear mongering without consideration of the positives or benefits that we are trading off against. Driving is a great convenience that saves us time by getting us directly from point A to point B quickly. It has a low rate of serious injuries and fatalities. The unregulated driver assistance tech from Tesla may have flaws and drawbacks that result in some rate of injuries and fatalities, but overall it reduces the rate of negative outcomes tremendously. Isn’t that proof enough that it’s a net positive? Why is regulation here a good thing when it may increase costs and inhibit the fast path to innovation we get otherwise? To me this sounds like an unproven and spurious claim that regulation will offer more benefit relative to letting a company like Tesla innovate freely. I don’t buy it, and it feels like they’re trying to fix a problem that doesn’t exist.
- AndrewDucker 6y ago
  "but overall it reduces the rate of negative outcomes tremendously" Do you have a citation for that?
  - bhupy 6y ago
    I'm not the GP, but I think they're referring to: https://cleantechnica.com/2020/08/01/tesla-autopilot-accidents-1-out-of-4530000-miles-us-average-1-out-of-479000-miles/ https://cleantechnica.com/2020/08/01/tesla-autopilot-acciden...
    - AndrewDucker 6y ago
      Thank you, that's very informative!
    - 6gvONxR4sf7o 6y ago
      That’s a comparison that would get any data scientist fired (or a marketer promoted). It’s not remotely apples to apples.
new_realist 6y ago
You can have self-driving progress without lax safety practices; look at Waymo, which is way ahead of Tesla. Tesla chooses not to behave ethically for marketing and cash flow reasons.
- H8crilA 6y ago
  You mean ego reasons. On some earnings call some analyst asked Elon if he would add LIDAR to the cars even if it costed literally nothing. "Nah, hmm, no. We would not.".
arminiusreturns 6y ago
I like Tesla, but... good. Having worked in the autonomous industry and seeing "how the sausage is really made" is scary as fuck. One thing to keep in mind, is thats its not just the feds, as you will notice testing is done in certain states that have less regulation (read: governors hands got greased) Ill leave you with one insight into the sausage factory to contemplate. I told a c-level we needed a code review, and he balked, saying something to the effect of "Do you know how much that costs, how long it takes, and how hard it is?! No" This company has vehicles on public roads already!...
- xnx 6y ago
  From what I've read there's Waymo and then there's everybody else.
- andrekandre 6y ago
  "Do you know how much that costs, how long it takes, and how hard it is?! No" This company has vehicles on public roads already!... this is why imo "just let the market figure it out" is not always the answer to every problem...
  - nyx_ 6y ago
    You statists are so silly. Obviously, we simply need to wait until the vehicles have killed several thousand people. Demand will decrease until it's no longer profitable for the manufacturer to operate. Another public health crisis solved by the invisible hand.
    - Spooky23 6y ago
      Sounds more like Adam Smith’s invisible finger
  - WalterBright 6y ago
    NASA has crashes, too.
    - 6y ago
ablekh 6y ago
I don't understand why Tesla has been and still is allowed to use the term Full Self Driving (FSD) to imply, that is advertise, something that clearly is not and will not be in the near(est) future. Where is FTC, which is supposed to protect and enforce truth in advertising in the U.S. (https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/media-resources/truth-advertising https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/media-resources/truth-advert...)? Especially considering that relevant false advertising (in terms of the naming / use of the FSD term, not the actual feature set) clearly can negatively affect the driver's judgement on manually controlling a car in various situations and, thus, ultimately, the safety of the driver and passengers.
- omgwtfbyobbq 6y ago
  Probably because of the small print/legalese. The currently enabled features require active driver supervision and do not make the vehicle autonomous. The activation and use of these features are dependent on achieving reliability far in excess of human drivers as demonstrated by billions of miles of experience, as well as regulatory approval, which may take longer in some jurisdictions. As these self-driving features evolve, your car will be continuously upgraded through over-the-air software updates.
  - ablekh 6y ago
    I understand it. That is why I have emphasized above ("in terms of the naming / use of the FSD term, not the actual feature set") that, regardless of the small print / legalese / disclaimers / clarifications etc., I believe that using confusing and not matching current capabilities terms should not be allowed. I might be wrong (as I'm not a lawyer), but I think that it is well within FTC's jurisdiction and power to enforce both truthfulness and clarity of advertising in the U.S.
    - saganus 6y ago
      I wonder if they could try to switch to something like "Fully-assisted Self Driving" to keep the original FSD accronym, if the term ends up being regulated.
ipsocannibal 6y ago
Having driven a Model Y and a Model 3 I can say that until Tesla removes that huge ass distraction magnet touchscreen from their vehicles I won't buy one. In order to determine anything about the status of the vehicle or change a setting you have to train all of your attention off of the road and onto an overly complicated cellphone interface. Autopliot is an optional feature, that damn tablet is not. Adding a simple HUD that comes standard on most Mazda's would be a huge improvement in safety.
- airhead969 6y ago
  There's something to be said for manual switches and gauges. Another case in point: F-35. Please swipe up and to the left to apply the brakes or draw a peace symbol if you'd like to eject instead of dying. - megacorp UX of the future
- BluSyn 6y ago
  Never going to happen. Some of us are the opposite, I can't stand cars with a thousand nobs and dials that take a 100 page manual to understand. I find the clutter 100x more distracting.
  - jonathankoren 6y ago
    Can you explain how buttons are a distraction? Also, by “distracting”, do you mean that the present of physical knobs prevent you from paying attention to the road?
    - jsight 6y ago
      He can't explain that any more than the OP can explain why having the speedometer slightly to the right is more distracting than hidden behind the steering wheel.
      - ipsocannibal 6y ago
        Sure, looking to right the forces my view away from the direction the vehicle's traveling to see information about that movement. A HUD does not.
impostervt 6y ago
I just test drove a model 3 today. Fun car! I ended up ordering one. But as a software developer myself..there is no WAY I'd let the car drive itself. I'm a pretty decent developer, and maybe Tesla's developers are better, but knowing how many mistakes I make in code...just hell no.
- camjohnson26 6y ago
  The fact that they’re talking about finishing QA weeks before releasing beta FSD software tells me everything I need to know. Watching any random YouTube video of the functionality fills in the gaps.
- kergonath 6y ago
  This. Friends sometimes don’t understand how one can be a nerd and still not want to AI all the things (or electronic voting, for that matter). We know how the sausage is made, and there’s no way I’m trusting developers at a car manufacturer to do things properly. Even in cases where there is a reasonable definition for “properly”.
- alexashka 6y ago
  Wait until you find out how much of society already runs based on code someone wrote. Just don't be one of the free beta testers :) When a new version of anything gets released, I give it a year or two. By that time, stackoverflow answers get magically generated, bugs fixed, articles written and trade-offs articulated.
yawaworht1978 6y ago
Saying any brand is safer than human driving is a huge lie. If we exclude DUI and tired drivers but include difficult terrain(not well marked, heavy rain, covered in snow) or streets like in India or Egypt with very few traffic lights at junctions, then the self driving cars will need permanent human intervention or to be stopped period. Under these circumstances, the human driver will be much less dangerous. I will be less sceptical about fsd when I see elon musk taking a blind fold amd his kids on the rear seats of a fsd Tesla in snow covered new york heavy duty traffic or an unmarked, slippery and snow covered road in a storm with 20feet visibility taking a 5 hr ride. Should not be a big deal for someone who announced a coast to coast trip without intervention. What happened to that anyway..?
- Retric 6y ago
  Except humans do drink and drive. If everyone drove like school buss drivers then US would have 1/10th it’s current mother vehicle fatality rate. But, we don’t so if you’re talking about human drivers you need to look at everything people behind the wheel do from highly defensive driving to getting a BJ while doing 140mph at 2AM. As someone not in a Tesla that’s what’s important to me.
  - bagels 6y ago
    Maybe the question is who it's safer for?
    - Retric 6y ago
      I am not buying their self driving package so as a bystander in the other car it’s statistically safer for me. As to the actual drivers/passengers that’s a more complex question. It’s likely going to continue killing some people who would otherwise survive, but nobody is forcing them to use the system while otherwise safe to drive. On the other hand others will only turn it on when tired etc which is likely where the net benefit comes from.
- xedeon 6y ago
  > Saying any brand is safer than human driving is a huge lie. Can you substantiate this statement with discernible data? We recently did a road trip in Oregon. Even with an older version of autopilot (AP1) on our Model X which only has one front facing camera. The drive with having it engaged while closely supervising was safer. There was really dense fog with long stretches of windy roads. I was having such a hard time that I had to slow down considerably. I was probably were pissing off local drivers behind me. Meanwhile autopilot made quick work of the task without any disengagements. The latest version (AP3) is already considerably better and actually provides practical value.
avsteele 6y ago
There is only one salient question: per-mile is the danger of Tesla's FSD more or less than not using it? All other questions are second order, and almost besides the point unless we have reason to suspect regulation of self-driving will be more efficacious than other safety regs. Now, I've seen stats either way, but this article doesn't even address it. So what are people taking away from it?
- 6gvONxR4sf7o 6y ago
  Per highway mile or per sunshine mile or luxury sedan mile or per what kind of mile driven by whom when and where? You have to be incredibly careful to compare like miles. If you just compare per mile Tesla on autopilot to per mile everything else, it’s a dishonest comparison.
- thebruce87m 6y ago
  For that particular driver If the same amount of people die except it’s nuns and orphan busses instead of drunks and other unsafe drivers then the “good” drivers odds just went the wrong way.
poundofshrimp 6y ago
I think self driving industry just doesn’t have enough real world data to prove or disprove that AI is better at driving cars than humans. The public doesn’t need to trust AI engineers any more so than it needs to trust airplane engineers. At the end of the day, data is what matters.
jsight 6y ago
I think it is great that they are starting to think about this, but I find the approach profoundly disappointing. While it is a bit silly in form at the moment, this test is starting in a much more useful direction, IMO: https://www.thedrive.com/tech/39688/drivers-new-to-automated-assists-more-often-missed-a-giant-teddy-bear-speeding-past-them-study https://www.thedrive.com/tech/39688/drivers-new-to-automated... We all know that there are car accidents every year, and it is no secret that driver inattention is the root cause for a very large percentage of them. But what can be done about them? The NTSB is focusing almost exclusively on driver monitoring while the driver assistance is turned on. But what about when its turned off? And more generally, how do these systems compare against driving without such systems at all? Its clear that the current state is far from perfect, but an overly heavy focus only on failure cases will lead to misleading conclusions.
- Guthur 6y ago
  When a driver fails they are culpable, when an auto pilot fails who is culpable, who loses a license and potentially faces criminal charges? Auto pilot vs human drivers is not apples to apples because of the culpability question imo.
  - hanniabu 6y ago
    Their comment was specifically about when the autopilot is off, so it is apples to apples because bot situation can be treated equally - a person driving a car fully manually.
  - optimiz3 6y ago
    In a plane when an auto pilot fails the pilot is still culpable.
    - foepys 6y ago
      Stop the comparison to planes just because it's named autopilot in both cases. There are always 2 highly trained professionals in a cockpit and both are familiar with emergency situations because they regularly train for it. They are in constant contact with ATC that keeps other planes far away from them. In case of a crash or even a deviation there are entire agencies all over it with sometimes international investigators present. All communication is recorded. A driver is not only alone, they can have very poor skills in general which were last tested 40 years ago. They are on the road with dozens of vehicles around them, tightly packed and often separated by less than a vehicle width between them. If a crash occured there may be a few police officers present that pick up the pieces and fill out forms to satisfy the insurance.
ericd 6y ago
This seems like a pretty key piece: This separation of responsibilities has contributed to a culture gap between the agencies. As the agency responsible for writing regulations, NHTSA has to trade safety off against other considerations like economic costs, the lobbying clout of automakers, and the risk of consumer backlash. In contrast, NTSB's rulings are purely advisory, which frees the agency to doggedly advocate strong safety measures. (NTSB is the one “blasting” Tesla). It’s hard to be completely sympathetic to a system-safety-at-all-costs viewpoint, in that slowing down the development of actual full self driving with superhuman performance by even a year due to increased friction on making changes has severe hidden costs - 38,000 are killed every year in the US alone in car-related incidents, and many more are severely injured with long lasting repercussions. And many of those are in the prime of their lives, so it’s worse than an apples to apples comparison with death counts from many ailments would suggest. I think the NHTSA letting things develop on their own for a bit is actually the smart move here, all things considered. That said, Tesla’s marketing strategy is pretty borderline.
twirlock 6y ago
>democrats win office >all the millennial cringe bloggers start shitting smear pieces and propaganda again and just genetalky being reddit Hm
jquery 6y ago
This is precisely why I bought a Mercedes instead of a Tesla a couple years ago. I don’t trust Tesla with my life and limb, yet.
- xedeon 6y ago
  Interesting take. I'm coming from driving MB. Their driver assist and safety systems have rarely worked and will always trigger false alerts. Tesla on the other hand have actually saved me from a few potential frontal, rear and side swipe accidents. Before I even realized what was happening.
  - jquery 6y ago
    I didn’t get MB for self driving capability. I got Mercedes because when there’s a serious accident, I have a very low risk of death. With Tesla it may be low, but at the time there wasn’t enough data to be sure. Tesla could have been the safest or the car version of the 737 Max. For the sake of my family’s safety I made the conservative choice.
    - xedeon 6y ago
      > I didn’t get MB for self driving capability. I wasn't referring to "self driving" capabilities. I was mainly referencing DISTRONIC PLUS®, Lane keeping assist(LKAS), Automatic emergency braking (AEB) and collision avoidance. We owned 2 MB sedans and an SUV and all had the same issues. > I got Mercedes because when there’s a serious accident, I have a very low risk of death I definitely get where you're coming from. There just isn't enough data available for Tesla yet from the IIHS. At least from their latest report dated May 28, 2020. I hope it comes out soon. What I do know is that the Tesla Model 3 scored high (if not the highest) marks as tested by multiple orgs such as NHTSA [1], Euro NCAP [2,3], IIHS [4]. [1] https://www.nhtsa.gov/vehicle/2020/TESLA/MODEL%2525203/4%252520DR/AWD https://www.nhtsa.gov/vehicle/2020/TESLA/MODEL%2525203/4%252... [2] https://youtu.be/z3cqj5AAP5I?t=27 https://youtu.be/z3cqj5AAP5I?t=27 [3] https://www.euroncap.com/en/press-media/press-releases/euro-ncap-s-best-of-the-best-of-2019/ https://www.euroncap.com/en/press-media/press-releases/euro-... [4] https://www.iihs.org/ratings/vehicle/tesla/model-3-4-door-sedan/2019 https://www.iihs.org/ratings/vehicle/tesla/model-3-4-door-se... The Tesla Model X was also "The First SUV To Receive A Perfect Crash Test Rating" https://mashable.com/2017/06/13/tesla-model-x-safety-rating/ https://mashable.com/2017/06/13/tesla-model-x-safety-rating/ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1hnctrWc_g4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1hnctrWc_g4
elzbardico 6y ago
This is obviously political. Elon has been too much vocal in the last year. This is not good for business

202 points by AndrewDucker 6y ago

Tesla usually goes for most technically advanced solution. But when it comes to driver alertness monitoring they pick the easiest to fool solution. I suspect it's intentional. Eye tracking would prevent their users from misusing autopilot. It would kill the hype.

11thEarlOfMar 6y ago
The latest FSD Beta monitors driver alertness with cabin camera. Tesla has rejected beta testers who did not pay enough attention: https://twitter.com/TSLAgang/status/1370524705950724097 https://twitter.com/TSLAgang/status/1370524705950724097
mcot2 6y ago
The latest FSD beta is now confirmed to be using the internal camera to monitor for alertness and Elon has just announced via twitter that they kicked people out of the Beta for misuse.
- camjohnson26 6y ago
  I’m guessing “misuse” means people who posted videos on YouTube.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
threeseed 6y ago
> Tesla usually goes for most technically advanced solution. They don't have LiDAR. So this statement is clearly false.
- nickik 6y ago
  An easy argument can be made that advanced vision system is technologically more advanced.

11thEarlOfMar 6y ago

> Under then-President Donald Trump, NHTSA largely let automakers do what they liked when it came to advanced driver-assistance systems (ADAS) and prototype driverless vehicles. I have questions. Were the NHTSA's policies regarding ADAS different under Obama than Trump? Are they different under Biden than Trump? If so, what changed? If not, why mention it?

Robotbeat 6y ago
Not significantly from what I can tell.
NoSorryCannot 6y ago
Written policies don't change that quickly. Policing, aka the execution of those policies, can be swayed by firings, appointments, executive order, and political pressure. Trump used these avenues more than most.
prepend 6y ago
> If not, why mention it? More hate, more clicks. People hate Trump. Therefore editors want more clicks.

mcot2 6y ago

I don’t think the NTSB is properly weighing the safety benefits of these systems. They seem to be myopically focused on a few crashes/incidents. Cars are not planes. For better or worse we as the public have a lot more tolerance for car crashes than plane crashes. I don’t think there is enough evidence that the current ADAS systems are better or worse than human drivers at this point. I’d say the best way to improve the situation is not to have heavy handed regulation at this stage and let the technology play out.

hahahahe 6y ago
That’s an interesting take. So you think we shouldn’t have regulations on this new unproven technology where the government poured billions upon billions to help develop. And that’s fine. Just don’t take gov’t money then.
- prophesi 6y ago
  Not that there shouldn't be any regulations, but that the direction regulations are going in are pretty heavy-handed when you consider how accepting as a society we are to have thousands of car accidents every single day, and thousands of car-related deaths every year (in the USA at least). Self-driving cars are already much safer than human-driven cars.
  - hahahahe 6y ago
    No they’re not safer than human-driven cars. Not enough data to claim that. And how can you even collect that data when we don’t even have fully automated cars in the wild?
    - prophesi 6y ago
      There's plenty of data on it. Safety is _the_ number one thing people are paying attention to in self-driving cars.
      - 6y ago

mhb 6y ago

As usual, and as exemplified by virtually every decision in the Covid handling debacle, no mention of cost/benefit tradeoffs. What number of deaths will be due to slower progress due to needing to comply with whatever the NTSB believes will save lives?

fasteddie31003 6y ago
It's a theme I notice across society. We no longer are consequentialists. We value the means over then ends. I believe this switch in ethics will hurt our society in the long run.
- Guzba 6y ago
  Isn't 'The ends justify the means' the argument of every villain ever? Unrelated to this Tesla stuff, it seems reasonable to observe that the means do actually matter.
  - rhino369 6y ago
    But it shouldn't be just a villain argument. Sometimes the ends justify the means and sometimes they don't. Depends--entirety--on what the ends and the means are and the relationship between the two. But the end to Telsa throwing out unreliable Not-Even-Close-to-FULL-SELF-DRIVING is to sell cars--not to usher in a glorious era without traffic collisions.
  - hoseja 6y ago
    Villains are those the media makers want you to dislike. Try sometimes noticing how many "villains" only want to disrupt the status quo, with some murder superficially tacked on for easy moral superiority.
- donovanian 6y ago
  > We value the means over then ends. I find this hard to square with a large segment of society just matter-of-factly espousing "equity", which is a less obvious way of saying what was expressed in the past as "equality of outcome". Of course, through societies of the past experimenting, it was largely recognized as only possible through systems that end up being miserable and authoritarian. So it's easier to push it again to a new generation under a vague, benign-sounding new term.

perardi 6y ago

On the one hand: caveat emptor, you should study the manual and docs before you engage the limited automatic driving system on your car. On the other hand: calling something “Full Self-Driving”, when it is in fact definitely not fully self-driving, kind of flies in the face of the obvious plain text reading of the phrase “Full Self-Driving”.

airhead969 6y ago
What is really important in the world of doublespeak [that is, marketing] is the ability to lie, whether knowingly or unconsciously, and to get away with it; and the ability to use lies and choose and shape facts selectively, blocking out those that don’t fit an agenda or program. - Edward S. Herman
IshKebab 6y ago
"You should study the manual before you use this potentially deadly system" is about the dumbest way to design a potentially deadly system ever. Decades of experience has repeatedly taught that people are not perfect robots that always read manuals, and if you design your system under the assumption that they are then it is you that is at fault, not them. There's a reason we have safety interlocks and dead man switches and seat belts and helmets and ... It's no use having a manual that says "do not open the microwave door while it is running".
- sokoloff 6y ago
  > You should study the manual before you use this potentially deadly system is about the dumbest way to design a potentially deadly system ever. That’s exactly how the manual/pilot operating handbook and supplements for most airplane autopilots (and airplanes) read.
  - 6gvONxR4sf7o 6y ago
    So should we start having drivers license requirements as hard as pilot license requirements? If not, then their manuals aren’t so comparable.

CrazyCatDog 6y ago

We need an infrastructure architect here in the us. The bus I commute on went under, and I can’t be trusted to drive 120 miles a day and keep my speed in check. I started looking at the most automated rides I could find (Tesla is leagues ahead if I’m not mistaken), and I’m still... driving. I for one, would be more than happy to prolong my commute, on a dedicated, reduced speed lane, if it meant I could sit in the back seat and work. The belief that we’ll incrementally get to level 5 besides human drivers on the extant infrastructure (lanes) is very misplaced. Fingers crossed that the feds can develop a roadmap (sorry!) to support the transition from level 2 to level 5. It will not happen on open roadways—lidar or not!

random5634 6y ago
I've thought this would be great for longer runs. Put a wire in the road or something for the vehicles to follow. Once you are on the wire some protocol for merge points (also marked on the wire) etc.
- CrazyCatDog 6y ago
  This is one of the options, have radar on board pointing down to follow the line, sensors are each end of the car...
zapita 6y ago
You’re in luck. The Democratic majority in US congress has just announced yesterday that their next priority after passing the American Rescue Act will be a national infrastructure plan. https://twitter.com/hugolowell/status/1370488211034755072 https://twitter.com/hugolowell/status/1370488211034755072
- throwawayboise 6y ago
  Like, "shovel ready jobs" ?
  - zapita 6y ago

hartator 6y ago

Can’t help to notice the sudden hate of the administration for anything Elon Musk related since the change of administration.

throwawaysea 6y ago
Something strange I have noticed in the last couple years on leftist social media is the contempt harbored by some for Musk. I can’t quite place it but it feels like a mix of envy and a hatred of success, in part because he seems like proof that capitalism works. I think the emphasis on his character flaws - which we all have - is disproportionate and frankly totally irrelevant considering the scale of his achievements. But he is a centrist not a progressive, he solves problems within the framework of capitalism, and he has an aggressive disregard for the norms of society. That makes him a target for those who are ideologically committed, dislike market driven economies, and favor big government/centralized restrictions. Those sentiments have increasingly bled into the Democratic Party as it has lurched leftward. I’m not sure if this is it, but I wouldn’t be surprised to see this administration try to reign him in. And when it happens, I wonder how news media and society will perceive it. Will they compare it to the relationship between China and Jack Ma? Or will they view these actions as virtuous, moral, and therefore justified?
- worik 6y ago
  "mix of envy and a hatred of success" No. It is distrust of such a erratic self loving obsessive fool. Yes he is very smart, and is capable of assembling teams of fantastic engineers. But he cannot shut up. If it is tweeting jokes about taking Tesla private, slandering peopel who are doing the dangerous work and do not want his foolish interference (pedo guy), advocating (Dog help us!) Bitcoin. The lawsuits against whistle blowers. And here: his tolerance of fatal failures in his technology in favour of marketing and cash flow. "aggressive disregard for the norms of society": If it were thought through and considered it would not be such a problem. If he were less intelligent, less driven, it would be less of a problem. He is a fool. But a fool with a big stick. And that is a very dangerous thing
  - 6y ago

throwawaysea 6y ago

This feels like the same flawed catastrophizing logic I see with anti-car movements like Vision Zero or discussions about coronavirus lockdowns - emphasis on negative outcomes and fear mongering without consideration of the positives or benefits that we are trading off against. Driving is a great convenience that saves us time by getting us directly from point A to point B quickly. It has a low rate of serious injuries and fatalities. The unregulated driver assistance tech from Tesla may have flaws and drawbacks that result in some rate of injuries and fatalities, but overall it reduces the rate of negative outcomes tremendously. Isn’t that proof enough that it’s a net positive? Why is regulation here a good thing when it may increase costs and inhibit the fast path to innovation we get otherwise? To me this sounds like an unproven and spurious claim that regulation will offer more benefit relative to letting a company like Tesla innovate freely. I don’t buy it, and it feels like they’re trying to fix a problem that doesn’t exist.

AndrewDucker 6y ago
"but overall it reduces the rate of negative outcomes tremendously" Do you have a citation for that?
- bhupy 6y ago
  I'm not the GP, but I think they're referring to: https://cleantechnica.com/2020/08/01/tesla-autopilot-accidents-1-out-of-4530000-miles-us-average-1-out-of-479000-miles/ https://cleantechnica.com/2020/08/01/tesla-autopilot-acciden...
  - AndrewDucker 6y ago
    Thank you, that's very informative!
  - 6gvONxR4sf7o 6y ago
    That’s a comparison that would get any data scientist fired (or a marketer promoted). It’s not remotely apples to apples.

new_realist 6y ago

You can have self-driving progress without lax safety practices; look at Waymo, which is way ahead of Tesla. Tesla chooses not to behave ethically for marketing and cash flow reasons.

H8crilA 6y ago
You mean ego reasons. On some earnings call some analyst asked Elon if he would add LIDAR to the cars even if it costed literally nothing. "Nah, hmm, no. We would not.".

arminiusreturns 6y ago

I like Tesla, but... good. Having worked in the autonomous industry and seeing "how the sausage is really made" is scary as fuck. One thing to keep in mind, is thats its not just the feds, as you will notice testing is done in certain states that have less regulation (read: governors hands got greased) Ill leave you with one insight into the sausage factory to contemplate. I told a c-level we needed a code review, and he balked, saying something to the effect of "Do you know how much that costs, how long it takes, and how hard it is?! No" This company has vehicles on public roads already!...

xnx 6y ago
From what I've read there's Waymo and then there's everybody else.
andrekandre 6y ago
"Do you know how much that costs, how long it takes, and how hard it is?! No" This company has vehicles on public roads already!... this is why imo "just let the market figure it out" is not always the answer to every problem...
- nyx_ 6y ago
  You statists are so silly. Obviously, we simply need to wait until the vehicles have killed several thousand people. Demand will decrease until it's no longer profitable for the manufacturer to operate. Another public health crisis solved by the invisible hand.
  - Spooky23 6y ago
    Sounds more like Adam Smith’s invisible finger
- WalterBright 6y ago
  NASA has crashes, too.
  - 6y ago

ablekh 6y ago

I don't understand why Tesla has been and still is allowed to use the term Full Self Driving (FSD) to imply, that is advertise, something that clearly is not and will not be in the near(est) future. Where is FTC, which is supposed to protect and enforce truth in advertising in the U.S. (https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/media-resources/truth-advertising https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/media-resources/truth-advert...)? Especially considering that relevant false advertising (in terms of the naming / use of the FSD term, not the actual feature set) clearly can negatively affect the driver's judgement on manually controlling a car in various situations and, thus, ultimately, the safety of the driver and passengers.

omgwtfbyobbq 6y ago
Probably because of the small print/legalese. The currently enabled features require active driver supervision and do not make the vehicle autonomous. The activation and use of these features are dependent on achieving reliability far in excess of human drivers as demonstrated by billions of miles of experience, as well as regulatory approval, which may take longer in some jurisdictions. As these self-driving features evolve, your car will be continuously upgraded through over-the-air software updates.
- ablekh 6y ago
  I understand it. That is why I have emphasized above ("in terms of the naming / use of the FSD term, not the actual feature set") that, regardless of the small print / legalese / disclaimers / clarifications etc., I believe that using confusing and not matching current capabilities terms should not be allowed. I might be wrong (as I'm not a lawyer), but I think that it is well within FTC's jurisdiction and power to enforce both truthfulness and clarity of advertising in the U.S.
  - saganus 6y ago
    I wonder if they could try to switch to something like "Fully-assisted Self Driving" to keep the original FSD accronym, if the term ends up being regulated.

ipsocannibal 6y ago

Having driven a Model Y and a Model 3 I can say that until Tesla removes that huge ass distraction magnet touchscreen from their vehicles I won't buy one. In order to determine anything about the status of the vehicle or change a setting you have to train all of your attention off of the road and onto an overly complicated cellphone interface. Autopliot is an optional feature, that damn tablet is not. Adding a simple HUD that comes standard on most Mazda's would be a huge improvement in safety.

airhead969 6y ago
There's something to be said for manual switches and gauges. Another case in point: F-35. Please swipe up and to the left to apply the brakes or draw a peace symbol if you'd like to eject instead of dying. - megacorp UX of the future
BluSyn 6y ago
Never going to happen. Some of us are the opposite, I can't stand cars with a thousand nobs and dials that take a 100 page manual to understand. I find the clutter 100x more distracting.
- jonathankoren 6y ago
  Can you explain how buttons are a distraction? Also, by “distracting”, do you mean that the present of physical knobs prevent you from paying attention to the road?
  - jsight 6y ago
    He can't explain that any more than the OP can explain why having the speedometer slightly to the right is more distracting than hidden behind the steering wheel.
    - ipsocannibal 6y ago
      Sure, looking to right the forces my view away from the direction the vehicle's traveling to see information about that movement. A HUD does not.

impostervt 6y ago

I just test drove a model 3 today. Fun car! I ended up ordering one. But as a software developer myself..there is no WAY I'd let the car drive itself. I'm a pretty decent developer, and maybe Tesla's developers are better, but knowing how many mistakes I make in code...just hell no.

camjohnson26 6y ago
The fact that they’re talking about finishing QA weeks before releasing beta FSD software tells me everything I need to know. Watching any random YouTube video of the functionality fills in the gaps.
kergonath 6y ago
This. Friends sometimes don’t understand how one can be a nerd and still not want to AI all the things (or electronic voting, for that matter). We know how the sausage is made, and there’s no way I’m trusting developers at a car manufacturer to do things properly. Even in cases where there is a reasonable definition for “properly”.
alexashka 6y ago
Wait until you find out how much of society already runs based on code someone wrote. Just don't be one of the free beta testers :) When a new version of anything gets released, I give it a year or two. By that time, stackoverflow answers get magically generated, bugs fixed, articles written and trade-offs articulated.

yawaworht1978 6y ago

Saying any brand is safer than human driving is a huge lie. If we exclude DUI and tired drivers but include difficult terrain(not well marked, heavy rain, covered in snow) or streets like in India or Egypt with very few traffic lights at junctions, then the self driving cars will need permanent human intervention or to be stopped period. Under these circumstances, the human driver will be much less dangerous. I will be less sceptical about fsd when I see elon musk taking a blind fold amd his kids on the rear seats of a fsd Tesla in snow covered new york heavy duty traffic or an unmarked, slippery and snow covered road in a storm with 20feet visibility taking a 5 hr ride. Should not be a big deal for someone who announced a coast to coast trip without intervention. What happened to that anyway..?

Retric 6y ago
Except humans do drink and drive. If everyone drove like school buss drivers then US would have 1/10th it’s current mother vehicle fatality rate. But, we don’t so if you’re talking about human drivers you need to look at everything people behind the wheel do from highly defensive driving to getting a BJ while doing 140mph at 2AM. As someone not in a Tesla that’s what’s important to me.
- bagels 6y ago
  Maybe the question is who it's safer for?
  - Retric 6y ago
    I am not buying their self driving package so as a bystander in the other car it’s statistically safer for me. As to the actual drivers/passengers that’s a more complex question. It’s likely going to continue killing some people who would otherwise survive, but nobody is forcing them to use the system while otherwise safe to drive. On the other hand others will only turn it on when tired etc which is likely where the net benefit comes from.
xedeon 6y ago
> Saying any brand is safer than human driving is a huge lie. Can you substantiate this statement with discernible data? We recently did a road trip in Oregon. Even with an older version of autopilot (AP1) on our Model X which only has one front facing camera. The drive with having it engaged while closely supervising was safer. There was really dense fog with long stretches of windy roads. I was having such a hard time that I had to slow down considerably. I was probably were pissing off local drivers behind me. Meanwhile autopilot made quick work of the task without any disengagements. The latest version (AP3) is already considerably better and actually provides practical value.

avsteele 6y ago

There is only one salient question: per-mile is the danger of Tesla's FSD more or less than not using it? All other questions are second order, and almost besides the point unless we have reason to suspect regulation of self-driving will be more efficacious than other safety regs. Now, I've seen stats either way, but this article doesn't even address it. So what are people taking away from it?

6gvONxR4sf7o 6y ago
Per highway mile or per sunshine mile or luxury sedan mile or per what kind of mile driven by whom when and where? You have to be incredibly careful to compare like miles. If you just compare per mile Tesla on autopilot to per mile everything else, it’s a dishonest comparison.
thebruce87m 6y ago
For that particular driver If the same amount of people die except it’s nuns and orphan busses instead of drunks and other unsafe drivers then the “good” drivers odds just went the wrong way.

poundofshrimp 6y ago

I think self driving industry just doesn’t have enough real world data to prove or disprove that AI is better at driving cars than humans. The public doesn’t need to trust AI engineers any more so than it needs to trust airplane engineers. At the end of the day, data is what matters.

jsight 6y ago

I think it is great that they are starting to think about this, but I find the approach profoundly disappointing. While it is a bit silly in form at the moment, this test is starting in a much more useful direction, IMO: https://www.thedrive.com/tech/39688/drivers-new-to-automated-assists-more-often-missed-a-giant-teddy-bear-speeding-past-them-study https://www.thedrive.com/tech/39688/drivers-new-to-automated... We all know that there are car accidents every year, and it is no secret that driver inattention is the root cause for a very large percentage of them. But what can be done about them? The NTSB is focusing almost exclusively on driver monitoring while the driver assistance is turned on. But what about when its turned off? And more generally, how do these systems compare against driving without such systems at all? Its clear that the current state is far from perfect, but an overly heavy focus only on failure cases will lead to misleading conclusions.

Guthur 6y ago
When a driver fails they are culpable, when an auto pilot fails who is culpable, who loses a license and potentially faces criminal charges? Auto pilot vs human drivers is not apples to apples because of the culpability question imo.
- hanniabu 6y ago
  Their comment was specifically about when the autopilot is off, so it is apples to apples because bot situation can be treated equally - a person driving a car fully manually.
- optimiz3 6y ago
  In a plane when an auto pilot fails the pilot is still culpable.
  - foepys 6y ago
    Stop the comparison to planes just because it's named autopilot in both cases. There are always 2 highly trained professionals in a cockpit and both are familiar with emergency situations because they regularly train for it. They are in constant contact with ATC that keeps other planes far away from them. In case of a crash or even a deviation there are entire agencies all over it with sometimes international investigators present. All communication is recorded. A driver is not only alone, they can have very poor skills in general which were last tested 40 years ago. They are on the road with dozens of vehicles around them, tightly packed and often separated by less than a vehicle width between them. If a crash occured there may be a few police officers present that pick up the pieces and fill out forms to satisfy the insurance.

ericd 6y ago

This seems like a pretty key piece: This separation of responsibilities has contributed to a culture gap between the agencies. As the agency responsible for writing regulations, NHTSA has to trade safety off against other considerations like economic costs, the lobbying clout of automakers, and the risk of consumer backlash. In contrast, NTSB's rulings are purely advisory, which frees the agency to doggedly advocate strong safety measures. (NTSB is the one “blasting” Tesla). It’s hard to be completely sympathetic to a system-safety-at-all-costs viewpoint, in that slowing down the development of actual full self driving with superhuman performance by even a year due to increased friction on making changes has severe hidden costs - 38,000 are killed every year in the US alone in car-related incidents, and many more are severely injured with long lasting repercussions. And many of those are in the prime of their lives, so it’s worse than an apples to apples comparison with death counts from many ailments would suggest. I think the NHTSA letting things develop on their own for a bit is actually the smart move here, all things considered. That said, Tesla’s marketing strategy is pretty borderline.

twirlock 6y ago

>democrats win office >all the millennial cringe bloggers start shitting smear pieces and propaganda again and just genetalky being reddit Hm

jquery 6y ago

This is precisely why I bought a Mercedes instead of a Tesla a couple years ago. I don’t trust Tesla with my life and limb, yet.

xedeon 6y ago
Interesting take. I'm coming from driving MB. Their driver assist and safety systems have rarely worked and will always trigger false alerts. Tesla on the other hand have actually saved me from a few potential frontal, rear and side swipe accidents. Before I even realized what was happening.
- jquery 6y ago
  I didn’t get MB for self driving capability. I got Mercedes because when there’s a serious accident, I have a very low risk of death. With Tesla it may be low, but at the time there wasn’t enough data to be sure. Tesla could have been the safest or the car version of the 737 Max. For the sake of my family’s safety I made the conservative choice.
  - xedeon 6y ago
    > I didn’t get MB for self driving capability. I wasn't referring to "self driving" capabilities. I was mainly referencing DISTRONIC PLUS®, Lane keeping assist(LKAS), Automatic emergency braking (AEB) and collision avoidance. We owned 2 MB sedans and an SUV and all had the same issues. > I got Mercedes because when there’s a serious accident, I have a very low risk of death I definitely get where you're coming from. There just isn't enough data available for Tesla yet from the IIHS. At least from their latest report dated May 28, 2020. I hope it comes out soon. What I do know is that the Tesla Model 3 scored high (if not the highest) marks as tested by multiple orgs such as NHTSA [1], Euro NCAP [2,3], IIHS [4]. [1] https://www.nhtsa.gov/vehicle/2020/TESLA/MODEL%2525203/4%252520DR/AWD https://www.nhtsa.gov/vehicle/2020/TESLA/MODEL%2525203/4%252... [2] https://youtu.be/z3cqj5AAP5I?t=27 https://youtu.be/z3cqj5AAP5I?t=27 [3] https://www.euroncap.com/en/press-media/press-releases/euro-ncap-s-best-of-the-best-of-2019/ https://www.euroncap.com/en/press-media/press-releases/euro-... [4] https://www.iihs.org/ratings/vehicle/tesla/model-3-4-door-sedan/2019 https://www.iihs.org/ratings/vehicle/tesla/model-3-4-door-se... The Tesla Model X was also "The First SUV To Receive A Perfect Crash Test Rating" https://mashable.com/2017/06/13/tesla-model-x-safety-rating/ https://mashable.com/2017/06/13/tesla-model-x-safety-rating/ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1hnctrWc_g4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1hnctrWc_g4

elzbardico 6y ago

This is obviously political. Elon has been too much vocal in the last year. This is not good for business