4 ms·

And also: “Mark Herman, Harris County Constable Precinct 4, said evidence including witness statements clearly indicated there was nobody in the driver's seat o

And also: “Mark Herman, Harris County Constable Precinct 4, said evidence including witness statements clearly indicated there was nobody in the driver's seat of the Model S when it crashed into a tree, killing two people, on Saturday night” How is this not a bigger story? Seemingly Elon Musk just straight lied on Twitter about an autopilot death and is refusing to help investigators.

ffggvv 6y ago
everything he says is a lie. especially with regards to autokill. but gets a free pass because of his super genius persona he sells
reasonabl_human 6y ago
It is a big story, and something about it isn’t adding up. Autopilot wouldn’t engage on the road as outlined, and even if it did wouldn’t exceed 35... that plus the driver would’ve had to activate it then leave to the back seat, and ask the passenger to tug the wheel every 15-30 seconds to keep it active. I’ve never tried to leave the drivers seat with autopilot engaged but I doubt it would work. Would be willing to try just to put some of this misinformation surrounding the news to rest. Even if it was engaged, this is a massively human error, not autonomy error. It’s a beta service- you have to hold the wheel and pay attention. It isn’t L5 FSD.
- camjohnson26 6y ago
  Here’s a video of someone not only exiting the driver seat, but exiting the CAR while autopilot is engaged, and almost getting locked out: https://youtu.be/Z_N5zrFJgII https://youtu.be/Z_N5zrFJgII Here’s another video showing autopilot engaging with no lane markings in a neighborhood and setting the target speed too high: https://twitter.com/LyftGyft/status/1383917552762384386?s=20 https://twitter.com/LyftGyft/status/1383917552762384386?s=20
  - reasonabl_human 6y ago
    Thanks for the videos! For the first one: The conclusion as outlined by the producer was that Tesla has implemented restrictions around how autopilot can be used and that it is safe when used correctly. (Someone actually in the seat, holding the wheel, paying attention). He had to jump through a significant number of hoops in a controlled environment to get exiting the car to work. The autopilot disengages when you unbuckle or open the front door, which sounds very reasonable to me. As he stated, idiots are going to be idiots, you can also get out of a moving plane if you try hard enough... Also, he didn’t ‘almost get locked out’, that is an exaggeration. He just observed that the car won’t open the doors while driving. Pretty standard. For the second one: That’s concerning that autopilot would allow you to engage without lane lines at such a high speed. What’s more concerning is that any human would engage it in that situation. You can technically land a small plane with Garmin autopilot systems but it’s really only used for emergencies when a pilot is incapacitated. Should such features be disabled? Or should it be up to the end user to not be an idiot when situationally applying the technology? As all Tesla owners know, this isn’t FSD level 5 and it’s up to the driver to situationally deem the environment safe to use autopilot. Pretty much limited to highways and large multi lane roads at this point. From my experience of ~5k autopilot miles it works very well in those environments. I’d never engage it on a backroad or parking lot etc. even if it ‘let me’. What happened to the men in this recent crash was tragic but easily avoidable.
    - camjohnson26 6y ago
      I see where you’re coming from but have a few major disagreements. First you say that all Tesla owners know this isn’t FSD level 5. The occupants were 70 and 60 years old, I’ve seen plenty of situations of technology blind spots with older acquaintances. That’s why vehicle safety often includes the concept of predictable abuse, features that will predictably be abused. Pair this crash with all the TikTok videos with no one driving and even Elon driving hands free and claiming self driving is imminent. And I think it’s pedantic to say he didn’t almost get locked out, not sure what else you would call not being able to open the door. If that other car wasn’t there he would have had to climb through the window.
- Decker87 6y ago
  As long as it's called "autopilot" it's going to be a problem.
  - reasonabl_human 6y ago
    I disagree. It is an autopilot that works well when applied correctly, it is not generally viable full self driving which is what I think people tend to hear when they read ‘autopilot’. Wikipedia: “An autopilot is a system used to control the trajectory of an aircraft, marine craft or spacecraft without requiring constant manual control by a human operator. Autopilots do not replace human operators. Instead, the autopilot assists the operator's control of the vehicle, allowing the operator to focus on broader aspects of operations.” The problem is when people don’t understand the difference between an autopilot driver assist system and a fully autonomous vehicle.
    - alphabetting 6y ago
      would you agree though that "full self driving" is not such a great name for a feature which isn't full self driving? Telsa's are rated as very safe cars, but this marketing tactic is definitely not.
      - reasonabl_human 6y ago
        Yes, I very much agree with that. ‘FSD Capability’ in its functional form doesn’t exist yet, people are buying it in advance to access beta autopilot enhancements which are then problematically referred to as ‘FSD’ colloquially. It would be more informative for Tesla to clarify these or change the naming convention... but it’s a convenient hype angle, probably why they keep this naming setup. The issue seems to be when people think that these limited beta enhancements of autopilot are FSD, when in fact, nobody has FSD yet. Tesla doesn’t do marketing in a traditional sense so I don’t think it’s a marketing failure but considering the dangers of confusing this FSD sentiment it should be clarified abundantly when signing up, signing waivers, something like that...
Jordrok 6y ago
Even if he happens to be telling the truth here and they have pulled back some data which shows that Autopilot didn't play any role in the crash, this kind of low-info twitter trolling isn't a good look. By not specifying exactly what data they were able to recover (if any) and coordinating with the investigators, he's raising many more questions than he's answering. It's a very Trumpian response to bad press that leaves a bad taste in my mouth, even in a situation where I'm inclined to believe that the initial reports are missing some key facts.
rasz 6y ago
1 didnt refuse anything 2 most likely didnt lie - car started in autopilot .. and disengaged after few seconds driving into the tree while _not on autopilot_
avereveard 6y ago
There's a non zero chance that autopilot disengaged after n second without input on the wheel, leaving the now out of control car to crash "without the autopilot engaged at the time of impact", which he going to spin as much as he can
- snypher 6y ago
  This is my reasoning on why Tesla can claim so many accident-free miles, if it gets too sketchy for the CPU it throws up it's hands and says 'you drive pls'

ffggvv 6y ago

everything he says is a lie. especially with regards to autokill. but gets a free pass because of his super genius persona he sells

reasonabl_human 6y ago

It is a big story, and something about it isn’t adding up. Autopilot wouldn’t engage on the road as outlined, and even if it did wouldn’t exceed 35... that plus the driver would’ve had to activate it then leave to the back seat, and ask the passenger to tug the wheel every 15-30 seconds to keep it active. I’ve never tried to leave the drivers seat with autopilot engaged but I doubt it would work. Would be willing to try just to put some of this misinformation surrounding the news to rest. Even if it was engaged, this is a massively human error, not autonomy error. It’s a beta service- you have to hold the wheel and pay attention. It isn’t L5 FSD.

camjohnson26 6y ago
Here’s a video of someone not only exiting the driver seat, but exiting the CAR while autopilot is engaged, and almost getting locked out: https://youtu.be/Z_N5zrFJgII https://youtu.be/Z_N5zrFJgII Here’s another video showing autopilot engaging with no lane markings in a neighborhood and setting the target speed too high: https://twitter.com/LyftGyft/status/1383917552762384386?s=20 https://twitter.com/LyftGyft/status/1383917552762384386?s=20
- reasonabl_human 6y ago
  Thanks for the videos! For the first one: The conclusion as outlined by the producer was that Tesla has implemented restrictions around how autopilot can be used and that it is safe when used correctly. (Someone actually in the seat, holding the wheel, paying attention). He had to jump through a significant number of hoops in a controlled environment to get exiting the car to work. The autopilot disengages when you unbuckle or open the front door, which sounds very reasonable to me. As he stated, idiots are going to be idiots, you can also get out of a moving plane if you try hard enough... Also, he didn’t ‘almost get locked out’, that is an exaggeration. He just observed that the car won’t open the doors while driving. Pretty standard. For the second one: That’s concerning that autopilot would allow you to engage without lane lines at such a high speed. What’s more concerning is that any human would engage it in that situation. You can technically land a small plane with Garmin autopilot systems but it’s really only used for emergencies when a pilot is incapacitated. Should such features be disabled? Or should it be up to the end user to not be an idiot when situationally applying the technology? As all Tesla owners know, this isn’t FSD level 5 and it’s up to the driver to situationally deem the environment safe to use autopilot. Pretty much limited to highways and large multi lane roads at this point. From my experience of ~5k autopilot miles it works very well in those environments. I’d never engage it on a backroad or parking lot etc. even if it ‘let me’. What happened to the men in this recent crash was tragic but easily avoidable.
  - camjohnson26 6y ago
    I see where you’re coming from but have a few major disagreements. First you say that all Tesla owners know this isn’t FSD level 5. The occupants were 70 and 60 years old, I’ve seen plenty of situations of technology blind spots with older acquaintances. That’s why vehicle safety often includes the concept of predictable abuse, features that will predictably be abused. Pair this crash with all the TikTok videos with no one driving and even Elon driving hands free and claiming self driving is imminent. And I think it’s pedantic to say he didn’t almost get locked out, not sure what else you would call not being able to open the door. If that other car wasn’t there he would have had to climb through the window.
Decker87 6y ago
As long as it's called "autopilot" it's going to be a problem.
- reasonabl_human 6y ago
  I disagree. It is an autopilot that works well when applied correctly, it is not generally viable full self driving which is what I think people tend to hear when they read ‘autopilot’. Wikipedia: “An autopilot is a system used to control the trajectory of an aircraft, marine craft or spacecraft without requiring constant manual control by a human operator. Autopilots do not replace human operators. Instead, the autopilot assists the operator's control of the vehicle, allowing the operator to focus on broader aspects of operations.” The problem is when people don’t understand the difference between an autopilot driver assist system and a fully autonomous vehicle.
  - alphabetting 6y ago
    would you agree though that "full self driving" is not such a great name for a feature which isn't full self driving? Telsa's are rated as very safe cars, but this marketing tactic is definitely not.
    - reasonabl_human 6y ago
      Yes, I very much agree with that. ‘FSD Capability’ in its functional form doesn’t exist yet, people are buying it in advance to access beta autopilot enhancements which are then problematically referred to as ‘FSD’ colloquially. It would be more informative for Tesla to clarify these or change the naming convention... but it’s a convenient hype angle, probably why they keep this naming setup. The issue seems to be when people think that these limited beta enhancements of autopilot are FSD, when in fact, nobody has FSD yet. Tesla doesn’t do marketing in a traditional sense so I don’t think it’s a marketing failure but considering the dangers of confusing this FSD sentiment it should be clarified abundantly when signing up, signing waivers, something like that...

Jordrok 6y ago

Even if he happens to be telling the truth here and they have pulled back some data which shows that Autopilot didn't play any role in the crash, this kind of low-info twitter trolling isn't a good look. By not specifying exactly what data they were able to recover (if any) and coordinating with the investigators, he's raising many more questions than he's answering. It's a very Trumpian response to bad press that leaves a bad taste in my mouth, even in a situation where I'm inclined to believe that the initial reports are missing some key facts.

rasz 6y ago

1 didnt refuse anything 2 most likely didnt lie - car started in autopilot .. and disengaged after few seconds driving into the tree while _not on autopilot_

avereveard 6y ago

There's a non zero chance that autopilot disengaged after n second without input on the wheel, leaving the now out of control car to crash "without the autopilot engaged at the time of impact", which he going to spin as much as he can

snypher 6y ago
This is my reasoning on why Tesla can claim so many accident-free miles, if it gets too sketchy for the CPU it throws up it's hands and says 'you drive pls'