7 ms·

So he changed langes without checking for traffic, crashed, the child didn't wear a seat belt and died, and now they're suing.

by Arnt 5y ago

smt88 5y ago
> So he changed langes without checking for traffic The article says no such thing. You could just as easily interpret the events as: "He put on his turn signal, which Autopilot ignored." A human driver should have been driving defensively and realized they needed to give the person space. A human driver usually would have hit the brake as soon as they saw a turn signal.
- ReptileMan 5y ago
  Does turn signal give you right of way in US? It usually is indication that you will switch lanes, but is there any rule that forces the drivers in the lane to be switched to accommodate you?
  - vladvasiliu 5y ago
    Not from the US so don't know what the rules say, but I do agree with the parent's comment. "Driving defensively" doesn't mean "give them the right of way". It means that if they put on the blinker, they're probably thinking of changing lanes even though it may not be safe to do so (and don't have the right of way). It's the type of situation where it's better to be safe than right.
  - walkedaway 5y ago
    No, it doesn't give you right of way in any state in the US. But it doesn't stop drivers in the Bay Area from thinking it does.
- Dylan16807 5y ago
  > The article says no such thing. If you change lanes on a freeway, and a vehicle is coming up behind you at normal freeway speeds, the only way for you to be surprised by it is if you didn't properly check for traffic. > You could just as easily interpret the events as: "He put on his turn signal, which Autopilot ignored." It's both. He didn't check properly and Autopilot ignored the turn signal. > A human driver should have been driving defensively and realized they needed to give the person space. I suppose, but if you're in a crash and your argument is that the other driver should have been defensive then you're basically admitting you caused it. (in situations with two drivers and no mechanical failure) > A human driver usually would have hit the brake as soon as they saw a turn signal. "Usually" I'd agree is true, but lots of drivers would expect to pass and then let them change lanes behind.
  - danso 5y ago
    It's not just that the Tesla driver ignored the turn signal, but it also ignored traffic conditions. Left lane traffic had slowed down enough that the Tesla is seen passing 2 cars on their right before hitting the truck. California law puts responsibility on all drivers to be drive at a "reasonable or prudent" speed given the conditions. Maintaining a speed where you're quickly passing cars on the left and right — and not slowing down at all despite a vehicle signaling for 3 seconds and then fully being in your lane for about 1 second — is arguably not "reasonable or prudent". https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=VEH&sectionNum=22350 https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySectio...
    - Dylan16807 5y ago
      I don't think the speed they were passing other cars was unreasonable. My best estimate is slightly above 50 for the white car, versus the tesla going 69/70. Not slowing down for the signal is bad behavior but I don't know if you're obligated to slow down for a signal and it's not really a driving speed issue. Someone signalling isn't a road condition.
  - fouc 5y ago
    It's better to assume he did check properly. The problem is the car behind didn't slow down AT ALL, that would be VERY surprising, leading to the last second attempt to swerve.
    - Dylan16807 5y ago
      It's possible, but if you enter a lane in a way that requires the car behind you to brake, that's just as bad as not checking. And just letting off the accelerator right after seeing the turn signal would not have slowed the Tesla down enough to avoid a collision, that situation needed braking. Also, a driver on the freeway continuing to go the same speed should not be "VERY surprising"!
      - fouc 5y ago
MPSimmons 5y ago
I have said, and will continue to say, that the greatest sin of Tesla is that using autopilot requires good judgement from the drivers, and that is an unreasonable expectation.
- rcMgD2BwE72F 5y ago
  >Driving safely requires good judgement and that is an unreasonable expectation.
  - arpa 5y ago
    Autopilot that requires constant attention of the pilot is not really an autopilot, is it?
    - colordrops 5y ago
      If you have ever flown an airplane with autopilot you would realize you are completely wrong.
      - _fizz_buzz_ 5y ago
        That might be true, but that is not the user's expectation and marketing at Tesla knows this isn't the user's expectation.
      - toomanybeersies 5y ago
        Most people have never flown an airplane, let alone one with autopilot. To the layman, autopilot and self-driving are synonymous (as epitomised by this scene from The Darwin Awards: https://youtu.be/PNF7Ru1mMeo https://youtu.be/PNF7Ru1mMeo)
    - rcMgD2BwE72F 5y ago
      >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 (for example, monitoring the trajectory, weather and on-board systems) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autopilot https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autopilot
fxtentacle 5y ago
Apparently he was forced to change lanes. But the reason they're suing seems to be that the Tesla autopilot did not slow down at all and the Tesla's driver was distracted. In my opinion, this is yet another case of people being lulled into a false sense of security that the car drives itself, when in reality the Tesla's driver should have been attentive and should have reacted. "The police faulted the Tesla driver — not the car — for his inattention and his driving at an unsafe speed"
- adrianN 5y ago
  > a truck in front of them slowed Doesn't sound like "forced to change lanes" to me.
- _ph_ 5y ago
  How was he forced to change lanes when traffic in front of you slows down? The correct reaction is hitting the brakes yourself and switch to another line only if it is clear, but that was not the case here.
  - exporectomy 5y ago
    He indicated for at least 3 seconds first. That's not really a panic swerve. He might have simply misjudged the existence or speed of the Tesla.
- prower 5y ago
  > In my opinion, this is yet another case of people being lulled into a false sense of security that the car drives itself, when in reality the Tesla's driver should have been attentive and should have reacted. In every similar story I always fail to imagine how the driver can possibly stay in a state of "active attention" 100% of the time, while also not doing anything active. That's not how much of the human race works. At this point it's a lot easier to just actively drive, instead of having to make a sudden split-second decision while being dulled by the inaction. I feel like non full-autonomous driving just doesn't make sense at all.
  - 5y ago
threeseed 5y ago
Did you even read the article ? It never said he changed lanes without checking for traffic. And the police put the blame squarely on the Tesla driver.
- _ph_ 5y ago
  As the Tesla was going with constant speed, the person switching the lane must not have checked for it.
  - sschueller 5y ago
    In many countries passing on the right at highspeed it illegal. If traffic on the left lane was coming to a stop then it is irresponsible for the cars on the left to pass at 65mph.
    - Arnt 5y ago
      Passing cars that stand still without slowing down doesn't have to be illegal in order to be stupid. There's clearly enough blame to share in this situation.
    - Dylan16807 5y ago
      > In many countries passing on the right at highspeed it illegal. Are those countries that also don't let you stay in the left lane? But even if it's illegal to pass on the right, it's still a terrible idea to change lanes to the right without looking behind you!
- Arnt 5y ago
  I did. Since he moved into the path of a car that AIUI had right of way and wasn't showing any sign of yielding, even after several seconds, I assume that he didn't notice, and that he didn't notice because he didn't really look. (Do vehicles already in a lane have right of way in the US, relative to vehicles who might cross into that lane from another?)
danso 5y ago
The story and the video evidence assert that his turn signal was on for a full 4 seconds before making the lane change
- adrianN 5y ago
  I don't know how driving in the US works, but here in Germany a turn signal doesn't give you any rights to change lanes if there is oncoming traffic, no matter how long it's been on. The driver changing lanes is most likely at least partially at fault here.
  - orwin 5y ago
    Legally yes. Anybody who drove a truck or even utilitary vehicles with blindspots know to give way when a truck activate its blinkers, and honestly even when i did not know how shitty it was i was carefull, because my driving instructor told me a dozen time about truck blindspots.
  - danso 5y ago
    The NYT story cites Tesla court filings about the police's determination — "The police faulted the Tesla driver — not the car — for his inattention and his driving at an unsafe speed," Mr. McCarthy wrote. IANAL, but given no other info about the investigators' conclusions, I wouldn't necessarily assume that the truck driver didn't have some* fault, and California isn't a state where it's either/or when it comes to blame — i.e. both drivers can share partial blame and recover damages. California has a couple of laws [0] that mandate "reasonable or prudent" speed, e.g. > No person shall drive a vehicle upon a highway at a speed greater than is reasonable or prudent having due regard for weather, visibility, the traffic on, and the surface and width of, the highway, and in no event at a speed which endangers the safety of persons or property. The truck met the requirement [1] for signaling a change (100 feet beforehand). Is it "reasonable or prudent" for the Tesla driver to maintain speed (nevermind accelerate at the last second) with the truck slowly entering the lane? Especially with the left lane traffic having slowed down enough that, in the span of the 5 second clip, the Tesla is seen passing 2 cars on their right before hitting the truck? [0] https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=VEH&sectionNum=22350 https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySectio... [1] https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?sectionNum=22108.&nodeTreePath=15.6&lawCode=VEH https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySectio...
rtfa245yhjted 5y ago
If you read to the end, you'll see that you're really wrong. Try reading first, then commenting. > The video saved by the car [the Tesla] Mr. Yalung was driving shows it passing vehicles on the right and left. Four seconds before impact, Mr. Maldonado turned on his blinker. It flashed four times while his Explorer was in its original lane. A fifth flash came as his truck was straddling the lanes. In court documents, Mr. Maldonado said he had noticed the Tesla approaching rapidly in his rearview mirror and tried to swerve back.
fouc 5y ago
That's not true at all. If you watch the video, you can see the lane was clear to basically 5 car lengths (1 second per car length), and he absolutely had right of way. He gave ample time for signalling and he was gradually merging into the lane, which would give plenty of time for any normal driver to respond to. At the last second he realizes the Tesla wasn't slowing down AT ALL, and he attempts to swerve back.
- Dylan16807 5y ago
  > you can see the lane was clear to basically 5 car lengths (1 second per car length) 5 car lengths is less than a second at freeway speeds. By the time the truck started changing lanes, you can look at points on the ground moving and see that it was about a second ahead of the tesla. Changing lanes that close and without speeding up into the new lane was not safe, autopilot or not.
  - fouc 5y ago
    I was referring to the rule of seconds. For example, below 40mph it's recommended to leave 2 seconds between you and the car in front. Above 40mph, it's recommended to leave 3 to 4 seconds between you and the car in front. The car length in this context is just the length the car travels per second.
    - Dylan16807 5y ago
      > The car length in this context is just the length the car travels per second. Is that how that term is used? Either way, that truck was far under that suggested amount of space when it crossed into the tesla's lane. It was around one second, well under two let alone more. Measuring against the ground, of course, not relative speed. At the speed limit, vehicles are going about 100 feet per second. At the start of the video they appear to be about 3 dashed lines apart (120ft?) and by the time the truck is about to switch lanes they're two dashed lines apart (80ft?)
      - fouc 5y ago
Cthulhu_ 5y ago
That's victim blaming. Yes the driver should have taken better precautions - the driver is responsible for all passengers to wear seatbelts, and to look behind - but it's the Tesla driver that crashed into the truck. Whether they had enough time to react or whether the truck cut them off is probably apparent enough in the footage, that's up to a judge to decide. Anyway, autopilot is not to blame; if anything comes out of the lawsuit, it's that autopilot should not be called that because it lulls drivers into a false sense of security. In the end, the driver is still responsible and the family should put the blame on the driver. It really sounds like the family is holding Tesla responsible instead of the actual person responsible, the driver of the Tesla. But in a court, they might not win since the driver of the truck may have made an unexpected maneuver, and the death of the child may be blamed on the truck driver because he wasn't wearing a seatbelt.
fortran77 5y ago
He was rear-ended.

So he changed langes without checking for traffic, crashed, the child didn't wear a seat belt and died, and now they're suing.

by Arnt 5y ago

So he changed langes without checking for traffic, crashed, the child didn't wear a seat belt and died, and now they're suing.

smt88 5y ago

> So he changed langes without checking for traffic The article says no such thing. You could just as easily interpret the events as: "He put on his turn signal, which Autopilot ignored." A human driver should have been driving defensively and realized they needed to give the person space. A human driver usually would have hit the brake as soon as they saw a turn signal.

ReptileMan 5y ago
Does turn signal give you right of way in US? It usually is indication that you will switch lanes, but is there any rule that forces the drivers in the lane to be switched to accommodate you?
- vladvasiliu 5y ago
  Not from the US so don't know what the rules say, but I do agree with the parent's comment. "Driving defensively" doesn't mean "give them the right of way". It means that if they put on the blinker, they're probably thinking of changing lanes even though it may not be safe to do so (and don't have the right of way). It's the type of situation where it's better to be safe than right.
- walkedaway 5y ago
  No, it doesn't give you right of way in any state in the US. But it doesn't stop drivers in the Bay Area from thinking it does.
Dylan16807 5y ago
> The article says no such thing. If you change lanes on a freeway, and a vehicle is coming up behind you at normal freeway speeds, the only way for you to be surprised by it is if you didn't properly check for traffic. > You could just as easily interpret the events as: "He put on his turn signal, which Autopilot ignored." It's both. He didn't check properly and Autopilot ignored the turn signal. > A human driver should have been driving defensively and realized they needed to give the person space. I suppose, but if you're in a crash and your argument is that the other driver should have been defensive then you're basically admitting you caused it. (in situations with two drivers and no mechanical failure) > A human driver usually would have hit the brake as soon as they saw a turn signal. "Usually" I'd agree is true, but lots of drivers would expect to pass and then let them change lanes behind.
- danso 5y ago
  It's not just that the Tesla driver ignored the turn signal, but it also ignored traffic conditions. Left lane traffic had slowed down enough that the Tesla is seen passing 2 cars on their right before hitting the truck. California law puts responsibility on all drivers to be drive at a "reasonable or prudent" speed given the conditions. Maintaining a speed where you're quickly passing cars on the left and right — and not slowing down at all despite a vehicle signaling for 3 seconds and then fully being in your lane for about 1 second — is arguably not "reasonable or prudent". https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=VEH&sectionNum=22350 https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySectio...
  - Dylan16807 5y ago
    I don't think the speed they were passing other cars was unreasonable. My best estimate is slightly above 50 for the white car, versus the tesla going 69/70. Not slowing down for the signal is bad behavior but I don't know if you're obligated to slow down for a signal and it's not really a driving speed issue. Someone signalling isn't a road condition.
- fouc 5y ago
  It's better to assume he did check properly. The problem is the car behind didn't slow down AT ALL, that would be VERY surprising, leading to the last second attempt to swerve.
  - Dylan16807 5y ago
    It's possible, but if you enter a lane in a way that requires the car behind you to brake, that's just as bad as not checking. And just letting off the accelerator right after seeing the turn signal would not have slowed the Tesla down enough to avoid a collision, that situation needed braking. Also, a driver on the freeway continuing to go the same speed should not be "VERY surprising"!
    - fouc 5y ago

MPSimmons 5y ago

I have said, and will continue to say, that the greatest sin of Tesla is that using autopilot requires good judgement from the drivers, and that is an unreasonable expectation.

rcMgD2BwE72F 5y ago
>Driving safely requires good judgement and that is an unreasonable expectation.
- arpa 5y ago
  Autopilot that requires constant attention of the pilot is not really an autopilot, is it?
  - colordrops 5y ago
    If you have ever flown an airplane with autopilot you would realize you are completely wrong.
    - _fizz_buzz_ 5y ago
      That might be true, but that is not the user's expectation and marketing at Tesla knows this isn't the user's expectation.
    - toomanybeersies 5y ago
      Most people have never flown an airplane, let alone one with autopilot. To the layman, autopilot and self-driving are synonymous (as epitomised by this scene from The Darwin Awards: https://youtu.be/PNF7Ru1mMeo https://youtu.be/PNF7Ru1mMeo)
  - rcMgD2BwE72F 5y ago
    >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 (for example, monitoring the trajectory, weather and on-board systems) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autopilot https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autopilot

fxtentacle 5y ago

Apparently he was forced to change lanes. But the reason they're suing seems to be that the Tesla autopilot did not slow down at all and the Tesla's driver was distracted. In my opinion, this is yet another case of people being lulled into a false sense of security that the car drives itself, when in reality the Tesla's driver should have been attentive and should have reacted. "The police faulted the Tesla driver — not the car — for his inattention and his driving at an unsafe speed"

adrianN 5y ago
> a truck in front of them slowed Doesn't sound like "forced to change lanes" to me.
_ph_ 5y ago
How was he forced to change lanes when traffic in front of you slows down? The correct reaction is hitting the brakes yourself and switch to another line only if it is clear, but that was not the case here.
- exporectomy 5y ago
  He indicated for at least 3 seconds first. That's not really a panic swerve. He might have simply misjudged the existence or speed of the Tesla.
prower 5y ago
> In my opinion, this is yet another case of people being lulled into a false sense of security that the car drives itself, when in reality the Tesla's driver should have been attentive and should have reacted. In every similar story I always fail to imagine how the driver can possibly stay in a state of "active attention" 100% of the time, while also not doing anything active. That's not how much of the human race works. At this point it's a lot easier to just actively drive, instead of having to make a sudden split-second decision while being dulled by the inaction. I feel like non full-autonomous driving just doesn't make sense at all.
- 5y ago

threeseed 5y ago

Did you even read the article ? It never said he changed lanes without checking for traffic. And the police put the blame squarely on the Tesla driver.

_ph_ 5y ago
As the Tesla was going with constant speed, the person switching the lane must not have checked for it.
- sschueller 5y ago
  In many countries passing on the right at highspeed it illegal. If traffic on the left lane was coming to a stop then it is irresponsible for the cars on the left to pass at 65mph.
  - Arnt 5y ago
    Passing cars that stand still without slowing down doesn't have to be illegal in order to be stupid. There's clearly enough blame to share in this situation.
  - Dylan16807 5y ago
    > In many countries passing on the right at highspeed it illegal. Are those countries that also don't let you stay in the left lane? But even if it's illegal to pass on the right, it's still a terrible idea to change lanes to the right without looking behind you!
Arnt 5y ago
I did. Since he moved into the path of a car that AIUI had right of way and wasn't showing any sign of yielding, even after several seconds, I assume that he didn't notice, and that he didn't notice because he didn't really look. (Do vehicles already in a lane have right of way in the US, relative to vehicles who might cross into that lane from another?)

danso 5y ago

The story and the video evidence assert that his turn signal was on for a full 4 seconds before making the lane change

adrianN 5y ago
I don't know how driving in the US works, but here in Germany a turn signal doesn't give you any rights to change lanes if there is oncoming traffic, no matter how long it's been on. The driver changing lanes is most likely at least partially at fault here.
- orwin 5y ago
  Legally yes. Anybody who drove a truck or even utilitary vehicles with blindspots know to give way when a truck activate its blinkers, and honestly even when i did not know how shitty it was i was carefull, because my driving instructor told me a dozen time about truck blindspots.
- danso 5y ago
  The NYT story cites Tesla court filings about the police's determination — "The police faulted the Tesla driver — not the car — for his inattention and his driving at an unsafe speed," Mr. McCarthy wrote. IANAL, but given no other info about the investigators' conclusions, I wouldn't necessarily assume that the truck driver didn't have some* fault, and California isn't a state where it's either/or when it comes to blame — i.e. both drivers can share partial blame and recover damages. California has a couple of laws [0] that mandate "reasonable or prudent" speed, e.g. > No person shall drive a vehicle upon a highway at a speed greater than is reasonable or prudent having due regard for weather, visibility, the traffic on, and the surface and width of, the highway, and in no event at a speed which endangers the safety of persons or property. The truck met the requirement [1] for signaling a change (100 feet beforehand). Is it "reasonable or prudent" for the Tesla driver to maintain speed (nevermind accelerate at the last second) with the truck slowly entering the lane? Especially with the left lane traffic having slowed down enough that, in the span of the 5 second clip, the Tesla is seen passing 2 cars on their right before hitting the truck? [0] https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=VEH&sectionNum=22350 https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySectio... [1] https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?sectionNum=22108.&nodeTreePath=15.6&lawCode=VEH https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySectio...

rtfa245yhjted 5y ago

If you read to the end, you'll see that you're really wrong. Try reading first, then commenting. > The video saved by the car [the Tesla] Mr. Yalung was driving shows it passing vehicles on the right and left. Four seconds before impact, Mr. Maldonado turned on his blinker. It flashed four times while his Explorer was in its original lane. A fifth flash came as his truck was straddling the lanes. In court documents, Mr. Maldonado said he had noticed the Tesla approaching rapidly in his rearview mirror and tried to swerve back.

fouc 5y ago

That's not true at all. If you watch the video, you can see the lane was clear to basically 5 car lengths (1 second per car length), and he absolutely had right of way. He gave ample time for signalling and he was gradually merging into the lane, which would give plenty of time for any normal driver to respond to. At the last second he realizes the Tesla wasn't slowing down AT ALL, and he attempts to swerve back.

Dylan16807 5y ago
> you can see the lane was clear to basically 5 car lengths (1 second per car length) 5 car lengths is less than a second at freeway speeds. By the time the truck started changing lanes, you can look at points on the ground moving and see that it was about a second ahead of the tesla. Changing lanes that close and without speeding up into the new lane was not safe, autopilot or not.
- fouc 5y ago
  I was referring to the rule of seconds. For example, below 40mph it's recommended to leave 2 seconds between you and the car in front. Above 40mph, it's recommended to leave 3 to 4 seconds between you and the car in front. The car length in this context is just the length the car travels per second.
  - Dylan16807 5y ago
    > The car length in this context is just the length the car travels per second. Is that how that term is used? Either way, that truck was far under that suggested amount of space when it crossed into the tesla's lane. It was around one second, well under two let alone more. Measuring against the ground, of course, not relative speed. At the speed limit, vehicles are going about 100 feet per second. At the start of the video they appear to be about 3 dashed lines apart (120ft?) and by the time the truck is about to switch lanes they're two dashed lines apart (80ft?)
    - fouc 5y ago

Cthulhu_ 5y ago

That's victim blaming. Yes the driver should have taken better precautions - the driver is responsible for all passengers to wear seatbelts, and to look behind - but it's the Tesla driver that crashed into the truck. Whether they had enough time to react or whether the truck cut them off is probably apparent enough in the footage, that's up to a judge to decide. Anyway, autopilot is not to blame; if anything comes out of the lawsuit, it's that autopilot should not be called that because it lulls drivers into a false sense of security. In the end, the driver is still responsible and the family should put the blame on the driver. It really sounds like the family is holding Tesla responsible instead of the actual person responsible, the driver of the Tesla. But in a court, they might not win since the driver of the truck may have made an unexpected maneuver, and the death of the child may be blamed on the truck driver because he wasn't wearing a seatbelt.

fortran77 5y ago

He was rear-ended.