10 ms·

Then why not flip the scheme. Instead of have the human as backup to the machine, make the machine backup the human. Let the human do all the driving and have

Then why not flip the scheme. Instead of have the human as backup to the machine, make the machine backup the human. Let the human do all the driving and have the robot jump in whenever the human makes a mistake. Telemetry can then record all the situations where the human and the machine disagreed. That should provide all the necessary data, with the benefit of the robot perhaps preventing many accidents. Of course this is impossible in the real world. Nobody is going to buy a car that will randomly make its own decisions, that will pull the wheel from your hands ever time it thinks you are making an illegal lane change. Want safety? How about a Tesla that is electronically incapable of speeding. Good luck selling that one.

velcii 5y ago
>Let the human do all the driving and have the robot jump in whenever the human makes a mistake. I really don't think that would give many data points, because all of the instances would be when a human fell asleep or wasn't paying attention.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
wizzwizz4 5y ago
> * Let the human do all the driving and have the robot jump in whenever the human makes a mistake.* Because when the human disagrees with the machine, the machine is usually the one making a mistake. It might prevent accidents, but it would also cause them, and you lose predictability in the process (you have to model the human and the machine).
- foobiekr 5y ago
  I don't know how anyone can look at the types of accidents Tesla is having and conclude that it should override the human driver.
FridayoLeary 5y ago
>Let the human do all the driving and have the robot jump in whenever the human makes a mistake. Nothing more annoying then a car that thinks i don't know how to drive (warning beeps etc.).
alistairSH 5y ago
Nobody is going to buy a car that will randomly make its own decisions, that will pull the wheel from your hands ever time it thinks you are making an illegal lane change. That's almost exactly what my Honda does. Illegal (no signal) lane change results in a steering wheel shaker (and optional audio alert). And the car, when sensing an abrupt swerve which is interpreted as the vehicle leaving the roadway, attempts to correct that via steering and brake inputs. But, I agree with your more general point - the human still needs to be primary. My Honda doesn't allow me to remove my hands from the steering wheel for more than a second or two. Tesla should be doing the same, as no current "autopilot" system is truly automatic.
- Robotbeat 5y ago
  Tesla’s system also requires driving’s to have their hands on the steering wheel and occasionally provide torque input.
  - alistairSH 5y ago
    Interesting, I assumed it didn't, given the prevalence of stories about driver watching movies on their phones. I guess they just leave one hand lightly on the wheel, but are still able to be ~100% disengaged from driving the car.
- peeters 5y ago
  > Illegal (no signal) lane change results in a steering wheel shaker (and optional audio alert). To be clear, tying the warning to the signal isn't about preventing unsignaled lane changes, it's gauging driver intent (i.e. is he asleep and drifting or just trying to change lanes). It's just gravy that it will train bad drivers to use their signals properly.
  - alistairSH 5y ago
    Correct. It's not (primarily) a training thing, but used to ensure the driver is driving and not sleeping/watching movies/whatever.
  - 5y ago
Someone 5y ago
I think that’s the approach many car manufacturers have been on for decades. As a simple example, ABS (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-lock_braking_system https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-lock_braking_system) only interferes with what the driver does when an error occurs. More related to self-driving, there’s various variants of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lane_departure_warning_system https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lane_departure_warning_system that do take control of the car. And it is far from “incapable of speeding”, but BMW, Audi and Mercedes-Benz “voluntarily” and sort-of limit the speed of their cars to 250km/hour (https://www.autoevolution.com/news/gentlemens-agreement-not-so-fast-sir-47736.html https://www.autoevolution.com/news/gentlemens-agreement-not-...)
CrazyStat 5y ago
> Want safety? How about a Tesla that is electronically incapable of speeding. That would be unsafe in many situations. If the flow of traffic is substantially above the speed limit--which it often is--being unable to match it increases the risk of accident. This is known as the Solomon curve [1]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solomon_curve https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solomon_curve
- sandworm101 5y ago
  Ok. Electronically incapable of driving more than 10% faster than other traffic.
  - rad_gruchalski 5y ago
    How do you know which traffic is "the other traffic"? So basically - there's no top limit.
- treesknees 5y ago
  > Subsequent research suggests significant biases in the Solomon study, which may cast doubt on its findings With the logic presented in the theoretical foundation section, it seems that the safer move would actually be slow down and match the speed of all the trucks and other large vehicles... which won't happen. Matching speed sounds great, except there are always people willing to go faster and faster. In my state they raised the speed limit from 70 to 75, it just means more people are going 85-90. How is that safer?
  - filoleg 5y ago
    To address your last paragraph, everyone going 85-90 is less safe than everyone going 70-75, you are correct. However, you individually going 70-75 when everyone else is going 85-90 is less safe than you going 85-90 like everyone else in the exact same situation. >there are always people willing to go faster and faster That’s why no one says “go as fast as the fastest vehicle you see”, it is “go with the general speed of traffic”. That’s an exercise for human judgement to figure that one out, which is why imo it isn’t a smart idea to have the car automatically lock you out of overriding the speed limit.
jeofken 5y ago
On most or all roads below 100km/h autopilot won’t allow speeding, and therefore I drive at the limit, which I know I would not have done if I controlled it. It also stays in the lane better than I do, keeps distance better, and more. Sometimes it’s wonky when the street lines are unclear. It’s not perfect but a better driver than I am in 80% of cases. My insurance company gives a lower rate if you buy the full autopilot option, and that to me indicates they agree it drives better than I, or other humans, do.
- Johnny555 5y ago
  On most or all roads below 100km/h autopilot won’t allow speeding, and therefore I drive at the limit, which I know I would not have done if I controlled it If following the speed limit makes cars safer, another way to achieve that without autopilot is to just have all cars limit their speed to the speed limit. Sometimes it’s wonky when the street lines are unclear. It’s not perfect but a better driver than I am in 80% of cases The problem is in those 20% of cases where you'd lulled into boredom by autopilot as you concentrate on designing your next project in your head, then suddenly autopilot says "I lost track of where the road is, here you do it!" and you have to quickly gain context and figure out what the right thing to do is. Some autopilot systems use eye tracking to make sure that the driver is at least looking at the road, but that doesn't guarantee that he's paying attention. But at least that's harder to defeat than Tesla's "nudge the steering wheel once in a while" method.
  - beambot 5y ago
    > just have all cars limit their speed to the speed limit. The devil is in the details... GPS may not provide sufficient resolution. Construction zones. School zones with variable hours. Tunnels. Adverse road conditions. Changes to the underlying roads. Different classes of vehicles. Etc. By the time you account for all the mapping and/or perception, you could've just improved the autonomous driving and eliminated the biggest source of humans driving: The human.
    - Johnny555 5y ago
gambiting 5y ago
I keep saying the same thing actually whenever people say that manual driving will be outlawed. Like, no, it won't be - because the computers will still save you in most cases either way, autopilot enabled or not. >>How about a Tesla that is electronically incapable of speeding. Good luck selling that one. From 2022 all cars sold in the EU have to have an electronic limiter that keeps you to the posted speed limit(by cutting power if you are already going faster) - the regulation does allow the system to be temporarily disabled however.
- ggreer 5y ago
  Your summary is incorrect. The ETSC recommends that Intelligent Speed Assistance should be able to be overridden.[1] It's supposed to not accelerate as much if you're exceeding the speed limit, and if you override by pressing the accelerator harder, it should show some warning messages and make an annoying sound. It's stupid, but it doesn't actually limit the speed of your car. I think it's a silly law and I'm very glad I don't live in a place that requires such annoyances, but it's not as bad as you're claiming. 1. https://etsc.eu/briefing-intelligent-speed-assistance-isa/ https://etsc.eu/briefing-intelligent-speed-assistance-isa/
  - Symbiote 5y ago
    I hired a new car with Intelligent Speed Assistance this summer, though it was set (and I left it) just to "ping" rather than do any limiting. I drove it to a fairly unusual place, though still in Europe and with standard European signs. It did not have a GPS map of the area. It could reliably recognize the speed limit signs (red circle), but it never recognized the similar grey-slash end-of-limit signs. It also didn't recognize the start-of-town or end-of-town signs, so it didn't do anything about the limits they implied. I would certainly have had to disable it, had it been reducing the acceleration in the way that document describes.
tablespoon 5y ago
> Of course this is impossible in the real world. Nobody is going to buy a car that will randomly make its own decisions, that will pull the wheel from your hands ever time it thinks you are making an illegal lane change. Yeah, add to that the unreliability of Tesla's system means that it cannot pull the wheel from the driver, because it's not unusual for it to want to do something dangerous and need to be stopped. You don't want it to "fix" a mistake by driving someone into the median divider.
cactus2093 5y ago
> How about a Tesla that is electronically incapable of speeding. Good luck selling that one. Instead they did the exact opposite with the plaid mode model S, lol. It kind of works against their claims that they prioritize safety when their hottest new car - fully intended for public roads - has as its main selling point the ability to accelerate from 60-120 mph faster than any other car.
9935c101ab17a66 5y ago
What? Cars with collision detection systems already exist, and they can handle both side on and head on collision avoidance when a human is driving. People literally are buying cars that “make their own decisions”. Importantly though, these systems only activate in the case of an imminent collision IF the corrective measure won’t cause another collision. > that will pull the wheel … Yah, of course no one is going to buy a care that does what you describe because what you describe is insane and inherently unsafe. Unless a collision is imminent, nothing happens.

velcii 5y ago

>Let the human do all the driving and have the robot jump in whenever the human makes a mistake. I really don't think that would give many data points, because all of the instances would be when a human fell asleep or wasn't paying attention.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

wizzwizz4 5y ago

> * Let the human do all the driving and have the robot jump in whenever the human makes a mistake.* Because when the human disagrees with the machine, the machine is usually the one making a mistake. It might prevent accidents, but it would also cause them, and you lose predictability in the process (you have to model the human and the machine).

foobiekr 5y ago
I don't know how anyone can look at the types of accidents Tesla is having and conclude that it should override the human driver.

FridayoLeary 5y ago

>Let the human do all the driving and have the robot jump in whenever the human makes a mistake. Nothing more annoying then a car that thinks i don't know how to drive (warning beeps etc.).

alistairSH 5y ago

Nobody is going to buy a car that will randomly make its own decisions, that will pull the wheel from your hands ever time it thinks you are making an illegal lane change. That's almost exactly what my Honda does. Illegal (no signal) lane change results in a steering wheel shaker (and optional audio alert). And the car, when sensing an abrupt swerve which is interpreted as the vehicle leaving the roadway, attempts to correct that via steering and brake inputs. But, I agree with your more general point - the human still needs to be primary. My Honda doesn't allow me to remove my hands from the steering wheel for more than a second or two. Tesla should be doing the same, as no current "autopilot" system is truly automatic.

Robotbeat 5y ago
Tesla’s system also requires driving’s to have their hands on the steering wheel and occasionally provide torque input.
- alistairSH 5y ago
  Interesting, I assumed it didn't, given the prevalence of stories about driver watching movies on their phones. I guess they just leave one hand lightly on the wheel, but are still able to be ~100% disengaged from driving the car.
peeters 5y ago
> Illegal (no signal) lane change results in a steering wheel shaker (and optional audio alert). To be clear, tying the warning to the signal isn't about preventing unsignaled lane changes, it's gauging driver intent (i.e. is he asleep and drifting or just trying to change lanes). It's just gravy that it will train bad drivers to use their signals properly.
- alistairSH 5y ago
  Correct. It's not (primarily) a training thing, but used to ensure the driver is driving and not sleeping/watching movies/whatever.
- 5y ago

Someone 5y ago

I think that’s the approach many car manufacturers have been on for decades. As a simple example, ABS (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-lock_braking_system https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-lock_braking_system) only interferes with what the driver does when an error occurs. More related to self-driving, there’s various variants of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lane_departure_warning_system https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lane_departure_warning_system that do take control of the car. And it is far from “incapable of speeding”, but BMW, Audi and Mercedes-Benz “voluntarily” and sort-of limit the speed of their cars to 250km/hour (https://www.autoevolution.com/news/gentlemens-agreement-not-so-fast-sir-47736.html https://www.autoevolution.com/news/gentlemens-agreement-not-...)

CrazyStat 5y ago

> Want safety? How about a Tesla that is electronically incapable of speeding. That would be unsafe in many situations. If the flow of traffic is substantially above the speed limit--which it often is--being unable to match it increases the risk of accident. This is known as the Solomon curve [1]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solomon_curve https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solomon_curve

sandworm101 5y ago
Ok. Electronically incapable of driving more than 10% faster than other traffic.
- rad_gruchalski 5y ago
  How do you know which traffic is "the other traffic"? So basically - there's no top limit.
treesknees 5y ago
> Subsequent research suggests significant biases in the Solomon study, which may cast doubt on its findings With the logic presented in the theoretical foundation section, it seems that the safer move would actually be slow down and match the speed of all the trucks and other large vehicles... which won't happen. Matching speed sounds great, except there are always people willing to go faster and faster. In my state they raised the speed limit from 70 to 75, it just means more people are going 85-90. How is that safer?
- filoleg 5y ago
  To address your last paragraph, everyone going 85-90 is less safe than everyone going 70-75, you are correct. However, you individually going 70-75 when everyone else is going 85-90 is less safe than you going 85-90 like everyone else in the exact same situation. >there are always people willing to go faster and faster That’s why no one says “go as fast as the fastest vehicle you see”, it is “go with the general speed of traffic”. That’s an exercise for human judgement to figure that one out, which is why imo it isn’t a smart idea to have the car automatically lock you out of overriding the speed limit.

jeofken 5y ago

On most or all roads below 100km/h autopilot won’t allow speeding, and therefore I drive at the limit, which I know I would not have done if I controlled it. It also stays in the lane better than I do, keeps distance better, and more. Sometimes it’s wonky when the street lines are unclear. It’s not perfect but a better driver than I am in 80% of cases. My insurance company gives a lower rate if you buy the full autopilot option, and that to me indicates they agree it drives better than I, or other humans, do.

Johnny555 5y ago
On most or all roads below 100km/h autopilot won’t allow speeding, and therefore I drive at the limit, which I know I would not have done if I controlled it If following the speed limit makes cars safer, another way to achieve that without autopilot is to just have all cars limit their speed to the speed limit. Sometimes it’s wonky when the street lines are unclear. It’s not perfect but a better driver than I am in 80% of cases The problem is in those 20% of cases where you'd lulled into boredom by autopilot as you concentrate on designing your next project in your head, then suddenly autopilot says "I lost track of where the road is, here you do it!" and you have to quickly gain context and figure out what the right thing to do is. Some autopilot systems use eye tracking to make sure that the driver is at least looking at the road, but that doesn't guarantee that he's paying attention. But at least that's harder to defeat than Tesla's "nudge the steering wheel once in a while" method.
- beambot 5y ago
  > just have all cars limit their speed to the speed limit. The devil is in the details... GPS may not provide sufficient resolution. Construction zones. School zones with variable hours. Tunnels. Adverse road conditions. Changes to the underlying roads. Different classes of vehicles. Etc. By the time you account for all the mapping and/or perception, you could've just improved the autonomous driving and eliminated the biggest source of humans driving: The human.
  - Johnny555 5y ago

gambiting 5y ago

I keep saying the same thing actually whenever people say that manual driving will be outlawed. Like, no, it won't be - because the computers will still save you in most cases either way, autopilot enabled or not. >>How about a Tesla that is electronically incapable of speeding. Good luck selling that one. From 2022 all cars sold in the EU have to have an electronic limiter that keeps you to the posted speed limit(by cutting power if you are already going faster) - the regulation does allow the system to be temporarily disabled however.

ggreer 5y ago
Your summary is incorrect. The ETSC recommends that Intelligent Speed Assistance should be able to be overridden.[1] It's supposed to not accelerate as much if you're exceeding the speed limit, and if you override by pressing the accelerator harder, it should show some warning messages and make an annoying sound. It's stupid, but it doesn't actually limit the speed of your car. I think it's a silly law and I'm very glad I don't live in a place that requires such annoyances, but it's not as bad as you're claiming. 1. https://etsc.eu/briefing-intelligent-speed-assistance-isa/ https://etsc.eu/briefing-intelligent-speed-assistance-isa/
- Symbiote 5y ago
  I hired a new car with Intelligent Speed Assistance this summer, though it was set (and I left it) just to "ping" rather than do any limiting. I drove it to a fairly unusual place, though still in Europe and with standard European signs. It did not have a GPS map of the area. It could reliably recognize the speed limit signs (red circle), but it never recognized the similar grey-slash end-of-limit signs. It also didn't recognize the start-of-town or end-of-town signs, so it didn't do anything about the limits they implied. I would certainly have had to disable it, had it been reducing the acceleration in the way that document describes.

tablespoon 5y ago

> Of course this is impossible in the real world. Nobody is going to buy a car that will randomly make its own decisions, that will pull the wheel from your hands ever time it thinks you are making an illegal lane change. Yeah, add to that the unreliability of Tesla's system means that it cannot pull the wheel from the driver, because it's not unusual for it to want to do something dangerous and need to be stopped. You don't want it to "fix" a mistake by driving someone into the median divider.

cactus2093 5y ago

> How about a Tesla that is electronically incapable of speeding. Good luck selling that one. Instead they did the exact opposite with the plaid mode model S, lol. It kind of works against their claims that they prioritize safety when their hottest new car - fully intended for public roads - has as its main selling point the ability to accelerate from 60-120 mph faster than any other car.

9935c101ab17a66 5y ago

What? Cars with collision detection systems already exist, and they can handle both side on and head on collision avoidance when a human is driving. People literally are buying cars that “make their own decisions”. Importantly though, these systems only activate in the case of an imminent collision IF the corrective measure won’t cause another collision. > that will pull the wheel … Yah, of course no one is going to buy a care that does what you describe because what you describe is insane and inherently unsafe. Unless a collision is imminent, nothing happens.