5 ms·

Thanks, I'm not sure how I missed that. >I'm not going to trust a system that isn't as good as a normal attentive driver. As I understand it, we're not expect

Thanks, I'm not sure how I missed that. >I'm not going to trust a system that isn't as good as a normal attentive driver. As I understand it, we're not expected to trust the current incarnation of Tesla Autopilot. We're supposed to be ready to intervene in case it screws up. I'd be interested to know how long the drivers of the 12 Teslas in these accidents had to intervene but didn't (how long was it obvious Autopilot had screwed up before the impact).

PavleMiha 5y ago
My problem with this is that we have little proof that people are any good at this sort of task (i.e. monitoring something without intervening for really long stretches of time). So if data show that people keep failing at it we have to take a look and decide that it's not a good system, not that the people are at fault.
- FireBeyond 5y ago
  Even more than that, we actual have multiple studies demonstrating that people are actively bad at this sort of task.
ghaff 5y ago
The challenge, which no one has a good answer for, is that if you do a "good" job of automating something, people will zone out. It's just how we're wired.