5 ms·

A few quotes from the video: * "My Tesla was on autopilot and it plowed into a deer in my lane, there were no cars behind me, it did not attempt to slow down o

A few quotes from the video: * "My Tesla was on autopilot and it plowed into a deer in my lane, there were no cars behind me, it did not attempt to slow down or stop." * "As one Tesla autopilot mile becomes 50, 500, 5000, the behavior of your brain changes - it offloads the cognitive burden of driving to the autopilot, even when you have your hands on the wheel looking straight ahead" * "Your brain cannot turn off habituation, it will put too much trust in autopilot, you can't do anything about that and that can be disastrous" * Mentioned article: Tesla Drivers Using Autopilot Watch the Road Less, MIT Study Shows - https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a37727214/tesla-drivers-autopilot-attention-mit-study/ https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a37727214/tesla-drivers-au... * The footage when it hits a deer is at the 3:50 timestamp - https://youtu.be/jrWH_0YA5XM?t=230 https://youtu.be/jrWH_0YA5XM?t=230

c7DJTLrn 5y ago
I don't get it, is the person advocating against using Autopilot then? What do they want Tesla do actually do? You can't have it both ways - can't pin it on Autopilot for making you less attentive and then continue using it only to point the finger when it doesn't compensate for lack of attention.
- JshWright 5y ago
  It is irresponsible for Tesla to market something as "autopilot" when it definitely isn't that. Telsa is the one trying to have it both ways (selling something by giving the impression that it offers full "autopilot" performance, then passing the buck back to the driver when anything goes wrong).
  - heavyset_go 5y ago
    For reference, Tesla's marketing[1] is clear about what they mean when they say "Autopilot" and "Full Self-Driving": > The person in the driver’s seat is only there for legal reasons. He is not doing anything. The car is driving itself. [1] https://www.tesla.com/videos/autopilot-self-driving-hardware-neighborhood-long?redirect=no https://www.tesla.com/videos/autopilot-self-driving-hardware...
    - josephcsible 5y ago
      They're saying that in those videos, the driver didn't need to provide any inputs to the car. They didn't say that you never will, or that he didn't have to pay attention and be ready to.
      - sidibe 5y ago
        There is absolutely no excuse for using that video to market Autopilot/FSD (it's still the main feature on tesla.com/autopilot). The driver is clearly not just there for legal reasons. Given that the video is a few years old and FSD beta is still screwing up every couple minutes in the most recent Youtube videos, that driver probably bailed it out in many bad takes before they got this one.
  - c7DJTLrn 5y ago
    I agree with you, but Tesla are very clear that the person in the driver's seat is 100% responsible for the vehicle when Autopilot is active. Until the law catches up with innovation, that will continue to be the case. Most planes today can land themselves, yet pilots still often land manually to keep their attention and skills sharp. Tesla drivers which make use of Autopilot should consider doing the same -- since ultimately it's their ass on the line for now.
    - falcolas 5y ago
      Aircraft pilots - especially those who fly jets with auto-landing features - are exceptionally well trained and paid to keep that attention and skill sharp. And that’s not counting their backup - the co-pilots - who are typically just as well trained and compensated as the lead pilots. I highly doubt Tesla will start putting drivers through several hundreds of hours of training every year (let alone pay them 6/7 figure salaries) to have properly safe and trained drivers in their cars.
      - userbinator 5y ago
        The other thing that people who bring up the aviation analogy don't often mention is the difference in scale of reaction times when flying in an aircraft; they are moving much faster, but the distance between them (and the ground below) is also much higher, more than proportional to cars; when the autopilot disconnects, there is at least a few seconds to react to the situation. In a car, reaction/handover times to avoid a collision are sub-second.
    - LilBytes 5y ago
      Like one of the GP comments said, >* "Your brain cannot turn off habituation' The entire argument falls apart, and quickly. If the statement 'its the drivers responsibility' relies on us completely ignoring human behaviours and patterns. People are falliable, and encouraging people to not concentrate and put trust into auto-pilot, and knowing with every kilometre travelled. People concentrate less and less. Who is at fault when the car misbehaves and breaks away from expected behaviours?
  - Ekaros 5y ago
    I'm not against calling Tesla's system autopilot. In the end autopilot in reality is dumb system. Cruise control is also an autopilot, so is lane assist. Problem comes when people think autopilot is actually smart, when it really only does pretty basic things... Selling FSD however is pure scam.
    - chucksta 5y ago
      Thats a pretty loose definition of autopilot; >noun: automatic pilot; plural noun: automatic pilots a device for keeping an aircraft on a set course without the intervention of the pilot. Cruise control only maintains velocity, lane assist still requires interventions when turns need to be made or lines are unclear. That sounds like intervention to me "without the intervention of the pilot" is a pretty pivotal part of everyone else's understanding of the word.
  - josephcsible 5y ago
    Do you agree with these two statements? 1. The feature marketed as "autopilot" on airliners is accurately named 2. The human pilots of airliners need to keep paying attention even when autopilot is active Isn't that exactly analogous to how it works in a Tesla? Why do you then say "it definitely isn't that"?
- tuatoru 5y ago
  With commercial airliners, they moved away from auto-landing systems to head-up displays: assistive technology for the pilots. To me it seems likely that putting in HUD-type assistance would be safer than attempting self driving, which is more complicated than landing a plane.
  - tialaramex 5y ago
    HUDs don't seem like they really impact auto-land. They do impact conditions in which take off is authorised because they can add a synthetic centre line so that pilots are comfortable taking off in low visibility. For landing existing CAT III landing will complete the entire landing and rollout. Failures (e.g. loss of a flight computer or sensor problems) that would lock out CAT III autoland would likewise rule out attempts in a HUD. The reason you don't see much real CAT IIIc bad weather landing isn't that it can't work or HUDs would be better, the problem is that sure, now you're safely on the ground but with zero visibility you're stuck on a runway, you can't very well taxi a jetliner when you can't see the concrete you're on let alone the signs and lights. Even a follow-me car won't help, you can't see it. Garmin's emergency autoland for GA pilots has the same problem, but since it's an emergency feature "Oh dear we took an entire airport out of service for an hour" is an acceptable consequence. The alternative may well have been fatal in that case. Anyway, people have added e.g. enhanced visibility and highway edge marker HUDs to high end vehicles before. But, that's going to be something you need to train with in order to use it effectively. An airline would send crew on the recommended two week course before they're allowed to fly the modified plane, but we know even private pilots routinely avoid recommended manufacturer training, and cars would definitely be worse. My guess: Tesla would sell a thousand cars with a HUD, fifty drivers would take the free training, ten of them would come away having learnt anything. All one thousand owners would be confident they can now drive at 60mph in dense fog even though the training said "You definitely must not drive at 60mph in dense fog".
    - tuatoru 5y ago
      Good points!
- carlivar 5y ago
  Autopilot is just poor quality. Period. If it can't even try to avoid a deer like this, it's bad software (and hardware). What should Tesla do? Make better software and hardware, and not let people pay for it and use it until it is good. This isn't early access to a Steam game but that's how Musk seems to treat it. But then again he has stock and reputation making it a one way road; there's no going back now. That leaves it to consumers and regulators. As consumers we can stop getting caught up in Musk's persona, and stop buying a dangerous product. And regulators should start doing their job for the first time in many years.
  - c7DJTLrn 5y ago
    Sure, I can acknowledge that the software should have reacted here, but so should've the driver. The driver is responsible for the vehicle and Tesla are clear about this. I don't think it's valid to blame inattentiveness on Autopilot either.
    - carlivar 5y ago
      So you're ignoring all the points of the video? That autopilot lulls the human brain slowly away from attention even with knowledge of its necessity? You're describing a flawed overall system. It has to be nearly perfect or it would be better not to exist at all. Middle ground is incompatible with our minds. You are asking for the impossible.
      - mjgoeke 5y ago
        Oh gosh no. I can see it now, google self driving car with built in “captcha” where it checks your response time to the “fire drill” alert tone to take over driving. That’ll train us. Probably the perfect time to show an advert too. Our attention is pulled, and the adrenaline is pumping… Or would that just train us to ignore the ‘take over tone’?
        sidibe 5y ago
        Google dropped this approach a long time ago precisely because of this problem: their employees were zoning out

c7DJTLrn 5y ago

I don't get it, is the person advocating against using Autopilot then? What do they want Tesla do actually do? You can't have it both ways - can't pin it on Autopilot for making you less attentive and then continue using it only to point the finger when it doesn't compensate for lack of attention.

JshWright 5y ago
It is irresponsible for Tesla to market something as "autopilot" when it definitely isn't that. Telsa is the one trying to have it both ways (selling something by giving the impression that it offers full "autopilot" performance, then passing the buck back to the driver when anything goes wrong).
- heavyset_go 5y ago
  For reference, Tesla's marketing[1] is clear about what they mean when they say "Autopilot" and "Full Self-Driving": > The person in the driver’s seat is only there for legal reasons. He is not doing anything. The car is driving itself. [1] https://www.tesla.com/videos/autopilot-self-driving-hardware-neighborhood-long?redirect=no https://www.tesla.com/videos/autopilot-self-driving-hardware...
  - josephcsible 5y ago
    They're saying that in those videos, the driver didn't need to provide any inputs to the car. They didn't say that you never will, or that he didn't have to pay attention and be ready to.
    - sidibe 5y ago
      There is absolutely no excuse for using that video to market Autopilot/FSD (it's still the main feature on tesla.com/autopilot). The driver is clearly not just there for legal reasons. Given that the video is a few years old and FSD beta is still screwing up every couple minutes in the most recent Youtube videos, that driver probably bailed it out in many bad takes before they got this one.
- c7DJTLrn 5y ago
  I agree with you, but Tesla are very clear that the person in the driver's seat is 100% responsible for the vehicle when Autopilot is active. Until the law catches up with innovation, that will continue to be the case. Most planes today can land themselves, yet pilots still often land manually to keep their attention and skills sharp. Tesla drivers which make use of Autopilot should consider doing the same -- since ultimately it's their ass on the line for now.
  - falcolas 5y ago
    Aircraft pilots - especially those who fly jets with auto-landing features - are exceptionally well trained and paid to keep that attention and skill sharp. And that’s not counting their backup - the co-pilots - who are typically just as well trained and compensated as the lead pilots. I highly doubt Tesla will start putting drivers through several hundreds of hours of training every year (let alone pay them 6/7 figure salaries) to have properly safe and trained drivers in their cars.
    - userbinator 5y ago
      The other thing that people who bring up the aviation analogy don't often mention is the difference in scale of reaction times when flying in an aircraft; they are moving much faster, but the distance between them (and the ground below) is also much higher, more than proportional to cars; when the autopilot disconnects, there is at least a few seconds to react to the situation. In a car, reaction/handover times to avoid a collision are sub-second.
  - LilBytes 5y ago
    Like one of the GP comments said, >* "Your brain cannot turn off habituation' The entire argument falls apart, and quickly. If the statement 'its the drivers responsibility' relies on us completely ignoring human behaviours and patterns. People are falliable, and encouraging people to not concentrate and put trust into auto-pilot, and knowing with every kilometre travelled. People concentrate less and less. Who is at fault when the car misbehaves and breaks away from expected behaviours?
- Ekaros 5y ago
  I'm not against calling Tesla's system autopilot. In the end autopilot in reality is dumb system. Cruise control is also an autopilot, so is lane assist. Problem comes when people think autopilot is actually smart, when it really only does pretty basic things... Selling FSD however is pure scam.
  - chucksta 5y ago
    Thats a pretty loose definition of autopilot; >noun: automatic pilot; plural noun: automatic pilots a device for keeping an aircraft on a set course without the intervention of the pilot. Cruise control only maintains velocity, lane assist still requires interventions when turns need to be made or lines are unclear. That sounds like intervention to me "without the intervention of the pilot" is a pretty pivotal part of everyone else's understanding of the word.
- josephcsible 5y ago
  Do you agree with these two statements? 1. The feature marketed as "autopilot" on airliners is accurately named 2. The human pilots of airliners need to keep paying attention even when autopilot is active Isn't that exactly analogous to how it works in a Tesla? Why do you then say "it definitely isn't that"?
tuatoru 5y ago
With commercial airliners, they moved away from auto-landing systems to head-up displays: assistive technology for the pilots. To me it seems likely that putting in HUD-type assistance would be safer than attempting self driving, which is more complicated than landing a plane.
- tialaramex 5y ago
  HUDs don't seem like they really impact auto-land. They do impact conditions in which take off is authorised because they can add a synthetic centre line so that pilots are comfortable taking off in low visibility. For landing existing CAT III landing will complete the entire landing and rollout. Failures (e.g. loss of a flight computer or sensor problems) that would lock out CAT III autoland would likewise rule out attempts in a HUD. The reason you don't see much real CAT IIIc bad weather landing isn't that it can't work or HUDs would be better, the problem is that sure, now you're safely on the ground but with zero visibility you're stuck on a runway, you can't very well taxi a jetliner when you can't see the concrete you're on let alone the signs and lights. Even a follow-me car won't help, you can't see it. Garmin's emergency autoland for GA pilots has the same problem, but since it's an emergency feature "Oh dear we took an entire airport out of service for an hour" is an acceptable consequence. The alternative may well have been fatal in that case. Anyway, people have added e.g. enhanced visibility and highway edge marker HUDs to high end vehicles before. But, that's going to be something you need to train with in order to use it effectively. An airline would send crew on the recommended two week course before they're allowed to fly the modified plane, but we know even private pilots routinely avoid recommended manufacturer training, and cars would definitely be worse. My guess: Tesla would sell a thousand cars with a HUD, fifty drivers would take the free training, ten of them would come away having learnt anything. All one thousand owners would be confident they can now drive at 60mph in dense fog even though the training said "You definitely must not drive at 60mph in dense fog".
  - tuatoru 5y ago
    Good points!
carlivar 5y ago
Autopilot is just poor quality. Period. If it can't even try to avoid a deer like this, it's bad software (and hardware). What should Tesla do? Make better software and hardware, and not let people pay for it and use it until it is good. This isn't early access to a Steam game but that's how Musk seems to treat it. But then again he has stock and reputation making it a one way road; there's no going back now. That leaves it to consumers and regulators. As consumers we can stop getting caught up in Musk's persona, and stop buying a dangerous product. And regulators should start doing their job for the first time in many years.
- c7DJTLrn 5y ago
  Sure, I can acknowledge that the software should have reacted here, but so should've the driver. The driver is responsible for the vehicle and Tesla are clear about this. I don't think it's valid to blame inattentiveness on Autopilot either.
  - carlivar 5y ago
    So you're ignoring all the points of the video? That autopilot lulls the human brain slowly away from attention even with knowledge of its necessity? You're describing a flawed overall system. It has to be nearly perfect or it would be better not to exist at all. Middle ground is incompatible with our minds. You are asking for the impossible.
    - mjgoeke 5y ago
      Oh gosh no. I can see it now, google self driving car with built in “captcha” where it checks your response time to the “fire drill” alert tone to take over driving. That’ll train us. Probably the perfect time to show an advert too. Our attention is pulled, and the adrenaline is pumping… Or would that just train us to ignore the ‘take over tone’?
      - sidibe 5y ago
        Google dropped this approach a long time ago precisely because of this problem: their employees were zoning out