5 ms·

Did Tesla respond to this? I am curious if this an algorithm issue or an issue with real time scheduling where the necessary signal did not arrive in time and s

Did Tesla respond to this? I am curious if this an algorithm issue or an issue with real time scheduling where the necessary signal did not arrive in time and so the whole system failed to react.

ars 5y ago
Did you watch the video? The truck is almost impossible to see it's so dark. However human night vision is much better than camera night vision, so I wonder what an actual human would have seen in that scenario. But it's certain the camera could not really see it.
- bitshiftfaced 5y ago
  The truck still blocks the view of headlights of the traffic in the other lane. It also blocked view of the lights of the right-lane truck near the end. I don't know what the state of the art is like, but humans can tell something is "off" up ahead when they see this kind of "disappearing headlights" pattern. In any case, the tweet claims there was no braking of any kind, and I'd expect braking at least in the split second before the crash, where the truck is visible to the camera.
- jabedude 5y ago
  The non-compressed video[0] is much clearer. I can clearly see the truck ~1s before the crash [0]. https://twitter.com/haenschengross/status/1473326136755118085?s=20 https://twitter.com/haenschengross/status/147332613675511808...
  - pwillia7 5y ago
    You can also see the system does apply brakes just before crash or before the system aborts if you frame by frame
  - SilasX 5y ago
    I'm reminded of the time the Uber SDC hit the pedestrian. Uber initally released one camera's footage, where the ped wasn't visible until it was too late.[1] But then others drove the same path in the same lighting conditions and, even with their (unspecialized) dashcams it was clear you had plenty of time to see someone in the street -- and even that much is ignoring how humans see better at night than the dashcam would! (Oddly, I can't seem to find any such videos at the moment or know what terms I should be using to search, but I definitely remember people uploading such videos to YouTube.) [1] https://fortune.com/2018/03/19/uber-self-driving-car-crash/ https://fortune.com/2018/03/19/uber-self-driving-car-crash/
- kybernetyk 5y ago
  There's a "less compressed" video. The computer had ample time to react: https://streamable.com/7ixg7l https://streamable.com/7ixg7l
- pwillia7 5y ago
  I feel like you would definitely notice the broken white lane lines ... You can see it pretty well in the uncompressed version.
- FireBeyond 5y ago
  That's part of the issue - Elon says that LIDAR is "a deadend" and removed radar from Teslas as being "unnecessary", because their cameras "could do everything needed". Either one of those would have detected this. My Audi's radar works great in pea soup fog. Has prevented me from nearly rear-ending a gray vehicle with no lights on in heavy fog.
  - criddell 5y ago
    Removing LIDAR could still be the right call even if it means accidents like this still happen or even happen more often. If removing LIDAR lowers the cost of the vehicles which means more of them are sold which results in a fewer accidents and fatalities overall, then I think it's the right call.
    - ModernMech 5y ago
      > more of them are sold which results in a fewer accidents and fatalities overall This argument needs to be fleshed out more after a video like this surfaces. I can't accept at face value that this style of autonomous car, which has demonstrated issues running into parked and stationary objects, is the platform which when mass distributed will reduce overall accidents and fatalities. It's clear from this video that this vehicle doesn't know when it's blind, and will merrily carry on at 75 mph even though it has no idea what's going on around it. If you are driving in the dark or the fog and you can't see 12 seconds in front of you, you slow down until you can. Not Tesla apparently -- it will continue on at 75mph even though it can't break in time if something emerges in front of it. How is this the technological basis of a something that promises to lower overall fatalities? How does this get better with scale? Seems to me, based on this repeatedly demonstrated mode of failure, scale will only reveal how broken their self driving system is. Why is it accepted here that filling the road with autonomous cars that don't know when they're blind and run into parked objects will somehow result in a net positive outcome? Moreover, how is Tesla in particular the company which is going to deliver these safer vehicles that make our roads safer? Tesla has a history and culture of deception in their marketing. They haven't taken these accidents seriously in their engineering and product design. Teslas have been running into stationary objects for 5+ years now and they show no sign of fixing that. Call me crazy but if I were shipping a driverless car technology, I'd want to make sure it didn't run into things. Maybe that's just me? Tesla recklessly released this flawed technology and product to actual consumers for use on actual roads. How are these the actions of a safety-focused company? From my perspective, if you flood the roads with Teslas, you're not going to get safer roads, you're going to get more Twitter threads with videos like this. The claim that this will necessarily lead to safer roads is yet to be proven.
- vb6sp6 5y ago
  scroll down. there is an uncompressed version that is a easier to see. It had plenty of time to apply the brakes
- aeternum 5y ago
  The truck driver also did not brake until just past the wreck and truck drivers a significantly more experienced than the average human driver. It's hard to see in the video even when primed for it, much less likely a human would see it when not expecting it.
- yalogin 5y ago
  I think folks here are misunderstanding what I am trying to say above. The system seems it, at least the sensors will and then they send the image to the module that processes this and runs the algorithm to detect that its a stationary object and that it needs to hit the brakes. Then the signal needs to be sent to the module that brakes. Being a real time system, all of these need to happen within a time window for the brakes to be applied at the right time. Its possible that because of some resource constraints or poor programming/design one of the steps in the chain is not triggered and so the system did not brake.

Did Tesla respond to this? I am curious if this an algorithm issue or an issue with real time scheduling where the necessary signal did not arrive in time and so the whole system failed to react.

ars 5y ago

Did you watch the video? The truck is almost impossible to see it's so dark. However human night vision is much better than camera night vision, so I wonder what an actual human would have seen in that scenario. But it's certain the camera could not really see it.

bitshiftfaced 5y ago
The truck still blocks the view of headlights of the traffic in the other lane. It also blocked view of the lights of the right-lane truck near the end. I don't know what the state of the art is like, but humans can tell something is "off" up ahead when they see this kind of "disappearing headlights" pattern. In any case, the tweet claims there was no braking of any kind, and I'd expect braking at least in the split second before the crash, where the truck is visible to the camera.
jabedude 5y ago
The non-compressed video[0] is much clearer. I can clearly see the truck ~1s before the crash [0]. https://twitter.com/haenschengross/status/1473326136755118085?s=20 https://twitter.com/haenschengross/status/147332613675511808...
- pwillia7 5y ago
  You can also see the system does apply brakes just before crash or before the system aborts if you frame by frame
- SilasX 5y ago
  I'm reminded of the time the Uber SDC hit the pedestrian. Uber initally released one camera's footage, where the ped wasn't visible until it was too late.[1] But then others drove the same path in the same lighting conditions and, even with their (unspecialized) dashcams it was clear you had plenty of time to see someone in the street -- and even that much is ignoring how humans see better at night than the dashcam would! (Oddly, I can't seem to find any such videos at the moment or know what terms I should be using to search, but I definitely remember people uploading such videos to YouTube.) [1] https://fortune.com/2018/03/19/uber-self-driving-car-crash/ https://fortune.com/2018/03/19/uber-self-driving-car-crash/
kybernetyk 5y ago
There's a "less compressed" video. The computer had ample time to react: https://streamable.com/7ixg7l https://streamable.com/7ixg7l
pwillia7 5y ago
I feel like you would definitely notice the broken white lane lines ... You can see it pretty well in the uncompressed version.
FireBeyond 5y ago
That's part of the issue - Elon says that LIDAR is "a deadend" and removed radar from Teslas as being "unnecessary", because their cameras "could do everything needed". Either one of those would have detected this. My Audi's radar works great in pea soup fog. Has prevented me from nearly rear-ending a gray vehicle with no lights on in heavy fog.
- criddell 5y ago
  Removing LIDAR could still be the right call even if it means accidents like this still happen or even happen more often. If removing LIDAR lowers the cost of the vehicles which means more of them are sold which results in a fewer accidents and fatalities overall, then I think it's the right call.
  - ModernMech 5y ago
    > more of them are sold which results in a fewer accidents and fatalities overall This argument needs to be fleshed out more after a video like this surfaces. I can't accept at face value that this style of autonomous car, which has demonstrated issues running into parked and stationary objects, is the platform which when mass distributed will reduce overall accidents and fatalities. It's clear from this video that this vehicle doesn't know when it's blind, and will merrily carry on at 75 mph even though it has no idea what's going on around it. If you are driving in the dark or the fog and you can't see 12 seconds in front of you, you slow down until you can. Not Tesla apparently -- it will continue on at 75mph even though it can't break in time if something emerges in front of it. How is this the technological basis of a something that promises to lower overall fatalities? How does this get better with scale? Seems to me, based on this repeatedly demonstrated mode of failure, scale will only reveal how broken their self driving system is. Why is it accepted here that filling the road with autonomous cars that don't know when they're blind and run into parked objects will somehow result in a net positive outcome? Moreover, how is Tesla in particular the company which is going to deliver these safer vehicles that make our roads safer? Tesla has a history and culture of deception in their marketing. They haven't taken these accidents seriously in their engineering and product design. Teslas have been running into stationary objects for 5+ years now and they show no sign of fixing that. Call me crazy but if I were shipping a driverless car technology, I'd want to make sure it didn't run into things. Maybe that's just me? Tesla recklessly released this flawed technology and product to actual consumers for use on actual roads. How are these the actions of a safety-focused company? From my perspective, if you flood the roads with Teslas, you're not going to get safer roads, you're going to get more Twitter threads with videos like this. The claim that this will necessarily lead to safer roads is yet to be proven.
vb6sp6 5y ago
scroll down. there is an uncompressed version that is a easier to see. It had plenty of time to apply the brakes
aeternum 5y ago
The truck driver also did not brake until just past the wreck and truck drivers a significantly more experienced than the average human driver. It's hard to see in the video even when primed for it, much less likely a human would see it when not expecting it.
yalogin 5y ago
I think folks here are misunderstanding what I am trying to say above. The system seems it, at least the sensors will and then they send the image to the module that processes this and runs the algorithm to detect that its a stationary object and that it needs to hit the brakes. Then the signal needs to be sent to the module that brakes. Being a real time system, all of these need to happen within a time window for the brakes to be applied at the right time. Its possible that because of some resource constraints or poor programming/design one of the steps in the chain is not triggered and so the system did not brake.