3 ms·
The result of "autopilot" is entirely predictable. The NTSB, NHTSA, CSB, and pretty much every other safety board have repeatedly found that any system that req
by olliej 5y ago
The result of "autopilot" is entirely predictable. The NTSB, NHTSA, CSB, and pretty much every other safety board have repeatedly found that any system that requires someone (anyone) pay complete attention, while also not actually doing anything, will fail in the second part. It is wholly unreasonable to expect a person "in control" of a partially self driving car to have instantaneous response, it isn't even reasonable to expect 90% attention to what is going on around the car.
Add to that Tesla's insistence on intentionally mislabeling things - autopilot has a clear implication, especially given their demos of it, the "full self driving" mode is clearly outright false labeling - and I think Tesla does share liability.
The current model of "self driving" with the expectation the a driver will be able to immediately respond to anything the driving system misses, is inherently unsafe.
- pxmpxm 5y agoThere are countless HCI studies showing the problem that you mentioned - any interface that requires full and immediate context 1/10000 times while being hands off otherwise will fail in real world use. This issue is so pronounced in mission critical systems that the problem is intentionally inverted, where the machine intervenes in the 1/10k scenarios and humans are in control the rest of the time - think flight control laws in aero or auto scram in nuclear engineering etc.