6 ms·

It's a good question, and I'm dismayed to see the various knee-jerk reactions to it. Seems to get caught up in the pro/anti-Tesla/Musk/blah noise. No, thank you

by throwaway320923 4y ago

It's a good question, and I'm dismayed to see the various knee-jerk reactions to it. Seems to get caught up in the pro/anti-Tesla/Musk/blah noise. No, thank you. Here's the thing - people get in accidents all the time when assistance features like ABS, lane keeping, traction control, TACC, good-old-fashioned dumb cruise control, etc. are actively altering the vehicle's performance and behavior. So when we consider Tesla's AP system, it's really just TACC + lane keeping. Something that is common on a wide variety of vehicles today. Why then is Tesla specifically being focused on? All these other systems have similar failure modes, including, but not limited to: Not stopping for a stopped vehicle far ahead, not slowing for or avoiding objects in or near the lane, etc. These are assistance features. Thus, in all of these scenarios, it is likely that chief responsibility for the accident lies with the human behind the wheel. We should be studying all OEM systems, not just Tesla's. And specifically, we should be looking at whether the system made the situation worse through its actions than if it had taken no action (akin to a distracted human driving on dumb cruise control). If it is the case that a Tesla on AP will ram right in to a firetruck flashing its lights while stopped in the lane directly ahead, it is quite likely that many other systems do the same. We just don't really talk about them, because it casually falls under the realm of "human wasn't paying attention". They're not special. We all sort of implicitly accept that. But when it's a Tesla, it's special. In any case, we'll get over it eventually. This technology is not unique to Tesla and will only become more commonplace. It will continue to get better at avoiding things despite the hoards of distracted drivers.

jdsully 4y ago
Most of these other implementations have radar and LiDAR. Teslas is the inferior solution. That’s why if you order one you see a disclaimer that it is vision only.
- jstream67 4y ago
  I think all the crashes involved in this investigation would have been radar. The vision only is really 2022+ year model cars (and possibly some late 2021).
- ActorNightly 4y ago
  You have no basis for saying its inferior.
  - clouddrover 4y ago
    Tesla says it is inferior because they are bringing radar back: https://electrek.co/2022/06/08/tesla-files-use-new-radar-confused/ https://electrek.co/2022/06/08/tesla-files-use-new-radar-con...
mike_d 4y ago
> Why then is Tesla specifically being focused on? Because before Tesla launched the feature, "Autopilot" was known in the general consciousness to mean a specific thing. Autopilot is the thing on planes that lets the pilot do other tasks (like navigational routing). Other car manufactures are smart enough to not brand their cruise control as "Self Driving" or the like. If I sold a brand of drain cleaner under the name "Laundry Detergent" that would rightly result in some consumer protection investigations.
- zionic 4y ago
  >Because before Tesla launched the feature, "Autopilot" was known in the general consciousness to mean a specific thing Not that I agree with your statement, but the "general consciousness" would be wrong in that case. Autopilot in most aircraft will gladly fly you into the side of a mountain or other aircraft.
  - lolc 4y ago
    The environment matters. An aircraft autopilot will allow the pilot to safely disengage while in controlled airspace. A Tesla "Autopilot" will not let the driver disengage in any situation.
    - zionic 4y ago
      >A Tesla "Autopilot" will not let the driver disengage in any situation. Um, what? A driver can override Tesla autopilot at any time.
      - lolc 4y ago
        Clearly, it must be possible to disengage the Tesla "Autopilot" at any time. Because it can fuck up any second. I was talking about freeing the pilot from maintaining situational awareness. This is not supported for drivers of Tesla vehicles; the term "autopilot" is misleading in that context.
colinmhayes 4y ago
Tesla markets their system as autopilot and full self driving. They are misleading people into believing the car is capable of driving itself. No one reads TACC/lane keeping and thinks "cool I can just play on my phone", But tons of tesla owners think that. It's not a coincidence.
- ActorNightly 4y ago
  Lots of people also buy sport motorcycles, thinking that because it has traction control and ABS means its safe, but then still end up crashing them and getting seriously hurt or dying. Should there be in investigations for motorcycle companies making unsafe bikes? Or is it more the case of certain people in general being predisposed to taking more risks and not realizing the consequences?
  - kaba0 4y ago
    That’s a bad faith analogy.
    - ActorNightly 4y ago
      Not really. Tesla markets their features a certain way with all the warnings present, and motorcycle manufacturers also market their features a certain way, and ironically enough, there isn't giant warning labels plasted all over the bike and/or dash about how dangerous motorcycles are. Why? Because most anyone already understands that motorcycles are dangerous, and those that choose to ignore risks get fucked. Why should Tesla be any different?
      - colinmhayes 4y ago
        Because people don't understand the risks with their tesla...
kube-system 4y ago
The difference between Tesla's system and driver assistance features that other automakers have, is that Tesla's system encourages a lower level of driver engagement, and it will initiate larger inputs. If those inputs are not what the driver is expecting, a driver in a Tesla may have to correct a more severe failure mode and they may have to do so after being mentally disengaged for a longer period.
- jstream67 4y ago
  From watching youtube videos I got the impression that the Ford 'Blue Cruise' does not require the hands to be on the wheel. I haven't used the Ford system but I have used the Tesla system and it requires you to move the wheel at a pretty annoyingly and regular frequency to remain in autopilot mode. I believe the cabin camera can also detect when you are on your phone or looking away - but i'm not sure if this is rolled out to non-FSD cars. I think the frequency that you have to prove you are paying attention is about every 30 seconds
  - kube-system 4y ago
    BlueCruise has a driver facing camera, some Tesla models do not: https://youtu.be/ovc2axLmzIw?t=65 https://youtu.be/ovc2axLmzIw?t=65
kaba0 4y ago
Tesla is the only one maliciously advertising their tech as something else than what it is. The general public doesn’t understand that the tech is largely the same as in a low-end car.

jdsully 4y ago

Most of these other implementations have radar and LiDAR. Teslas is the inferior solution. That’s why if you order one you see a disclaimer that it is vision only.

jstream67 4y ago
I think all the crashes involved in this investigation would have been radar. The vision only is really 2022+ year model cars (and possibly some late 2021).
ActorNightly 4y ago
You have no basis for saying its inferior.
- clouddrover 4y ago
  Tesla says it is inferior because they are bringing radar back: https://electrek.co/2022/06/08/tesla-files-use-new-radar-confused/ https://electrek.co/2022/06/08/tesla-files-use-new-radar-con...

mike_d 4y ago

> Why then is Tesla specifically being focused on? Because before Tesla launched the feature, "Autopilot" was known in the general consciousness to mean a specific thing. Autopilot is the thing on planes that lets the pilot do other tasks (like navigational routing). Other car manufactures are smart enough to not brand their cruise control as "Self Driving" or the like. If I sold a brand of drain cleaner under the name "Laundry Detergent" that would rightly result in some consumer protection investigations.

zionic 4y ago
>Because before Tesla launched the feature, "Autopilot" was known in the general consciousness to mean a specific thing Not that I agree with your statement, but the "general consciousness" would be wrong in that case. Autopilot in most aircraft will gladly fly you into the side of a mountain or other aircraft.
- lolc 4y ago
  The environment matters. An aircraft autopilot will allow the pilot to safely disengage while in controlled airspace. A Tesla "Autopilot" will not let the driver disengage in any situation.
  - zionic 4y ago
    >A Tesla "Autopilot" will not let the driver disengage in any situation. Um, what? A driver can override Tesla autopilot at any time.
    - lolc 4y ago
      Clearly, it must be possible to disengage the Tesla "Autopilot" at any time. Because it can fuck up any second. I was talking about freeing the pilot from maintaining situational awareness. This is not supported for drivers of Tesla vehicles; the term "autopilot" is misleading in that context.

colinmhayes 4y ago

Tesla markets their system as autopilot and full self driving. They are misleading people into believing the car is capable of driving itself. No one reads TACC/lane keeping and thinks "cool I can just play on my phone", But tons of tesla owners think that. It's not a coincidence.

ActorNightly 4y ago
Lots of people also buy sport motorcycles, thinking that because it has traction control and ABS means its safe, but then still end up crashing them and getting seriously hurt or dying. Should there be in investigations for motorcycle companies making unsafe bikes? Or is it more the case of certain people in general being predisposed to taking more risks and not realizing the consequences?
- kaba0 4y ago
  That’s a bad faith analogy.
  - ActorNightly 4y ago
    Not really. Tesla markets their features a certain way with all the warnings present, and motorcycle manufacturers also market their features a certain way, and ironically enough, there isn't giant warning labels plasted all over the bike and/or dash about how dangerous motorcycles are. Why? Because most anyone already understands that motorcycles are dangerous, and those that choose to ignore risks get fucked. Why should Tesla be any different?
    - colinmhayes 4y ago
      Because people don't understand the risks with their tesla...

kube-system 4y ago

The difference between Tesla's system and driver assistance features that other automakers have, is that Tesla's system encourages a lower level of driver engagement, and it will initiate larger inputs. If those inputs are not what the driver is expecting, a driver in a Tesla may have to correct a more severe failure mode and they may have to do so after being mentally disengaged for a longer period.

jstream67 4y ago
From watching youtube videos I got the impression that the Ford 'Blue Cruise' does not require the hands to be on the wheel. I haven't used the Ford system but I have used the Tesla system and it requires you to move the wheel at a pretty annoyingly and regular frequency to remain in autopilot mode. I believe the cabin camera can also detect when you are on your phone or looking away - but i'm not sure if this is rolled out to non-FSD cars. I think the frequency that you have to prove you are paying attention is about every 30 seconds
- kube-system 4y ago
  BlueCruise has a driver facing camera, some Tesla models do not: https://youtu.be/ovc2axLmzIw?t=65 https://youtu.be/ovc2axLmzIw?t=65

kaba0 4y ago

Tesla is the only one maliciously advertising their tech as something else than what it is. The general public doesn’t understand that the tech is largely the same as in a low-end car.