6 ms·

Germany: 1 Dead, 9 injured after BMW self driving test car veers into traffic

53 points by belltaco 4y ago

hypertele-Xii 4y ago
Title is missing the 1 from "1 Dead"
hedora 4y ago
It was not a self driving car: https://www.autoevolution.com/news/bmw-ix-with-an-autonomous-driving-label-crashes-in-germany-killing-one-injuring-nine-196141.html https://www.autoevolution.com/news/bmw-ix-with-an-autonomous... It was a test EV with level two autonomy (driver is always in control) features that are currently in production vehicles. It sounds like the test driver's family was in the car as well. I hope everyone is as well as can be. Having media attention like this focused on an apparent driving error must be terrible. The autonomous driving label was probably on the car to comply with a German privacy law.
- oblib 4y ago
  "It was not a self driving car" That doesn't work for me. The car was clearly "self driving" when it crossed the lane line. Even at very slow speeds that can be deadly because we're talking about something that can happen in less than a second or two. You cannot tell someone "this car can drive itself but you must be ready to take control at all times because if it fails it's your fault" while knowing that a failure can happen in less than a second. From what I've found you're more than twice as likely to get into a wreck when using this tech.
  - detaro 4y ago
    > The car was clearly "self driving" when it crossed the lane line Because it's impossible the driver was driving it manually and made a mistake? It's entirely possible that this was indeed a testing incident (although late afternoon and family with the driver doesn't sound like it, could still be), but we do not know that yet.
  - joshstrange 4y ago
    > The car was clearly "self driving" when it crossed the lane line. Literally not a scrap of proof that is the case here and yet you are willing to state it as fact. > From what I've found you're more than twice as likely to get into a wreck when using this tech. Source? This smells like FUD.
    - oblib 4y ago
      I couldn't find much on this, but I did find this: https://getjerry.com/questions/how-many-fatalities-have-been-due-to-self-driving-vehicles https://getjerry.com/questions/how-many-fatalities-have-been...
      - joshstrange 4y ago
        You'll have to forgive me for not taking an insurance company's uncited number at face value. > Stats estimate that per million miles driven, there are 9.1 self-driving car accidents, whereas there are only 4.1 crashes per million miles driven with human-operated vehicles. What stats? Where are these stats? Also the type/severity of accident matters here as well which further muddies the water. All that said I'm not willing to accept the status quo just because the new tech has caused a few deaths (5 according to the link you provided) since the status quo is 30-40K/year [0]. Obviously the important stat is a per-capita-type number that gives us "deaths per car of a given automation level, 0-5". [0] https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/813053 https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/...
        oblib 4y ago
        I agree that source is lacking. I did find this though, and it says "Verified Tesla Autopilot Death" are at 15 now, but the total deaths from Tesla involved crashes are at 290 since 2013. So you may be more likely to die from being smacked by a Tesla than being in one using their autopilot feature: https://www.tesladeaths.com/ https://www.tesladeaths.com/
  - Demonsult 4y ago
    Agreed because humans do a poor job of passively monitoring automated things for an extended time. I don't think we can talk our way out of that.
  - jnwatson 4y ago
    Level 2 automation doesn't typically switch lanes. I'd wager 10-to-1 odds this was an active mistake by the driver. It is possible, however, that the car was in lane-following mode and got horribly confused (in which case, it is still a mistake by the driver, just different).
  - topspin 4y ago
    > You cannot tell someone "this car can drive itself but you must be ready to take control at all times because if it fails it's your fault" while knowing that a failure can happen in less than a second. You can; you only need to be powerful enough to dilute responsibly for failures enough to get away with it. It is self evident that the margin for error is too small to rely on human intervention. It is absurd to expect humans to maintain the equivalent of manual driving situational awareness at all times. But when you're hell bent on selling automated driving you lose the capability of grasping these things.
- cmsj 4y ago
  Level 2 is the equivalent of Tesla's Autopilot. The driver is not always in control, but they must always be monitoring and be ready to immediately assume control. (In many ways, L2 is just about the dumbest imaginable level of automation)
  - panick21_ 4y ago
    > (In many ways, L2 is just about the dumbest imaginable level of automation) Except that it literally helps 100000s of people make their drives more enjoyable and is perfectly fine in a in many situations.
    - hugh-avherald 4y ago
      https://www.theonion.com/report-93-of-drunk-drivers-get-home-just-fine-1819569973 https://www.theonion.com/report-93-of-drunk-drivers-get-home...
oblib 4y ago
This is just wrong. Innocents being injured or killed while testing this tech is more akin to a negligent murder via technology than an "accident". Many years ago the 3M company created a magnetic tape for the lane lines on roads and a device to detect those for automobiles, along with a gizmo that would vibrate the driver's seat on the side the vehicle was getting too close to crossing the lane lines. That could help prevent these kinds of incidents, but cameras trying to detect painted lane lines have many obvious fail points and one of them is keeping the car in it's lane. This incident proves that once again. You cannot tell a human "this car can drive itself but you need to be ready to take control at all times" because that's a clear oxymoron. It either works, or it doesn't, and if it doesn't it's potentially deadly, and it only takes a second to become deadly, and humans cannot react to that failure 100% of the time. That's been proven too many times already.
- cmsj 4y ago
  > Innocents being injured or killed while testing this tech is more akin to a negligent murder via technology than an "accident". I'd like to see us treat autonomous road safety the way we treat aircraft safety, where even minor incidents are thoroughly investigated and often lead to industry-improving changes. Their approach clearly works because despite the fact that we hurl hundreds of thousands of people through the air every day in millimetre thick metal tubes, it's the safest way to travel. Leaving autonomous driving to the whims of the empathy-deficient utilitarianist VCs of the world, and barely regulating their work at all, is really not ok.
  - shultays 4y ago
    I'd like to see us treat autonomous road safety the way we treat aircraft safety To do that you need to increase your standards for being a car driver up to being a pilot. Since most accidents would involve human error.
    - salex89 4y ago
      Yeah, but training will cost a multiple thousand dollars and the car would go for a checkup every week.
dehrmann 4y ago
To Tesla's credit, it mostly kills its own passengers.
bengoodger 4y ago
Have a BMW X5 with this auto-steer nonsense and have had several incidents where it's abruptly turned the wheel, where if I weren't grabbing it it would have caused an accident. Ended up disabling the assistant system.
- _trampeltier 4y ago
  Two years ago an rental Audi A2 almost crashed me several times into the tunnel wall on the right side. It was a rainy night and sometimes when I drove into the tunnel, the car steared really hard right.
  - prodent 4y ago
    The Audi A2 has been out of production since 2005. Maybe a Q2?
GekkePrutser 4y ago
Ouch... That sounds very heavy. I wonder why they were testing this if it's exactly the same as the production system? Because if I read it correctly that's what they're saying now. That makes no sense. There must be something beta in there. At least it sounds the thing was chock full of cameras and telemetry recorders so it shouldn't be hard to find out exactly what happened, and prevent it in the future.
zht 4y ago
I have autosteering on for my 3 series and it really makes the drive easier. that being said you have to pay attention and you have to be ready to intervene. it doesn't try to kill me often but it does happen occasionally such a shame for those to die this way
- happytoexplain 4y ago
  I would hesitate to refer to being in a condition where you are watching a machine, ready to grab it the moment it tries to kill you, as "easy", but I understand how you're using the word.
chgo1 4y ago
The article was updated to: "Germany: 1 dead, 9 injured after test car veers into traffic"
hindsightbias 4y ago
Why is a child riding in a “test” vehicle?

53 points by belltaco 4y ago

Title is missing the 1 from "1 Dead"

It was not a self driving car: https://www.autoevolution.com/news/bmw-ix-with-an-autonomous-driving-label-crashes-in-germany-killing-one-injuring-nine-196141.html https://www.autoevolution.com/news/bmw-ix-with-an-autonomous... It was a test EV with level two autonomy (driver is always in control) features that are currently in production vehicles. It sounds like the test driver's family was in the car as well. I hope everyone is as well as can be. Having media attention like this focused on an apparent driving error must be terrible. The autonomous driving label was probably on the car to comply with a German privacy law.

oblib 4y ago
"It was not a self driving car" That doesn't work for me. The car was clearly "self driving" when it crossed the lane line. Even at very slow speeds that can be deadly because we're talking about something that can happen in less than a second or two. You cannot tell someone "this car can drive itself but you must be ready to take control at all times because if it fails it's your fault" while knowing that a failure can happen in less than a second. From what I've found you're more than twice as likely to get into a wreck when using this tech.
- detaro 4y ago
  > The car was clearly "self driving" when it crossed the lane line Because it's impossible the driver was driving it manually and made a mistake? It's entirely possible that this was indeed a testing incident (although late afternoon and family with the driver doesn't sound like it, could still be), but we do not know that yet.
- joshstrange 4y ago
  > The car was clearly "self driving" when it crossed the lane line. Literally not a scrap of proof that is the case here and yet you are willing to state it as fact. > From what I've found you're more than twice as likely to get into a wreck when using this tech. Source? This smells like FUD.
  - oblib 4y ago
    I couldn't find much on this, but I did find this: https://getjerry.com/questions/how-many-fatalities-have-been-due-to-self-driving-vehicles https://getjerry.com/questions/how-many-fatalities-have-been...
    - joshstrange 4y ago
      You'll have to forgive me for not taking an insurance company's uncited number at face value. > Stats estimate that per million miles driven, there are 9.1 self-driving car accidents, whereas there are only 4.1 crashes per million miles driven with human-operated vehicles. What stats? Where are these stats? Also the type/severity of accident matters here as well which further muddies the water. All that said I'm not willing to accept the status quo just because the new tech has caused a few deaths (5 according to the link you provided) since the status quo is 30-40K/year [0]. Obviously the important stat is a per-capita-type number that gives us "deaths per car of a given automation level, 0-5". [0] https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/813053 https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/...
      - oblib 4y ago
        I agree that source is lacking. I did find this though, and it says "Verified Tesla Autopilot Death" are at 15 now, but the total deaths from Tesla involved crashes are at 290 since 2013. So you may be more likely to die from being smacked by a Tesla than being in one using their autopilot feature: https://www.tesladeaths.com/ https://www.tesladeaths.com/
- Demonsult 4y ago
  Agreed because humans do a poor job of passively monitoring automated things for an extended time. I don't think we can talk our way out of that.
- jnwatson 4y ago
  Level 2 automation doesn't typically switch lanes. I'd wager 10-to-1 odds this was an active mistake by the driver. It is possible, however, that the car was in lane-following mode and got horribly confused (in which case, it is still a mistake by the driver, just different).
- topspin 4y ago
  > You cannot tell someone "this car can drive itself but you must be ready to take control at all times because if it fails it's your fault" while knowing that a failure can happen in less than a second. You can; you only need to be powerful enough to dilute responsibly for failures enough to get away with it. It is self evident that the margin for error is too small to rely on human intervention. It is absurd to expect humans to maintain the equivalent of manual driving situational awareness at all times. But when you're hell bent on selling automated driving you lose the capability of grasping these things.
cmsj 4y ago
Level 2 is the equivalent of Tesla's Autopilot. The driver is not always in control, but they must always be monitoring and be ready to immediately assume control. (In many ways, L2 is just about the dumbest imaginable level of automation)
- panick21_ 4y ago
  > (In many ways, L2 is just about the dumbest imaginable level of automation) Except that it literally helps 100000s of people make their drives more enjoyable and is perfectly fine in a in many situations.
  - hugh-avherald 4y ago
    https://www.theonion.com/report-93-of-drunk-drivers-get-home-just-fine-1819569973 https://www.theonion.com/report-93-of-drunk-drivers-get-home...

oblib 4y ago

This is just wrong. Innocents being injured or killed while testing this tech is more akin to a negligent murder via technology than an "accident". Many years ago the 3M company created a magnetic tape for the lane lines on roads and a device to detect those for automobiles, along with a gizmo that would vibrate the driver's seat on the side the vehicle was getting too close to crossing the lane lines. That could help prevent these kinds of incidents, but cameras trying to detect painted lane lines have many obvious fail points and one of them is keeping the car in it's lane. This incident proves that once again. You cannot tell a human "this car can drive itself but you need to be ready to take control at all times" because that's a clear oxymoron. It either works, or it doesn't, and if it doesn't it's potentially deadly, and it only takes a second to become deadly, and humans cannot react to that failure 100% of the time. That's been proven too many times already.

cmsj 4y ago
> Innocents being injured or killed while testing this tech is more akin to a negligent murder via technology than an "accident". I'd like to see us treat autonomous road safety the way we treat aircraft safety, where even minor incidents are thoroughly investigated and often lead to industry-improving changes. Their approach clearly works because despite the fact that we hurl hundreds of thousands of people through the air every day in millimetre thick metal tubes, it's the safest way to travel. Leaving autonomous driving to the whims of the empathy-deficient utilitarianist VCs of the world, and barely regulating their work at all, is really not ok.
- shultays 4y ago
  I'd like to see us treat autonomous road safety the way we treat aircraft safety To do that you need to increase your standards for being a car driver up to being a pilot. Since most accidents would involve human error.
  - salex89 4y ago
    Yeah, but training will cost a multiple thousand dollars and the car would go for a checkup every week.

dehrmann 4y ago

To Tesla's credit, it mostly kills its own passengers.

bengoodger 4y ago

Have a BMW X5 with this auto-steer nonsense and have had several incidents where it's abruptly turned the wheel, where if I weren't grabbing it it would have caused an accident. Ended up disabling the assistant system.

_trampeltier 4y ago
Two years ago an rental Audi A2 almost crashed me several times into the tunnel wall on the right side. It was a rainy night and sometimes when I drove into the tunnel, the car steared really hard right.
- prodent 4y ago
  The Audi A2 has been out of production since 2005. Maybe a Q2?

GekkePrutser 4y ago

Ouch... That sounds very heavy. I wonder why they were testing this if it's exactly the same as the production system? Because if I read it correctly that's what they're saying now. That makes no sense. There must be something beta in there. At least it sounds the thing was chock full of cameras and telemetry recorders so it shouldn't be hard to find out exactly what happened, and prevent it in the future.

zht 4y ago

I have autosteering on for my 3 series and it really makes the drive easier. that being said you have to pay attention and you have to be ready to intervene. it doesn't try to kill me often but it does happen occasionally such a shame for those to die this way

happytoexplain 4y ago
I would hesitate to refer to being in a condition where you are watching a machine, ready to grab it the moment it tries to kill you, as "easy", but I understand how you're using the word.

chgo1 4y ago

The article was updated to: "Germany: 1 dead, 9 injured after test car veers into traffic"

hindsightbias 4y ago

Why is a child riding in a “test” vehicle?