4 ms·

I suspect a lot of commenters will miss this part, so it's probably good to emphasize it. > In the footwell of the car, the officers found what is known as a s

by jchw 4y ago

I suspect a lot of commenters will miss this part, so it's probably good to emphasize it. > In the footwell of the car, the officers found what is known as a steering wheel weight, which is used to trick the security systems. It attaches to the steering wheel and gives the car the illusion that your hands are on the wheel. This seems pretty clear-cut, and Autopilot's capabilities and other safeguards (or lack therefore of) are irrelevant. The driver was mitigating safety features. It'd be pretty much the same story with adaptive cruise control and lane-keep assist. At the end of the day, there's only so much you can do to stop someone from shooting themselves in the foot. Once you have to deal with drivers mitigating the driver awareness detection, it's probably a lost cause.

nichochar 4y ago
Only solution is to regulate the companies. Musk is using his army of cultish followers to do QA with other people's lives. In my opinion this should be highly illegal, and prosecuted. Imagine your kid gets killed by a Tesla influencer trying to prove that autopilot is everything Elon promised them. [disclaimer] i worked for a while at Cruise, and that company cares deeply about security and works hard with the government to move regulation forward as we move the technology forward.
- jchw 4y ago
  > Only solution is to regulate the companies. Musk is using his army of cultish followers to do QA with other people's lives. In my opinion this should be highly illegal, and prosecuted. In this case, relevant to this news story, what do you think should be regulated? I agree driver assistance systems, especially ones like Autopilot that are clearly not near human levels of driving proficiency, should prevent operation from drivers that are not aware. It seems such measures were taken, but they were defeated intentionally. > Imagine your kid gets killed by a Tesla influencer trying to prove that autopilot is everything Elon promised them. I suppose that would make me rather upset, but I'm struggling to make the connection to this news story. It doesn't seem to talk about the driver in question or their intent. I'd had guessed it was less about being a Tesla fan and more about being able to sleep while driving.
ReaLNero 4y ago
Considering that human lives are at stake, shrugging at the issue is not a good solution. I think two solutions are 1) criminal liability for drivers disabling safety features that endanger others (e.g. on traffic stops) and 2) adversarially strengthening against safety workarounds.
- junon 4y ago
  > Considering that human lives are at stake This has always been the case with cruise control. EDIT: or one ton death machines (cars) with imperfect logic machines (humans) driving them, actually.
- philippejara 4y ago
  I'm sure GP is talking about in the context of what is really Tesla's fault here, as the article clearly is trying to bait a reaction on it. Not sure about criminal liability, but at the very least there should be a fine for using it. I also wouldn't want the AI to decide i'm not touching the wheel because my hands are cold that day or something said AI training might end up.
  - theCrowing 4y ago
    That's why most of the other systems use eye tracking but tesla decided against it.
- jchw 4y ago
  Well, yeah. It should be a crime. In fact, I'm pretty sure it IS a crime in some places. That's the point though. You can do anything you want to try to bring the number as close to zero as possible, but there's going to be a non-zero amount of people who make unbelievably irresponsible, potentially deadly decisions. I'm pretty sure that's a fact of life. It's not exactly shrugging it off. I seriously doubt the person in the vehicle was not aware that they could lose their license for this...
ajross 4y ago
> Autopilot's capabilities and other safeguards (or lack therefore of) The car had an incapacitated driver and no one got hurt! Surely that particular capacity is very relevant here. If all incapacitated drivers had autopilots that drove safely, the world would be a safer place, right? I really don't understand the resistance to this feature.
- afavour 4y ago
  > The car had an incapacitated driver and no one got hurt! But had Autopilot not been available would he have driven? Or would he have taken a taxi? The problem (IMO) is the promises Tesla is making even with the name “autopilot”. It makes people think it’s a whole lot more capable than it is.
  - ajross 4y ago
    Tesla didn't invent DUI. Consider it this way: if your friend were to stumble out of the pub drunk and drive home, would you rather they did it in a civic or a model 3?
    - afavour 4y ago
      Not the point I’m making. If you misunderstand the capabilities of a product named “Autopilot” you might choose that over a taxi in a way you wouldn’t a totally manual drive. So the scenario would be “your friend stumbles out drunk and drives Autopilot, drives manually or takes a taxi” I’d rather they took a taxi. But if I were similarly mistaken about what “Autopilot” does I might not stop him driving home when I might otherwise.
      - simondotau 4y ago
        I question the claim that there are people who are misled. Anyone who has used Autopilot for more than a few minutes will be left in no doubt that it is nothing more than adaptive cruise control with lane centering. Its behaviour describes itself. The problem in this instance wasn't the driver misunderstand the capabilities of Autopilot, it was the driver being irresponsible with drugs, fatigue and the installation of a safety defeat device.
heavyset_go 4y ago
Why aren't Tesla's ensuring that the drivers' eyes are open and on the road when using AP? They have driver facing cameras.
- simondotau 4y ago
  Tesla currently have visual driver monitoring in beta. Right now they are relying on steering torque sensing. People have worked out how to trick the torque sensor with weights. People will work out how to trick the visual monitoring too. In pretty much every car on sale today, the driver's seat seatbelt sensors can be trivially defeated. Should Ford be blamed if people realise that you can latch the belt before sitting down and the car will operate as though your belt is on? Surely Ford should be responsible if they failed to correctly interlock the occupancy (weight) sensor and seatbelt sensor?
  - avereveard 4y ago
    If a known exploit exist against safety features the car should not pass inspection and the feature be grounded for however long it takes for the company to fix it, this beta bullshit with actual living being taking part of the test environment by should be stopped.
    - simondotau 4y ago
      As I said, there's a known exploit against seatbelt sensors. Where is your outrage about that? This incident has nothing to do with any beta.
      - avereveard 4y ago
        Seabelt exploit is dangerous for the driver, not people outside the car. Driving wheel weight is dangerous for anyone else on the road. Super simple line to draw.
        simondotau 4y ago
whateverman23 4y ago
> It'd be pretty much the same story with adaptive cruise control and lane-keep assist. Incorrect. This just continues to show that the gap between adaptive cruise control/lane assist and real full self driving is incredibly dangerous. It's the gap where the user can feasibly relax and ignore the road for a decent period of time, but it's not safe to do so. We should be jumping right into real full self driving (which is not autopilot or Tesla's "FSD"). This in between state should be illegal.

by jchw 4y ago

nichochar 4y ago

Only solution is to regulate the companies. Musk is using his army of cultish followers to do QA with other people's lives. In my opinion this should be highly illegal, and prosecuted. Imagine your kid gets killed by a Tesla influencer trying to prove that autopilot is everything Elon promised them. [disclaimer] i worked for a while at Cruise, and that company cares deeply about security and works hard with the government to move regulation forward as we move the technology forward.

jchw 4y ago
> Only solution is to regulate the companies. Musk is using his army of cultish followers to do QA with other people's lives. In my opinion this should be highly illegal, and prosecuted. In this case, relevant to this news story, what do you think should be regulated? I agree driver assistance systems, especially ones like Autopilot that are clearly not near human levels of driving proficiency, should prevent operation from drivers that are not aware. It seems such measures were taken, but they were defeated intentionally. > Imagine your kid gets killed by a Tesla influencer trying to prove that autopilot is everything Elon promised them. I suppose that would make me rather upset, but I'm struggling to make the connection to this news story. It doesn't seem to talk about the driver in question or their intent. I'd had guessed it was less about being a Tesla fan and more about being able to sleep while driving.

ReaLNero 4y ago

Considering that human lives are at stake, shrugging at the issue is not a good solution. I think two solutions are 1) criminal liability for drivers disabling safety features that endanger others (e.g. on traffic stops) and 2) adversarially strengthening against safety workarounds.

junon 4y ago
> Considering that human lives are at stake This has always been the case with cruise control. EDIT: or one ton death machines (cars) with imperfect logic machines (humans) driving them, actually.
philippejara 4y ago
I'm sure GP is talking about in the context of what is really Tesla's fault here, as the article clearly is trying to bait a reaction on it. Not sure about criminal liability, but at the very least there should be a fine for using it. I also wouldn't want the AI to decide i'm not touching the wheel because my hands are cold that day or something said AI training might end up.
- theCrowing 4y ago
  That's why most of the other systems use eye tracking but tesla decided against it.
jchw 4y ago
Well, yeah. It should be a crime. In fact, I'm pretty sure it IS a crime in some places. That's the point though. You can do anything you want to try to bring the number as close to zero as possible, but there's going to be a non-zero amount of people who make unbelievably irresponsible, potentially deadly decisions. I'm pretty sure that's a fact of life. It's not exactly shrugging it off. I seriously doubt the person in the vehicle was not aware that they could lose their license for this...

ajross 4y ago

> Autopilot's capabilities and other safeguards (or lack therefore of) The car had an incapacitated driver and no one got hurt! Surely that particular capacity is very relevant here. If all incapacitated drivers had autopilots that drove safely, the world would be a safer place, right? I really don't understand the resistance to this feature.

afavour 4y ago
> The car had an incapacitated driver and no one got hurt! But had Autopilot not been available would he have driven? Or would he have taken a taxi? The problem (IMO) is the promises Tesla is making even with the name “autopilot”. It makes people think it’s a whole lot more capable than it is.
- ajross 4y ago
  Tesla didn't invent DUI. Consider it this way: if your friend were to stumble out of the pub drunk and drive home, would you rather they did it in a civic or a model 3?
  - afavour 4y ago
    Not the point I’m making. If you misunderstand the capabilities of a product named “Autopilot” you might choose that over a taxi in a way you wouldn’t a totally manual drive. So the scenario would be “your friend stumbles out drunk and drives Autopilot, drives manually or takes a taxi” I’d rather they took a taxi. But if I were similarly mistaken about what “Autopilot” does I might not stop him driving home when I might otherwise.
    - simondotau 4y ago
      I question the claim that there are people who are misled. Anyone who has used Autopilot for more than a few minutes will be left in no doubt that it is nothing more than adaptive cruise control with lane centering. Its behaviour describes itself. The problem in this instance wasn't the driver misunderstand the capabilities of Autopilot, it was the driver being irresponsible with drugs, fatigue and the installation of a safety defeat device.

heavyset_go 4y ago

Why aren't Tesla's ensuring that the drivers' eyes are open and on the road when using AP? They have driver facing cameras.

simondotau 4y ago
Tesla currently have visual driver monitoring in beta. Right now they are relying on steering torque sensing. People have worked out how to trick the torque sensor with weights. People will work out how to trick the visual monitoring too. In pretty much every car on sale today, the driver's seat seatbelt sensors can be trivially defeated. Should Ford be blamed if people realise that you can latch the belt before sitting down and the car will operate as though your belt is on? Surely Ford should be responsible if they failed to correctly interlock the occupancy (weight) sensor and seatbelt sensor?
- avereveard 4y ago
  If a known exploit exist against safety features the car should not pass inspection and the feature be grounded for however long it takes for the company to fix it, this beta bullshit with actual living being taking part of the test environment by should be stopped.
  - simondotau 4y ago
    As I said, there's a known exploit against seatbelt sensors. Where is your outrage about that? This incident has nothing to do with any beta.
    - avereveard 4y ago
      Seabelt exploit is dangerous for the driver, not people outside the car. Driving wheel weight is dangerous for anyone else on the road. Super simple line to draw.
      - simondotau 4y ago

whateverman23 4y ago

> It'd be pretty much the same story with adaptive cruise control and lane-keep assist. Incorrect. This just continues to show that the gap between adaptive cruise control/lane assist and real full self driving is incredibly dangerous. It's the gap where the user can feasibly relax and ignore the road for a decent period of time, but it's not safe to do so. We should be jumping right into real full self driving (which is not autopilot or Tesla's "FSD"). This in between state should be illegal.