3 ms·

Interesting observation from the comment section: It is important to note that they are using the UNECE Level 3 certification loophole which technically demand

Interesting observation from the comment section: It is important to note that they are using the UNECE Level 3 certification loophole which technically demands that the company takes responsibility, but sets the minimum intervention interval for the driver at zero seconds for the under 60km/h case. That means, as long as the car exits its autonomous mode before a crash, the driver is instantly fully responsible. It's level 2 in all but name. If true, I’m not sure I’d feel comfortable using this feature. This is separate from the fact that the EQS line all look like beans.

kart23 3y ago
I doubt that's true. I don't know why it wasn't in the actual article, but the byline of the title is: "PREPARE TO RESUME CONTROL IN 10 SECONDS...", which I think is the minimum time that it takes to exit autonomous mode. the ars technica article is just kinda garbage honestly. https://techcrunch.com/2023/09/27/first-drive-navigating-la-freeways-with-mercedes-hands-off-eyes-off-automated-driving-system/ https://techcrunch.com/2023/09/27/first-drive-navigating-la-... > However, if the system senses a pedestrian or a bicyclist on the highway, detects an emergency vehicle or enters a construction zone, Drive Pilot will hand control back over to the driver. There are audible, visual and tactile warnings — the seatbelt tightens — and during that time the car is still actively driving. > If after 10 seconds I do not respond, Drive Pilot brings the car to a stop in the lane, > Drive Pilot is currently legal on California and Nevada freeways. Of course, all states are different in terms of traffic liability, but Mercedes-Benz says it stands behind its product as long as the driver operates the system correctly in a properly maintained vehicle.
enragedcacti 3y ago
I haven't seen any evidence that Mercedes has published anything about the specific intervention interval, but even so liability is discovered in court and Mercedes can't just wave a wand and say "we aren't liable because we deactivated 0.001 seconds before the crash!". It would definitely be very disappointing if they tried to exploit the loophole but if they did its very possible that a judge or jury would look at Mercedes encouraging the driver to watch a movie and tell them and their loophole to pound sand.
- kevinventullo 3y ago
  That’s a good point. And that’s not even to mention the hit to their brand reputation, which historically they seem to care about more than some other car companies.

kart23 3y ago

I doubt that's true. I don't know why it wasn't in the actual article, but the byline of the title is: "PREPARE TO RESUME CONTROL IN 10 SECONDS...", which I think is the minimum time that it takes to exit autonomous mode. the ars technica article is just kinda garbage honestly. https://techcrunch.com/2023/09/27/first-drive-navigating-la-freeways-with-mercedes-hands-off-eyes-off-automated-driving-system/ https://techcrunch.com/2023/09/27/first-drive-navigating-la-... > However, if the system senses a pedestrian or a bicyclist on the highway, detects an emergency vehicle or enters a construction zone, Drive Pilot will hand control back over to the driver. There are audible, visual and tactile warnings — the seatbelt tightens — and during that time the car is still actively driving. > If after 10 seconds I do not respond, Drive Pilot brings the car to a stop in the lane, > Drive Pilot is currently legal on California and Nevada freeways. Of course, all states are different in terms of traffic liability, but Mercedes-Benz says it stands behind its product as long as the driver operates the system correctly in a properly maintained vehicle.

enragedcacti 3y ago

I haven't seen any evidence that Mercedes has published anything about the specific intervention interval, but even so liability is discovered in court and Mercedes can't just wave a wand and say "we aren't liable because we deactivated 0.001 seconds before the crash!". It would definitely be very disappointing if they tried to exploit the loophole but if they did its very possible that a judge or jury would look at Mercedes encouraging the driver to watch a movie and tell them and their loophole to pound sand.

kevinventullo 3y ago
That’s a good point. And that’s not even to mention the hit to their brand reputation, which historically they seem to care about more than some other car companies.