Another fatal autopilot crash - China

[Stoneymonster]

Jiminy.

 

[Canuck]

That is an awfully large assertion to make, we have no reason to suspect either of them would still be alive...

Seriously, we have no reason to believe Mr. Brown would be alive if he had no AP? We have every reason to believe that based on the facts to date.

... and likely more people would also be dead.

That's a completely different argument that I make all the time. But it doesn't detract from my arguments at all.

 

[green1]

Seriously, we have no reason to believe Mr. Brown would be alive if he had no AP? We have every reason to believe that based on the facts to date.

I've seen absolutely nothing to indicate that he would. Are you privy to a NHTSA report that nobody else has read yet?
A large truck turned across his path, and he hit it. That's frequently fatal, and people die of that sort of thing in all sorts of vehicles without AP all the time. We have no reason to believe that he would have seen the truck, and had time to react. For that matter, we don't know that he would have been paying any more attention without AP than he was with it. Many people don't.

 

[Canuck]

I've seen absolutely nothing to indicate that he would. Are you privy to a NHTSA report that nobody else has read yet?
A large truck turned across his path, and he hit it. That's frequently fatal, and people die of that sort of thing in all sorts of vehicles without AP all the time. We have no reason to believe that he would have seen the truck, and had time to react. For that matter, we don't know that he would have been paying any more attention without AP than he was with it. Many people don't.

Do you know how slow a semi turns? Do you know it was a straight stretch with no obstructions? Do you know what his friends said about him usually working on his computer while driving? Do you know what the witnesses said? Do you know he was healthy with no known medical conditions? Do you know the investigation is ongoing after all this time, so AP has not been ruled out?

Give me a break. He was driving on AP and AP failed to recognize the truck. Tesla told us that! What more do you need?

Edit: As an aside, aren't you usually bashing Tesla and I'm defending them? Ha! Good to switch sides, (not that I'm bashing Tesla now, or you did before, buy you know what I mean). Just a good debate.

 

[green1]

I'll remember to tell my next patient's family that semi-trucks move slowly and that their loved one wouldn't have hit it if they weren't using Autopilot in their 1990 Honda. People have this exact type of collision all the time, it doesn't usually go well. Semi trucks take time to turn, but somehow people still manage to run in to them quite frequently.

His friends said he normally used his laptop when driving. Did they also say that he never once looked away from the road before he had AP?
And news-flash: People who are healthy with no known medical conditions ALSO get in crashes all the time. In fact health issues are not really among the leading causes of collisions.

And no, I don't know how the investigation is going, and neither do you, so you really shouldn't put your foot in your mouth by releasing a conclusion that hasn't been determined yet.

As for me "bashing Tesla", sure, I bash Tesla a lot, but only when they've done something wrong. And the only thing they've done wrong here is refuse to blame the dead person for causing a collision and instead bowing down to pressure to neuter AP.

 

[Canuck]

I can't believe the blinders you have on. We know what happened:

1. Driver not paying attention.
2. Semi turns in front.
3. AP was activated during the crash.
4. AP fails to react due to theories advanced by Tesla that require further investigation.
5. NHTSA is investigating the reason Tesla's AP failed with the outcome being possible restrictions, recall or nothing at all.

No foot in mouth here. And, sorry, while Joshua Brown undoubtedly has blame, our laws fortunately are not all or nothing. We have something very important called "contributory negligence" that doesn't allow a tortfeasor off the hook just because the plaintiff is also liable.

Funny how you say I have my foot in my mouth by having drawn a conclusion, yet you are quick to tell Tesla to:

blame the dead person for causing a collision

Ouch!

 

[green1]

Umm, there's a difference. If the fault of the collision is found to lie with the Tesla, then we know for certain that the dead person caused the accident. This is known because autopilot is 100% incapable of causing an accident as it is never in control of the vehicle.
If the semi-truck is determined to be the cause of the accident, then you are right, I should be more careful not to place blame.

Either way, Autopilot in no way has any responsibility whatsoever for this collision because it was never APs job to prevent a collision in the first place.

As for your numbered list:
1) this is a large contributor to collisions in many makes and models of vehicles and not related to AP
2) this appears to be a fact that AP could do nothing about
3) this also appears to be a fact
4) AP did not react, but neither did anybody else, and AP was never responsible for the control of the vehicle in the first place.
5) NHTSA is investigating the cause of the collision, not why AP failed to do the driver's job for them.

Nothing in your list explains why the dead person would be alive if it weren't for AP

Your main argument is that no company should ever invent anything because they'll be sued in to oblivion. Unfortunately you are correct.
We should just go back to our cave-dwelling days.

 

[Tam]

Transcript: Elon Musk’s press conference about Tesla Autopilot under v8.0 update [Part 1]

Thanks @enzo for the reference for AEB improvement.

Under Version 7 Elon Musk tweeted "Radar tunes out what looks like an overhead road sign to avoid false braking events"

So with the upcoming Version 8, Radar will no long "tune out" and will activate brakes. That's good news indeed!

Now, we only need someone to recreate a Lateral Turn Across Path (LTAP) event with a high-rise tractor-trailer and test that out.

 

[somnambule]

1:40

I don't know about the test with the pedestrian but I'm quite sure Tesla will handle the cases with mockups of vehicles. Everything I've read suggests the cases AP has trouble with are:
1. Stationary objects that are partially blocking a lane
2. Stationary objects revealed only when the vehicle immediately in front moves to a different lane just before the stationary object
3. Objects that have high ground clearance

The Mercedes video doesn't show any of these "difficult" cases. Surely, Tesla can detect ordinary vehicles stopped smack in the middle of the lane. Otherwise, we would be seeing a lot more accidents under TACC.

That said, I agree with those who point out that it is a huge limitation that massive objects partially obscuring the lane are not identified (and that's independent of whether the limitation is unique to Tesla or is common to other manufacturers). I sincerely hope 8.0 addresses this case.

 

[Canuck]

Nothing in your list explains why the dead person would be alive if it weren't for AP

Simple: Non-AP car. Then he is driving and paying attention. So no accident. I'm done debating this point since I know you'll again tell me about a 1990's Honda Accord in the same accident, which completely misses my point.

Your main argument is that no company should ever invent anything because they'll be sued in to oblivion. Unfortunately you are correct.
We should just go back to our cave-dwelling days.

Spend some time in third world countries and you'll really appreciate our well-reasoned tort laws. I've said more about this here:

I'd much prefer that if people don't want to live in a society that guides itself by the Donoghue v Stevenson principle of tort law, that people just say that. Please also tell us why people and corporations owing a reasonable duty of care to others in our society is such a bad thing?

Of course, the law in not perfect, but travel in many third world countries where no one owes anyone a duty of care, and see if you'd prefer to live in that type of society. Our common law duty of care has established itself for a reason. It may not be perfect but we need to draw lines somewhere and I, for one, like where we have drawn them, and how our law has evolved to the point it is today.

It wasn't all that long ago that we had to huddle around fires to keep warm and lawlessness was the rule. Maybe we can evolve further and develop better principles than the seminal Donahue case, but rather than trash the ones we have established with false commentary on case-law, tell us how you propose to make us better.

I'm all ears.

https://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/posts/1612052/

 

[green1]

Simple: Non-AP car. Then he is driving and paying attention. So no accident. I'm done debating this point since I know you'll again tell me about a 1990's Honda Accord in the same accident, which completely misses my point.

Because we all know that nobody ever takes their eyes off the road in non-AP cars... I don't see why you equate driving a non-AP car with paying attention. We have many decades of proof that this is not the case. We know in this case the driver was not paying attention, but there is no reason to suspect that he would have been paying attention without AP.

 

[Canuck]

Because we all know that nobody ever takes their eyes off the road in non-AP cars... I don't see why you equate driving a non-AP car with paying attention.

I don't. I equate a straight stretch, no obstructions, the time it takes for a semi to cross your path, and how long you can not pay attention in a non-AP car vs. an AP car as relevant. You don't. We agree to disagree. Fair enough. I enjoyed the debate but we're just going in circles now. Over and out.

 

[ohmman]

Because we all know that nobody ever takes their eyes off the road in non-AP cars... I don't see why you equate driving a non-AP car with paying attention. We have many decades of proof that this is not the case. We know in this case the driver was not paying attention, but there is no reason to suspect that he would have been paying attention without AP.

Are you saying that it's unreasonable to assume that people are willing to pay less attention in AP cars than they are in non-AP cars? AP doesn't create any sense of security for checking a phone or picking up a candy off the floor, or taking off a sweater?

 

[green1]

Are you saying that it's unreasonable to assume that people are willing to pay less attention in AP cars than they are in non-AP cars? AP doesn't create any sense of security for checking a phone or picking up a candy off the floor, or taking off a sweater?

That's an awfully long way away from an outright statement that this particular individual would definitely be alive if it weren't for AP. Every one of the items you listed are done daily by many people behind the wheel. The claim wasn't that some people pay less attention, the claim was that this particular person would definitely still be alive.

 

[Canuck]

Are you saying that it's unreasonable to assume that people are willing to pay less attention in AP cars than they are in non-AP cars? AP doesn't create any sense of security for checking a phone or picking up a candy off the floor, or taking off a sweater?

Thanks for pinch hitting! ha...

 

[ohmman]

That's an awfully long way away from an outright statement that this particular individual would definitely be alive if it weren't for AP. Every one of the items you listed are done daily by many people behind the wheel. The claim wasn't that some people pay less attention, the claim was that this particular person would definitely still be alive.

So yes, it's reasonable to assume that people pay less attention when on AP?

 

[Tam]

I don't know about the test with the pedestrian but I'm quite sure Tesla will handle the cases with mockups of vehicles. Everything I've read suggests the cases AP has trouble with are:
1. Stationary objects that are partially blocking a lane
2. Stationary objects revealed only when the vehicle immediately in front moves to a different lane just before the stationary object
3. Objects that have high ground clearance

The Mercedes video doesn't show any of these "difficult" cases. Surely, Tesla can detect ordinary vehicles stopped smack in the middle of the lane. Otherwise, we would be seeing a lot more accidents under TACC.

That said, I agree with those who point out that it is a huge limitation that massive objects partially obscuring the lane are not identified (and that's independent of whether the limitation is unique to Tesla or is common to other manufacturers). I sincerely hope 8.0 addresses this case.

How do you explain that the owner below had to manually brake to avoid collision to a regular height sedan in front as posted by @TRON ?

The car was traveling at about 48 to 50 MPH, the owner braked when it seemed not to automatically brake on its own.

If you look at the the dashboard, there is and icon of the car in front.

That means the radar did detect the stationary obstacle in front and reported it on the dashboard appropriately.

 

[green1]

So yes, it's reasonable to assume that people pay less attention when on AP?

Without a study on the subject, I don't know that we can assume that. However it's not even relevant to the discussion. My response was to the idea that we knew this particular individual would still be alive. If you have proof that he would be, please share it.

 

[ohmman]

Without a study on the subject, I don't know that we can assume that. However it's not even relevant to the discussion.

It's relevant, and you know exactly why it is. And deciding whether something is "reasonable" isn't the same as deciding that there's hard evidence. But you know that too. Duck, duck, duck, duck... Goose.

 

[Canuck]

My response was to the idea that we knew this particular individual would still be alive. If you have proof that he would be, please share it.

Proof in a civil case is "balance of probabilities", or "more likely than not", "50% plus .000001", etc. Here's some of that proof:

The guy that died was a former Navy EOD guy. Absolute shame. I am very close to a few of his former EOD coworkers and they are all very, very sad.

This was sent to me on Monday by my good friend:

"A buddy of mine (Josh Brown- prior Navy EOD) had the same car with the auto pilot and loved it. He drove all over the country in his tending to his business and had all the recharge stations mapped out everywhere. It was cool and he posted a bunch of YouTube videos with one being picked up by Elon Musk and posted on the Tesla site. When that happened, Josh posted on Facebook: "I can die and go to heaven now..." Unfortunately that statement was prophetic in that Josh died a couple of weeks later in a car accident. We're pretty certain, he had it on auto-pilot while working on his laptop and didn't see the semi that pulled out. He shot underneath it and it clipped his roof killing him instantly. Sorry for the downer but, he loved that car and swore by it. To say I was relieved to see you "didn't" get the auto pilot is an understatement.. As soon as I saw you had ordered a Tesla, my blood literally ran cold until I saw 'no auto-pilot'. It is a great car and I feel like an old man in saying "please be careful in it young lady!!!" Take care"

Be safe out there - regardless if you're using auto-pilot or not.

https://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/posts/1609135/

The claim wasn't that some people pay less attention, the claim was that this particular person would definitely still be alive.

Yes, that's my claim and I'm convinced, 100%, that it is true. That is, if Mr. Brown had a non-AP car he would still be alive today. But it's just my view after reviewing the available facts. It also doesn't absolve Mr. Brown of liability. Nor does it mean that AP doesn't save more lives, and prevent more injuries, than not having it.