-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Andyw2100
Well-Known Member
You really are quite the narcissist, aren't you? I specifically said "you and others" in the post that prompted your outburst. For you to consider that a personal scolding says a heck of a lot more about you than it does about me.
Krugerrand
Meow
NikeWings
Active Member
CHG-ON
Still in love after all these miles
It strikes me as pretty damn obvious that we should be paying full attention all the time. Would you put your life in the hands of your cell phone? It is essentially the same thing.
I don't mean to be insensitive to one losing their life. But we need to take ownership for all that we do. Including trusting unproven computer tech.
I don't mean to be insensitive to one losing their life. But we need to take ownership for all that we do. Including trusting unproven computer tech.
Exactly. Let's say I do something royally stupid, and I die. At the very least I'd want people to learn from the stupid mistake I made. Even if they weren't 100% exact in what transpired. The most important thing is they don't end up like me. If I save a few people it will be more than I accomplished in my entire life while alive. As a navy seal he probably saved more, but he probably doesn't mind adding some to his count.
People are hardly completely unique individuals. We tend to share our traits, and our mistakes with a lot of other people. Whether we live or die a lot of times comes down to dumb luck. Sometimes we're given dozens of chances to learn, and other times it's a single chance. A badly timed text message, or a date with the worst possible person.
What was unique for him wasn't who he was, and it wasn't the mistake he made.
It was the brand of car he was in, and the hyperbole surrounding autopilot. He had the misfortune of being in a car with driver assist technology that the media assumed to be self-driving. We all played our part in one way or another.
Most of us will remember him for the impact the accident had on semi-autonomous driving. Without much reflection on him as an individual, but him on the lesson.
His friends, and family will remember him for who he was.
The irony is the computer tech was designed to combat what the cell phone has brought.
So we're just fighting technology with technology, and hoping to lose as few lives as possible while we're at it.
Whether one agrees with this is pretty irrelevant since it's happening. All these driver assist technologies are being rushed to market likely before they've really been proven out. But, in some ways that necessary because people keep driving distracted. Driving for me used to be fun back when people drove, but now day's half the drivers are barely paying attention.
We're losing so badly we're welcoming our robot overlords with open arms.
Tesla's AP1 is more like the original aircraft autopilots up until the late 80s. Today most airliners have autopilots that are capable of flying the plane runway to runway without the pilots touching anything.
Building the autopilots airliners have today is an easier job than it is for cars. The airliners were connecting with a system that is much more controlled from the start than ground transportation and the only operations with many edge conditions are landing and taking off. Aircraft also have a lot more space around them than cars do. The crowded airspace around the busiest airport has a much lower density of vehicles per square mile than even the least busy city freeway in the middle of the night. Add to that there is already a system that pre-dates sophisticated auto pilots that allows someone to monitor where every aircraft is in real time and the space is three dimensional.
Everybody up there should be better trained than the average driver on the ground too.
There are just fewer variables to contend with. I wouldn't be surprised if the code for Tesla's AP1 is more complex than most airliner autopilots. Most of the computers in those boxes on aircraft are pretty basic and simple. The regulatory agencies require lots of lead time and lots of testing before anything gets flight certified and every electronic part needs to be vetted with a good track record. So the processors are usually way behind the cutting edge with small memory available.
Processor cores like the 8051 (8 bits, introduced in the late 70s) are common. These are usually incorporated into a single chip computer, but the guts are old processors like that.
Well, or that the truck driver, at some point, was closer to the car. I know if it were me in that situation, I'd go over to see if anyone in the Model S needed help.
Tesla speakers go up to 11 and can be quite loud. Perhaps it was paired to the Tesla via BlueTooth?
He allegedly listened to audiobooks in his previous videos, so it's not at all clear to me that he was really using a DVD player at the time of the crash.
I can't imagine what would be said about me if I were judged by what the at-fault driver told a reporter and what highway patrol found in my car at time of death.... just sayin'
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
Yeah, at this point there does not appear to be any confirmation on whether there was a DVD inside the player, nor whether it was Harry Potter as the truck driver was claiming. Maybe the civil suit might find it, but this investigation is more concerned about what role Autopilot played in the accident.
Despite claims by naysayers of Autopilot, the NHTSA does not seem to think the current nags are too lax.
Despite claims by naysayers of Autopilot, the NHTSA does not seem to think the current nags are too lax.
jsollender
Member
And how do you know Harry Potter was playing as car approached truck? Wouldn't truck driver be seeing rear of the video monitor as he was looking rearward behind left shoulder? Or did he park and run the several hundred feet from point of impact to final resting place and then see video playing? No explanation offered for what trucker is said to have "seen". Just saying...
What do you expect? The truck driver driving away after the crash? Of course he went to see if the driver could still be assisted. The claim at the time was that the truck driver noted the movie when he approached the crashed car after the accident. However, whether it was just an audio book reading Harry Potter or a movie playing, that I think has not been verified in public. There is the possibility he heard the audio playing still for example.
But definitely it was after crash that the truck driver allegedly noted the Harry Potter thing. Not during driving.
Just to add on, initial reports of the accident states that the truck driver and several witnesses reported that they heard the Harry Potter coming from the crash. Other witnesses did not report it. Later reporting indicated that the FHP found both a laptop and a DVD player in the car but could not confirm whether or not either was being used (playing Harry Potter or anything else) at the time of the crash.
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
This is where secondary reporting makes things lost in translation. The only "witness" that said Harry Potter was playing was the truck driver himself. Some reports described him as a "witness" which makes it seem like it was a third party not involved in the accident.
dhanson865
Well-Known Member
If he heard it after the accident that doesn't mean it was playing during the accident. The actual accident or the crash into the telephone pole could have provided the force to start the player if it was paused. All it takes is one key press and the key doesn't have to be pressed by a human, any random object pushing against it is fine.
Occams Razor says he was likely playing it at the time of the accident but even then that doesn't mean he was watching it, he could have been using it as a glorified audio book and be listening to it.
So we have possibilities of
1. impact cause player to start
2. player was playing but driver wasn't watching / only listening
3. player was playing and driver was watching
You can say which is most likely but you can't say for certain because no eye witness mentioned seeing his face or head and the direction facing at or immediately before the impact.
I'd just leave it as an unfortunate accident and stop trying to peg down the details when there are multiple possibilities that can't be confirmed or ruled out.
Similar threads
