FUD I believe in. There is an enormous leap from a safe Level 2 system to a safe Level 3-5 system.

[Daniel in SD]

Here's a video of what happened when Google gave their driver assist system to employees to test out. Note that their "AutoPilot" system is more advanced than what Tesla has released to the public. I still don't see how an advanced system that requires driver attention will ever be safe.

Waymo @ IAA Frankfurt 2019

 

[BZM3]

What are we looking at? looks pretty good to me...? is it sarcasm maybe?

 

[Zextraterrestrial]

this stuff? or another flavor

 

[Tam]

...I still don't see how an advanced system that requires driver attention will ever be safe.

Despite misuses and abuses, it's still safer than driving without one as Tesla's statistic has shown quarterly.

 

[powertoold]

Google had like maybe 100-200K miles on it's AP system before scrapping it for level 4. Tesla comes out with stats in the tens of millions of miles for AP.

 

[jordanair45]

I believe in the Neural Net!

And really, you have to believe in Elon. Guy has a great track record, for the most part.

 

[Daniel in SD]

I believe in the Neural Net!

And really, you have to believe in Elon. Guy has a great track record, for the most part.

Well, Elon is promising robotaxis which are by definition Level 4-5 and I think those will be safe. My concern is with Level 2 systems that are advanced enough to cause driver complacency (like what Google tested and abandoned). I think the current implementation of Autopilot is right at the limit of what a Level 2 system can be. It's just bad enough to keep you on your toes and keep sane people from texting, falling asleep, etc.

 

[Tam]

...like what Google tested and abandoned...

I think Google's logic is faulty, emotional and not based on facts.

It's just like thinking all immigrants are rapists but the statistic doesn't support that.

Google needs to look at the statistics that when people misused and abused their system, how many got into accidents?

Whether people use their system or not, accidents still occurred.

It's a disservice to the public that they abandoned this L-2 project.

 

[jordanair45]

Well, Elon is promising robotaxis which are by definition Level 4-5 and I think those will be safe. My concern is with Level 2 systems that are advanced enough to cause driver complacency (like what Google tested and abandoned). I think the current implementation of Autopilot is right at the limit of what a Level 2 system can be. It's just bad enough to keep you on your toes and keep sane people from texting, falling asleep, etc.

I see people doing that without any autonomy. As a matter of fact, I was on the 101 with autopilot on and some girl swerved into my lane while doing her make up, and autopilot avoided any contact.

Hell, even if everyone just had autopilot/NOA, and electric cars, I'm 100% for it!!

 

[powertoold]

Tesla isn't the only company offering level 2, pretty much all car mfgs have some form of lane and traffic assist.

 

[Daniel in SD]

Tesla isn't the only company offering level 2, pretty much all car mfgs have some form of lane and traffic assist.

Yep. Most other companies could easily implement the type of lane keeping that Tesla has (after all AP1 used Mobileye tech which is what most other manufacturers are using). Instead they choose to have a drunk driver mode where the car will bounce between lane lines. Tesla's statistics on safety are misleading since they don't take into account when and where autopilot is being used. For example, maybe users aren't using autopilot during snow storms and maybe accident rates go up during snow storms. It seems like that could skew the results.
My real concern is about what happens when the systems become advanced enough to require very infrequent user intervention, say once every 10,000 miles? Will people still be alert if they haven't had to touch the steering wheel in 10,000 miles? I'm skeptical.

 

[Tam]

...what happens when the systems become advanced enough to require very infrequent user intervention, say once every 10,000 miles? Will people still be alert if they haven't had to touch the steering wheel in 10,000 miles? I'm skeptical.

At this rate, that day will be decades from now.

Robotaxi will be here but I expect the nagging system will still be enforced until the system will be graduated from the current "beta" level.

 

[Daniel in SD]

At this rate, that day will be decades from now.

Robotaxi will be here but I expect the nagging system will still be enforced until the system will be graduated from the current "beta" level.

How the hell can a robotaxi have nags? What if the passenger doesn't have a license, is drunk, or is sitting in the back seat?

 

[Tam]

How the hell can a robotaxi have nags? What if the passenger doesn't have a license, is drunk, or is sitting in the back seat?

In the Autonomy Day, Elon Musk did talk about supervised robotaxis and people asked why not creating an app like Uber / Lyft during that "supervised" period.

At Tesla annual meeting, Elon Musk softens claims of a robotaxi fleet next year

 

[Daniel in SD]

In the Autonomy Day, Elon Musk did talk about supervised robotaxis and people asked why not creating an app like Uber / Lyft during that "supervised" period.

At Tesla annual meeting, Elon Musk softens claims of a robotaxi fleet next year

I hadn't heard about supervised robotaxis. Hopefully the supervision period will be short since Uber and Lyft seem to have trouble making money in that business.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

Google needs to look at the statistics that when people misused and abused their system, how many got into accidents?

Whether people use their system or not, accidents still occurred.

It's possible what you're saying is true. It's too bad we don't have statistics published by Tesla, the manufacturer that probably has the most level 2 miles, and an appropriate control group to compare to...

It may be safer than without, but unfortunately we just don't know, and Tesla hasn't published the data so that it can be parsed.

 

[acoste]

I think Google's logic is faulty, emotional and not based on facts.

It's just like thinking all immigrants are rapists but the statistic doesn't support that.

Google needs to look at the statistics that when people misused and abused their system, how many got into accidents?

Whether people use their system or not, accidents still occurred.

It's a disservice to the public that they abandoned this L-2 project.

The difference between you and Google is that you accept that some people will die during this development stage. One thing you don't realize that it can happen to you as well. You can't escape from human nature. This is not intentional misuse. Your mind tricks you.

Just think about how many people report here that they hit or nearly hit something because they thought they were on autopilot while it was just cruise control.

And if some thing turns up good 99% of the time, humans have a hard time catching that 1%.

 

[Tam]

The difference between you and Google is that you accept that some people will die during this development stage. One thing you don't realize that it can happen to you as well. You can't escape from human nature. This is not intentional misuse. Your mind tricks you.

Google has been withholding its life-saving technology during its development.

As a result, drivers without Google's life-saving technology are dying in traffic during its project.

By the way, about deaths, Elon Musk tweeted:

"...It’s not possible to be zero, but probability of fatality is much lower in a Tesla..."

Also quoted:

“Perfect safety is really an impossible goal. It’s really about improving the probability of safety. That’s the only thing that’s ever really possible. With 200,000 cars, eventually we’ll have millions of cars driving millions of miles a year, so even if something is a one in a billion chance, there won’t ever be zero injuries, zero fatalities"

That in contrast with Volvo Vision 2020:

'No Deaths' By 2020: Is Volvo's Audacious Goal Possible? | GearJunkie

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

Google has been withholding its life-saving technology during its development.

As a result, drivers without Google's life-saving technology are dying in traffic during its project.

By the way, about deaths, Elon Musk tweeted:

"...It’s not possible to be zero, but probability of fatality is much lower in a Tesla..."

Also quoted:

“Perfect safety is really an impossible goal. It’s really about improving the probability of safety. That’s the only thing that’s ever really possible. With 200,000 cars, eventually we’ll have millions of cars driving millions of miles a year, so even if something is a one in a billion chance, there won’t ever be zero injuries, zero fatalities"

That in contrast with Volvo Vision 2020:

'No Deaths' By 2020: Is Volvo's Audacious Goal Possible? | GearJunkie

If only we actually had some statistics. I’m totally open to the possibility that these systems actually save lives, but I want to see some unassailable, scientific, peer-reviewed numbers which prove it to be true. It is not that much to ask.

 

[Tam]

If only we actually had some statistics. I’m totally open to the possibility that these systems actually save lives, but I want to see some unassailable, scientific, peer-reviewed numbers which prove it to be true. It is not that much to ask.

There have been no commercially available autonomous vehicles so there is no data on it.

However, Google has bragged that its system can brake and avoid accidents but it would not just release that to consumers.

Tesla has not a working autonomous system yet so there is no data on it either.

However, Tesla has been voluntarily supplying its L2 data to NTSB/NHTSA so the agency can monitor the progress. Tesla has also been reporting its Autopilot Accident Statistics quarterly starting Q3-2018 to the public.

Right now we just have very crude numbers and people might not like it.

NHTSA issued that "The data show that the Tesla vehicles crash rate dropped by almost 40 percent after Autosteer installation."

It talks about cars that have been equipped with Autopilot Hardware and not necessarily the hardware was paid for, activated, or even used.

It's just like saying "A Household with a toothbrush has less dental cavities than those without." That doesn't even say whether a toothbrush was used, and if used, how often, and if often, was it done correctly...

However, if I have to choose, I would choose to have Autopilot and toothbrushes despite the crudeness of the statistics at the present time.