Tesla's Autopilot needs to be shut down and NHTSA needs to do their due diligence

[Sully's8]

AP1 and AP2 are not autonomous and require drivers to think and pay attention.

[drop mic]

Pictures over words. . .well done.

 

[u00mem9]

Here's AP1 handling road barriers:
(from Tesla Autopilot crash caught on dashcam shows how not to use the system)

AP1 and AP2 are not autonomous and require drivers to think and pay attention.

Ouch! I haven't seen that one before.

 

[AudubonB]

Audubon,
Sounds like a great drive, did you take a video to share? Do we need to fly Bjorn over to replicate this???

RT

I, unfortunately, was holding the camera....

We have not yet, in truth, taken a good look at it. I fouled up the sound, so Sebastian says it is in "underwater mode". I think he put it up on Facebook last night, about one minute's worth.

 

[AmpedRealtor]

if the car begins to do something anomalous, the driver who is paying attention and has a hand on the wheel has zero difficulty taking over. engaging autopilot does NOT disavow the driver of responsibility for operating the vehicle.

Isn't this a de-facto admission that the system isn't safe? If it were, it would not require monitoring. Monitoring something that you're vehicle is doing while you are required to be in control of that vehicle, by its very nature, is distractive is it not? You're looking at the speedo, icons, making sure the system is recognizing vehicles around you, etc., and all the while you aren't looking at the road.

In my opinion, until Tesla (and others) puts its money where its mouth is and assumes all financial and legal liability on behalf of the driver who uses Autopilot, it will never get the sort of development and safety tests that it truly deserves and needs.

A deliberately abrasive first post is not you "trying to be helpful". You came here with one intent: to spread FUD.

Try not to be so closed minded.

Here's AP1 handling road barriers:
(from Tesla Autopilot crash caught on dashcam shows how not to use the system)

AP1 and AP2 are not autonomous and require drivers to think and pay attention.

Driver must have been too busy "monitoring" and "supervising" Autopilot when that happened because he clearly wasn't looking at the road.

 

[Max*]

Isn't this a de-facto admission that the system isn't safe?

No, don't play with words, this is a de-facto admission that the system is not autonomous. And it's not autonomous.

If it were, it would not require monitoring.

Again, no. Are you saying that for something to be "safe" it requires zero monitoring? You're telling me you can't think of anything that's safe, yet requires some level of monitoring? Seriously?

Monitoring something that you're vehicle is doing while you are required to be in control of that vehicle, by its very nature, is distractive is it not? You're looking at the speedo, icons, making sure the system is recognizing vehicles around you, etc., and all the while you aren't looking at the road.

No. Think of it as you're managing the vehicle, looking at the 10,000 foot view, instead of working on the nitty gritty details like keeps your car in lane or watching the vehicle ahead of you. If you see something from that 10,000 foot view that the car is doing wrong, you intervene.

It's a lot more relaxing than driving yourself.

In my opinion, until Tesla (and others) puts its money where its mouth is and assumes all financial and legal liability on behalf of the driver who uses Autopilot, it will never get the sort of development and safety tests that it truly deserves and needs.

And once it's autonomous, they might. But for now it's a drivers aid.

Driver must have been too busy "monitoring" and "supervising" Autopilot when that happened because he clearly wasn't looking at the road.

And you're clearly just making assumptions, because you clearly have no idea what the driver was doing.

 

[Shorty]

If you don't like AP... don't use it.

In order not to use AP he would need to own a Tesla! Likely a paid basher by an organization who has a large short position on the stock. Short interest is near its all time high and folks are panicking as the price rises. Watch for more and more of this to occur.

 

[stopcrazypp]

i find it interesting that this post got 3 informative ratings, 2 likes, and 2 loves.

yet it perfectly echoes the OP's sentiment on AP2's shortcomings.

the OP got 32 dislike ratings.

This is very clearly a false equivalent. The OP is pretty much calling for a ban for AP2 and said both NHTSA and Tesla should not allow it to be released. I don't see where wk057 did that. He simply said AP2 was worse than AP1 according to his experience.

 

[croman]

I look at the road. Who the hell cares what's on the IC? I keep my car away from harm and I keep my hands on the wheel because I don't like crashes no matter who is liable!

Further there is a perverse incentive for car owners to push software in stupid ways if Tesla absolves drivers' liability wrt autopilot. I know Volvo will do that but I don't think their system will be ready for years because of that promise. No car is totally safe, drivers can only do what they can to prevent accidents.

Creating a moral hazard is a piss poor marketing and legal strategy for autonomous vehicles adoption.

 

[jelloslug]

Try not to be so closed minded.

Really?

 

[Sir Guacamolaf]

The problem is when you have confidence in a system there is a greater chance that the confidence is going to result in a crash.

Well this does depend on the driver.
I find it a lot safer to check my blind spot with AP on, than with AP off.

I do agree however that there is no substitute to attention on the road. And given how boring long stretches of driving can get, the very little bit stimulus of steering that the brain gets, becomes critical to keeping you attentive. We are very good sometimes at sleeping with our eyes open. Too much crap going on in our heads.

 

[Canuck]

Musk's mantra that he is statistically saving lives is not only wrong but his system is putting the public in danger.

This is the main issue to me. So far, I am aware of two fatalities while on AP (Joshua Brown and the one in China). How do you know there would be less if AP was never granted approval? (I note you cite the McCarth/Speckman crash but the driver was more than twice the legal limit of alcohol and there's no indication AP was on. It's fair game to call for the logs but it seems odd you use that case to back-up your argument that AP is killing people.)

It seems to me what you are doing is similar to posting a video of a seat-belted person who is killed in a crash, and another who is not seat-belted and thrown clear and survives. Then you tell us - "look how unsafe seat-belts are!".

Do you think it's proper to allege that AP is not "statistically saving lives" without providing any statistics to back up your argument? If you don't have any, then at least provide us with the facts and assumptions upon which you base this statement. There are many people, including many elderly people, who say that driving while monitoring AP does a better job of driving for them than without it, that it keeps them relaxed and refreshed, and from these facts we can assume that lives are being saved. I need to know the facts and assumption you rely on when you say that that AP is killing people -- because that is exactly what your statement says above when you say Musk is wrong that it is saving lives.

I am a former systems engineer, program and engineering manager for Lockheed Martin. There I worked on aircraft simulation, the Aegis Weapon System and was Software Engineering Manager for all of NORAD. I was also the whistleblower who raised the Deepwater Program issues - IEEE Xplore Full-Text PDF:

Impressive but I'm certain you've been wrong before, and will be again in the future, like all of us humans.

 

[AmpedRealtor]

No, don't play with words, this is a de-facto admission that the system is not autonomous. And it's not autonomous.

I'm not playing with words, I'm interpreting them literally. It's your interpretation that is whimsical by introducing the word "autonomous" where it did not exist in the original context.

Again, no. Are you saying that for something to be "safe" it requires zero monitoring? You're telling me you can't think of anything that's safe, yet requires some level of monitoring? Seriously?

Yes, seriously. What Tesla is doing is no different than saying "your car has airbags, a safety feature, but you are responsible for monitoring the air bag sensor at all times to ensure that it is properly functioning prior to having an accident otherwise Tesla assumes no responsibility over the consequences." Or let's try another example: "Your car has ABS as a safety feature, however ABS only works under the following conditions [insert 10 pages of disclaimers] and should not be used under these circumstances."

No. Think of it as you're managing the vehicle, looking at the 10,000 foot view, instead of working on the nitty gritty details like keeps your car in lane or watching the vehicle ahead of you. If you see something from that 10,000 foot view that the car is doing wrong, you intervene.

You can take a 10,000 foot view if you're at 10,000 feet, not when you're surrounded by a shooting gallery of other vehicles and obstacles. If you had other airplanes beside you on both wing tips, would you still make this statement? AEB won't bring your car to a stop, unlike other manufacturers, TACC won't stop your car if you change lanes into a lane where the car in front is stationary, and you're saying that Autopilot keeps track of "nitty gritty" details such as watching the vehicle in front of you? Apparently not.

It's a lot more relaxing than driving yourself.

Except you are driving yourself, remember? You are always supposed to be in charge of your vehicle, and as you pointed out earlier, AP is not autonomous. So which is it?

And once it's autonomous, they might. But for now it's a drivers aid.

An aid that Tesla wants nothing to do with in terms of liability. Sounds like a cop out to me.

And you're clearly just making assumptions, because you clearly have no idea what the driver was doing.

I think it's called sarcasm.

 

[u00mem9]

This is the main issue to me. So far, I am aware of two fatalities while on AP (Joshua Brown and the one in China). How do you know there would be less if AP was never granted approval? (I note you cite the McCarth/Speckman crash but the driver was more than twice the legal limit of alcohol and there's no indication AP was on. It's fair game to call for the logs but it seems odd you use that case to back-up your argument that AP is killing people.)

It seems to me what you are doing is similar to posting a video of a seat-belted person who is killed in a crash, and another who is not seat-belted and thrown clear and survives. Then you tell us - "look how unsafe seat-belts are!".

Do you think it's proper to allege that AP is not "statistically saving lives" without providing any statistics to back up your argument? If you don't have any, then at least provide us with the facts and assumptions upon which you base this statement. There are many people, including many elderly people, who say that driving while monitoring AP does a better job of driving for them than without it, that it keeps them relaxed and refreshed, and from these facts we can assume that lives are being saved. I need to know the facts and assumption you rely on when you say that that AP is killing people -- because that is exactly what your statement says above when you say Musk is wrong that it is saving lives.



Impressive but I'm certain you've been wrong before, and will be again in the future, like all of us humans.

I agree with this and I think NHTSA made a solid case that the system was safer (fewer airbag deployments) in the cars that were AP1 capable after release than before. While there is some concern the driver's first miles are being compared to his experienced miles, that is probably as good a sample set as you are going to get.

But, now I have to say that there is really no reason that data should be used as evidence that AP2 is safer. We now know that the system is so different (not in intent, but in performance) that it may well have a worse accident history.

 

[DillyBop]

This is very clearly a false equivalent. The OP is pretty much calling for a ban for AP2 and said both NHTSA and Tesla should not allow it to be released. I don't see where wk057 did that. He simply said AP2 was worse than AP1 according to his experience.

did you even bother reading WK057's original post? he quite blatantly said it shouldn't have been released, just as the OP did.

here, allow me to do the research you didn't:

AP2 should NOT be publicly utilized nor have even been released yet. Seriously. I don't know who in their right mind thought it was a good idea to start rolling out AP2 hardware before they even had basic feature parity with AP1, but those involved should be sacked.

again, i'm not agreeing/disagreeing. i just find it funny how two people say the same thing and get vastly different reactions.

let's look at the count today....

OP now up to 57 dislikes.

wk057 now has 5 informatives, 2 likes, and 2 loves.

 

[schonelucht]

The initial release of AP1 was 20x more reliable, despite AP2 having a significant sensor advantage.

From testing by members, it seems to be the case that AP2 does not (yet) use 7 out 8 available cameras and therefore has no sensor advantage (yet) on AP1.

 

[croman]

From testing by members, it seems to be the case that AP2 does not (yet) use 7 out 8 available cameras and therefore has no sensor advantage (yet) on AP1.

Ultrasonics extend 10ft farther. Radar goes 100m farther. There is no camera advantage but still plenty of sensor benefits.

 

[brianman]

...

This post is missing the firmware version info.

 

[AudubonB]

Let's try this snag from YouTube....yep, this seems to work. Enjoy Sab's great German accent.

 

[Archduke]

Yesterday our AP2 Chitty Chitty Shush Shush navigated the 45 miles of a narrow, tight-curved, and moderately steep road.

Chitty Chitty Shush Shush?!

Can we be friends? Please?!

 

[AudubonB]

I'm friends with everyone, donchaknow?

Well, except for one "Keef Wivaneff". As I'd written above, this ex-Mercedes technician (9 years), who for decades has been one of the world's top dog mushers (Iditarod and Yukon Quest Champion, and multiple-time "Mushers' Choice" and "Veterinarians' Choice" award winner - i.e., a great sportsman) had never ever SEEN a Tesla before getting behind the wheel of mine....yet KW was the first to post a comment on the YouTube video Sab put up...an alarmingly scatological one...

Mercy.