The end of "Autopilot" (term)

[flashflood]

Naming aside, it's actually quite challenging to explain anything between L0 and L5. L0 means you're the driver. L5 means you're not. The intermediate levels of 'driver assistance' all kind of follow this path:

Q: I hear this car has AutoTask.
A: Yes. It assists you with Task.
Q: So it performs Task for me?
A: Sometimes, when it can.
Q: When AutoTask engages, can I trust it?
A: No. Conditions may change such that it can no longer perform Task.
Q: Well, what if conditions don't change? Then can I trust it?
A: No, AutoTask may still perform Task incorrectly.
Q: Sorry, what is AutoTask again?

And I don't even mean that as a criticism. It's just hard to explain the limitations, and hard to understand them until you've had some experience behind the wheel with it. Personally, I use AutoPilot as a kind of enhanced collision avoidance. I stay attentive, as though driving is still 100% on me, but with the added comfort of knowing that if I get distracted or bored, the car may well save both my life and the lives of those near me.

 

[WannabeOwner]

It's just hard to explain the limitations, and hard to understand them until you've had some experience behind the wheel with it

For me, that is absolutely the crux of the issue. Newbies (without instruction, or carefully reading the manual / forums like this) have no idea when it might misbehave. Discovering "when & how" on a self-training basis, as at present, seems to be cart-before-horse to me. I think that this needs an education solution in the short term - in a few years time the knowledge will be commonplace (and perhaps I will have gotten use to the latest iOS upgrade by then too ...)

 

[S4WRXTTCS]

Kinda curious about what they would have to say about Drive-Pilot.

Personally I don't like the Autopilot name anyways, but not for the commonly cited reasons. I don't like it because there is multiple meanings when someone refers to Autopilot depending on context.

An Autopilot save means that anything within the Autopilot package (any car made late 2014 and beyond) prevented a crash.

A person that crashed while Autopilot was on only means that TACC+LaneSteering was on.

I wouldn't mind if Autopilot was under an Advanced driver assistance package, and autopilot was the name for TACC+LaneSteering (what other people hate because they assume we're all idiots, and they gleefully remind us of that anytime someone crashes).

Personally I don't feel as if the name caused any confusion. I think the media reviewers and how popular social media has become created a condition where people were careless in their presentation of it. Even Elon's own wife presented it in a not so safe manner. The fine folks at Arstechnica were complete hypocrites about it. They did their review playing pattycake, and then they turned around and said what a horrible name Autopilot was because it could cause confusion. Bah.

One element I do like about the name Autopilot is it's future proof. I really like the name Autopilot and Summons as the names of features to build off of. I believe that's was Tesla was aiming for and if we weren't such morons everything would be fine.

God I hate it when people use the "But, it could cause confusion" as an excuse as to why we can't have nice things. They always seem to eventually get proven right and I hate it. It's usually spoken by people with first hand experience dealing with zombies from states such as Florida, and Arizona.

 

[S4WRXTTCS]

Naming aside, it's actually quite challenging to explain anything between L0 and L5. L0 means you're the driver. L5 means you're not. The intermediate levels of 'driver assistance' all kind of follow this path:

Q: I hear this car has AutoTask.
A: Yes. It assists you with Task.
Q: So it performs Task for me?
A: Sometimes, when it can.
Q: When AutoTask engages, can I trust it?
A: No. Conditions may change such that it can no longer perform Task.
Q: Well, what if conditions don't change? Then can I trust it?
A: No, AutoTask may still perform Task incorrectly.
Q: Sorry, what is AutoTask again?

And I don't even mean that as a criticism. It's just hard to explain the limitations, and hard to understand them until you've had some experience behind the wheel with it. Personally, I use AutoPilot as a kind of enhanced collision avoidance. I stay attentive, as though driving is still 100% on me, but with the added comfort of knowing that if I get distracted or bored, the car may well save both my life and the lives of those near me.

I agree.

It all comes down to the fact that it's messy, and accidents will happen regardless of what something is called. Once you or I use something for a bit do we really care what it's called? Notice how the first person really against the name doesn't even have it? In his defense he's always been against the name, and he's not in any shape or form wrong about it (he has a valid opinion that would have saved Tesla some bad publicity). But, I do think having it would have changed his perspective on the name.

I'm a little concerned that renaming Autopilot will actually cause more deaths long term. The reason is the MAJOR reason for the hysteria around the Florida AP fatality was the name Autopilot. It was a fear based reaction that pushed Tesla to completely overhaul the AEB system. I have no doubt that when fully implemented that it will save lives.

 

[WannabeOwner]

One element I do like about the name Autopilot is it's future proof

Reminds me of a software package (back in early 1980's) called "The Last One" which wrote software, and was therefore the last one you would ever need because it would write all your software for you.

"The Last One Plus" came out a few years later ...

 

[AmpedRealtor]

Every aircraft pilot who has ever used one knows that they do not fly the aircraft themselves, they are an aide to the pilot(s). Were there to be any implication that "autopilot" equals "autonomous" what would pilots be for? Obviously the autopilot, however capable, cannot be autonomous. None of them, let me shout NONE, are capable of changing instructions automatically, NONE are so reliable that the pilot(s) can leave them alone.

I know many people who interpret "autopilot" to mean that the car will handle things that it's not designed to handle. Unfortunately, very few potential Model S customers are aircraft pilots who understand the fine points of what an autopilot can or cannot do. The average consumer, however, is confused based on my conversations with prospective customers. When I spoke with a Reuters news reporter who interviewed me about my experience with my car, she told me many industry experts also feel that the term "Autopilot" is misleading. Perhaps that is the fault of most consumers not understanding how an airline autopilot system functions, but really they shouldn't have to.

I fully understand what Autopilot can and cannot do, but from a marketing standpoint Tesla has failed somewhat because people think it can do things that it cannot. Tesla let this genie out of the bottle without properly framing the technology in ways most people can immediately understand. I'm reading reports that version 8 is causing cars to veer out of their lanes, or violently steering to the right at unexpected moments... and these are basic tasks that any true autopilot system should be able to handle.

For the record I don't think Tesla is going to change the term voluntarily because that would be taken as a sign of failure. I'd be surprised if Tesla did not fight the proposed language tooth and nail. It seems whoever wrote it was gunning specifically at Tesla's naming convention. Tesla has far too much invested into this to change course on the name at this point.

I wish Tesla made every new owner take a mandatory course, either online or at the service center, to teach them the limitations of Autopilot.