Will Auto-Pilot (Steering) Be Delayed Due To Legal Restrictions? (NY Times Article)

[wk057]

Isn't this the same news organization that employs this guy?: A Most Peculiar Test Drive | Tesla Motors

*places NY Times on ignore*

- - - Updated - - -

Elon said they were testing driving from San Francisco to Seattle without the driver touching the steering wheel. I'm almost positive it can't do this if all it does is lane keeping. I-5 up to Seattle splits into multiple roads on several occasions. At a minimum it'd have to be able to put itself into the correct lanes without driver intervention. Does that fall outside the law in some states?

Autopilot will change lanes when told to do so with the signal control, we're told (and shown in the demo). I guess technically that isn't the steering wheel, so Elon isn't exactly lying.

Personally, once my P85D does what I want with autopilot (lane keeping) I won't be immediately installing updates anymore until after I verify somewhere (like here) that the update doesn't cripple this functionality in some way (like the temporary air suspension neutering update). Let's say Tesla pushes 7.0 and it will do autopilot lane keeping without hands on the steering wheel.... then a month later they determine this isn't legal for whatever reason and push an update that removes it, or requires a constant hand on the wheel. I'll be sticking with 7.0 as long as possible in that case.

 

[JohnQ]

I most definitely did address your point.

The law professor in the Wired article is speaking specifically about the Tesla situation, and saying that states could revoke registration or refuse to register the cars. My hypothetical situations are based on his statements. You seem willing to dismiss his statements. So essentially you're saying that you know more about what's likely to happen than this law professor does. I don't know which one of you will turn out to be right. I hope it's you. But I am making my points on the assumption that the law professor knows what he is talking about, and that there is at least the possibility of what he believes might happen happening.

As you say, you're basing your points on what the professor said. You should consider the possibility that

1. The reporter is including a particularly provocative viewpoint to spice up the piece
2. The reporter phrased the question in such a way to elicit such a viewpoint and/or
3. The law professor is an outlier and does not represent the commonly accepted viewpoint of of those in his position

Being a law professor does not make his viewpoint valid in the real world application of Tesla's (and other manufacturer's) technology.

 

[breser]

The laws are not particularly clear and this is far from a settled area of law. To answer the question in the subject, no I don't think that this will delay anything Tesla is doing. If all the manufacturers just implement things that are obviously legal they won't push this technology forward. This is no different than Tesla trying to open a location in a state only to run into problems with the local dealer laws. They can't be sure of the authorities interpretation of the law or challenge that interpretation until they try to open a location. People have criticized Tesla for being ready to open those locations without realizing that the law often requires they be in that position to apply for the license. Same thing will be true with Autopilot. Until Tesla ships it they can't really be sure how the authorities will react. They can try and talk to them privately and get their take but there's no guarantee that will be successful. So I tend to think that some conflict is almost inevitable. But that's not necessarily a bad thing.

 

[ecarfan]

Will Auto-Pilot (Steering) Be Delayed Due To Legal Restrictions? (NY Times Ar...

@breser, nice post and I agree. Tesla will install their Auto Pilot on cars in all states and gauge the reaction. It's important to do to advance the technology. And as others have pointed out over and over, basically all cars contain "Illegal" capabilities, such as the power to go well over the speed limit. But they are not banned for offering the driver that capability; the driver is expected to obey the law and operate the car within legal limits.

I really do not see how the Tesla Auto Pilot is any different: it is a feature available to the driver if they choose to use it. Yes if the driver gets in an accident while using Auto Pilot there will be legal wrangling over where the fault lies, that is nothing new and those legal cases will have an impact of the development of self driving cars. But since states often do not pass laws regulating new technologies before the introduction of such technologies, what courts decide is part of the process of society determining how new technologies are implemented and used. It's a multi-faceted process of interaction between manufacturers, the public, the legal system, and legislatures. Messy at times, but inevitable.

 

[Andyw2100]

As you say, you're basing your points on what the professor said. You should consider the possibility that

1. The reporter is including a particularly provocative viewpoint to spice up the piece
2. The reporter phrased the question in such a way to elicit such a viewpoint and/or
3. The law professor is an outlier and does not represent the commonly accepted viewpoint of of those in his position

Being a law professor does not make his viewpoint valid in the real world application of Tesla's (and other manufacturer's) technology.

I don't disagree with anything that you said.

I only made the points I did to counter a couple of people who said that they didn't believe Tesla would have any issues with any of this because the manufacture of the cars would not be illegal. Specifically it was the post below, and then someone that agreed with it that prompted me to make the argument that I did:

I don't see a problem at all. It is perfectly legal to sell a car with illegal capabilities. Every car is capable of speeding, some jurisdictions have excessive acceleration laws, you can leave your brights on when not legal.

I don't see a legal problem for Tesla rolling these features out. If the features malfunction, big problem for Tesla. If a driver gets caught using these features where not legal, the driver gets a ticket, and maybe their insurance will prohibit the use of features. I just don't see trouble for Tesla, assuming everything functions well.

It's all moot if no state ever takes action. EVbwcaer was stating his or her belief that even if a state did make the Model S illegal, Tesla could legally sell it, and that there would be no trouble for Tesla. I was disagreeing with that, and offering support for that argument.

 

[LetsGoFast]

If you read other things that the law professor has written, you are left with the strong impression that he doesn't think there are significant legal obsticals to automated cars. For instance, check out his paper entitled Automated Vehicles Are Probably Legal in the United States or his interview on CCTV

 

[Evbwcaer]

I don't disagree with anything that you said.

I only made the points I did to counter a couple of people who said that they didn't believe Tesla would have any issues with any of this because the manufacture of the cars would not be illegal. Specifically it was the post below, and then someone that agreed with it that prompted me to make the argument that I did:

I'm all ears....what are the points that counter my point that all cars are currently sold with illegal capabilities and there is no problem? I have not heard point of differentiation why it is fine for a car to be able to go 275mph (speeding), or burn rubber (reckless driving, excessive acceleration), or pull 1G on the skid pad (reckless driving), but not OK for it to be able to have an autonomous mode.

The funny thing about all of this is that we are discussing autonomous driving being illegal.....you gotta think in the future there will be a point where people are mad as hell that they can no longer drive a car themselves....just too dangerous.

 

[Andyw2100]

I'm all ears....what are the points that counter my point that all cars are currently sold with illegal capabilities and there is no problem? I have not heard point of differentiation why it is fine for a car to be able to go 275mph (speeding), or burn rubber (reckless driving, excessive acceleration), or pull 1G on the skid pad (reckless driving), but not OK for it to be able to have an autonomous mode.

The funny thing about all of this is that we are discussing autonomous driving being illegal.....you gotta think in the future there will be a point where people are mad as hell that they can no longer drive a car themselves....just too dangerous.

I'm really not sure why you're having a hard time following this.

I'm saying that --IF-- a state has an issue with the car, Tesla will have problems, and pointing to the professor's statements in the articles as evidence that this it at least a possibility.

You were and are saying that because the car has illegal capabilities does not mean there will be problems for Tesla because cars have illegal capabilities now. You continue to ignore the fact that I am saying Tesla will have problems --IF-- a state chooses to either make the Tesla Model S itself illegal, or chooses to revoke registrations or chooses to not register the model in the future. These were things presented as possibilities in the article. I am not commenting on how likely or unlikely I believe they are to happen. You, in your initial comment, said that the car being illegal would not be a problem for Tesla, and I'm saying it would be, if a state or states choose to act as the article states they might. If the states continue not to take action, as they are doing now concerning speed limits, there is no issue. We agree on that.

 

[Evbwcaer]

Point taken. But if we are asking this rhetorical -IF- question, we must think there is some reasonable possibility of the event occurring. My point/question is, why would this (revoking registrations, banning sales, etc.) occur now and with Tesla when every car on the road has illegal capabilities?

The standard has never been to make capabilities illegal, but rather making using those capabilities illegal or restricting how, or the extent to which, they are used illegal.

What reason/rationality would legislators have to change the game now? Won't they just make using the features illegal if they don't think they are safe?

 

[Andyw2100]

Point taken. But if we are asking this rhetorical -IF- question, we must think there is some reasonable possibility of the event occurring. My point/question is, why would this (revoking registrations, banning sales, etc.) occur now and with Tesla when every car on the road has illegal capabilities?

The standard has never been to make capabilities illegal, but rather making using those capabilities illegal or restricting how, or the extent to which, they are used illegal.

What reason/rationality would legislators have to change the game now? Won't they just make using the features illegal if they don't think they are safe?

Those would be questions to ask of the law professor. My only thinking on that is that if "Wired" a pretty reputable publication, saw fit to publish an article that says this is possible, it's probably at least remotely possible.

We know there are states, like Michigan, that have it in for Tesla. Would it really surprise you if some law-maker in a state like that tried to make life difficult for Tesla when the opportunity presented itself?

All I'm saying is that the idea that some state could attempt to do something along these lines is not a ridiculously outlandish idea. I really can't say how likely it is to happen, but I'm open to the possibility that it could.

 

[Beryl]

We know there are states, like Michigan, that have it in for Tesla. Would it really surprise you if some law-maker in a state like that tried to make life difficult for Tesla when the opportunity presented itself?

You are right but I'm thinking that the hate won't affect lawmakers.
US automakers benefit from Tesla implementations. Not much different from Android manufacturers who benefit from iDevices. (Yes, I know Android devices get many features long before iDevices do.) Moreover, like Apple products, Teslas are currently priced out of the range of most customers.

 

[donv]

In order to do that, it would need to change lanes on it's own, or at least exit onto a ramp from one freeway to another. Given that it requires driver intervention to change lanes (by pressing the turn signal), how do you see it transitioning from one freeway to another without driver intervention?

The Tesla Auto Pilot function will certainly be able to transition from one freeway to another "hands free" as long as the nav route indicates that is the preferred path. This seems obvious to me. The latest MobileEye system can do this right now, and Tesla is using the MobileEye technology.

- - - Updated - - -

States can do anything they want. They could probably ban automobiles all together, if they wanted to.

The point you are missing is that EVERY auto maker is working on stuff like this, and many are either selling it already in their current product, or planning to introduce it in the near future. Google "Cadillac Super Cruise" if you don't believe me...

We know there are states, like Michigan, that have it in for Tesla. Would it really surprise you if some law-maker in a state like that tried to make life difficult for Tesla when the opportunity presented itself?

All I'm saying is that the idea that some state could attempt to do something along these lines is not a ridiculously outlandish idea. I really can't say how likely it is to happen, but I'm open to the possibility that it could.

 

[ecarfan]

Will Auto-Pilot (Steering) Be Delayed Due To Legal Restrictions? (NY Times Ar...

In order to do that, it would need to change lanes on it's own, or at least exit onto a ramp from one freeway to another. Given that it requires driver intervention to change lanes (by pressing the turn signal), how do you see it transitioning from one freeway to another...

You realize that software is continually being improved, right?

Yes, at the D and Auto Pilot launch SIX MONTHS AGO all that was demonstrated was speed limit detection, TACC, hands off lane keeping, and automatic lane changing using the turn signal stalk. Because that is all they could demonstrate.

MobilEye has already demonstrated total self-driving capability following a nav route LAST YEAR. Tesla is going to launch that capability in the S this year. Enabling the S to pilot itself on well marked freeway ramps and highway transitions isn't difficult.

Elon has been very clear that the Auto Pilot isn't for surface streets, urban environments, or rural roads. It is for major freeways and highways. The S will be able to drive itself on those types of roads, including transitioning between different freeways and highways, in reasonably good weather (not in heavy rain, sleet, or snow). The key is that the roads need to be clearly marked. MobileEye relies heavily on the forward facing camera and visual processing algorithms.

 

[donv]

Sure, it's improving-- maybe someday it will be so improved that they can actually release it!

Where have you seen any promise from Tesla that it can change lanes without driver input?

Late this year, they'll probably announce an improved sensor package which will do more. But, as it sits today, I haven't seen anything saying it can change lanes on it's own.

You realize that software is continually being improved, right?

Yes, at the D and Auto Pilot launch SIX MONTHS AGO all that was demonstrated was speed limit detection, TACC, hands off lane keeping, and automatic lane changing using the turn signal stalk. Because that is all they could demonstrate.

MobilEye has already demonstrated total self-driving capability following a nav route LAST YEAR. Tesla is going to launch that capability in the S this year. Enabling the S to pilot itself on well marked freeway ramps and highway transitions isn't difficult.

Elon has been very clear that the Auto Pilot isn't for surface streets, urban environments, or rural roads. It is for major freeways and highways. The S will be able to drive itself on those types of roads, including transitioning between different freeways and highways, in reasonably good weather (not in heavy rain, sleet, or snow). The key is that the roads need to be clearly marked. MobileEye relies heavily on the forward facing camera and visual processing algorithms.

 

[Lump]

Broad ranging discussion including regulators.

 

[mikeash]

It's unlikely that the current Model S autopilot will ever be able to change lanes on its own. Safely changing lanes requires checking for traffic in the target lane for some distance behind you, to ensure you don't pull out in front of someone going much faster than you are. Humans do this with the side mirrors. Computers can do this with rear-facing radars or cameras, but they need to be mounted on the side to see around traffic behind you. The Model S only has one rear-facing camera, and it's mounted in the center and is zoomed way out so couldn't see well at long distances anyway. There's no rear-facing radar (unless they've hidden one to keep in reserve and surprise us).

This capability certainly has been demonstrated in other cars, but they have more sensors to accomplish it.

 

[mspohr]

Broad ranging discussion including regulators.

These guys have it right. Elon pushes the envelope. Other car makers are behind and the politicians bring up the rear.

 

[donv]

I don't know... an Acura you can buy today will do what Autopilot promises sometime in the future.

2015 Acura TLX Driving by Itself - LKAS Test Drive Review - YouTube

The steering input he is giving is just to let the car know he's still there-- basically nagging, which I hope Tesla will minimize.

These guys have it right. Elon pushes the envelope. Other car makers are behind and the politicians bring up the rear.

 

[Beryl]

There are several ICE vehicles with autopilot capability deployed. I wanted a USA made BEV with autopilot and long battery range and onlyTesla has all of this.

 

[JohnQ]

It's unlikely that the current Model S autopilot will ever be able to change lanes on its own. Safely changing lanes requires checking for traffic in the target lane for some distance behind you, to ensure you don't pull out in front of someone going much faster than you are. Humans do this with the side mirrors. Computers can do this with rear-facing radars or cameras, but they need to be mounted on the side to see around traffic behind you. The Model S only has one rear-facing camera, and it's mounted in the center and is zoomed way out so couldn't see well at long distances anyway. There's no rear-facing radar (unless they've hidden one to keep in reserve and surprise us).

This capability certainly has been demonstrated in other cars, but they have more sensors to accomplish it.

Would you consider a driver giving a turn signal which indicates that it's safe to change lanes as "cheating?" The car could simply use that as a trigger.