Will Mercedes jump to level 3 before Tesla? Looks like it.

[Daniel in SD]

Not all of us.

I mean, I’d like FSD to get very good … but not for Tesla to take on the liability until it’s 10x better than humans at least.

ps : Tesla has the option of covering liability only if you take their insurance ….

Most of us here support the Master Plan.
I fully expect FSD Robotaxi to be a per mile subscription only service.
The problem with your idea is that if the system is L2 you can face criminal charges even if you have insurance.

Felony charges are 1st in a fatal crash involving Autopilot

California prosecutors have filed two counts of vehicular manslaughter against the driver of a Tesla on Autopilot who ran a red light, slammed into another car and killed two people in 2019.

apnews.com

 

[EVNow]

Most of us here support the Master Plan.
I fully expect FSD Robotaxi to be a per mile subscription only service.
The problem with your idea is that if the system is L2 you can face criminal charges even if you have insurance.

Felony charges are 1st in a fatal crash involving Autopilot

California prosecutors have filed two counts of vehicular manslaughter against the driver of a Tesla on Autopilot who ran a red light, slammed into another car and killed two people in 2019.

apnews.com

They should.

What I man by the insurance thing is … it makes it the exposure not that much worse for Tesla assuming, FSD does get that much better.

Oh yes - if they get to robotaxi, they have to cover it. We are talking about current purchasers of FSD ….

 

[t3sl4drvr]

if the system is L2 you can face criminal charges even if you have insurance.

That leads to the interesting question of who goes to jail, if the court find autonomous car guilty of vehicular homicide?

(Just to keep it clearer, lets say there are no humans in the car at the time of accident)

 

[Raurele]

That leads to the interesting question of who goes to jail, if the court find autonomous car guilty of vehicular homicide?

(Just to keep it clearer, lets say there are no humans in the car at the time of accident)

I’m guessing Mercedes has figured that out and accepted the outcome. I’d like to know as well

 

[t3sl4drvr]

This is how Mercedes-Benz Level 3 DRIVE PILOT system works when it needs human to take over

 

[t3sl4drvr]

L3 will be available in fairly limited operational domain at launch. Sounds similar, but a more limited ODD compared to Navigate on Autopilot. When out of ODD, car can fall back to L2 (more like NoA). Even with the initially limited ODD, this is a huge step over NoA: L3 needs to start somewhere.

 

[Bouba]

This is how Mercedes-Benz Level 3 DRIVE PILOT system works when it needs human to take over

View attachment 784704

L3 will be available in fairly limited operational domain at launch. Sounds similar, but a more limited ODD compared to Navigate on Autopilot. When out of ODD, car can fall back to L2 (more like NoA). Even with the initially limited ODD, this is a huge step over NoA: L3 needs to start somewhere.

View attachment 784711

Interested
I didn’t see where it is written that the car will pull over onto the hard shoulder of the freeway to stop (in the event of the driver not responding quickly enough)...in fact it didn’t even mention that it will move to the slow lane to stop. So...we could have a situation where cars are stopping on the fast lane...death and destruction could follow from a pile up

 

[Goose66]

That leads to the interesting question of who goes to jail, if the court find autonomous car guilty of vehicular homicide?

I assume this was rhetorical and/or a joke, but just in case: A car obviously cannot be guilty of a mens rea based crime, i.e. the car could not have the required intent for the elements of a crime like vehicular homicide. Absent evidence that a programmer at the manufacturer specifically programmed the car to perform one of the intentional acts required, e.g. going around a school bus or fleeing the police, a death resulting from the operation of an autonomous vehicle would fall under consumer product law. There could be criminal charges stemming from that (if someone intentionally cut corners or let a known flaw be released), but the charges would not be vehicular homicide.

It's always interesting to me when people bring up the question of how courts will handle autonomous car accidents in the future as if it's some sort of threshold problem that has to be overcome. I assure you our laws and courts are currently amply suited to handle these situations already.

 

[Bouba]

I assume this was rhetorical and/or a joke, but just in case: A car obviously cannot be guilty of a mens rea based crime, i.e. the car could not have the required intent for the elements of a crime like vehicular homicide. Absent evidence that a programmer at the manufacturer specifically programmed the car to perform one of the intentional acts required, e.g. going around a school bus or fleeing the police, a death resulting from the operation of an autonomous vehicle would fall under consumer product law. There could be criminal charges stemming from that (if someone intentionally cut corners or let a known flaw be released), but the charges would not be vehicular homicide.

It's always interesting to me when people bring up the question of how courts will handle autonomous car accidents in the future as if it's some sort of threshold problem that has to be overcome. I assure you our laws and courts are currently amply suited to handle these situations already.

What about corporate manslaughter? It would be impossible to argue that Mercedes got everything perfectly right for every possible situation

 

[Daniel in SD]

Interested
I didn’t see where it is written that the car will pull over onto the hard shoulder of the freeway to stop (in the event of the driver not responding quickly enough)...in fact it didn’t even mention that it will move to the slow lane to stop. So...we could have a situation where cars are stopping on the fast lane...death and destruction could follow from a pile up

Sort of like what could happen if your car breaks down in the fast lane? I don't think anyone really knows how safe this system will be. Will people be able to safely transition to driving? Will people have mode confusion between the L2 and L3 modes? Will there be crazy rare deadly situations that the system can't handle? It will be very interesting to see how well it works.

This system won't change lanes at all (though the car does have automated lane changes when not using Drive Pilot).

 

[t3sl4drvr]

This system won't change lanes at all (though the car does have automated lane changes when not using Drive Pilot).

Seems like the MB approach here is to find the smallest possible, but still useful subset of the L2 autopilot and set that as the initial ODD for L3. Then iteratively expand ODD to make L3 increasingly useful. Not a bad approach IMO, the will have the dibs for being first and limit the risk from the unexpected human behavior.

 

[GlmnAlyAirCar]

Agreed.

Also, taking a nap on drivers seat could be dangerous due to your feet accidentally hit the break or you could lean on the steering wheel.

Brake

 

[EVNow]

Seems like the MB approach here is to find the smallest possible, but still useful subset of the L2 autopilot and set that as the initial ODD for L3.

Its based on a UN std that only allows L3 below 60 kmph on highways. Germany has adopted that. Search for my comments on it.

 

[Daniel in SD]

Its based on a UN std that only allows L3 below 60 kmph on highways. Germany has adopted that. Search for my comments on it.

Yep but the US is not subject to those rules. Mercedes claims their goal is to continually expand the operational design domain. I think the same system with only an increase in maximum speed would be very valuable to people in California (where we have lots of Interstates and no weather).
Though I’m probably being way too optimistic. I give a 50% chance of this never being released at all here.

 

[Bouba]

It seems to me that they have defined L3 as a traffic jam on a freeway...isn’t that basic Autopilot

 

[Daniel in SD]

It seems to me that they have defined L3 as a traffic jam on a freeway...isn’t that basic Autopilot

Reread this thread and you will understand the difference.
They haven’t defined L3 at all, they have designed a system that meets the definition of L3. Easiest way to think about it is that while an L3 system is engaged you are not responsible for what the vehicle does. It does seem like a difficult concept for people to wrap their heads around.

 

[EVNow]

Yep but the US is not subject to those rules. Mercedes claims their goal is to continually expand the operational design domain. I think the same system with only an increase in maximum speed would be very valuable to people in California (where we have lots of Interstates and no weather).
Though I’m probably being way too optimistic. I give a 50% chance of this never being released at all here.

That US has not accepted that UN std is also a problem. I think the current NHTSA line is - you apply for an exception and we'll consider it on a case-by-case basis.

Unless NHTSA (and local state laws) allow the liability to be transferred to the manufacturer, police will continue to hold the driver responsible.

 

[Daniel in SD]

That US has not accepted that UN std is also a problem. I think the current NHTSA line is - you apply for an exception and we'll consider it on a case-by-case basis.

Unless NHTSA (and local state laws) allow the liability to be transferred to the manufacturer, police will continue to hold the driver responsible.

I think liability for autonomous (and non autonomous) driving is 100% state law and has nothing to do with the NHTSA. Mercedes system is legal in California (after approval) and they will be responsible for at fault collisions. No state would ever allow an L3 system without having the manufacturer be liable. It wouldn’t make any sense.

 

[EVNow]

Mercedes system is legal in California (after approval)

What approval - State or NHTSA ?

Finally - as a driver the minimum you need is that the local police will not arrest you for something the car did. For that state needs to positively approve that liability transfer. Ofcourse, actually getting all the cops educated on that is a different question.

Ofcourse NHTSA has to approve before the car can be sold at all.

 

[Bouba]

I think liability for autonomous (and non autonomous) driving is 100% state law and has nothing to do with the NHTSA. Mercedes system is legal in California (after approval) and they will be responsible for at fault collisions. No state would ever allow an L3 system without having the manufacturer be liable. It wouldn’t make any sense.

It seems that Mercedes is laying down a challenge to Tesla..put your money where your mouth is....but with US juries awarded damages closing in a billion dollars per case...it is not worth the effort.
Also the car owner will be obligated to make sure they follow all servicing to the letter