Another Autopilot crash

  • Thread starter Thread starter bwilson4web
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 35
  • Views Views 7K
interestedinEV said:
Ahh, it looks like others have used the trolley problem analogy for autonomous vechicles
You may want to take this test
http://moralmachine.mit.edu/
Click to expand...
Sorry, while all this makes for good discussion, and could be fun, but frankly, I have better things to do. I will leave it to students and those who like to theorize about what is best for us, and how we should live. When their heads come out of the clouds and feet solid on the ground, then we can talk.
 
R P said:
When their heads come out of the clouds and feet solid on the ground, then we can talk
Click to expand...

Here is the deal: People are doing things and autonomous driving is already taking roots. You can
1) stop it completely and tell manufacturers to come back when they are 100% sure,
2) you can slow down it by regulating it somehow (in other words adding layers of bureaucracy to decide which feature is acceptable or not) or
3) you can leave the manufacturers to exercise their best judgement (with minimum or no regulation) and they are accountable if things go wrong.

Today, we have the last one. New drug introduction follows the second one.

If you don't like the third option for autonomous vehicles, you have to get the people in the clouds to support you as they influence policy.
 
interestedinEV said:
Here is the deal: People are doing things and autonomous driving is already taking roots. You can
1) stop it completely and tell manufacturers to come back when they are 100% sure,
2) you can slow down it by regulating it somehow (in other words adding layers of bureaucracy to decide which feature is acceptable or not) or
3) you can leave the manufacturers to exercise their best judgement (with minimum or no regulation) and they are accountable if things go wrong.
Today, we have the last one. New drug introduction follows the second one.
If you don't like the third option for autonomous vehicles, you have to get the people in the clouds to support you as they influence policy.
Click to expand...
I do support #3, but there should be better self regulation, so that a rogue manufacturer doesn't spoil it for everyone else. And that's where we differ, I think. The people in the clouds are less concerned about collective self regulation and accountability. And if that doesn't happen I fear we will end up with #1 or #2, the latter being the more likely.
 
Another consideration is how fast can the normal driving public (not us geeks) adapt to the gradual implementation of driver assist features leading to FSD. I know with my other car, there are a lot of complaints in that forum how some people don't like them, and prefer to just do everything themselves with no help from the car. Unreasonable response, but I do understand why they think that way. Even my wife initially didn't like how the car would try to yank her back into the center of a lane or if she didn't signal when changing a lane. I just said, it will make you a better driver. And I think it did..., haha (and I am still married).
 
Relax my friend. It costs $3k+$6k to get both Autopilot and Full Self Driving in my Tesla. Your car(s) are incapable of either. So I'm not really impressed by your assertion ... unless you'd like to:
  • pay me $9k to stop using both
  • pay the resulting accident victims for your denial of Autopilot and Full Self Driving ... taking responsiblity for the claim
Of course I expect nothing.

A claim not backed up by facts and data that Autopilot and the current Full Self Driving are more dangerous than not ... well there is no data (or money) supporting that FUD. Irresponsible postings about the failures of Autopilot and FSD are common and equally worthless.

Bob Wilson
 
Last edited:
bwilson4web said:
Relax my friend. It costs $3k+$6k to get both Autopilot and Full Self Driving in my Tesla. Your car(s) are incapable of either. So I'm not really impressed by your assertion ... unless you'd like to:
  • pay me $9k to stop using both
  • pay the resulting accident victims for your denial of Autopilot and Full Self Driving ... taking responsiblity for the claim
Of course I expect nothing.

A claim not backed up by facts and data that Autopilot and the current Full Self Driving are more dangerous than not ... well there is no data (or money) supporting that FUD. Irresponsible postings about the failures of Autopilot and FSD are common and equally worthless.

Bob Wilson
Click to expand...
You sure like to live in your own little bubble. Guess you don't know much about other cars and their driver assist features... And not sure what FUD you are referring to. That's not what we have been talking about. Maybe you should reread some of the past posts, and try to better understand the conversation before commenting off tangent somewhere.
 
R P said:
You sure like to live in your own little bubble. Guess you don't know much about other cars and their driver assist features... And not sure what FUD you are referring to. That's not what we have been talking about. Maybe you should reread some of the past posts, and try to better understand the conversation before commenting off tangent somewhere.
Click to expand...
I have been more impressed by those posting of their own experience than making claims about someone else, Matthew 7:3-5:

3 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?
4 Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?
5 Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.​

Bob Wilson
 
Yeah, but when I post my experience with my son's M3, and compare it to other cars, you get all upset. Like I said, you live in a bubble.

Anyway, this thread discussion has now deteriorated. So let's drop it, OK?
 
R P said:
you live in a bubble.
Click to expand...
Fair enough since my side is filled with facts and data:
https://www.tesla.com/VehicleSafetyReport

At Tesla, we believe that technology can help improve safety. That’s why Tesla vehicles are engineered to be the safest cars in the world. We believe the unique combination of passive safety, active safety, and automated driver assistance is crucial for keeping not just Tesla drivers and passengers safe, but all drivers on the road. It’s this notion that grounds every decision we make – from the design of our cars, to the software we introduce, to the features we offer every Tesla owner.

Model S, X and 3 have achieved the lowest probability of injury of any vehicle ever tested by the U.S. government’s New Car Assessment Program. Much of this has to do with the rigid, fortified structure of the battery pack that is mounted to a car’s floor, which provides a vehicle with exceptional strength, large crumple zones, and a uniquely low center of gravity. Because of their strength, Tesla’s battery packs rarely incur serious damage in accidents. And, in the extremely unlikely event that a fire occurs, the state-of-the-art design of our battery packs ensures that its safety system works as intended and isolates a fire to select areas within the battery while simultaneously venting heat away from the passenger cabin and the vehicle.

While no car can prevent all accidents, we work every day to try to make them much less likely to occur. Active safety features come standard on all Tesla vehicles made after September 2014 for an added layer of safety beyond the physical structure of each car. Because every Tesla is connected, we’re able to use the billions of miles of real-world data from our global fleet – of which more than 1 billion have been driven with Autopilot engaged – to understand the different ways accidents happen. We then develop features that can help Tesla drivers mitigate or avoid accidents. And through over-the-air software updates, we’re able to introduce safety features and enhancements long after a car has been delivered.

In October 2018, we began voluntarily releasing quarterly safety data in order to provide critical safety information about our vehicles to the public, and in July 2019 we began voluntarily releasing data about vehicle fires as well.
. . . ​

Your side appears to be full of something else.

Bob Wilson
 
bwilson4web said:
Your side appears to be full of something else.
Bob Wilson
Click to expand...
Again, Bob, you still don't understand. Reread my posts. I keep repeating that of course using Autopilot (which incl the Driver Assist features will yield better accident stats than not using it). You seem to want to argue something different than what I have been saying.

Now you are also bringing up crash worthiness. Apparently the IIHS (and they affect your insurance rates) doesn't agree with you. Teslas are getting better, but they don't all get Top Safety Pick Plus ratings. And they still haven't solved the Small Overlap Front: Driver-Side crash test with only an Acceptable rating on one of the injury areas. Both of my current cars have a Good rating on that test and in fact all of the crash test results (in other words, better than any Tesla).

Also, Tesla only gets an Advanced (vs Superior) rating on their Pedestrian crash prevention. And that is where you would expect Tesla to excel with all their software and sensors. Some other cars costing half as much get a Superior rating.

But again, this thread is about Tesla's Autopilot crashes. If you want to talk about something else, why don't you start another thread.
 
R P said:
I have made the same point in the several past posts, and was quickly admonished by the Tesla lovers who claim the loss of some lives with autopilot is an acceptable cost to further the testing of self driving. I don't know of any other manufacturer takes that position, esp when self driving is nowhere near ready for public usage. They need to better test it in a virtual AI environment to a point where such obvious software deficiencies are fixed before letting it loose on untrained drivers and without on board monitors.

If the needless accidents and deaths continue, I fear a regulatory backlash which could put all EVs in a bad light, just because of a few bad apples.
Click to expand...

First you say Tesla lovers and then you somehow transfer that to Tesla the company. Faulty logic.


Sent from my iPad using Inside EVs
 
Source: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2020/jan/01/tesla-autopilot-california-crash-two-deaths

The US National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is investigating a crash involving a speeding Tesla that killed two people in a Los Angeles suburb, the agency said on Tuesday.
. . .
The black Tesla had left a freeway and was moving at a high rate of speed when it ran a red light and slammed into a Honda Civic at an intersection, police said. A man and woman in the Civic died at the scene. A man and woman in the Tesla were hospitalized with non-life threatening injuries. No arrests were immediately made.

An NHTSA statement said the agency has assigned its special crash investigation team to inspect the car and the crash scene. That team has inspected 13 crashes involving Tesla vehicles the agency believed were operating on the Autopilot system.
. . .​

Time to autopilot the dogs to the dog park.

Bob Wilson
 
Source: https://www.wthr.com/article/1-dead-after-car-slams-fire-truck-i-70

Investigators say a 2019 Tesla driven by 25-year-old Derrick N. Monet of Prescott Valley, Arizona, apparently didn't see a fire truck in the passing lane. Monet ran into the back of the truck.

Monet and his wife, 23-year-old Jenna N. Monet, were injured and taken to hospitals. Jenna later died from crash injuries.
. . . ​

This has similar characteristics of another emergency vehicle accident in California without a fatality:
  • emergency vehicle stopped in far left lane
  • Tesla hits without braking
Tesla detection of stationary objects in the left lane and straight ahead needs work. I remember seeing something similar on a trip with a large pickup that had lost a wheel and was barely out of the left lane. Easily seen, I took over from Autopilot and easily passed it.

Bob Wilson
 
Last edited:
bwilson4web said:
Source: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2020/jan/01/tesla-autopilot-california-crash-two-deaths

The US National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is investigating a crash involving a speeding Tesla that killed two people in a Los Angeles suburb, the agency said on Tuesday.
. . .
The black Tesla had left a freeway and was moving at a high rate of speed when it ran a red light and slammed into a Honda Civic at an intersection, police said. A man and woman in the Civic died at the scene. A man and woman in the Tesla were hospitalized with non-life threatening injuries. No arrests were immediately made.

An NHTSA statement said the agency has assigned its special crash investigation team to inspect the car and the crash scene. That team has inspected 13 crashes involving Tesla vehicles the agency believed were operating on the Autopilot system.
. . .​

Time to autopilot the dogs to the dog park.

Bob Wilson
Click to expand...
The Guardian is getting as bad as Fox news. I far as I know the federal agency hasn't said the vehicle was using Autopilot.
 
marshall said:
The Guardian is getting as bad as Fox news. I far as I know the federal agency hasn't said the vehicle was using Autopilot.
Click to expand...
When a normally safe vehicle crashes, it is news. But when anything else crashes, 'crickets' ... if it bleeds it leads. Still, I prefer the Guardian as they tend to report with a relatively minimum of 'editorial' noise. My only fault with them are excessive coverage of Manning (traitor), Assange (Russian agent), and Snowden (traitor.)

Bob Wilson
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top