There's Growing Evidence Tesla's Autopilot Handles Lane Dividers Poorly (arstechnica.com) 238
An anonymous reader writes: Within the past week, two Tesla crashes have been reported while Autopilot was engaged, and both involved a Tesla vehicle slamming into a highway divider. One of the crashes resulted in the death of Walter Huang, a Tesla customer with a Model X. The other crash resulted in minor injuries to the driver, thanks largely to a working highway safety barrier in front of the concrete divider. Ars Technica reports on the growing evidence that Tesla's Autopilot handles lane dividers poorly: "The September crash isn't the only evidence that has emerged that Tesla's Autopilot feature doesn't deal well with highway lane dividers. At least two people have uploaded videos to YouTube showing their Tesla vehicles steering toward concrete barriers. One driver grabbed the wheel to prevent a collision, while the other slammed on the brakes. Tesla argues that this issue doesn't necessarily mean that Autopilot is unsafe. 'Autopilot is intended for use only with a fully attentive driver,' a Tesla spokesperson told KGO-TV. Tesla argues that Autopilot can't prevent all accidents but that it makes accidents less likely. There's some data to back this up. A 2017 study by the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (NHTSA) found that the rate of accidents dropped by 40 percent after the introduction of Autopilot. And Tesla argues that Autopilot-equipped Tesla cars have gone 320 million miles per fatality, much better than the 86 million miles for the average car. These figures don't necessarily settle the debate. That NHTSA figure doesn't break down the severity of crashes -- it's possible that Autopilot prevents relatively minor crashes but is less effective at preventing the most serious crashes. And as some Ars commenters have pointed out, luxury cars generally have fewer fatalities than the average vehicle. So it's possible that Tesla cars' low crash rates have more to do with its wealthy customer base than its Autopilot technology. What we can say, at a minimum, is that there's little evidence that Autopilot makes Tesla drivers less safe. And we can expect Tesla to steadily improve the car's capabilities over time."
wrong statistic (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
Re:wrong statistic (Score:5, Insightful)
Given that all cars in the 320 million miles/fatality are modern 5 star safety rated and the cars in the 86 million miles/fatality are average cars, you can't make the the assumption that the correlation between incidents and fatalities are the same for both groups.
If you want to compare Autopilot cars with non-autopilot cars, the cars you compare it to also should have the same standard safety features:
automatic emergency braking
a dozen or so air bags
stability control
abs
5 star impact rating
front and side collision warnings
All features that are available on other new vehicles.
Then it's a fair comparison.
Re:wrong statistic (Score:4, Interesting)
Also you should compare cars under the similar driving conditions. Currently, autopilots refuse to function in difficult road conditions, while human drivers do.
Re: (Score:2)
Also you should compare cars under the similar driving conditions.
So limit the comparison to just drivers in the San Francisco and Phoenix metropolitan areas?
Re: (Score:2)
If you want a really good control group, how about comparing Teslas-purchased-with-the-autopilot-option against Teslas-purchased-without-the-autopilot-option?
That's about as apples-to-apples as you're going to get, assuming there are enough of each on the road to make the comparison statistically significant (I think there probably are).
Re:wrong statistic (Score:4, Insightful)
It's not a like-for-like comparison though.
Tesla cars are expensive. You have to be well off to own one, which means you are much less likely to be taking risks like driving drunk or on drugs. Having spent all that money on a car, you are probably going to look after it and not take the same risks you would in a $1000 banger. You are also likely travelling very different roads, better maintained and at less congested times of the day. Your car is likely to be well maintained.
So comparing to the average, especially in the US where regulations are relatively lax, is misleading. A fair comparison would be with accident rates among luxury cars in a similar price bracket. Audi, Lexus, Mercedes.
Re: (Score:2)
Lawyers do their best to make up for the non-drug abusing professionals with money tho
Re: (Score:2)
You've made a whole load of assumptions there. And you've missed out out other factors that may not favour the wealthier driver. Like what speed they are doing, and how likely they are to be using a cellphone whilst driving.
Re: (Score:2)
The Tesla safety record compared to high end sedans driving on highways in good conditions (where AP is supposed to be limited to), not rain, snow, fog, etc, is not better from any data that is available.
htt [bestride.com]
Re: (Score:2)
What we can say, at a minimum, is that there's little evidence that Autopilot makes Tesla drivers less safe.
No, data as to relative safety doesn't appear to be available.
It does 'seem' like when there is a Tesla highway death, the investigation shows AP was being used. So there might be a statistic that shows more Tesla highway deaths happen with AP on, but of course most drivers probably use it most of the time they are on highways, so the number of non-AP highway deaths might not be statistically significant yet.
The necessary data is not easy to obtain unfortunately. So everyone is assuming.
Re: (Score:2)
You don't want to know how many accidents there were in cars with autopilot, that doesn't matter. What you want to know is miles per accident *with autopilot engaged.* Using the other number is highly misleading.
It's one of several statistics you're interested in.
Over time, frequent users of the autopilot may become worse drivers as their skills grow rusty (or they may get better as they become less complacent during their limited driving time).
And even then, what kind of conditions does the auto-pilot work in vs regular driving, how does it affect other drivers on the road, how do pedestrians and other drivers adjust their behaviour when the cars start to become ubiquitous, etc, etc.
Without overwhelming evidence o
Re: (Score:3)
You don't want to know how many accidents there were in cars with autopilot, that doesn't matter. What you want to know is miles per accident *with autopilot engaged.* Using the other number is highly misleading.
Exactly. Furthermore, it's very likely that Tesla knows the number of number miles and accidents with Autopilot on and off. So, they could trot out the comparative mean miles between accidents/fatalities if it were in their favor. That they don't implies that the comparative numbers are either similar or worse with Autopilot.
Re: wrong statistic (Score:2)
that's possible.
it's also possible that they are being careful using a stat that is still fluctuating and may change in the future against them.
Re: (Score:2)
You don't want to know how many accidents there were in cars with autopilot, that doesn't matter. What you want to know is miles per accident *with autopilot engaged.* Using the other number is highly misleading.
If it's going to veer into a lane divider that's a problem. So what you want to know in this case is how many times Teslas with Autopilot engaged have successfully navigated past lane dividers.
Re: (Score:2)
The Autopilot is different then a self driving car. It is too bad that this hasn't been properly explained to the public.
Autopilot is in essence a step up from cruise control which is in general good at keeping you in your lane, at speed limit, and not ram into other cars. I would actually like this feature on my car, when I am taking a long trip, and my eyes are getting strained, and I am miles away from a place where I can safely pull over and rest. It can give me a few seconds to relax my body, refocus m
Re: (Score:2)
Sigh, I just don't get it (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
What is the point to an autopilot if I have to be fully attentive and ready to take over?
Mainly, that is just unfortunate lawyer CYA language so they have an easy cop out for situations like this.
"Oh, our ridiculously named system soiled the bed? That's YOUR fault."
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Probably low karma. My karma is 'good', so I get +1 to start, but that's probably just because I don't post here very often.
Re:Sigh, I just don't get it (Score:4, Insightful)
If you have to pay attention then autopilot is less than useless. The fact it is in control makes it much more likely you will not be paying attention.
Re: (Score:2)
I imagine it's kind of like having a spell checker. The spell checker isn't perfect, (e.g. accepting waist instead of waste) so you have to be paying some attention when you write, but it will catch and prevent lots of your errors. The two of you working together can generally do a better job more easily than you a person would alone.
Re: (Score:2)
What is the point to an autopilot if I have to be fully attentive and ready to take over?
So cruise control is also pointless?
Also dammit if i'm going to die in a car, I want it to be my fault and freaking awesome.
What's so special about cars? Do you ever travel by air? Do you have a pilot's licence? Air accidents tend to be much more awesome than car crashes.
Re: (Score:3)
What is the point to an autopilot if I have to be fully attentive and ready to take over?
Kansas. No, really; ever had to drive across that shit??
Re: (Score:3)
Simple: If you fall asleep behind the wheel of a Tesla with Autosteer engaged, odds are good that you will survive the experience. If you fall asleep behind the wheel of a car without Autosteer, you probably won't.
Re: (Score:2)
>> If you fall asleep behind the wheel of a Tesla with Autosteer engaged, odds are good that you will survive the experience.
This is why I want it.. Falling asleep at the wheel is a problem for me. Between the two of us we ought to make one decent driver.
Re: (Score:2)
What is the point to an autopilot if I have to be fully attentive and ready to take over?
The same point as an autopilot in a plane. Just becuase you didn't know what the term meant doesn't mean it has to perform differntly to anything else called autopilot in the world.
Re: (Score:3)
Fatigue. If you're driving a long distance, you will arrive less fatigued it your hands haven't spent hours doing micro-management of steering wheel position. Just as existing cruise control and adaptive cruise control gave that benefit to your right foot. And it's not just muscular fatigue, it's the mental fatigue of micromanaging.
Autopilot lets you take one step back. You are acting as the manager of the drive, not the worker doing the driving.
Re: (Score:2)
What is the point to an autopilot if I have to be fully attentive and ready to take over?
Because it's a little helper pilot, not an autopilot.
Re: (Score:2)
Which is why it is poorly named.
Re:Sigh, I just don't get it (Score:5, Insightful)
1. Safety. Despite the alarmism in TFA, you are safer using Autopilot than driving yourself.
Why do people keep claiming this as some kind of fact when they don't have any data to back it up? We've been through the flaws of using the "40%" study, which was supposed to compare before AP vs after AP but 2/3 of the cars in the study didn't have any 'before AP' miles. Not to mention other control features were never accounted for such as Auto Steer.
Tesla with AP may be a lot safer, but we don't have the data to make that declaration. So please stop abusing statistics.
Re: (Score:2)
"which was supposed to compare before AP vs after AP but 2/3 of the cars in the study didn't have any 'before AP' miles."
That's not really a problem if you know something beyond stats 100. Auto steer plus auto braking... starting to sound like auto pilot hey?
Re: (Score:2)
"which was supposed to compare before AP vs after AP but 2/3 of the cars in the study didn't have any 'before AP' miles."
That's not really a problem if you know something beyond stats 100. Auto steer plus auto braking... starting to sound like auto pilot hey?
Yes, its is a very significant problem when using the one statistic to draw any conclusions. I guess you didn't even look at the study or the method, and you are just saying stuff in ignorance.
Re: (Score:3)
Additionally, they assert safety of AP relative to *all other vehicles* in *all conditions*. It is in fact highly likely that systems with auto braking and lane alarms (without just doing all the steering for you) are safer than autopilot. Such systems don't really allow for a driver to stop paying attention compared to autopilot's system (there's nagging and then there's "your car simply doesn't go unless you actively are steering it").
This is one of the things that royally aggravates me about Tesla, the
Re: (Score:2)
You say cars without AutoPilot don't allow drivers to stop paying attention. And yet collisions in manually driven cars often occur when people have stopped paying attention.
Re: (Score:3)
1. Safety. Despite the alarmism in TFA, you are safer using Autopilot than driving yourself.
You might think so, but there are often unintended consequences.
It was either anti-lock brakes or all wheel drive that was supposed to decrease accident rates but actually increased them, at least for a while. It was because drivers expected them to work in situations where they weren't going to and they took greater risks because they were "safer".
I would expect that "autopilot" has the same consequence. "I've put it in autopilot mode, I can now safely text everyone about my wonderful experience while r
Sounds like a philosophy 101 question (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
The intentionally misnamed "autopilot"
I don't know why you think it is misnamed. It is named exactly the same way that aircraft autopilots are. Aircraft autopilots also require an attentive pilot ready to take over, because aircraft autopilots will happily fly the airplane into obstructions, or can fail in a large number of other ways. In fact, "can disable autopilot" is a standard pilot checklist item, and it can be done in half a dozen different ways.
Seems like the Tesla "autopilot" is named just right.
Re:Sounds like a philosophy 101 question (Score:5, Insightful)
The intentionally misnamed "autopilot"
I don't know why you think it is misnamed. It is named exactly the same way that aircraft autopilots are. Aircraft autopilots also require an attentive pilot ready to take over, because aircraft autopilots will happily fly the airplane into obstructions, or can fail in a large number of other ways. In fact, "can disable autopilot" is a standard pilot checklist item, and it can be done in half a dozen different ways.
Seems like the Tesla "autopilot" is named just right.
I take it you've never flown as a pilot before. No really, it's ok because most people aren't pilots :P
My roadway is as big as the horizon. My fellow pilots in other planes are several hundred meters if not kilometers away.
In my car, my fellow drivers are 1.5-2 meters away and my roadway is as big as the city planners decide to make it.
On larger jets, they have systems that monitor you with transponders and much more. If you're aiming to the ground, the system will shout at you in a Skybus or Boeing jet.
A few seconds of inattentiveness with autopilot on in a plane won't hurt anyone. Heck I read a book sometimes.
A few seconds of inattentive in a passenger car (with or without Tesla autopilit) will at best cause a crash or worse kill you.
Call it cruise control assist and save a few live or call it MuskSense if you want something sexy and to achieve the same thing. Autopilot is just a terrible misnomer for what it really is.
Re: (Score:2)
Autopilot is just a terrible misnomer for what it really is.
And yet it functions in the same way. Just because the reaction situation is slightly different doesn't change the function. Also a few seconds of inattentiveness in a passenger car with autopilot will not kill you. Only when auto pilot is not working does that come into play.
*I was driving next to someone in traffic in Amsterdam who was asleep at the wheel and his Model S was coping just fine. I just hope he woke up before he missed his highway exit.
Re:Sounds like a philosophy 101 question (Score:5, Insightful)
This all misses the point: the vast majority of people are not pilots, everything they think about 'autopilot' comes from tv shows and media and every thing they deal with that is 'auto' in their lives meaning not having to worry about it.
Pilots can debate the accuracy of the term given the reality of the situation, but what matters is the lay man's perspective (which is precisely what Tesla is trying to take advantage of).
Re: (Score:2)
Wish I had some mod points to give you, since you’re the only one who’s really identified the crux of the matter.
Re: (Score:2)
This all misses the point: the vast majority of people are not pilots,
Learning to operate something with an "autopilot" requires non-pilots to learn that "autopilot" is not "perfection" or "needs no monitoring", just like learning to drive a car with an "autopilot" requires the same.
If you have a function on a car that can kill you when it fails, it really does seem logical that you realize you need to pay attention to what it is doing and be ready to take control to avoid death. At least, it seams logical to me.
every thing they deal with that is 'auto' in their lives meaning not having to worry about it.
Most things that are "auto" in real life don't have life-threa
Re: (Score:2)
While it is the correct thing for users of a product to understand things better, the situation remains that from a responsible marketing perspective, Tesla is doing the wrong thing.
You can't even play the "Tesla is technically correct, the best kind of correct" card and say the plebes should just get over it, as nothing "pilots" a car. It doesn't resemble the methods of airplane autopilot enough to say they are bringing over the technology either. So it's a technology given a misleading name for the sake
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed, if you look on the TMC forums there are regular questions from people thinking about buying, or worse having just bought a Tesla and asking if they can take a nap while Autopilot takes them to work.
It doesn't help that Tesla is actually selling "full self driving" capability already, to be delivered as a software update. Apparently the salespeople are telling customers it's six months away, which is a joke. Even Musk thinks 2020, but that's incredibly optimistic.
Re: (Score:2)
The former is just a series of cameras, logic, sensors, and software designed to identify and navigate around fairly obvious things like a truck or large vehicle in front of you. The latter lets you take your hands off the wheel and not pay real attention to what's going on. Think of it as being similar to a train. You take your seat and the train gets you to your destination with
Re: (Score:2)
I have not undergone the training, but I wouldn't be 100% certain the tone of the person conducting the training would be/has been that grave on the matter, particularly when the person doing the training I assume is the same salesman that had previously been chatting up autopilot and how powerful it is.
I did watch a video of the warning, and it is very unobtrusive and only demands that you touch the wheel once every three minutes or so. Everything about this seems consistent with Musk's general attitude th
Re: (Score:2)
Seems like the Tesla "autopilot" is named just right.
Fits your name.
Re: (Score:2)
Aircraft fly in three dimensions in mostly empty space
It is a fact that somewhere below every aircraft in flight is either rock or water, both of which can be fatal when hit in the wrong way. Further, that rock sometimes sticks up into that "mostly empty space", and is just as fatal when run into at full speed. A failed autopilot will not prevent those fatal interactions, it takes an attentive pilot detecting the failure and taking control.
AND have air traffic control monitoring and directing traffic away from each other.
Many of them do, many more of them do not. If you are VFR and not taking advantage of flight following (or the controller
Re: (Score:2)
You are being purposely obtuse.
Allow me to rephrase: the problem of implementing a safe autopilot for a plane is VASTLY, HUGELY easier than implementing a safe autopilot for a car.
There are very good reasons why autopilots for planes have existed for over a century while the first tentative forays into building autopilots for cars have just now begun after many enormous advances in computation, radar, computer vision, sensing, AI, etc., etc., etc.
Most importantly, in a plane if the autopilot can simply mai
Re: (Score:2)
Allow me to rephrase: the problem of implementing a safe autopilot for a plane is VASTLY, HUGELY easier than implementing a safe autopilot for a car.
That may be. It has nothing to do with the fact that the naming of "autopilot" in the Tesla is quite correct based on historical naming of "autopilot" in aircraft. BOTH require an active pilot/driver paying attention to deal with failures of the system when they happen.
I am not debating how hard one is compared to the other, so telling me I missed that point is moot.
Most importantly, in a plane if the autopilot can simply maintain altitude and direction, then the vast majority of the time that will be safe for a long period of time.
Yes, I think we've all figured out that if the autopilot is working then the "pilot" doesn't have much to do -- other than monitor the autopi
Re: Sounds like a philosophy 101 question (Score:2)
If you want to be like that, fine. Tesla cars are steered by drivers, not pilots, hence the autopilot name is wrong. Also driving a Tesla car doesn't require a type rating, which makes the comparison even more nonsensical.
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly because the problem is so much vastly harder, then the failure rate of the mechanism will be much higher.
Sigh. I didn't say anything different. But is the problem "vastly harder" for an aircraft than an automobile? The sensors for determining heading, roll, etc in an aircraft are stable and can be redundant to reduce failures in those. The data they produce is also pretty simple. The control mechanisms are more complex, but then again they are old technology.
The sensors for a vehicle "autopilot" are relatively new (lidar, cameras, etc) and require robust image and data processing to get the appropriate info
Re: (Score:2)
From down thread, maybe it means something to you:
Yes, I understood every word. A well trained ATP can catch an autopilot mistake and correct it in 25-25 seconds. (In the movie "Sully" it was a major plot point that the pilots required 30 seconds just to recognize the bird strike before they began to react to it. This may or may not be "real life", but I doubt it is far from the truth.) That requires him to be monitoring the status of the autopilot to catch the error and be ready to correct it. This reinforces my point: there has to be an attentive pilot r
Re: (Score:2)
So it sounds like you fly. Are you a member of the mile high club?
Re: (Score:2)
The intentionally misnamed "autopilot"
The only people who think autopilot is misnamed are those who have no idea how the autopilot of a plane works.
Re: (Score:2)
You can certainly make the questions progressively more difficult to answer until it basically becomes a six of one, half a dozen of the other situation. My point was that the first question as posed was a no brainer.
To your specific question, no, I would not save 3 80 year olds (smokers or non-smokers) to kill 2 children. The 80 year olds have already lived full lives and are near death regardless due to natural causes. Collectively, the 2 children probably have much more life ahead of them than the 3 8
Re: (Score:2)
What's the point of "autopilot" if the driver has to be "fully attentive?"
What's the point of cruise control then?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
a) Autopilot gives an ergonomic improvement so you don't have to be constantly applying pressure to the steering wheel to micromanage your course. Yes, you have to touch the wheel with one hand. But you don't need to apply any forces.
b) Autopilot allows the user to spend less time looking at the lane markings and translating that into steering wheel position, and more time scannign ahead for obstacles.
c) Autopilot isn't as good at maintaining lane as a human yet. But it will be. It's a technology in progres
To be fair... (Score:2)
Re:To be fair... (Score:5, Informative)
And the driver who destroyed said barrier was not on autopilot. Normal human error.
Check out the intersection on Google Maps and you can see what went wrong, both for the human, and for autopilot. The left line is quite distinct. The right line is rather worn. There is no visible crosshatching at all between them. Once a vehicle crosses the fading line, what looks like a "lane" forms around them, seemingly reinforcing that this is an acceptable place to drive. This happens only seconds before the barrier is hit, so there's not that much time to react to the situation. There are no overhead signs, just the road-level sign. In dense traffic, it's not visible until you're in the invalid "lane".
Any driver, paying attention, will of course not do this. But human drivers' attentions lapse, and that's a mistake that humans can - and recently did - make.
Concerning Autopilot, there's a big question as to what versions people are running. Walter Huang, at the very least, was almost certainly running the old AP. It's not clear what versions the YouTubers were running. There was a massive AP update that just started rolling out recently that makes a huge difference in quality. To the degree that I'm actually rather concerned about it. The more imperfect the system, the more attention you pay to it. I have worries that with the new system, it's gotten good enough that it's going to cause peoples' attention to lapse. Having to touch (with torque) the wheel at regular intervals helps, but I hope Tesla gets eye tracking in place soon.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds like a Wile E. Coyote trick.
At some stage autopilot will start taking input from GPS, just as I do at night on a dark road, to see ahead for any significant bends in the road to be at an appropriate speed, and be ready to turn. With GPS getting more and more accurate, autopilot would perhaps see the difference between the road markings it can see and the GPS track, and slow right down.
Why didn't it see the barrier? One online theory is that there was another vehicle in front that wanted to make the t
Re: (Score:2)
If the Tesla Autopilot requires clearly marked lanes it is somewhat useless. At least in my country, there are usually some streets where lanes are not marked at all, or the marking is worn away. And the street has 2 (sometimes 3) lanes in one direction.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes - known as 'chevrons'. Just over a year ago, a bus crashed into a nearly identical barrier just down the road - killed 2 and injured 'over a dozen'. The primary NTSB report puts the primary blame on inadequate road markings.
While the report only came out at the end of March, they should have known about it before then. Hopefully they will react to the report and fix the lane markings - what we see there is shocking, and I'm not surprised people hit those dividers constantly. As more and more cars come
Re: (Score:2)
Sometimes my lane departure warning software can see markings I can't (typically on a rainy night), and sometimes I see markings it misses.
Inherently unsafe (Score:2, Insightful)
It seems even worse than regular driving if you have to continuously be on the look out to prevent the steering wheel suddenly sending you into a wall.
Maybe Tesla should focus on automatic braking, parallel parking, and things like that until using their Autopilot is no longer the same as playing the Russian roulette. At some point, these accidents will damage their reputation badly...
Re: Inherently unsafe (Score:2)
You know, itâ(TM)s not randomly turning. Itâ(TM)s not able to handle a highway exit/split. Which is perfectly expected for, I quote the manual âoeauto lane keepâ.
It works perfectly fine when driving down a marked highway. And from anecdotal experience works better than I could at night and in rain.
And just like adaptive cruise control, itâ(TM)s a convenience feature meant to be used in the right conditions.
If they can't spot a narrow divider... (Score:5, Interesting)
what about motorcycles? I know BMW's Traffic Jam Assistant doesn't do well with that since I had a BMW 750 rear-end me at about 10 MPH. The guy that hit me says it usually does a great job of going the correct speed in 0-30 MPH traffic here on I-5 in Seattle. I think it didn't see me, but instead saw the dump truck in front of me and then tried to drive through me.
Re:If they can't spot a narrow divider... (Score:4, Insightful)
I call shenanigans. It's been quite a while since I hit 30mph in a vehicle anywhere in Seattle.
Re: (Score:2)
LOL. But seriously, it was at about 6:45am so traffic wasn't completely stopped yet.
Poor comparison (Score:2)
Recalculate the miles per fatality after you remove all the other cars without the other safety systems the Tesla has.
It would be interesting to see the miles per fatality when the cars counted all have stability control, crumple zones, a dozen or so airbags, side impact beams, etc.
Unless you're comparing 5 star crash rating cars with other 5 star crash rating cars, it's not even a remotely fair comparison of Autopilot.
Minor crashes (Score:2)
I find the skewed submitter's view of "minor crashes" a bit odd.
The comparison is for fatalities per mile. I'd have a hard time expecting that there would be
Re: (Score:2)
http://www.iihs.org/iihs/sr/st... [iihs.org]
Re: (Score:2)
The figures being commonly quoted are heavily unreliable as well, as the oldest Tesla sold dates from 2008 (and there were only 2,500 Roadsters delivered, so that changes the figures as well), so when we are talking about Tesla mileage we are also talking about very modern cars, and also prestige cars which people take care of.
The "average" car on the road must also take into account all the 20, 30, 40 year old beaters on the roads, and the declining road-worthiness of those older cars - not only do they ou
Dirty little secret of statistics (Score:3)
Statistics are only as valid as the data they're based on, and the assumptions made about the data that isn't there.
Most transportation statistics are missing a LOT of base data. Things like "miles driven per year" are guesses.
Except in the case of cars like the Tesla, where there is a black box collecting statistics. How does Tesla know that auto pilot was on or off? It's recorded. How many miles are driven with AP on or off is recorded.
Many of the details are tossed out after an interval, but Tesla can collect a whole lot of data that other manufacturers cannot.
Now, the particular problem with dividing lanes is probably tied to trying to stay between the lines, when the lines are spreading out. If you don't stick to one line or the other, you're target is what is in the middle, and it is going to hurt.
U folks are Crazy (Score:2)
they should fix that (Score:2)
Autopliot steering directly into a concrete barrier at highway speeds in broad daylight is an enormous bug. Multiple sensors must have detected the barrier under those conditions, yet the onboard AI chose to drive into it. This looks like a great big hole in Tesla's software validation process and badly faulty software. A concrete barrier directly in front of the car is not some one-in-a-zillion anomalous corner case. Autopilot software architecture must be very badly flawed; Even if the lane-detectio
Re: (Score:2)
There is simply no good reason these vehicles should not have detected obstacles with which they were about to collide and engaged emergency braking at the very least!
But they don't have to be perfect; only better than people, who often collide with obstacles for no good reason.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, for people to accept handing over control and the fate of their lives to AVs, AVs will have to be much better than your average human driver and not fail in ways that a human would easily handle.
That might be irrational, but that's the way people work.
Amazing (Score:2)
uh (Score:2)
'Autopilot is intended for use only with a fully attentive driver,'
Said no logic ever.
"You had one job!"
One minute commercial (Score:2)
I wanted to watch the video from the near misses, but YouTube is starting with a one minute commercial.
Autopilot (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Agreed, and their stupid marketing ploy is killing people.
Re: (Score:2)
The marketing ploy certainly contributes, but also the design decision to basically work when the person is completely inattentive. Contrast this with other systems that offer steering assist only in an exceptional scenario, and create an unacceptable driving experience when the steering has to intervene for lane keeping, requiring the human to generally be the one steering, with machine intervention only when it detects a dangerous scenario.
Re: (Score:2)
It's no worse than GPS which resulted in an entire family from the UK being killed when they made a U-turn in the middle of a highway "because the GPS told them to". https://www.theguardian.com/uk... [theguardian.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Different cars have different breaking distances,
My Subaru has gone more than 100,000 miles without any significant breaking.
Re: (Score:2)
What the hell does any of that have to do with purposely naming a feature in such a way that it lulls people into a false sense of security???
Re: (Score:2)
Except you learn when not to use Autopilot after Autopilot fails and you crash.
Tesla's navigated past the crash barrier that killed the man thousands of times before. The first time it failed, the driver died. How do you learn from that?
The guy who died probably drove past it hundreds of times using Autopilot, it was part of his daily commute.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not saying it is a bad feature that should be removed. I'm saying their purposely chosen name for the feature is needlessly dangerous. I guess "Driver Assist" just wasn't sexy enough?
Re: (Score:2)
HA! I suggested the exact same name up above! Obviously, that name isn't sexy enough to sell more vehicles so it got nixed.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Also, how many of those 86 million miles *could have been autopilot (since autopilot can opt out of conditions the driver cannot)* and how many of those if you remove cars that mechanically break (old cars, Tesla's aren't old enough yet to exhibit this), and adjust for various safety technologies (from anti-lock brakes, to airbags, to just having braking, to competitor systems that do have some sort of lane keep assist, but only for accident avoidance and otherwise doesn't help someone drive with their hand
Re: (Score:2)
It should be pretty obvious that anything that sticks up from the surface more than an inch or two should be be considered a hazard to avoid.
Not so much. In many countries it's illegal to swerve to miss small animals because the result can be a crash that injures humans. And how can you tell the difference between a bird, a cat, a brick and a discarded bag of fast-food packaging? Not to mention that animals move unpredictably. The active suspension people had to give up on trying to use remote sensing to smooth out bumps and pot-holes because it was impossible to tell the nature of the surface irregularities before the wheels hit them.
Re: (Score:2)
And how can you tell the difference between a bird, a cat, a brick and a discarded bag of fast-food packaging?
Humans do that easily all the time. AVs should be at least in the same ballpark as humans in sensing and diagnosing potentially dangerous obstacles.
Re: (Score:2)
It got dramatically better in the 2018.10.4 firmware, though it still has an unnatural tendency to hug center barriers a little too closely and get a little too close to other cars. And it still occasionally ignores solid lines and drives right across gore areas, like the one bet
Re: (Score:2)
Which are you? Jealous or a Luddite?
Because if you are not fascinated and excited at the idea of a robot driving your car, you might as well turn your geek card in and leave slashdot