No one was in driver’s seat in fatal Tesla crash(cnn.com)
cnn.com
No one was in driver’s seat in fatal Tesla crash
https://www.cnn.com/2021/04/19/business/tesla-fatal-crash-no-one-in-drivers-seat/index.html
85 comments
Discussed before : https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26852399 ( 695 comments )
This is a great example of technology that refuses to embrace how human brains actually work. The lawyers say that drivers must be engaged and ready to take over while the technology does a good enough job that it makes driving as un-engaging as possible. This is not how human brains work.
It doesn't help that the CEO is lying to investors and customers that "full self-driving" is right around the corner and Tesla's are on the cusp of providing robot Taxi services.
It doesn't help that the CEO is lying to investors and customers that "full self-driving" is right around the corner and Tesla's are on the cusp of providing robot Taxi services.
>The lawyers say that drivers must be engaged and ready to take over while the technology does a good enough job that it makes driving as un-engaging as possible. This is not how human brains work.
Yes. "Drivers must be engaged and ready to take over" is not really a thing humans will ever do (if they have a tech that can sorta drive itself, they will 100% get distracted)
And even worse, the name of the feature and the whole marketing makes it appear as its Level 5, where it's not even a solid 4.
Yes. "Drivers must be engaged and ready to take over" is not really a thing humans will ever do (if they have a tech that can sorta drive itself, they will 100% get distracted)
And even worse, the name of the feature and the whole marketing makes it appear as its Level 5, where it's not even a solid 4.
> if they have a tech that can sorta drive itself, they will 100% get distracted
That's been known for a while. Some of the automation systems that have a human in the loop will actually lower the level of automation every once in a while and ask the human to take over so that the human does not get complacent.
That's not really a popular way to sell cars though. Having a car that requests a lane change or to re-center the car in the lane every once in a while isn't what people are really looking for, even though it would increase driver attentiveness.
That's been known for a while. Some of the automation systems that have a human in the loop will actually lower the level of automation every once in a while and ask the human to take over so that the human does not get complacent.
That's not really a popular way to sell cars though. Having a car that requests a lane change or to re-center the car in the lane every once in a while isn't what people are really looking for, even though it would increase driver attentiveness.
Worse yet, the AP beta many customers are testing now is explicitly billed as "full self-driving". Which it isn't.
For people who assume the AP is some breakthrough in self driving tech, it doesn't feel too different from this [0] 2013 Mercedes Benz video and demo. Just that different CEOs have different appetites for lying to customers.
[0] https://twitter.com/sascha_p/status/1321469775051186177
For people who assume the AP is some breakthrough in self driving tech, it doesn't feel too different from this [0] 2013 Mercedes Benz video and demo. Just that different CEOs have different appetites for lying to customers.
[0] https://twitter.com/sascha_p/status/1321469775051186177
> where it's not even a solid 4.
It's not any kind of 4, let alone solid.
It's tech level 2 working on making 3 solid.
It's not any kind of 4, let alone solid.
It's tech level 2 working on making 3 solid.
This is a great example of sales and marketing outpacing technology. Tesla has been absolutely negligent from the very beginning by marketing Autopilot as "full self driving". Full level 4 self driving capability does not exist, and will not exist for a long time to come. They have repeatedly lied to the public through their advertising to make people think that it does. What Autopilot is is a very sophisticated form a cruise control, and nothing more. Those peoples' deaths are on Elon's hands for purposely selling a false bill of goods.
> This is a great example of sales and marketing ...
I don’t know if shifting the responsibility from the technology to marketing is the right move here.
It would be very easy for Tesla to do what every other car company already does with lane keeping, which is making sure the drivers hands are on the wheel. If I take my hands off the wheel of my VW for more than 30 or so seconds, lane keep assist turns off and I’ll drive straight into a tree if I don’t put my hand back on the wheel.
...or is Tesla’s philosophy that you shouldn’t need to touch the steering wheel turning a trip from point a to point b, even without level 4 self driving?
How do Tesla’s verify drivers are engaged? And how does the system penalize drivers when they aren’t engaged for extended periods?
There is definitely a problem with their marketing. But the core problem is the technology, IMO.
I don’t know if shifting the responsibility from the technology to marketing is the right move here.
It would be very easy for Tesla to do what every other car company already does with lane keeping, which is making sure the drivers hands are on the wheel. If I take my hands off the wheel of my VW for more than 30 or so seconds, lane keep assist turns off and I’ll drive straight into a tree if I don’t put my hand back on the wheel.
...or is Tesla’s philosophy that you shouldn’t need to touch the steering wheel turning a trip from point a to point b, even without level 4 self driving?
How do Tesla’s verify drivers are engaged? And how does the system penalize drivers when they aren’t engaged for extended periods?
There is definitely a problem with their marketing. But the core problem is the technology, IMO.
Every other car manufacturer makes it a point to ensure that drivers are never under the impression that things like LKAS and ACC are meant to supplant the drivers undivided full attention to the road. Toyota specifically has held back their technology for this very reason. Even GM Super Cruise, which is arguably more advanced than Autopilot, is marketed solely as an advanced form a cruise control, with no mention anywhere of any kind of autonomy, and is only enabled when the system is certain the driver is in the seat watching the road.
My very-non-self-driving car beeps when I'm not wearing my seatbelt; clearly technology to detect the driver's presence is not rocket science. Lawyers saying it's the "driver's responsibility" strike me as a fairly weak argument, if a Tesla is at all allowed to autonomously accelerate without a person physically putting their butt on the driver seat in the first place. </two-cents>
I'm even somewhat concerned about single-pedal driving, because it weakens the driver's reflex to find the brake pedal in an emergency. Autopilot with real-time human backup is just a whole other level of madness.
> It doesn't help that the CEO is lying to investors and customers that "full self-driving" is right around the corner and Tesla's are on the cusp of providing robot Taxi services.
Yup
Tesla's Vegas Loop, which is a completely controlled and isolated environment, somehow still needs drivers in those Teslas. I guess that could be a legal requirement, but I'm pretty sure if Tesla actually got the full self-driving to work in the loop then they would have used that at least for PR.
The whole thing is just such a bad joke considering the same tunnel could be used for a self-driving subway/train, which would be a massive improvement in terms of throughput over having people enter and exit cars that are not at all designed for public transport.
Yup
Tesla's Vegas Loop, which is a completely controlled and isolated environment, somehow still needs drivers in those Teslas. I guess that could be a legal requirement, but I'm pretty sure if Tesla actually got the full self-driving to work in the loop then they would have used that at least for PR.
The whole thing is just such a bad joke considering the same tunnel could be used for a self-driving subway/train, which would be a massive improvement in terms of throughput over having people enter and exit cars that are not at all designed for public transport.
This!
Even driving Highway Hypnosis is a major problem in many areas.
It why some roads in deserts curve a lot. Helps keep the mind alert.
Take away any active involvement and it will be far worse.
https://www.healthline.com/health/highway-hypnosis#causes
It why some roads in deserts curve a lot. Helps keep the mind alert.
Take away any active involvement and it will be far worse.
https://www.healthline.com/health/highway-hypnosis#causes
FWIW: that kind of human failure (loss of attention in boring/featureless/static environments) is exactly where automation is best and most productively applied. It seems weird to see an argument against automation framed like this.
You want help people pay attention better by making it more dangerous for them to nod off?
You want help people pay attention better by making it more dangerous for them to nod off?
Well the expectation is to have incomplete automation, full attention and zero engagement.
Those don’t go together.
Those don’t go together.
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1384254194975010826
The car hadn't purchased autopilot.
The car hadn't purchased autopilot.
Could this technology go the way of Modular Smartphones or Virtual Reality?
There are two possible explanations I've seen proposed:
1. The obvious. The "driver" turned on autopilot and then hopped into the back seat for a thrill-ride. This is what everyone is talking about, but its not necessarily true.
2. The less obvious. The driver took his passenger for a joyride, lost control of the vehicle in a residential area and then slammed into a tree. Lets call this the "Tiger Woords" theory. The resulting fire damaged the doors and the two people were unable to escape. The driver unbuckles himself and tries to escape through the rear-doors, but those also don't work. As such, both people burn to death in the car.
--------
This isn't *necessarily* an autopilot problem. But this is absolutely a "you crashed and then burned to death" problem. In both #1 and #2, this crash proves that a high-speed collision involving these Li-Ion battery packs could very well result in a fire that's extremely hard to douse.
There's also been numerous complaints about the difficulty of opening Tesla-doors when power is cut. If the batteries are damaged (or on fire), can be be sure that those doors can be opened at all?
How do Tesla's doors perform under a variety of crash situations? Are the manual-override instructions too confusing for typical people (especially during emergencies) ??
See: https://www.reddit.com/r/teslamotors/comments/1rdqte/questio...
Even Tesla fans have difficulty precisely describing the manual override procedure to open up these doors.
1. The obvious. The "driver" turned on autopilot and then hopped into the back seat for a thrill-ride. This is what everyone is talking about, but its not necessarily true.
2. The less obvious. The driver took his passenger for a joyride, lost control of the vehicle in a residential area and then slammed into a tree. Lets call this the "Tiger Woords" theory. The resulting fire damaged the doors and the two people were unable to escape. The driver unbuckles himself and tries to escape through the rear-doors, but those also don't work. As such, both people burn to death in the car.
--------
This isn't *necessarily* an autopilot problem. But this is absolutely a "you crashed and then burned to death" problem. In both #1 and #2, this crash proves that a high-speed collision involving these Li-Ion battery packs could very well result in a fire that's extremely hard to douse.
There's also been numerous complaints about the difficulty of opening Tesla-doors when power is cut. If the batteries are damaged (or on fire), can be be sure that those doors can be opened at all?
How do Tesla's doors perform under a variety of crash situations? Are the manual-override instructions too confusing for typical people (especially during emergencies) ??
See: https://www.reddit.com/r/teslamotors/comments/1rdqte/questio...
Even Tesla fans have difficulty precisely describing the manual override procedure to open up these doors.
At least on my Model 3, the manual override is a literal handle that is easy enough to use that I have had unfamiliar passengers open the door with it accidentally more than once.
https://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/threads/opening-the-doors-in...
> The interior handles on the front doors electronically open the door; if you continue pulling them all the way, a cable engages and unlocks the door in case of power loss
> The rear door latch is in the body frame and not the door. Therefore, in the event of power loss, there's something to pull on under the seat which will open the door
That's from 2012, so things have probably changed for the S. The front door looks easy enough, but if the front door was damaged from the accident... the rear-manual open procedure looks complicated.
> The interior handles on the front doors electronically open the door; if you continue pulling them all the way, a cable engages and unlocks the door in case of power loss
> The rear door latch is in the body frame and not the door. Therefore, in the event of power loss, there's something to pull on under the seat which will open the door
That's from 2012, so things have probably changed for the S. The front door looks easy enough, but if the front door was damaged from the accident... the rear-manual open procedure looks complicated.
The rear manual on a 3/Y is a wire at the bottom of the map pocket on the door.
I teach new passengers about it like some kind of airline safety video, but I doubt all people do.
I teach new passengers about it like some kind of airline safety video, but I doubt all people do.
You could also fold down the rear seats and escape through the trunk (the seat folding latches are on the inside of the Model 3).
Car companies need to stop fucking around with door handles. All door handles should be physically connected to the latch mechanism.
The time someone really needs a mechanical door latch will be an emergency situation where they are not in the frame of mind necessary to understand why the handle they've successfully used a million other times is suddenly not functioning.
Imagine getting into a fist fight, only to realize that when you go to cover your face, your brain instead decides that your arms should cover your ass instead. "Well, the human manual says that during a fist fight, stomping your feet will cause your arms to cover your face." is hardly what someone wants to hear.
The time someone really needs a mechanical door latch will be an emergency situation where they are not in the frame of mind necessary to understand why the handle they've successfully used a million other times is suddenly not functioning.
Imagine getting into a fist fight, only to realize that when you go to cover your face, your brain instead decides that your arms should cover your ass instead. "Well, the human manual says that during a fist fight, stomping your feet will cause your arms to cover your face." is hardly what someone wants to hear.
When you slam to tree, various bits are broken or moved. What was possible to open might not be anymore. It happens in other cars too.
> At least on my Model 3, the manual override is a literal handle that is easy enough to use
That's if you're conscious.
After an accident strong enough for the batteries to burst into flames, the manual override being on the inside of the car seems dubious.
Plus, as others have mentioned, it's very likely the same accident has wedged body panels together making opening of the door impossible, despite the manual override.
That's if you're conscious.
After an accident strong enough for the batteries to burst into flames, the manual override being on the inside of the car seems dubious.
Plus, as others have mentioned, it's very likely the same accident has wedged body panels together making opening of the door impossible, despite the manual override.
The potential for body panels wedging a door close after an accident is pretty much a universal automotive problem, no matter what the latch release mechanisms are. (though I'm sure some latch designs might independently be more or less likely to get stuck).
The problem here, is most cars don't spontaneously burst into flames upon impact... making getting out of the car in a real hurry non-necessary.
Most cars don't, but gas and electric cars both occasionally do so. I would guess that the rate of cars catching fire after an accident is actually higher for gas cars.
If one wants a more guaranteed way out - I advise buying a safety hammer for your car. They have a pointed impact head to shatter safety glass, as well as a belt cutter in case your seat belt is jammed.
If one wants a more guaranteed way out - I advise buying a safety hammer for your car. They have a pointed impact head to shatter safety glass, as well as a belt cutter in case your seat belt is jammed.
There are still fewer than 2-million Teslas in existence.
And the Ford Pinto (yes, the Pinto. The "exploding car" that was the subject of "Fight Club" the movie) had 27 fire-related deaths around the 2.2-million car sold.
The number of Tesla-fires is quickly approaching Ford Pinto levels. (Mostly because the Ford Pinto fires were overblown: as a subject matter in a popular movie and pop culture, they really weren't much more explosive than other cars)
--------
Furthermore: the explosions of Tesla vehicles are requiring far more care. There needed to be over 20,000+ gallons of water over four hours to douse the flames in this very crash.
Only electric vehicles have that kind of sustained, multi-hour fire problem. Fire departments know full well how to put out a regular gasoline fire. But Li-Ion is kind of dangerous tech.
And the Ford Pinto (yes, the Pinto. The "exploding car" that was the subject of "Fight Club" the movie) had 27 fire-related deaths around the 2.2-million car sold.
The number of Tesla-fires is quickly approaching Ford Pinto levels. (Mostly because the Ford Pinto fires were overblown: as a subject matter in a popular movie and pop culture, they really weren't much more explosive than other cars)
--------
Furthermore: the explosions of Tesla vehicles are requiring far more care. There needed to be over 20,000+ gallons of water over four hours to douse the flames in this very crash.
Only electric vehicles have that kind of sustained, multi-hour fire problem. Fire departments know full well how to put out a regular gasoline fire. But Li-Ion is kind of dangerous tech.
Gas cars and trucks can have multi hour accidents too. Here’s a seven hour accident.
https://www.wcax.com/2021/03/03/car-fire-closes-part-of-i-93...
Last time the stats were visited on this a couple of years ago it seems has cars catch fire about 10x more than electric cars.
https://www.wcax.com/2021/03/03/car-fire-closes-part-of-i-93...
Last time the stats were visited on this a couple of years ago it seems has cars catch fire about 10x more than electric cars.
There's a big difference between neglecting maintenance on a vehicle until it overheats enough to catch fire, and a vehicle which bursts into flames regularly upon impact while people are trapped inside.
We get you like Tesla... but that doesn't excuse being deliberately obtuse. You cannot hand wave away these people that were stuck inside a fire bomb of a vehicle which required about 20 fire trucks worth of water[1] to extinguish the flames... For what should have been a routine accident response. The people inside, if still alive, had no chance of survival. That's really bad...
[1] https://www.solonohio.org/203/Fire-Trucks#:~:text=Contempora....
We get you like Tesla... but that doesn't excuse being deliberately obtuse. You cannot hand wave away these people that were stuck inside a fire bomb of a vehicle which required about 20 fire trucks worth of water[1] to extinguish the flames... For what should have been a routine accident response. The people inside, if still alive, had no chance of survival. That's really bad...
[1] https://www.solonohio.org/203/Fire-Trucks#:~:text=Contempora....
Looking at the quantitative picture and thinking systematically is trying to be obtuse? I would also think about gas tanker fires and the systematic reduction of those on the types of vehicles on the road with more electric vehicles.
Many gas automotive fires don't have to do with maintenance either - that seems like a really odd assumption.
Many gas automotive fires don't have to do with maintenance either - that seems like a really odd assumption.
Do you have any evidence to backup your assertions?
You stated upthread that you'd guess gasoline fueled vehicles catch fire more frequently than EV vehicles... you're going to need evidence to backup such an outlandish claim, and the cause of the fire would also need to be an accident such as the one this Tesla was involved in.
It's actually quite difficult to ignite gasoline in liquid form (which is what is in the fuel lines and fuel tank of an automobile). It must be a vapor, and it must be in the presence of an ignition source. ICE vehicles have been designed over the last 100 years to precisely not explode upon impact.
Real life isn't hollywood... cars just don't explode because of an accident... you can even shoot a full gas tank with a high caliber rifle and it'll still not explode nor catch fire. The problem you are equating to vehicles just does not exist anywhere except electronic vehicles powered by these Lithium-Ion batteries... like what is found in your average Tesla.
You stated upthread that you'd guess gasoline fueled vehicles catch fire more frequently than EV vehicles... you're going to need evidence to backup such an outlandish claim, and the cause of the fire would also need to be an accident such as the one this Tesla was involved in.
It's actually quite difficult to ignite gasoline in liquid form (which is what is in the fuel lines and fuel tank of an automobile). It must be a vapor, and it must be in the presence of an ignition source. ICE vehicles have been designed over the last 100 years to precisely not explode upon impact.
Real life isn't hollywood... cars just don't explode because of an accident... you can even shoot a full gas tank with a high caliber rifle and it'll still not explode nor catch fire. The problem you are equating to vehicles just does not exist anywhere except electronic vehicles powered by these Lithium-Ion batteries... like what is found in your average Tesla.
https://www.nfpa.org/-/media/Files/News-and-Research/Fire-st...
From the report:
"Vehicle fires accounted for 16 percent of the 1.3 million fires reported to US fire departments. Vehicle fires also caused 15 percentof all civilian fire deaths and 10 percent of all reported civilian fire injuries. In 2018, only fires in one- and two- family homes claimed more lives than vehicle fires. Vehicle fires caused 4.5 times the number of deaths as nonresidential structure fires and 1.6 times the number of apartment fire deaths."
From the report:
"Vehicle fires accounted for 16 percent of the 1.3 million fires reported to US fire departments. Vehicle fires also caused 15 percentof all civilian fire deaths and 10 percent of all reported civilian fire injuries. In 2018, only fires in one- and two- family homes claimed more lives than vehicle fires. Vehicle fires caused 4.5 times the number of deaths as nonresidential structure fires and 1.6 times the number of apartment fire deaths."
Option 3: There was a third person who jumped before impact from the drivers seat.
> Option 3: There was a third person who jumped before impact from the drivers seat.
Interviews with the widows suggest there were only two people in the car. I don't see why the two men would lie to their wives about how many people would be in the car. If there was a mysterious 3rd person "driver", then that "mysterious driver" would be sued the ever living crap out of by the two widows.
Interviews with the widows suggest there were only two people in the car. I don't see why the two men would lie to their wives about how many people would be in the car. If there was a mysterious 3rd person "driver", then that "mysterious driver" would be sued the ever living crap out of by the two widows.
> I don't see why the two men would lie to their wives
It wouldn't be the first time men have lied to their wives about what they are doing late at night. I'm just saying its a possibility.
It wouldn't be the first time men have lied to their wives about what they are doing late at night. I'm just saying its a possibility.
Its looking like the 4 people (2 men + 2 wives) were originally in the car. The 2-wives got out, and watched the 2-men drive away. Minutes later, the car crash occurred.
I'm really not seeing how a 3rd person magically appears in this story.
I'm really not seeing how a 3rd person magically appears in this story.
The thrill-ride theory seems unlikely.
"The names of the two crash victims, a 69-year old man, and a 59-year old man, were not immediately released by authorities."
This was in a quiet residential cul-de-sac, too.
What can cause high acceleration with no one in the driver's seat?
"The names of the two crash victims, a 69-year old man, and a 59-year old man, were not immediately released by authorities."
This was in a quiet residential cul-de-sac, too.
What can cause high acceleration with no one in the driver's seat?
> What can cause high acceleration with no one in the driver's seat?
Hypothesis: the driver stepping on the accelerator caused the high acceleration.
After crashing into the tree, the driver tries the front door (which was damaged and fails to open). When the fire starts, the driver then moves to the rear seats, hoping to escape through the back doors.
Then the driver dies to the flames, unable to open even the rear doors. (Either due to ignorance to the back-latch, or due to the damage the rear-doors took during the crash).
-------
Remember, the Model S is a complicated electronic lock on both the front and rear doors. The safety issues associated with messing with door handles are well known, but you know... Tesla's want to be special.
> This was in a quiet residential cul-de-sac, too.
EDIT: So was Tiger Woods's car. But rich people with fast cars like to go 87mph on residential roads. Its an unfortunately common situation.
Hypothesis: the driver stepping on the accelerator caused the high acceleration.
After crashing into the tree, the driver tries the front door (which was damaged and fails to open). When the fire starts, the driver then moves to the rear seats, hoping to escape through the back doors.
Then the driver dies to the flames, unable to open even the rear doors. (Either due to ignorance to the back-latch, or due to the damage the rear-doors took during the crash).
-------
Remember, the Model S is a complicated electronic lock on both the front and rear doors. The safety issues associated with messing with door handles are well known, but you know... Tesla's want to be special.
> This was in a quiet residential cul-de-sac, too.
EDIT: So was Tiger Woods's car. But rich people with fast cars like to go 87mph on residential roads. Its an unfortunately common situation.
Option 2 sounds very plausible. It seems the authorities on the scene were pretty convinced no one was in the driver's seat when it crashed, so maybe there's some convincing evidence that they haven't divulged.
As far as exiting the vehicle goes, hand-crank windows seem like they'd be a lot safer, as they continue to function even if there isn't any power. I don't know if it would have mattered in this particular case, but I think it's a good idea to maximize the number of ways one could exit a potentially-burning car, whether it's powered by gas or batteries. Strange that society (car buyers, manufacturers, and regulators) make this trade-off of decreased safety because window cranks seem cheap, dorky, and old-fashioned.
As far as exiting the vehicle goes, hand-crank windows seem like they'd be a lot safer, as they continue to function even if there isn't any power. I don't know if it would have mattered in this particular case, but I think it's a good idea to maximize the number of ways one could exit a potentially-burning car, whether it's powered by gas or batteries. Strange that society (car buyers, manufacturers, and regulators) make this trade-off of decreased safety because window cranks seem cheap, dorky, and old-fashioned.
The side windows in most cars can be broken easily with a punch tool. These really should be standard safety equipment in a known easily-reachable location (such as on the key fob).
Based on this video, https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=9KtkIarbnMg it seems #2 is more likely scenario.
From my standpoint, there is insufficient information to conclude what has happened. The police believe that no one was in the seat, but police also tend to be routine liars [1]. Without having the facts they used to draw that inference, I can't endorse their belief.
For my part, I'm also curious how easy it is to actually switch from the driver's seat to the backseat of this kind of car. I know in my personal car (a sedan), it is very difficult to move from the driver's seat to any other seat, which makes me discount scenarios that involve the driver quickly hopping in any other seat. But internal car layouts differ, and I don't know if this specific model is much easier to transfer.
Another thing that is woefully unclear to me is a) what Teslas actually do to make sure the driver is driving when using Autopilot/FSD/whatever, and b) what they actually do when they think the driver isn't paying attention. I've seen many contradictory reports on these topics, especially when some people say that Tesla says this is what they do yet videos seem to indicate that they aren't doing that.
[1] That said, this is also a case where I would have a priori expected the police to be lying to blame the driver instead of the car manufacturer itself.
For my part, I'm also curious how easy it is to actually switch from the driver's seat to the backseat of this kind of car. I know in my personal car (a sedan), it is very difficult to move from the driver's seat to any other seat, which makes me discount scenarios that involve the driver quickly hopping in any other seat. But internal car layouts differ, and I don't know if this specific model is much easier to transfer.
Another thing that is woefully unclear to me is a) what Teslas actually do to make sure the driver is driving when using Autopilot/FSD/whatever, and b) what they actually do when they think the driver isn't paying attention. I've seen many contradictory reports on these topics, especially when some people say that Tesla says this is what they do yet videos seem to indicate that they aren't doing that.
[1] That said, this is also a case where I would have a priori expected the police to be lying to blame the driver instead of the car manufacturer itself.
There seems to be enough evidence that points to a fire problem. This is NOT the first Tesla fire, and it won't be the last.
There is plenty of evidence towards rich assholes driving fast in residential areas (Tiger Woods). Why didn't Tiger Wood's car catch fire? Or I'm sure we've all know our high school jock who was a bit dangerous with his own car (maybe died of a crash while young). In my case, they didn't burn to death either. Etc. Etc.
There is plenty of evidence towards rich assholes driving fast in residential areas (Tiger Woods). Why didn't Tiger Wood's car catch fire? Or I'm sure we've all know our high school jock who was a bit dangerous with his own car (maybe died of a crash while young). In my case, they didn't burn to death either. Etc. Etc.
I don't think any reasonable person could think "autopilot" meant this was okay to do. It seems more like thrill seeking, maybe?
Yes, I think Tesla dangerously over-sells the autopilot capabilities, but I have a hard time laying the blame for this accident at those feet. If anything, it's unfortunate that such a ridiculous thing happened, because Tesla will be able to use it to paint all autopilot failures with the same brush of irrational behavior, when many are a rational response to the the over-sold marketing from Tesla.
Yes, I think Tesla dangerously over-sells the autopilot capabilities, but I have a hard time laying the blame for this accident at those feet. If anything, it's unfortunate that such a ridiculous thing happened, because Tesla will be able to use it to paint all autopilot failures with the same brush of irrational behavior, when many are a rational response to the the over-sold marketing from Tesla.
“But they are so close to FSD.”
What are people going to think? People will take what they think is a small risk.
“Major improvements are being made to the vision stack every week. Beta button hopefully next month.
This is a “march of 9’s” trying to get probability of no injury above 99.999999% of miles for city driving. Production Autopilot is already above that for highway driving. 6:17 PM · Apr 14, 2021”
UPDATE
To be clear, I obviously understand they are not close to FSD. I’m trying to get people to understand how many in the general public will view this.
What are people going to think? People will take what they think is a small risk.
“Major improvements are being made to the vision stack every week. Beta button hopefully next month.
This is a “march of 9’s” trying to get probability of no injury above 99.999999% of miles for city driving. Production Autopilot is already above that for highway driving. 6:17 PM · Apr 14, 2021”
UPDATE
To be clear, I obviously understand they are not close to FSD. I’m trying to get people to understand how many in the general public will view this.
Tesla's FSD is a complete fraud. Musk has been saying it's less than a year away since 2018
https://youtu.be/antLneVlxcs?t=639
https://youtu.be/antLneVlxcs?t=725
https://youtu.be/antLneVlxcs?t=489
https://youtu.be/antLneVlxcs?t=582
https://youtu.be/antLneVlxcs?t=639
https://youtu.be/antLneVlxcs?t=725
https://youtu.be/antLneVlxcs?t=489
https://youtu.be/antLneVlxcs?t=582
> since 2018
At least 2016, actually.
At least 2016, actually.
Lets say that somehow the only thing these people knew about a Tesla was that tweet and they bought a Tesla based off of that Tweet and someone else enabled autosteer (beta), which is off by default on a new Tesla. And some how they buckled in the driver's seatbelt and put a weight on the seat accidently, not because they were trying to circumvent Tesla safety features.
They would still be in a situation where they knew that there was a chance that the could be injured by relying only on autopilot. No one should expect autopilot to be perfect and if they value their safety they should pay attention at all times just like the Tesla UI tells you when you enable autopilot and while you are driving.
They would still be in a situation where they knew that there was a chance that the could be injured by relying only on autopilot. No one should expect autopilot to be perfect and if they value their safety they should pay attention at all times just like the Tesla UI tells you when you enable autopilot and while you are driving.
We’re told Coronavirus vaccines are something like 94% effective
We’re also told FSD is 99.999% effective and getting better fast
There are those in the general public who will take that to mean that it’s safer than they should
We’re also told FSD is 99.999% effective and getting better fast
There are those in the general public who will take that to mean that it’s safer than they should
> But they are so close to FSD.
No, they are not. I own a Tesla with the FSD package and I've seen many of the videos with FSD beta. FSD is definitely a remarkable technology but they are nowhere near close to FSD.
No, they are not. I own a Tesla with the FSD package and I've seen many of the videos with FSD beta. FSD is definitely a remarkable technology but they are nowhere near close to FSD.
I mentioned this repeatedly in the thread yesterday, but I don't think that autopilot was actually in use here. The environment was a tiny cul de sac, and this was a high speed collision. Autopilot simply won't accelerate like that, it won't reach the speeds observed.
More likely they were playing with launch mode somehow and I guess thought that autopilot would magically engage and keep them safe? But IIRC those aren't compatible features.
I think it's correct to say that no one was driving the car. I just don't believe the CAR was attempting to drive itself either.
Edit: And per Musk, the card didn't have the FSD beta software (nor had even purchased it) and autopilot indeed wasn't enabled: https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1384254194975010826
More likely they were playing with launch mode somehow and I guess thought that autopilot would magically engage and keep them safe? But IIRC those aren't compatible features.
I think it's correct to say that no one was driving the car. I just don't believe the CAR was attempting to drive itself either.
Edit: And per Musk, the card didn't have the FSD beta software (nor had even purchased it) and autopilot indeed wasn't enabled: https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1384254194975010826
Agreed. Even if they somehow had autopilot enabled, they defeated multiple safety measure to do it like the steering wheel weight and sitting on the buckled seat belt.
Right, but I think it's important to note the conflation of arguments here. If autopilot had been successfully engaged, and the only thing these drivers did wrong was to sit in the wrong seats while the car made all the decisions, then I think it would be very reasonable to view that as an autopilot failure and something that needs to be fixed. The car clearly would be guilty of trying to drive them into a tree at high speed.
That said, what seems much more likely here is that they were engaged in some kind of manual work to get the car to accelerate ludicrously. And that's not a situation against which the autopilot should be reasonably expected to protect against.
That said, what seems much more likely here is that they were engaged in some kind of manual work to get the car to accelerate ludicrously. And that's not a situation against which the autopilot should be reasonably expected to protect against.
At a minimum, to drive with AP from the back seat, you would need to
a) Plug in a seat belt defeater, or plug in the seat belt after you hop out.
b) Hang a weight off the steering wheel so it feels torque.
At some point, it's hard to ban people being stupid. You can buy a woodchipper and take the guard off and shove your arm in, do we need to ban woodchippers? Or if we build something with layers of guards and safeties.. at some point you the user are responsible for what happens when you bypass them?
a) Plug in a seat belt defeater, or plug in the seat belt after you hop out.
b) Hang a weight off the steering wheel so it feels torque.
At some point, it's hard to ban people being stupid. You can buy a woodchipper and take the guard off and shove your arm in, do we need to ban woodchippers? Or if we build something with layers of guards and safeties.. at some point you the user are responsible for what happens when you bypass them?
Newspaper: "You're self-driving car killed people!"
Company: "Nah bro, it was my car's feature X that killed them, not the self-driving feature"
Newspaper: "But self-driving cars are supposed to be safe!"
Company: "They are safe. It's just feature X cars that aren't safe. And we give people a choice."
Newspaper: "But self-driving cars are supposed to be safe!"
Which is to say, no one paid to attention to the exact breakdown because most people aren't going to dive into the options. If Tesla wants self-driving to seem safe, they sure as better disable all unsafe self-driving features.
Company: "Nah bro, it was my car's feature X that killed them, not the self-driving feature"
Newspaper: "But self-driving cars are supposed to be safe!"
Company: "They are safe. It's just feature X cars that aren't safe. And we give people a choice."
Newspaper: "But self-driving cars are supposed to be safe!"
Which is to say, no one paid to attention to the exact breakdown because most people aren't going to dive into the options. If Tesla wants self-driving to seem safe, they sure as better disable all unsafe self-driving features.
But... "Feature X" in this case is the accelerator pedal.
Yes, if Tesla marketing leads people to believe their cars safe just launching with no driver, Tesla technology should probably prevent drivers from just pressing the accelerator peddle from the passenger seat.
I mean, just automatic transmission imposes a few restrictions on the driver that standard doesn't. "Maybe self-driving" is going to create driver behaviors that definitely-not-self-driving doesn't. Cars have been elaborately idiot-proofed for a long time 'cause a lot of idiots drive.
I mean, just automatic transmission imposes a few restrictions on the driver that standard doesn't. "Maybe self-driving" is going to create driver behaviors that definitely-not-self-driving doesn't. Cars have been elaborately idiot-proofed for a long time 'cause a lot of idiots drive.
> Autopilot simply won't accelerate like that, it won't reach the speeds observed.
They said the same thing about the Toyota acceleration problem.
They said the same thing about the Toyota acceleration problem.
I'm not saying it's impossible, just that it seems poorly justified. Tesla autopilot and FSD footage is EVERYWHERE on youtube. If there was really some kind of anomalous acceleration problem surely someone would see it. There are all sorts of other persistent gripes about the system, but AFAIK rapid acceleration and overspeed simply hasn't been observed.
Didn't this turn out to be floor mats getting stuck under the accelerator?
That was a story Toyota used to evade investigation, which came later anyway.
Which was never concluded to be a Toyota software issue.
Then there's the pesky fact that a car needs like 1000HP to overpower the brakes on something like a modern Camry. So if people were actually pressing a brake pedal, which is physically connected to the hydraulic brake system, the car will stop.
Yeah, they were successfully sued over it, but all that means is that they were probably responsible based on the information the jury was allowed to hear. And I believe much of the culpability came down to the fact that the floormats did actually move into the pedal box for that era Toyota (mine did it all the time, even post-recall).
Then there's the pesky fact that a car needs like 1000HP to overpower the brakes on something like a modern Camry. So if people were actually pressing a brake pedal, which is physically connected to the hydraulic brake system, the car will stop.
Yeah, they were successfully sued over it, but all that means is that they were probably responsible based on the information the jury was allowed to hear. And I believe much of the culpability came down to the fact that the floormats did actually move into the pedal box for that era Toyota (mine did it all the time, even post-recall).
If I remember correctly, they found many bugs in the Toyota software which could cause unintended acceleration and also could cause braking to be ignored. This report has some info: https://users.ece.cmu.edu/~koopman/pubs/koopman14_toyota_ua_...
PS: I had a Prius during this time. Even after selling it, without experiencing any acceleration issues, Toyota wrote me a $2k check to agree to never sue them.
PS: I had a Prius during this time. Even after selling it, without experiencing any acceleration issues, Toyota wrote me a $2k check to agree to never sue them.
I think your definition of reasonable may exclude large numbers of people then, possibly over half or more. What maybe self-evident to you as a technical person may not be to folks who think “aol is the internet” equivalent of today
I guess we need the definition of "reasonable". Something like 20% of Americans believe that they can buy a self driving car today. That's not an accident, that's what Tesla is telling people.
Don't believe me? This video from the FSD beta opens up with the text "The person in the driver's seat is only there for legal reasons. He is not doing anything. The car is driving itself"
https://vimeo.com/188105076
At some point, we need to acknowledge that Elon Musk is deceiving his customers, his investors and all the hand-wavey legal bullshit around that is just that...bullshit.
Don't believe me? This video from the FSD beta opens up with the text "The person in the driver's seat is only there for legal reasons. He is not doing anything. The car is driving itself"
https://vimeo.com/188105076
At some point, we need to acknowledge that Elon Musk is deceiving his customers, his investors and all the hand-wavey legal bullshit around that is just that...bullshit.
Wow, you're right: I knew FSD was supposedly in beta & talked about, but now they're marketing it in those terms on their front page for the Model S. I wasn't aware they'd proceeded from calling it autopilot to FSD, and autopilot was bad enough.
Yes, it's therefore at least somewhat reasonable for someone to think they didn't need to be in the drivers seat. Although in this case it doesn't look like FSD was installed or activated on the car, if they're marketing it as a feature then sometimes even reasonable people will be confused and believe they have that option.
Yes, it's therefore at least somewhat reasonable for someone to think they didn't need to be in the drivers seat. Although in this case it doesn't look like FSD was installed or activated on the car, if they're marketing it as a feature then sometimes even reasonable people will be confused and believe they have that option.
The car should not drive without the weight of a person in the drivers seat and the steering wheel sensing 2 hands on it. Autopilot and FSD should immediately disengage if those two criteria are not met. Easy fix.
It does have a steering wheel weight sensor. People learned you can hang a weight on a rope to "Trick" it. It should not require an arms race to outsmart people trying to defeat safeties.
I thought it also used pressure sensors on the driver seat besides the 30 sec nudge on the steering wheel?
Exactly. Plus, luxury car manufacturers today have a camera in the dashboard to sense the driver's drowsiness level, and tells him to pull over if it senses that he's tired or dosing off.
I appreciate the help, but definitely wouldn't buy a car that puts me on camera, no exceptions. Companies have proven themselves irresponsible with such technology.
I think they may be referring to a camera facing the road, not the driver. That's how Toyota's drowsiness sensing functionality works.
It tracks the lane lines using a dashboard camera and detects swaying/lane drifting. The system will nudge you back into your lane and beep at you. If it has to do this repeatedly, the dashboard will light up and ask you to take a break.
It tracks the lane lines using a dashboard camera and detects swaying/lane drifting. The system will nudge you back into your lane and beep at you. If it has to do this repeatedly, the dashboard will light up and ask you to take a break.
3/y both have a driver facing camera above the rearview mirror. As of yet, it is not officially enabled for anything.
That's incorrect there's an opt-in for them to send the in-cabin footage during "emergency situations" or some other ill defined term.
edit:
"Model 3 and Model Y are equipped with a Cabin Camera that is located above the rear-view mirror and turned off by default. If you enable the Cabin Camera, a short video clip will be captured and shared with Tesla following a safety event such as a collision or an advanced emergency braking (AEB) event. This short video clip is intended to capture the few seconds before a safety event and does not include any footage from the safety event itself."
https://www.tesla.com/support/car-safety-security-features#c...
edit:
"Model 3 and Model Y are equipped with a Cabin Camera that is located above the rear-view mirror and turned off by default. If you enable the Cabin Camera, a short video clip will be captured and shared with Tesla following a safety event such as a collision or an advanced emergency braking (AEB) event. This short video clip is intended to capture the few seconds before a safety event and does not include any footage from the safety event itself."
https://www.tesla.com/support/car-safety-security-features#c...
Correct and that doesn’t do anything.
Other cars with the camera enable such things as hands free driving. Tesla camera doesn’t do anything for you. Maybe send a pic of you screaming if you crash, but it’s not useful to you at that point.
Other cars with the camera enable such things as hands free driving. Tesla camera doesn’t do anything for you. Maybe send a pic of you screaming if you crash, but it’s not useful to you at that point.
Take matters into your own hands then. OpenPilot supports this and their firmware is open source, you can flash it yourself if you want. You can also disable uploading driving data to the internet and the driver monitoring camera defaults to not providing them any data.
https://comma.ai/
https://comma.ai/
Sounds cool, but I don't drive enough to get sleepy doing it.
It does. I think if you turn on the cruise control (maintain speed but not lane) the car will not break or keep the lane. Maybe the driver thought they activated Autopilot but in reality activated cruise control at a high rate of speed and jumped in back? There wouldn't be an Autopilot nudge for cruise control either (IIRC).
There should be a name akin to "uncanny valley" to describe the deadly terrain between what we have, in everything from "driver assist" and "adaptive cruise control" and contemporary "autopilot", and the currently vacuous promise of reliable resilient autonomous vehicles.
Might I suggest "Death Valley."
Might I suggest "Death Valley."
[deleted]
Would not surprise me if alcohol was involved.