Hacker News Reader

Comment by debt | Hacker News Reader

"The operator of a vehicle is responsible for operating it."

But he wasn't operating it.

But he should have been. Tesla's cars are not self-driving. The automated driving features are supposed to assist the driver, not replace.

Yeah! Isn't it obvious that a feature named "autopilot" means you have to watch it like a hawk, keep your eyes on the road and your hands on the wheel?

Should be. Obviously people get their notion of "autopilot" from science fiction, not from aviation.

Which is why I’ve always maintained it was a very misleading name and would lead to dangerous accidents. Which it seems to have on a number of occasions.

Of course people may have abused the system if it had a more sensible name anyway. But names competitors use like Automatic Cruise Control or SuperCruise seem much more descriptive of the system’s actual abilities.

It’s a car, not a plane. Why is the definition from aviation more relevant than the definition from science fiction (which also happens to be closer to the plain English understanding of the phrase)?

Because the technology is more similar to that of aviation than science fiction.

Because it's science fiction. As in, "this is not real." But well, I guess that if Moon landing was fake and wrestling is real, then science fiction is also real ;) (In other words, that the perception matters more than reality)

Yes, it is obvious. What do you think a plane pilot does when autopilot is on? He watches to make sure everything is alright, and intervenes when necessary.

Not really. He sure isn't expected to be able to jump in with less than a second's notice to override what autopilot is doing. And he typically isn't there to make sure the autopilot isn't doing something stupid. He's there to watch for conditions that the autopilot can't handle...and those typically have plenty of warning time in a plane. And a pilot is a trained professional.

The expectation that the driver will jump in to prevent a car's autopilot from steering the car off the road into an obstruction is ridiculous. It's one thing to expect the driver to stop for on-the-actual-road dangers. This wasn't.

We don't really know what happened yet, but if it was the autopilot and it did steer into the barrier, this is at least 95% Tesla's fault.

When on a plane there's a "Ground" alert, pilot is supposed to act immediately to prevent a crash. He cannot be absent from the cabin and he cannot finish the game level on his smartphone first. The same is with the car, that is not sold as fully autonomous: if you are on the driver seat, you are responsible for making the final decisions on steering and braking, not a technology. Technology may help you and prevent from making mistakes, but it was not promised or advertised that it will help in 100% of the cases.

As we see in latest Tesla report, there were multiple warnings to which the driver should respond: this means, that the problem was detected with enough time to react and the autopilot was not able to solve it on its own. Thus, it does not make sense to blame the autopilot - the technology did behave as expected (when problem cannot be solved, report asap to the owner, that he should intervene).

What Tesla can actually be blamed for, is the misunderstanding of the autopilot capabilities by the drivers. It's not an algorithmic bug, but rather a usability one. Perhaps, the warning should be issued earlier or in a more clear way. Perhaps, the drivers should receive some training, to act as supervisors of the system, not as passengers, or there even should exist a special driving license for such types of cars.

Nevertheless, the main fault was not the driver's and not the Tesla's. The safety of this road should be guaranteed by the authorities in charge, the navigation should be made sufficient for the drivers, and they clearly failed to do so.

Wow you did that investigation quickly. You should let the NTSB know your results.

Seriously though....I doubt it. The report said he was told to put his hands back on the wheel "earlier in the drive". I seriously doubt he would have had time to react in this case. This is not the same as a plane...there was no "ground alert" or anything like it. From what I can tell, it was doing its job then steered right into a wall. That sort of thing simply doesn't happen with a plane....when autopilot is active on a plane, there is never a situation that requires instantly noticing something is wrong, and correcting it, within a few seconds. Never.

And usability bugs, if that is what you want to call this, are indeed Tesla's fault. They, not the driver, have the resources to test and understand how human attention works (i.e. "vigilance deficit" / "handoff problem")

>What do you think a plane pilot does when autopilot is on?

In a commercial jet - Goes to the toilet? Eats lunch? Chats to the co-pilot?

Sure none of those might be right but I'd warrant that a lot of people would answer with things that move the pilots concentration away from piloting, "because the auto-pilot is doing the flying". Honestly I'd assume they do any of these answers; but with the proviso that the co-pilot stays in the cockpit when the pilot leaves.

Airplane pilots are supposed to do that, no?

I think most of us would be more keen on not dying regardless of who is legally responsible

If a Tesla on autopilot hit your car, would you be happy with an outcome in which the driver did not accept any blame?

Would it make a difference if you learned that the driver knew there were problems with autopilot and was using it anyway?

Well he should have been considering he was the driver...

That's entirely speculation at this point. Tesla are the only ones who could confirm or deny that and it's possible that they will never be able to determine it depending on the condition of the computer hard ware.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com