Hacker News Reader

Comment by linsomniac | Hacker News Reader

That's all very true, but one interesting thing is that the driver in this case knew that at this location the autopilot was 100% likely to fail. I believe I read he had even reported it several times to Tesla Service and his family.

The lane markers in this area, based on video I watched of it years ago, are pretty bad, IIRC. Like, a human could have problems following the markers bad. As evidence to support this I'll say that there had been an accident in this exact area days (again, IIRC) before that destroyed the "crumple zone" in this area. :-)

It's going to be extremely interesting to see how the courts rule in a case where "I knew the Tesla on autopilot would drive in to the barrier in this area, and I turned on autopilot in this area and it drove into the barrier."

View on HN

The problem is:

- Autopilot doesn’t work in that area. Driver reports it to Tesla.

- Tesla fixes the issue in a software update.

- Driver sees the improvement, and happily relies on autopilot.

- After a while, a new software update introduces a regression.

- Driver doesn’t find out about the regression until it’s too late (and is not around to testify about it anymore).

The driver has only been not around to testify three times in the history of Tesla, and only once since 2016 (despite increasing capabilities and far more cars on the road). The instance here is the one time. [1]

Regressions undoubtedly happen, but clearly in the vast, vast majority of cases, no deaths are involved. It's not "the problem," it's "the exception."

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_self-driving_car_fatal...

Is this what happened in this case, or is this speculation? Just curious, because it's a valid point, but I hadn't heard that it got better but then reverted. Source?

Except he won’t argue that because he is dead. Which, in itself, is the best counter argument to your conclusion that he knew what he was doing and allowed it to happen intentionally. Unless you’re also theorizing that he chose to commit suicide using one of the most creative methods he could, while making Tesla take the blame. It’s not impossible I suppose, but it doesn’t seem like the most reasonable conclusion.

Except there are multiple reports from driver that autopilot problematic in that location.

I imagine that the court or some regulatory agency could order to automate these kind of reports and use them to shutdown autopilot or make it unavailable on some routes.

It would be interesting to design the ux for this. Based on the wording it could even make them more liable if accidents happen outside of roads with known issues.

Why does it even need to be reported? Tesla should be able to detect where autopilot is regularly deactivated or does some wrong (driver takes over with sharp input on brakes or steering wheel), and use that to deactivate it prematurely.

Indeed, I meant that the car should report the manual takeovers to Tesla HQ so the information can be shared. In additional you should be able to add context to it as a human.

I think they do the first part of your suggestion (they send reports from all disengagements, and detailed reports from some), but not the last part.

Sounds like a sensible idea, particularly in an area where they've seen a near collision. The difficulty might be that conditions change all the time (barriers are moved or removed), and that makes it difficult to make this kind of determination on a case by case basis.

Well at least Tesla drivers can and to openly report. When I had issues with phantom breaking etc on my BMW while driving on the Autobahn I never reported this since there was no sensible channel.

You just learned to live with the limitations and used it where it worked under supervision.

Agreed, it's not impossible but also seems unlikely. It seems, as I was writing my previous message, like the plot for some crazy courtroom drama show: He couldn't go on living but needed to support his family!

Seems unlikely, but I just don't understand why he'd be using Autopilot in this area given his past with it.

When I first got Autopilot in my Tesla, I was playing with it on the city streets, and it decided to swerve into the divided, concrete median at the end of the intersection, deciding that was the lane. I grabbed control of it, no problem, but 2 years later I still am extra vigilant around any lane dividers. Mostly though, I don't use Autopilot in such restricted areas.

>Like, a human could have problems following the markers bad.

The black-and-white stripes on the highway divider were good, though[1]. They are hard for humans to avoid.

That's the fundamental problem: the signage optimized for being glaring to humans is sometimes invisible to self-driving cars.

Instead of trying to teach cars to read signs not meant for them, we should install signs that are easy for cars to understand.

[1]https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/03/28/tesla-claims-highway-...

(this also shows the lack of crumple zone, but clear signage).

In these kinds of civil liability cases there doesn't have to be a blanket assigning of 100% fault. The court can in fact decide that Tesla, the DOT and the driver all contributed in some proportion and assign damages accordingly.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com