Almost as bad as a Tesla crashing into a stopped fire truck. Why is Tesla “autopilot” still allowed on Californian roads?
https://www.wired.com/story/tesla-autopilot-why-crash-radar/
Because Pony.ai is level 4 autonomy while Autopilot is level 2. The human driver is ultimately responsible for any accidents in a level 2 system. There is no driver to intercede or to blame in the case of a level 4 system. This crash is the sole responsibility of Pony.ai.
https://www.engadget.com/2018-03-24-tesla-model-x-driver-die...
The driver of the tesla had complained in the past of the tesla swerving into the wall when passing that spot, yet still had his guard down on the day he died.
That the tesla swerved is down to the poor striping on the road. The stripe along the right side of the left fork was brand new and very sharp, while the stripe along the left side of the right fork was extremely dim to non existant due to excessive wear sustained during construction of the left fork and the bridge it leads to (connection from the fast lane of 101s to the fast lane of 85s).
The crash barrier has since been properly replaced and the striping redone with diagonal lines hashing off the gore so it's abundantly clear even to a camera not to drive there.
That said, the tesla self driving made a very dumb error no human driver would make.
No, it's down to defective self driving.
Certainly not. It's not appropriate for a self driving car to make any assumptions about striping or any road markings being correct. It crashed because it wasn't capable of self-driving after all.
PS Tesla rolled a software update to detect emergency vehicles and slow down.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-tesla-autopilot-germany/g...
Tesla's Full Self Driving has been released only to a tiny number of beta testers.
2) Yes, and the videos I’ve seen from those beta testers are terrifying.
Even taking the lesser of these two scenarios, this would imply that Tesla autopilot should be capable of doing most of the driving, with the driver just there for whatever bits you might argue are equivalent to a takeoff and landing. Given the stories of Teslas accelerating into stationary objects or totally losing track of the road lane, I don’t think even this limited understanding of what “autopilot” means is correct.
> "The person in the driver's seat is only there for legal reasons. He is not doing anything. The car is driving itself."
> “Full Self-Driving Capability All new Tesla cars have the hardware needed in the future for full self-driving in almost all circumstances. The system is designed to be able to conduct short and long distance trips with no action required by the person in the driver’s seat. All you will need to do is get in and tell your car where to go. If you don’t say anything, the car will look at your calendar and take you there as the assumed destination or just home if nothing is on the calendar. Your Tesla will figure out the optimal route, navigate urban streets (even without lane markings), manage complex intersections with traffic lights, stop signs and roundabouts, and handle densely packed freeways with cars moving at high speed. When you arrive at your destination, simply step out at the entrance and your car will enter park seek mode, automatically search for a spot and park itself. A tap on your phone summons it back to you. The future use of these features without supervision is dependent on achieving reliability far in excess of human drivers as demonstrated by billions of miles of experience, as well as regulatory approval, which may take longer in some jurisdictions. As these self-driving capabilities are introduced, your car will be continuously upgraded through over-the-air software updates.”
That’s also why most TACC doesn’t work below 30km/h or so. It can’t tell the difference between the car in front and a stationary object next to the road.
Edit: This is actually an interesting rabbit hole to go down, because on the face of it, it seems like a fairly straightforward system to implement. Then the more you think about how a 'simple' system should handle various scenarios, the more you realise that to actually do it properly, 'just keep a good distance from the car in front' requires most of the perception required for general free-form driving.
https://youtu.be/0A4i4-xALVg?t=252
Edit;
I guess you did say braking with TACC is complicated -- but I think that's a bit of an edge case that only applies to Tesla. The Subaru version of TACC is ~fine but it never gives you the impression it will handle 100% of the driving for you, so you'd never leave it to navigate around emergency vehicles by itself. Maybe the solution to rarely dangerous self-driving is to make them only ~75% good so driver's are always aware?
Do you have one (or experience driving one)? If so:
- How does it go with phantom braking and various objects on the side of the road?
- Does it distinguish between various on-road things? (eg. does it brake for a dog? a plastic bag? a puff of smoke? an anvil falling off the back of the truck in front?)
- How good's its understanding of lanes (eg. a very slow car that's in another lane but currently directly in front of you due to the road curving)?
- Does it brake for objects outside the lane entering it (cross traffic, lane cut-ins, pedestrians, vegetation moving around in high winds)?
You're still responsible for watching traffic and using the brake or gas as needed, especially if there is some issue up ahead that requires a safety maneuver of any kind.
i.e. an emergency vehicle, like a California Highway Patrol vehicle, begins a traffic break 15 car lengths ahead of you. As long as you're observant, you'll notice that in time and either cancel the cruise control or make the right adjustment so you slow down enough to the break speed.
Citation needed. Subaru claims their eye sight system will detect and attempt to brake for a stationary vehicle. Whether or not they’ll managed to halt the vehicle is obviously speed dependent, but obviously slowing down before the crash is vastly superior to maintaining speed.
When the vehicle is stationary, the radar data has to be heavily filtered because radar has poor angular resolution and there are a lot of other stationary objects, many that you don't want to stop for at similar angles, like overhead road signs. That means you're relying purely on vision, which alone has a lot of false positives and negatives, so detection thresholds need to be set much lower.
Doesn't mean it won't work. Just means it's less likely to work, especially in the dark and the rain, where radar would normally be a big part of the signal.
Because Tesla suckered some idiots to take the blame if for example the car will instantly change direction and throw you of a bridge or in from of a truck, Tesla is saying that their customers are supposed to be ready for this cases .
For now only some Tesla alpha testers suckers got killed and no innocent person, but when an innocent will be killed I am waiting to see if the driver and hist lawyer will accept the blame or will fight the ToS claims.