Hacker News Reader

Comment by obtino | Hacker News Reader

Tesla shouldn't call their driver assist system "Autopilot" either, but here we are.

By the same logic you could say that airplanes shouldn't call their pilot assist system "Autopilot" either, because it requires monitoring and input from pilots who will need to disengage the system and intervene/fly manually in certain scenarios.

Autopilot is probably actually quite a good term for it if you actually compare it to a plane Autopilot - you don't expect pilots to be inattentive or away from the controls, and you expect them to intervene in certain scenarios and disengage autopilot if there is danger.

Yes, I think if we want to be clear about whether you can legally fall asleep, or not be present at all, while driving, we need to be more explicit about the FSD level.

Not comparable at all. Airplanes are flown by trained professionals who know exactly what Autopilot can and cannot do. Regular consumers don't know these differences though and Tesla deliberately uses this ambiguity to deceive their own customers, who expect a "fully self driving" car.

As, but both sets are trained to different levels on a sliding scale. Shades of grey make language complicated.

And we don't expect drivers to be adequately trained and get a licence?

I disagree with calling the top level of Autopilot "FSD" by the way - I think that is misleading. But Autopilot - I think that's a fair term personally considering the context and historical use.

Do the driving licensure requirements in any state require knowing what the capabilities of Tesla Autopilot are?

They don't currently, but they clearly could if they thought that was required.

Drivers do not need to get training and a license for driver assistance software.

Pilots need to get training and certification for autopilot before they can use it.

> And we don't expect drivers to be adequately trained and get a licence?

At the level of airline pilots???

This discussion has happened many, many times here on HN. Tesla's marketing is extremely misleading (and it's not the only case).

But what's the broader point here, is it that the word "Autopilot" implies you need care or training?

Because if so, it sounds like Autopilot would be a good word.

I think the term "Full Self Driving" is misleading, but comparing it to an Autopilot (i.e. a system which requires pilot input and care) seems correct.

And we don't expect drivers to be adequately trained and get a licence?

In the US? No, we don't. Even ignoring that a driver's license is treated more as a right than a perk... Consumers are absolutely NOT trained on the nuances of any particular car's UI, systems, etc.

An airline pilot absolutely IS trained on those nuances and can ONLY operate planes in which they've trained. And they get periodic check-rides from FAA examiners. And, as we saw with the 737Max, failure to train on those nuances can have deadly consequences.

Well again, Autopilot probably is an accurate word then - because consumers should clearly know the limitations and nuances of Autopilot to safely operate it, and a failure to understand those limitations can clearly have deadly consequences.

Is the argument "You can't call it Autopilot because Autopilot refers to a complex system that requires a skilled operator and needs people to pay constant attention"?

I don't really care what it's named. I care about the implications of the system in the real world. Humans are notoriously bad at paying attention to boring tasks. This applies to pilots as well as ordinary drivers (thus the massive amount of training, redundant operators, and very details operators manuals/procedures that apply to ATPs). Tesla released a system that encourages people to operate their car with less than 100% focus. That's bad.

I'm not aware of similar reports of crashes/deaths with systems like Subaru's EyeSight or Honda's SensingSuite. Or, on the other end of the spectrum, Mercedes's Drive Pilot.

Fine, we are agreed then.

I’m just talking about the name because that’s what this thread was about.

“People are morons” is not a justification for claiming they aren’t equivalent when they are.

The justification isn't that people are morons, it's that the same word can have different meanings on different contexts.

In what transportation context does “autopilot” mean it works without supervision? I’ll wait.

But they aren't equivalent.

The airline system requires thousands of hours of training total (and many hours on a specific type/model of plane) to operate.

Driving a car requires no such training.

The training has nothing to do with the capabilities of the system.

The aircraft requires hundreds of hours to operate without autopilot. Autopilot isn’t what imposes the training requirement.

They expect to not have to pay $12000 for something called Full Self Driving, and still get it?

Let's check the first paragraph of the Autopilot section in the manual:

Autopilot is a suite of advanced driver assistance features that are intended to make driving safer and less stressful. None of these features make Model 3 fully autonomous or replace you as the driver

And on the same page:

Warning Basic Autopilot is a hands-on feature. Keep your hands on the steering wheel at all times and be mindful of road conditions, surrounding traffic, and other road users (such as pedestrians and cyclists). Always be prepared to take immediate action. Failure to follow these instructions could cause damage, serious injury, or death.

In most states no training at all is required to operate a boat, and I don’t think there are any specific requirements around autopilot.

The earliest autopilot for boats was built in the 1800s.

Which states are you referring to? Locally you need a certificate for motorized craft and it seems like almost every other state is in this situation.

You can get the certificate after taking training but I imagine there is some way to test out of it.

The training doesn't need to be months long though. Try renting a jet-ski; they'll give you a very quick training but it's still present. Although jet-skis are probably not long enough to qualify as motorized boats in a lot of states.

https://www.americasboatingcourse.com/lawsbystate.cfm?lid=50

Sweden and New Zealand doesn't require any licence to operate a boat which is great. But try leaving marina without any experience and your boat neighbour will stop ya or at least help you get your feet wet.

Thanks for the correction. My own state of Washington mandated boater education only about ten years ago, I assumed it was an early mover given how much navigable water we have.

Airplane autopilots are something else. You are not allowed to use an autopilot unless you have training and a license for it.

Different contexts: Pilots are a niche margin of highly trained, tested, and skilled, responsible people. The ~100 million car drivers in the u.s. have no actual training required, a 10 question multiple choice test, and a brief non-standard, subjective road test. Car drivers in the u.s. who want to surf the web, smoke weed, and watch porn all at the same time and don't want to take the bus are rampant. Others want to edit spreadsheets, film their blog, and apply makeup while driving. Many don't even have a high school degree or their perceptual and cognitive faculties intact. To them "autopilot" sounds like it will empower them and solve their problems. Consumer protection exists because government needs to protect the average nice, but non-expert people from the most egregious, predatory, irresponsible businesses.

It's called autopilot though, not auto-smoke-weed-and-watch-porn.

They are comparing it to piloting, which as you point out, requires a trained and skilled, responsible and attentive person.

The industry that invented the term shouldn’t get to use it because the public, who will never use it, has misconceptions about how it works?

Are you aware of how much pilots do once autopilot is engaged? They do some checklists, then they sit on their arse, eat food, watch something. While being responsible for 100's of peoples lives. They only intervene in start, landing and if something really goes south.

Calling something an autopilot implies you can do essentially whatever you want while the machine operates itself.

An airplane autopilot is fully capable of flying the plane from point A to B, including landing (but not takeoffs) while the pilots sleep or eat or read or do something other than paying attention. For most international flights, autopilot is flying the plane once the plane reaches cruising altitude up until final approach.

Airplane autopilots are usually disengaged for landing because the failure mechanism is to return control to the human pilots, but in the event of a failure during landing there is usually insufficient time for that.

Tesla "Autopilot" is basically the landing portion of a flight, all the time. It has the same failure window: seconds, or less, for the human to take over and prevent an accident. And Tesla's AP is uniquely bad compared to comparable advanced cruise control systems: Tesla has more than 17x as many crashes than the next crashiest automaker, and more than 60x as many crashes as the safest major automaker. Given that Tesla has far fewer cars on the road, scaled up for fleet size, Tesla's AP system is the most dangerous advanced cruise control system in the world. (And the fatalities bear that out; FSD alone has more fatalities than the combined fatality count of every other automaker in the world combined.)

That's not even the worst of it. They call their driver assistance features "Full Self Driving". What a scam.

Why do people never say this about Nissan and "ProPILOT"?

Does Nissan’s CEO have a history of grossly overstating what their system is capable of doing? Tesla has been aggressive about claiming their system can do a lot more, to the point that they charged people for features which never shipped over the time many people owned their vehicles.

If you were a prospective buyer in the past, the autopilot link would take you to a page which very prominently says this:

> Full Self-Driving Hardware on All Cars. All Tesla vehicles produced in our factory, including Model 3, have the hardware needed for full self-driving capability at a safety level substantially greater than that of a human driver.

Way down the page, you get this:

> Enhanced Autopilot adds these new capabilities to the Tesla Autopilot driving experience. Your Tesla will match speed to traffic conditions, keep within a lane, automatically change lanes without requiring driver input, transition from one freeway to another, exit the freeway when your destination is near, self-park when near a parking spot and be summoned to and from your garage.

Finally, you get a bit more realistic warning after a bit of misdirection intended to make you think the product was ready but government red tape was delaying availability:

> Tesla’s Enhanced Autopilot software has begun rolling out and features will continue to be introduced as validation is completed, subject to regulatory approval. Every driver is responsible for remaining alert and active when using Autopilot, and must be prepared to take action at any time.

https://web.archive.org/web/20190101050434/https://www.tesla...

Contrast with Nissan’s page which is very clear that it assists you in hands-on driving. There’s nothing on there which sounds like the vehicle can drive itself (e.g. who reads the smart summons description and thinks it can’t reliably stop or identify pedestrians?)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com