Hacker News Reader

Comment by razemio | Hacker News Reader

I think I already had this discussion on HN. I am not sure why most people think autopilot is hands of the wheel without looking. There literally is no autopilot, which does not require constant attention from a human. This is true for planes, ships and cars. Hell this true even for most drones.

FSD is very much correctly named. It does not say you can go for a sleep. It just means, the vehicle is capable of full self driving, which is true for most conditions and something most cars are not capable of. How would you have named it?

View on HN

> I am not sure why most people think autopilot is hands of the wheel without looking.

Well, because they named it autopilot.

Autopilot means it pilots... automatically. Automatic pilot. Not Manual Pilot, not with intervention, automatically.

They could have named it "driver assist", "partial-pilot", "advanced cruise control", "automatic lanekeeping" or anything else, but they named it Autopilot. That's Tesla's fault.

>Well, because they named it autopilot.

do commercial pilots lean back and whip out their phone when they turn on "autopilot"?

Commercial pilots have approximately 100x as much training as your typical driver.

No but they have years of training.

Commercial pilots have that point hammered into their heads. Tesla did everything in their power to convince buyers that "driver is there only for legal purposes" and they can chill instead of driving.

A few years ago, I sat in an Italian airplane with the cockpit door open. The pilot and copilot spent most of the trip speaking to each other, using their hands to emphasize their words (if you've ever seen two Italians arguing passionately, you'll see what I mean).

As far as I could tell, they only had their hands on the instruments during take off and landing.

It was a bit weird :)

Yes, there's some caveats to that but the simple answer is yes.

Teslas monitor drivers’ attention via the in-cabin camera.

ffs this is such a silly argument

Why is it named like this on ships or planes then? You most certainly need to intervene, when other vehicles are approaching. Just because this happens less in those environments, the name autopilot certainly fits.

If you go back in history, Tesla was one of the first manufacturers, to provide something more than just a lane assist. It is fair in my opinion to search for a different name, that distinguishes yourself from the competition.

For the same reason ships have starboard and port, and cars have driver's side and passenger's side. The terminology is different, the surrounding culture is different, and ignoring that will result in tragedy.

Tesla established the name autopilot in vehicles. they decided it’s exactly like planes and ships. There is no other concept of autopilot in cars.

That's not how words work. They chose that word because it's evocative of exactly what most people think while being just vague enough to give them regulatory deniability.

It's not unreasonable for people to think that "autopilot" means something that automatically pilots a vehicle. According to a dictionary automatic means "having the capability of starting, operating, moving, etc., independently". Whether or not that's how actual autopilots in airplanes and ships works is irrelevant, most people aren't pilots or captains. Tesla knew what they were doing when they chose "autopilot" instead of "lane assist" or similar, like their competitors did. It sounds more advanced that way, in line with how their CEO have been promising full autonomous driving "next year" for a decade now.

It's also worth noting that the recent ship collision in the north sea is thought to be because the autopilot was left on without proper human oversight, so even trained professionals in high stakes environments make that mistake.

Automatic means something different. Here is the definition of what an autopilot is:

The autopilot controls the watercraft or spacecraft without the need for constant manual control by a human. Autopilots do not replace the human operator, rather the autopilot assists the operator in controlling the vehicle or aircraft, allowing the operator to focus on broader aspects of the operation. (Wikipedia)

I do not like Tesla but to this day I don't get the outrage about their autopilot capabilities. It 100% fits the definition of what an autopilot does.

Like I mentioned in the first post, I don't think the definition of what autopilot means in terms of ships or airplanes is relevant. Tesla chose the name because it makes people think the auto part refers to automatic, and then assume the car can drive automatically.

Combine this with how they released a video[0] with the description "The person in the driver's seat is only there for legal reasons. He is not doing anything. The car is driving itself." at the same time. This video was about their FSD and not autopilot, but I think it's reasonable to assume most people won't know the difference. It's deceptive on purpose.

[0] https://vimeo.com/188105076

The _only_ relevant question is what the average person understands “autopilot” to mean in the context of a car. This isn't a question that can be declared answered by pulling out a dictionary.

Mercedes has gained approval to test Level 4 autonomous driving. Level 4 is considered fully autonomous driving, although the vehicle retains a traditional cockpit, and the driver can request control at any time. If a Level 4 system fails or cannot proceed, it is required to pull the vehicle over and bring it to a complete stop under its own control.

I would argue that it is getting very close to what people think autopilot can do. A car that, under certain circumstances, can drive for you and doesn't kill you if you don't pay constant attention.

Ah yes the Mercedes L4

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=h3WiY_4kgkE

The one which needs a leading vehicle to follow below 40mph on some stretches of freeways? Try to look up videos of it from owners that are not press or mercedes reps.

They even take legal responsibility for crash in those circumstances. Because they trust it to work in specified circumstances.

Not sure about other countries but in Germany L4 is only active on freeways up to certain speeds. The video you linked is not showing this. At least the parts where I skipped through.

With a lead car, on select sections without any significant bends, in perfect weather, and with a speed limit*

That’s clearly marketed as Level 3. As in, level 3 is publicly available and usable on public roads right now.

From: https://www.mbusa.com/en/owners/manuals/drive-pilot

> Raising the bar in autonomous driving technology, Mercedes-Benz is the first automobile manufacturer in the US to achieve a Level 3 certification based on a 0-5 scale from the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE). Under specific conditions, our technology allows drivers to take their hands off the steering wheel, eyes off the road — and take in their surroundings

(Specific conditions being the lead car and speed limits you noted, but that’s not what the person you’re replying to is talking about)

Additionally to their level 3 system, they’ve been granted permission to test Level 4 systems not for public use/availability, on a prototype vehicle:

https://www.wardsauto.com/autonomous-adas/mercedes-benz-gain...

> There literally is no autopilot, which does not require constant attention from a human. This is true for planes, ships and cars.

Can’t comment on ships, but autopilots in planes definitely match SAE level 3:

- Hands off

- Do not require constant attention

- Will alarm and indicate to the user when attention is required

ie. “when the feature requests, you must drive [fly]” from the SAE nomenclature: https://www.sae.org/blog/sae-j3016-update

And this is autopilot that’s been in commercial aviation for decades (so long that it’s started filtering down to general aviation).

This isn't true. The autopilot in a plane does nothing but keeping it's course. In this regard it does less than cruise control. It will not even disengage if you forget it is turned on some planes. TCAS will warn you ahead of time, that something needs your attention. This isn't failsafe. You can not (irl should not) do something else, like reading a book, while autopilot is in action.

There is a study which links autopilot to 19 crashes and 175 minor incidents (which have been reported) sine 1983. If you take those numbers an put it into perspective, how often planes crash in general, it is not minor. Same goes for ships.

https://www.faa.gov/sites/faa.gov/files/data_research/resear...

The checkride required to get an IFR rating quite literally requires you to “read a book” (brief the approach plate to the flight inspector) while the autopilot conducts the initial parts of a precision approach.

A 20 year old avionics suite (GTN 450) does much more than cruise control - you input a flight plan including an approach, it will fly the flight plan, capture the approach signals (VOR/localiser/whatever - which is far more complex than “keeping course”) all the way down to approach minimums.

The report you linked is specifically about general aviation - not about commercial (part 121) aviation. GA lags behind by decades (still uses carburettored engines burning leaded fuels).

In any case, it’s talking about error cases for autopilots, not the operational domain for when they should/shouldn’t be used. The key take away was improved training for identifying autopilot malfunctions and not reduce/eliminate the usage of autopilots in certain scenarios.

> You can not (irl should not) do something else

I’m curious, what autopilots have you used and what capabilities did they have?

> It does not say you can go for a sleep.

That means, by definition, it's not "full" self driving.

Why? It is capable of full self driving. That has been proven numerous times. It is however not capable to do this all time. I ask again, give a better name that describes the function FSD currently offers. It is most certainly not a lane assist.

If I'm on a road trip with somebody, and they're driving, I expect to be able to sleep in the passenger seat. “Full” implies that level of competence, which includes knowing its own limitations and therefore when to pull over.

I can think of half a dozen terms off the top of my head that would better describe what its doing, but they aren't quite as punchy, and critically, they won't give the impression that the car is capable of functioning without oversight. Being able to obliquely claim-without-claiming is very much the point of the current terminology.

   * trip control
   * trip assist
   * co-pilot
   * auto steer and throttle
   * partial self-driving (i.e., what it's actually doing!)
   * hands-free steering

Why does full mean to you never to interact with the car. This would mean L5 driving. They never claimed that. Even the mercedes system which is L4 is only working under certain conditions.

All the names you have given suggest, that it is not capable of managing a complete trip but it is.

If you do not need to do anything for 95% (often 100%) of the trip, which is true for most FSD drives, this would not qualify as FSD for you? Then we can end this discussion and just have different opinions.

Correct. And indeed, L5 is called “Level 5: Full driving automation”. The only reason the word “full” is even in there is because of previous abuses of the notion of “self-driving” cars that couldn't. “Full-no-we-really-mean-it-this-time self-driving”

"Full self driving beta (supervised)" always felt to me like report_draft2_(final)--revised.docx

My 1990 Fiat is also capable of full self driving for short periods of time, if I put a rock on the gas pedal.

If "full" doesn't mean "completely autonomous", what would you call a system that can drive a car in exactly all the circumstances a human can?

The name does not matter. In the terms it has to say L5.

Joking aside... 95% of the drives are with 1 or no manual disengagement. The disengagement does not have to be critical. I would always disengage to park because I am faster. Is this not enough to call something FSD?

https://teslafsdtracker.com/

> I ask again, give a better name that describes the function FSD currently offers

"Mostly Self-Driving"

Haha :). I would have liked this name.

You could go with "Full Sorta Driving" or "Full Somewhat Driving" and you don't even have to change the initialism.

"It mostly self drives.... mostly" - Elon Musk as Newt from Aliens

> It just means, the vehicle is capable of full self driving, which is true for most conditions and something most cars are not capable of.

But that’s not true.

It’s not capable of fully driving itself, hence why the supervised part was added

It most certainly is. Is it reliable? No, not at all. However there are many YouTube channels showing certain routes, where this car is capable from driving itself from a to b without the need of manual intervention. Including parking.

“Reliable” is implicit in “fully self-driving”, otherwise I could call my car self-driving when it manages to stay in its lane after I let go of the steering wheel.

Again. Present a name, which fits and describes the capabilities of FSD. It can under certain circumstances drive a route completely on its own. This is not a lane assist, not (advanced) Cruise Control, not HDA and not Super Cruise.

   * trip control
   * trip assist
   * co-pilot
   * auto steer and throttle
   * partial self-driving (i.e., what it's actually doing!)
   * hands-free steering

Naming is hard, but FULL self driving definitely ain’t it

Otherwise what would you name a L5 system that 100% drives autonomously all the time without any input?

Exactly. They knew exactly what they were doing when they named it.

Partial Self Driving.

I just checked the current numbers on FSD Tracker. It is at 95% now for the last 30 days. That's a number I would call reliable under supervision. It is way higher than it used to be. It was at 73% when I checked it the last time.

https://teslafsdtracker.com/

I think you're ignoring that most car drivers are not versed in the tools and jargon of the air and shipping industries. It really isn't relevant what "autopilot" means in various professional contexts, what matters is what somebody with a high school education (or less) thinks that "autopilot" means.

This is an interesting point. Maybe the problem is most people don’t drive boats or planes so are not familiar with the experience in those contexts. I think you’re right from the boat standpoint a “auto pilot” means you set a heading and the sails/rudder is adjusted to get there.

"Full self driving unless abnormal conditions come up in which case the driver is expected to be instantly alert and capable of doing better than FSD"?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com