Hacker News Reader

Comment by mikkupikku | Hacker News Reader

All these self driving and "drivers assistance" features like lane keeping exist to satisfy consumer demand for a way to multitask when driving. Tesla's is particularly cancerous, but all of them should be banned. I don't care how good you think your lane keeping in whatever car you have is, you won't need it if you keep your hands on the wheel, eyes on the road, and don't drive when drowsy. Turn it off and stop trying to delegate your responsibility for what your two ton speeding death machine does!

View on HN

I think it’s unfair to group all those features into “things for people who want to multitask while driving”.

I’m a decent driver, I never use my phone while driving and actively avoid distractions (sometimes I have to tell everyone in the car to stop talking), and yet features like lane assist and automatic braking have helped me avoid possible collisions simply because I’m human and I’m not perfect. Sometimes a random thought takes my attention away for a moment, or I’m distracted by sudden movement in my peripheral vision, or any number of things. I can drive very safely, but I can not drive perfectly all the time. No one can.

These features make safe drivers even safer. They even make the dangerous drivers (relatively) safer.

There are two layers, both relating to concentration.

Driving a car takes effort. ADAS features (or even just plain regular "driving systems") can reduce the cognitive load, which makes for safer driving. As much as I enjoy driving with a manual transmission, an automatic is less tiring for long journeys. Not having to occupy my mind with gear changes frees me up to pay more attention to my surroundings. Adaptive cruise control further reduces cognitive load.

The danger comes when assistance starts to replace attention. Tesla's "full self-driving" falls into this category, where the car doesn't need continuous inputs but the driver is still de jure in charge of the vehicle. Humans just aren't capable of concentrating on monitoring for an extended period.

What about lane assist and follow technology in other cars? Do they also fall in the category of thing that replace attention?

IMNSHO yes. But not necessarily so drastically -- a VW (to pick an example I've seen evidence of: https://www.thedrive.com/article/10131/the-volkswagen-arteon...) will ping at you if you stop touching the steering wheel for ten seconds or so, and will actively monitor to make sure your attention is on the road. A Tesla won't, or at least wouldn't in 2018, to the point where someone was convicted of dangerous driving having climbed into the passenger seat while driving along the M1: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-43934...

Have you ever driven more than 200km at an average of 80km/h with enough turns on the highway? Perhaps after work, just to see your family once a month?

Driver fatigue is real, no matter how much coffee you take.

Lane-keep is a game changer if the UX is well done. I'm way more rested when I arrive at destination with my Model 3 compared to when I use the regular ICE with bad lane-assist UX.

EDIT: the fact that people that look at their phones will still look at their phones with lane-keep active, only makes it a little safer for them and everyone else, really.

If you're on a road trip, pull the fuck over and sleep. Your schedule isn't worth somebody else's life. If that's your commute, get a new apartment or get a new job. Endangering everybody else with drowsy driving isn't an option you should ever find tenable.

You are correct - but the reality is many humans do those stupid things.

Maybe I wasn't clear. I've always stopped to take a nap when I had the inferior car, because I knew I was risking my well being and that of others. Ever since I bought my Model 3, I never had to.

As an example, after a refreshing 8h night's sleep, you put yourself at the wheel and you know you need to drive for 8h. After 2h, you'll feel the need to stretch your legs, have a bite, go to the toilet.

But if you have something like Tesla's AP, you'll still be alert and awake. Otherwise - at least for me, but I bet for many people - the constant nagging of micro-correcting the wheel, keeping the distance to the car in front, keeping the right speed, takes a huge toll on your mental resources, so much that it puts you to sleep whether you want it or not, and many people will try and push through that regardless.

You're saying that cruise and lane assist are dangerous because they're used to do bad things.

I'm saying they're very liberating from the busywork that is driving, and even people that use them as an excuse to stay on their phones are better off for it, because something more alert and precise is driving for them and as a consequence, less harm can derive from their stupidity.

I'm not saying that people that do stupid things should not be punished, and I'm quite happy that Tesla had to implement better driver monitoring. I know how things work and that I always need to monitor the system, but many people assume it's a magic button and disconnect their brain.

We made drunk driving super illegal and that still doesn't stop people. I would rather they didn't in the first place, but since they're going to anyway, I'd really rather they have a computer that does it better than they do. FSD will pull over and stop if the driver has passed out.

If we could ensure that only drunk people use driver assistance features, I'd be all for that. The reality is that 90% of the sober public are now driving like chronic drunks because they think their car has assumed the responsibility of watching the road. Ban it ALL.

What I'm hearing here is anecdotal and largely based on feelings. The facts are that automatic emergency braking (which should not activate under normal driving circumstances as it is highly uncomfortable) and lane-keeping are basic safety features that have objectively improved safety on the roads. Everything you've said is merely conjecture.

No, remove their licenses if they can’t drive safely. Let safe and responsible drivers use these safety-enhancing features.

If someone is driving dangerously despite these safety features, they should not have a license to operate a motor vehicle on public roads.

These features are still valuable even to safe drivers simply because safe drivers are human and will still make mistakes.

Modern cars could easily detect drunk like driving and stop or call the cops.

A car that calls the cops on you. Great. It could also park, lock the doors and hold you in while the police take their sweet time knowing you're already in a cell?

It is creepy but it WOULD save lives.

The most effective way to "save lives" would be to sterilize the entire population, reducing fatalities to zero within 100 years or so.

That is even LESS reasonable than my idea. Society is a delicate balance between individual and group rights.

But this is why people bought Tesla. Musk promised that the car is automatic.

Don’t be silly. Why would a reasonable person think “Full Self Driving” meant that a car would fully drive itself?

My current FSD percentage is 90% over 2k miles (recorded since v14 update).

FSD is not perfect, but it is everyday amazing and useful.

A couple of friends with Teslas have told me it's not perfect and you do still have to pay attention but they do regular long drives and say it mostly works and they use it all the time.

(They also say there's still the handoff issue if a human needs to take control but it's still a big net win.)

At least some jury [1].

1. https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/tesla-...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com