Tesla To Further Restrict Its Autopilot Software To Prevent Accidents (electrek.co)

Tesla is planning to further restrict its Autopilot mode via a v8.0 software update that will make it much harder for drivers to ignore safety alerts. Tesla's Autopilot currently issues alerts on the dashboard "reading Hold Steering Wheel and the driver has to apply pressure on the wheel to make it go away," reports Electrek. "If you quickly respond to those alerts, the Autopilot's Autosteer and Traffic Aware Cruise Control (TACC) do not disengage." The system will disengage if you ignore those warnings for too long. Electrek reports: "Now we learn that Tesla is about to introduce a new restriction with the upcoming v8.0 software update to give more weight to the alerts. According to sources familiar with the Autopilot program, Tesla will add a safety restriction that will result in not only the Autopilot disengaging after alerts are repeatedly ignored, but also blocking the driver from re-engaging the feature after it was automatically disengaged. The driver will not be able to reactivate the Autopilot until the car is stopped and put in 'Park.' So far, it looks like it would only affect the Autosteer feature of the Autopilot and TACC would still be available for the duration of the drive. The goal of the new restriction appears to be to encourage Tesla owners to respond to the visual alert and not to ignore them."

Comments

Autopilot will disengage

[turkeydance]

Zzzzzzzzz

Re: Autopilot will disengage

[Anonymous Coward]

Yup. Disgage and the driver not holding the wheel what can go wrong????

Map drop the speed to 20 mph. Would be better??? ;-p

Should pull over to the right and turn on flashers and stop. Then prevent driver from moving the car. AND CALL THE COPS.

Is this cover in the EULS? Or the fact that software is not warranted for its attended use.

Re:Autopilot will disengage

[antdude]

Top!

Re: Autopilot will disengage

[davester666]

Maybe first if Tesla changed the name to what it actually is from what it is not. It is not an auto-pilot system. Tesla just saying that "Autopilot" is just a brand name is stupid and clearly causing problems with how people expect something called "Autopilot" to work.

Maybe call it "DriverAssist"

Re: Autopilot will disengage

[Donwulff]

Agree, that's just false advertising. Where's our flying cars?! Something called Autopilot should cause your car to take flight. On the safety issue it seems to have a perfect record, however, since I've not yet heard of any Tesla collisions with airplanes. If only airplane autopilots worked half as well!

Re: Autopilot will disengage

[michelcolman]

Yes, real autopilots automatically swerve to avoid other aircraft, and refuse to fly into terrain.

Oh, wait, turns out they don't.

And autoland automatically lands an aircraft right? Oh, turns out the pilots still have to extend the flaps and landing gear, put the right data into the flight management computer, select the approach mode at the correct time, and use it only on runways that are equipped with specially certified ILS Cat III transmitters. And, during the automatic approach, they have to be CONSTANTLY monitoring the system with their hands at the controls ready to initiate a go-around immediately if anything goes wrong (which does happen from time to time). And they dare to call it "autoland"!

Yes, at sufficiently high altitude an autopilot system is hands-off because there isn't really anything you can fly into. That has nothing to do with it being an "autopilot" but simply with the environment it is in. Autopilot at low altitude during approach is hands-on. And it's perfectly safe to drive a Tesla autopilot hands-off in the middle of the Nevada salt flats.

Next up: lawsuit against "automobile" manufacturers because the vehicles don't spontaneously move by themselves as their name implies.

Re: Autopilot will disengage

[gweilo8888]

Looks like someone is about 30 years out of date on their aircraft knowledge. Modern commercial aircraft autopilots can and on a daily basis do indeed avoid other traffic, courtesy of the TCAS system. ICAO mandates TCAS use in all aircraft carrying ten or more people. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wik...

Re: Autopilot will disengage

[pauljlucas]

Even though he's out of date with what aircraft autopilot can do, the point is that it was still called "autopilot" back before the enhancements. Over time, it got better as you pointed out. Presumably, Tesla's autopilot will get better over time too.

Re: Autopilot will disengage

[ausekilis]

I'm interpreting more like the car is acting like a child saying "You don't wanna play with me? Well I don't wanna play with YOU!"

Lets hope the drivers seat has a trap door for when the car suddenly stops with autopilot, starts slowing/drifting, and the driver shits themselves.

Re: Autopilot will disengage

[michelcolman]

TCAS is a warning system. It just says "Traffic, traffic" and then, when you get closer, some instruction like "Climb! Climb!". It is then up to the pilots to actually disconnect the autopilot and initiate that climb. So no, autopilots do not avoid traffic. TCAS is completely separate from the autopilot.

Same for terrain, you do get EGPWS warnings but again it's up to the pilot to actually disconnect the autopilot and pull up. The autopilot will happily fly right into a mountain.

Re: Autopilot will disengage

[michelcolman]

OK, I stand corrected, apparently the A380 autopilot now does automatically avoid traffic. That doesn't mean other types without this new functionality don't have an "autopilot" however.

Re: Autopilot will disengage

[meerling]

They probably named it autopilot because it's basically the same thing some planes have that is called autopilot, and is significantly more advanced than those previous things that planes had, and many still do, that was called autopilot.

Re: Autopilot will disengage

[gweilo8888]

Not just the A380. Many aircraft are now capable of this, both from Boeing, Airbus and others.

Re: Autopilot will disengage

[rpstrong]

I think you may sit. As I read the article, TCAS and the Auto-Pilot/Flight-Director (AP/FD) do remain separate; the airbus advance is in allowing the AP/FD to react directly to the TCAS advisories instead of requiring action from the pilot. (The article also mentioned that it would be retrofitted to fly-by-wire aircraft; no mention of 'traditionally' controlled aircraft).

Not that matters - the salient point is that aircraft are capable of taking autonomous evasive action, regardless of how they accomplish it. (I guess Teslas can do that, too.)

Re: Autopilot will disengage

[Coren22]

then they left out the safeties and nags that other manyfacturers use that prevent abuse.

Except, no, they did not. Autopilot always warned you that you were still driving, and asked that you still pay attention to the road, and even had the added feature that it would disable if you released the wheel for too long.

Re: Autopilot will disengage

[slashdotwannabe]

We're getting pedantic. The vast, VAST majority of "autopilots" in the world today are 2 or 3 axis (pitch, roll and possibly yaw). They aren't "intelligent" in terms of doing anything more than taking inputs from the VSI, compass, altimeter and autogyro and leveling the wings, keeping a set altitude/attitude and centering the ball. Just because a tiny fraction of autopilots can do Cat IIIc autolanding and some hook up with TCAS and/or ADS-B doesn't make them fucking aircraft pilots. And yet this little magic black box is still called an "autopilot" and nobody gives 2 shits about it, even when it's the cause of a crash.

In the same manner, people losing their shit about Tesla's use of a moniker that's been used for 50 years for something that was less sophisticated than my ancient IBM Selectric typewriter are fucking morons. If the name was "DoobaDooba" instead of "Autopilot", the same idiots would STILL be doing the same dumbfuck things and getting into the same dumbfuck accidents.

The "autopilot" in a plane is not a pilot, and the "autopilot" in a Tesla is not a driver. Please stop perpetuating this monstrously stupid double standard.

Re: Autopilot will disengage

[davester666]

It's something called "training". aircraft pilots get buckets of it, telling them exactly how their autopilot system works, what it's limitations are and when it should be used and when it shouldn't. and as the autopilot system improves/changes, the pilots get more training.

But in this case, most people's "training" for what autopilot does is:
1) seeing what the "autopilot" system does in an airplane in a movie. these work very well under very demanding situations. generally only start having a problem if a wing or the tail section of the plane has been physically severed from the body of the plane.
2) a couple of paragraphs displayed onscreen in the car, probably just once the first time you get in the car when you 'personalize' it (sure you can read it again later, but who has time?), and perhaps another couple when Tesla randomly updates the car (great, another update message, I'm in a rush, close it).

The technology is not ready yet

[NotInHere]

It will be ready, one day, but people shouldn't mistake the feature with "fully autonomous driving" until then.

Re: The technology is not ready yet

[alcmena]

It's pretty ready now. I use it all the time and love it. Living in FL means it makes me a safer driver, not a lesser one. Our highways often have no merge lanes. The entrance ramp ends directly in the highway with no dashed line. That presents you with two choices... 1) ride the lane until it ends, and expect you or the car next to you will slam on your brakes; coin toss to who does. 2) look behind you and see if it is safe to cross across 20 feet of "don't merge" zone; risk running into the car in front of you because they lost the "break coin toss". Mirrors are useless because the other lane is too far away. Autopilot is safer here. I can engage it and trust it will react to what is in front of me and keep me in my lane. That leaves me free to look behind me for a safe merge point, take over, and merge. I can do so in a way that doesn't surprise anyone, and doesn't force anyone into quick decisions, something that should be avoided on the road at all costs. Sure, sane highway design would make everyone safer. But... I live in Florida, and #floridaman isn't a meme because my state is known for thinking consequences through.

Re: The technology is not ready yet

[NotInHere]

From how you describe it, you use it like an assistant, and not as autopilot. That's probably safe and good. But its still beta technology and it will take a lot of time until its ready.

Re:The technology is not ready yet

[mysidia]

It will be ready, one day, but people shouldn't mistake the feature with "fully autonomous driving" until then.

It's more "ready" than human beings are, in many different driving scenarios. Don't be deluded into thinking blocking autopilot activation blocks accidents.

People get into accidents all the time without any help from autopilot.

even if A-P had caused some; it's apparently safer than human drivers.

Re:The technology is not ready yet

[NicknameUnavailable]

It will be ready, one day, but people shouldn't mistake the feature with "fully autonomous driving" until then.

Yeah, there are four key steps to making the tech ready:

1. Get it into every car by law.
2. Lock down the media.
3. Make people feel safe(r) with self-driving cars.
4. Find all the political dissidents.

These untimely crashes clearly go against step 3.

Re:The technology is not ready yet

[NotInHere]

It's more "ready" than human beings are, in many different driving scenarios.

But not everywhere. "ready" for me means that I can lean back and not do anything other than type in the destination and get out of the car once I am there. As long as that isn't the case, and I have to "watch out" for events that maybe happen all 20 million kilometers, then its not ready in my eyes.

Maybe deploying the technology will help already, as it certainly is more safe than drunk drivers driving manually, but it needs to be more safe than people who drive responsibly and with attention until I would consider using it.

Re: The technology is not ready yet

[Mr D from 63]

What we've seen is that even this advanced system still has its limits, and there are dangers related to partial autonomous systems and the human factors elements that need to be worked on. People that use the feature and experience no issues gain confidence in its capabilities, sometimes possibly to the point of not paying proper attention, then all it takes is one scenario that they system simply cannot read correctly or is not configured to respond to correctly and something bad can happen. The solutions only come with many miles and years of driving and improving.

Re:The technology is not ready yet

[Mr D from 63]

It's more "ready" than human beings are, in many different driving scenarios.

How many scenarios? The thing is that humans can deal with a much larger range of scenarios, so maybe there is a subset that the existing system handles as good or better, but nobody at this point can pinpoint an overall safety improvement. The system itself has only been exposed to limited scenarios thus far.

Re:The technology is not ready yet

[Dutch Gun]

People get into accidents all the time without any help from autopilot.

Yeah, but that's not *news*. You'll be hearing another spate of these stories once fully autonomous vehicles are on the road in significant numbers.

Re: The technology is not ready yet

[kriston]

Umm, what? Turn your head. And position your mirrors so you have to lean your head to see the side of your car.

Traffic is never so dense you can't force yourself in if you just turn your head to look.

I drive a truck with limited visibility in heavy Washington DC and New York City traffic. I don't understand how people have so much trouble turning their heads.

Re: The technology is not ready yet

[michelcolman]

An autopilot is an assistant. It is in airplanes, and it is in cars. Various levels of sophistication exist. The simplest airplane autopilots can only fly straight ahead at a given altitude. The most complex ones can actually land an airplane, if the pilots program it correctly and are ready with their hands on the controls to take over at any time when necessary.

The question whether or not you have to hold the controls is dictated by the environment, not the capabilities of the device. At high altitude, sure, we can let go of the controls. During an automatic landing: no way. I have actually had to perform a go-around during an automatic approach because the system was not working properly, and I only do a couple of automatic approaches per year (only in low visibility conditions).

The Tesla autopilot is undoubtedly more sophisticated than any airplane autopilot in existence today, but obviously has to deal with a much more difficult and unpredictable environment. That doesn't mean it shouldn't be called an autopilot. Ask any actual pilot.

The only thing Tesla did wrong, is demonstrate their autopilot with their hands off the wheel. Even Elon Musk did so himself. But there's nothing wrong with the name "autopilot". And seriously, do you think people would not drive it hands-off if it had a different name?

Re: The technology is not ready yet

[NotInHere]

On airplanes it works much better with autopilots than on the ground. The difference is: if the next thing you could crash into is minutes of even falling away, then you can actually let go off the controls and rely on the autopilot. Its much different for cars. Here the deadly stuff is much closer, and thus the time the driver has to react to an alert from the autopilot is smaller.

Re: The technology is not ready yet

[tehcyder]

That doesn't mean it shouldn't be called an autopilot. Ask any actual pilot.

The fact that "autopilot" is a highly misleading name for the feature on an aircraft doesn't mean it's a good idea to use it as an equally misleading name for a feature on a car.

Re:The technology is not ready yet

[jabuzz]

Because the requirements to be a pilot in a commercial airliner are orders of magnitude harder than to drive a car. To be a commercial airliner pilot you will have to log thousands of hours of flying time and be regularly re-evaluated.

On the other hand plenty of states in the USA will allow children under 16 a full drivers license, and every state in the USA will allow a learners permit from 16 at the latest.

Apples and oranges comparison.

Re:The technology is not ready yet

[meerling]

Yes, but it's rather a huge step back if the system determines you aren't paying attention to the road, so it stops paying attention to the road!
Someone or something needs to be paying attention to the road, even if one of them is an incompetent waste of space, and the other a machine!

Re:The technology is not ready yet

[mysidia]

The thing is that humans can deal with a much larger range of scenarios

Humans can often deal with scenarios.

Humans are not very consistent, however.

Without exception for any individual..... every human is often 'inattentive' or negligent, or become distracted, and many people also willfully disobey traffic safety rules, and fail to handle scenarios that humans would normally be capable of handling.

This is an advantage that autopilot has out of the gate.... It's not going to miss something because it was texting; it's not going to become fatigued and fall into some form of waking sleep, or stare at one point ahead and become hypnotized by the road.

Come to think of that, if the human is still doing all the navigating and deciding where to go, regarding highway driving: humans set a really really low bar for Autopilot to exceed.

Re: The technology is not ready yet

[Coren22]

Those damn misleadingly named automobiles, why don't they mobile automatically?

Misleading

[MouseR]

They need to change the feature name to something that doesn't mislead the dimwits out there that it is, in fact, an "automatic pilot".

At best, it's a co-pilot. And that would be a better name for it.

Re:Misleading

[gman003]

Tesla's Autopilot functions at almost exactly the same level as an aircraft autopilot. Perhaps even better - an aircraft will not automatically detect and avoid other aircraft, only mapped obstacles. A Tesla will automatically brake for other vehicles moving into your lane.

I do agree that "Copilot" would be a better name, but only because people are idiots, not because it's a bad name.

Re:Misleading

[MouseR]

Planes do detect other planes in proximity with the aptly-named proximity warning. Miles in advance. With beeps buzzes and autopilot disengagement. They are called ACAS. There are various levels of support depending on version being used by an aircraft.

If the pilot fails to respond, there's a loud bang and a cut on his paycheck.

Re:Misleading

[wbr1]

ACAS responds with autopilot disengagement, meaning fucker you need to wake up and fly now cause I could bollocks this up. Tesla autopilot actually responds to encroaching vehicles, hence it is actually better in some aspects than flight autopilot.

Re:Misleading

[ColdWetDog]

The difference with aircraft being is that you have a central authority controlling and regulation what paths aircraft take, so no, it's not better.

What? You think you can drive anywhere? A 'central authority controlling and regulation what paths cars (aircraft) take' sounds one hell of a lot like a road.

Re:Misleading

[mysidia]

If the pilot fails to respond, there's a loud bang and a cut on his paycheck.

Actually....... the former pilot is likely awarded a massive paycheck from his life insurance company.
Shame, that a good bit of that will wind up going to Uncle Sam, his Uncle Sam's cousin named Local State Government, and his child called Local County gov't, and the former pilot won't get to spend any of the pittance that remains himself/herself.

Re:Misleading

[viperidaenz]

Or it will be deemed a suicide or terrorism, and the life insurance won't pay out.

Re:Misleading

[viperidaenz]

Roads don't direct traffic to avoid collisions.

If there was a "Ground Traffic Control" dictating which roads everyone had to take on their pre-planned and logged journeys, perhaps we'd already have driverless cars.

Re:Misleading

[vux984]

Tesla's Autopilot functions at almost exactly the same level as an aircraft autopilot.

Except that most of the time an aircraft on autopilot is a mile or two from ANYTHING. Including the ground. And the parts of a flight where a plane is expected to be nearer to anything the pilot is paying a LOT more attention.

Mid-flight on a long haul, the pilot has to be there, and he has to be awake, but he can be filling out paperwork, reading aircraft manuals, checking maps, etc.

That's NOTHING like what a tesla driver can ever do. A tesla driver needs to be paying attention the same way a pilot does during an automated landing ... the ENTIRE trip. Not only is that completely different from an aircraft pilot, its also an unreasonable / unrealistic expectation.

Re:Misleading

[the_Bionic_lemming]

I drive a jeep wrangler.

Roads are optional.

Re:Misleading

[SeaFox]

At best, it's a co-pilot. And that would be a better name for it.

Aren't co-pilots also fully licensed aircraft pilots, able to completely control and land the plane should the "real pilot" be incapacitated? That doesn't sound any better.

Re:Misleading

[dunkelfalke]

Yep, the first officer is just second in command, but a fully qualified pilot otherwise.

Re:Misleading

[michelcolman]

ACAS responds with autopilot disengagement, meaning fucker you need to wake up and fly now cause I could bollocks this up.

No, it most certainly does not. ACAS only gives aural warnings. First "Traffic, Traffic". Then, when you get closer, an actual command like "Climb, climb". It is then up to the pilots to disengage the autopilot (it does not disconnect by itself) and take the corrective action.

I'm a pilot on the A320. I've also flown the 737, A330, Falcon 2000, and a few others. I don't know of any aircraft where the autopilot automatically disconnects because of an ACAS warning.

Re:Misleading

[michelcolman]

The simplest airplane autopilots just maintain a heading and an altitude. They are still called autopilots.

The most sophisticated autopilots can actually land the plane, but, wait for it... the pilots have to have their hands on the controls and be ready to take over at any time! Still, they don't just call it autopilot, they even dare to call it autoland.

Re:Misleading

[michelcolman]

"an aircraft will not automatically detect and avoid other aircraft, only mapped obstacles"
This is not true for many modern autopilots. Peer to peer traffic avoidance is now available for even small GA aircraft. These systems not only detect possible collisions, but negotiate how to avoid the collision so that both aircraft don't turn towards each other.

First of all, aircraft autopilots do not automatically avoid mapped obstacles. They can be programmed to fly a certain route that does not contain those obstacles, but you can just as easily program them to fly straight into a mountain. On modern airplanes you do get aural warnings ("Terrain ahead", "Terrain, terrain, pull up!") but that's it. The autopilot won't do anything, it won't even disconnect.
Second of all, even though TCAS systems will tell the pilot to climb or descend to avoid another aircraft, it is still up to the pilot to actually disconnect the autopilot and take the required corrective action.

Re:Misleading

[michelcolman]

A copilot is actually a fully licenced pilot who is perfectly capable of flying and landing the aircraft without any help whatsoever. It's one of the things they have to actually demonstrate during their training, with the instructor pretending to be dead.

An autopilot has to be told what to do and cannot even extend the landing gear by itself.

So no, "copilot" is actually a worse name.

Re:Misleading

[stephanruby]

The driver will not be able to reactivate the Autopilot until the car is stopped and put in 'Park.'

That's a really bad idea. If they really want to punish them, they should use a timer instead.

A few years ago, a friend drove a Prius and the GPS navigation input function didn't work unless she went less than 5 miles an hour, so what my friend ended up doing was slowing down at the most inappropriate places on freeways and highways just so she could use the built-in navigation.

No doubt, frustrated Tesla drivers will just start parking their car in the middle of the roads just so they can re-engage their auto-pilot. That's what happens when one tries to use technology to control human beings. Those human beings start rebelling and start acting like even bigger idiots, possibly causing even more accidents. Also, I suspect that many Tesla owners will just try to disable/postpone this last update for as long as they can.

Re: Misleading

[gweilo8888]

Aircraft autopilots have been able to avoid moving aircraft since at least the late 1980s, courtesy of TCAS.

Re:Misleading

[PrimaryConsult]

That built in navigation speed restriction is in a lot of cars (though for mine it's only the text input fields). This is reasonable but only if I'm the only one in the car. If I have a passenger there is no reason they shouldn't be able to type in an address. In a perfect world they'd put a button on the passenger side door which will give 1 minute of typing function, that only activates on initial press (so that taping it down doesn't work).

Re:Misleading

[fluffernutter]

Maybe there could be a comment in the instruction book about not stopping in traffic. People would HAVE to follow that!

Re:Misleading

[fgouget]

A car autopilot has to be much more sophisticated than aircraft ones because pedestrians, bicycles and even other cars don't have a transponder broadcasting their position and speed at all times. Furthermore in the air there are essentially no stationary obstacles (mountains and relief don't count: they are well mapped), whereas on the ground there are tons of obstacles (from parked cars to road work, construction areas encroaching on the road, etc). Plus the pilots of other aircrafts are nowhere as crazy and unpredictable as car drivers (fortunately).

Re:Misleading

[fgouget]

Planes do detect other planes in proximity with the aptly-named proximity warning. Miles in advance. With beeps buzzes and autopilot disengagement. They are called ACAS.

Given that, to quote Wikipedia, while larger civil aircraft carry weather radar, sensitive anti-collision radar is rare in non-military aircraft, ACAS either does not detect planes that don't have a transponder, or need to rely on external systems to do so. Car autopilots can neither rely on other cars and pedestrians having transponders, nor on some central authority warning them when they're about to hit something. Thus they have to detect obstacles entirely on their own which requires a whole lot more sophistication than plane autopilots (which is also why planes have had autopilots for over 30 years and cars are just beginning to get them).

Re:Misleading

[tehcyder]

Tesla's Autopilot functions at almost exactly the same level as an aircraft autopilot. Perhaps even better - an aircraft will not automatically detect and avoid other aircraft, only mapped obstacles. A Tesla will automatically brake for other vehicles moving into your lane.

I do agree that "Copilot" would be a better name, but only because people are idiots, not because it's a bad name.

No, "autopilot" is a stupid name, both for the aircraft and car versions. The difference is that airline pilots know what the system actually does and so the name is irrelevant.

But the average car driver is only going to think one thing when he sees "autopilot".

It's just a typical marketing-led balls-up.

Re:Misleading

[Anonymous Coward]

" I don't know of any aircraft where the autopilot automatically disconnects because of an ACAS warning."

It would be a silly thing to do. You'd be going from a potentially dangerous situation (the other plane may move out of the way), to a known dangerous situation (plane is no longer under control) without knowing how fast or even if, the human will take over.

Hell the A380 has a mode where the autopilot will automatically follow the ACAS RA, subject to override by other sensors (eg terrain avoidance), if the pilot doesn't respond within a deadline.

Re:Misleading

[Anonymous Coward]

"Second of all, even though TCAS systems will tell the pilot to climb or descend to avoid another aircraft, it is still up to the pilot to actually disconnect the autopilot and take the required corrective action."

Your information is old. http://www.airbus.com/presscentre/pressreleases/press-release-detail/detail/easa-certifies-new-autopilotflight-director-tcas-mode-for-a380/

Re:Misleading

[mysidia]

Or it will be deemed a suicide or terrorism, and the life insurance won't pay out.

Insurance adjusters are scumbags; However, pilot inattentiveness is negligence, not suicide, and is not likely to be legally ruled as such.

If the insurance will not cover such things, then they would likely not write the insurance policy to someone employed as a pilot in the first place. (If you are a licensed pilot, your insurer does ask, And if you are flying a plane, your Life insurance is extra-expensive, by the way.)

Re:Misleading

[vux984]

Also, how is paying close attention for an entire trip an unreasonable / unrealistic expectation?

People cannot sit there at the ready for hours on end.

If it was, it'd be an unreasonable and/or unrealistic expectation to teach someone how to drive, which involves the exact kind of attention as monitoring the autopilot system. Yet, millions of people do this daily without trouble.

No, actually driving; is a continual feedback loop that is completely different from sitting there "pepetually ready to drive but not actually driving".

Re:Misleading

[minogully]

People cannot sit there at the ready for hours on end.

I completely disagree. The amount of attention required, which is basically just keeping an eye on the road and what's going on around you, is exactly what is required when teaching someone to drive. It's what I do when I'm a passenger in the front seat of the car, for hours on end. It's exactly what my spouse does when she's the passenger and I'm driving, for hours on end.

It's a good thing too, having two eyes on the road has saved us from some accidents. This is exactly the advantage that autopilot gives the driver.

Re:Misleading

[minogully]

two eyes

By this I mean, "to sets of eyes", of course.

Re:Misleading

[vux984]

The amount of attention required, which is basically just keeping an eye on the road and what's going on around you, is exactly what is required when teaching someone to drive.

A 'driving instructor' scenario is quite different; for starters its their paid job to *evaluate your driving* -- which is very different from being a passenger. So they are constantly evaluating your speed, control, position and how you perform each manuver; they may be taking notes on it. They do it for 20-30 minutes at a time, with breaks, usually in city traffic, etc, etc.

They aren't doing it for hours on end on road trips.

As a parent teaching a child, if they are still new then yeah you can be very attentive because you are basically driving as surrogate through them and they are doing all kinds wrong, but once they've pretty much mastered it, and you are comfortable with their driving and your just in the car so they can practice, your mostly a passenger and just at heightened alert sporadically or if you notice something; or are trying to help them with a particular maneuver.

It's what I do when I'm a passenger in the front seat of the car, for hours on end. It's exactly what my spouse does when she's the passenger and I'm driving, for hours on end.

That's just it, no your not.

Your are sporadically attentive and you don't even realize when you aren't being attentive. Yes, my wife will call out a light change if she thinks I'm not reacting to it, or a cyclist if she thinks I might not see it, etc, etc. But she'll also send text messages, look something up online, play with the radio, space out and look out the window.

I definitely appreciate that she's a 2nd set of eyes; and she absolutely makes a positive contribution the total situational awareness, and i don't even dispute that some of the time she's 'ready to take over', but not 'every minute of every trip', not even close. She takes breaks from paying attention all the time; she'll be on higher alert in a new city in weird traffic when helping me navigate; but on some highway we've been on a hundred times...she'll pull out her phone and see what's playing at the theatre without giving it a 2nd thought.

Re:Misleading

[minogully]

As a parent teaching a child, if they are still new then yeah you can be very attentive because you are basically driving as surrogate through them and they are doing all kinds wrong

Which is my point about how we should view the Tesla autopilot, and even you agree that you are capable of that level of attention.

...but once they've pretty much mastered it...

Once I feel that the Tesla autopilot has "mastered it" through software updates and the like, then yes, I'll pay much less attention. But just like with a kid learning to drive, that won't happen until it's been proven to have mastered it.

I imagine that the sporadic attentiveness that you speak of is a direct result of knowing or assuming that the driver has everything under control. But, that's just it, no where has anyone said that the Tesla Autopilot has everything under control 100% of the time.

Re:Misleading

[Coren22]

They should instead call it Autopilot Pro, since clearly it is way better than even the most sophisticated autopilot.

Re:Misleading

[vux984]

Which is my point about how we should view the Tesla autopilot, and even you agree that you are capable of that level of attention.

The tesla is only used on thie highway, and it generally drives perfectly fine. Do you think the guy who ran into a truck while watching Harry potter would have done that if the car drove like it was under the control of a brand new novice driver? Of course not, he'd had the car for quite some time, and had many hours experience letting it drive and it drove just fine.

While he SHOULD have treated it like a new driver; hour after hour, mile after mile of it doing everything right -- you won't stay in high alert. You can't. New drivers constantly trigger your high alert attention with their jerky movements, lane positioning, and other issues... if they do everything right for 3 months, you simply are not going to be on constant high alert. Its just not human nature. At best you'll be paying attention the way any relaxed passenger does; if your sitting there looking out the front window you'll see things, but that is NOT high alert. That is NOT ready to take over with instant notice. And if something distracts you, you'll be distracted because the driving is taking care of itself.

Sure, you absolutely can avoid going full retard and firing up a harry potter movie, and sitting in the seat passively watching the world sail by is going to catch a lot of tesla's mistakes. But if it misses a bend in the road and slams into a gaurd rail or crosses into oncoming traffic... that's going to happen FAST. And unless you are sitting there at high alert almost expecting a mistake like that, you won't react fast enough. And you can't sit on an interstate crossing the country for long stretches ready to jump in like that.

The average human being isn't wired for that.

The average human being can drive the car for long stretches because the constant micro adjustments continually engage them.

Scientists have written papers on this stuff.

Once I feel that the Tesla autopilot has "mastered it" through software updates and the like, then yes, I'll pay much less attention. But just like with a kid learning to drive, that won't happen until it's been proven to have mastered it.

Again... the guy who ran into a truck watching harry potter didn't buy a tesla and then pull out his DVD player. The car had convinced him, through thousands of miles of demonstration, that it was perfectly capable of driving itself,... until it wasn't.

I imagine that the sporadic attentiveness that you speak of is a direct result of knowing or assuming that the driver has everything under control. But, that's just it, no where has anyone said that the Tesla Autopilot has everything under control 100% of the time.

The car gets it right enough of the time, that it's proven to these owners that it does. If it made lots of little mistakes every time people turned it on people would pay at lot more attention.

Re:Misleading

[RespekMyAthorati]

I wonder if a drunk who tells a Tesla to drive him home (while using a pair of ViseGrips to grip the wheel) would be safer than having him drive himself.

I suspect that the answer is yes. If so, even the present version of "autopilot" would save thousands of lives.

What? Why?

[110010001000]

I thought autonomous cars were right around the corner! Guess not!

Re:What? Why?

[michelcolman]

What makes you think the truck had the right of way? He turned across multiple lanes just expecting cars to stop for him. Just because you're bigger doesn't mean you have the right of way.

Re:What? Why?

[DirkDaring]

I bet the guy with this head lopped off is pretty mad he broke the rules.

Re:What? Why?

[PrimaryConsult]

Common sense (via sense of self preservation) is that the larger vehicle always has the right of way, regardless of what the rules say. They're harder to maneuver and require more distance to stop. Or you can choose to be dead right, either way the driver of the rig / bus / truck will be fine, and likely so will the vehicle they are operating (which often isn't theirs anyway, so no skin off their back if it gets a few dings).

Re:What? Why?

[tehcyder]

Common sense (via sense of self preservation) is that the larger vehicle always has the right of way, regardless of what the rules say. They're harder to maneuver and require more distance to stop. Or you can choose to be dead right, either way the driver of the rig / bus / truck will be fine, and likely so will the vehicle they are operating (which often isn't theirs anyway, so no skin off their back if it gets a few dings).

It's one of the advantages of learning to ride a motorbike: they drum it into you from early on that you have to assume not only that cars/trucks don't see you, but that they're actively trying to kill you.

Re:What? Why?

[fluffernutter]

If a truck turning out onto a road at 5mph isn't predictable then you're driving way too fast.

Re:What? Why?

[michelcolman]

According to which article of the traffic code would that be?

As far as I know, if traffic has to slow down for you, that means you have failed to yield to them. I know it's hard in a truck, but that doesn't legally give them the right of way. Feel free to correct me with an actual legal text or precedent.

Misleading headline

[NoNonAlphaCharsHere]

Tesla To Further Restrict Its Autopilot Software To Prevent Negative Publicity And Lawsuits

FTFY

Apply pressure on the wheel

[PPH]

I'm sure we can rig up some sort of clamp that will take care of this.

Re:Apply pressure on the wheel

[MouseR]

I believe what is meant by "pressure on the steering wheel" is to try to steer it while AutoPilot makes you believe you're safe in it's control. Pressure here is more like "gently applying turning force" to indicate you are still holding the wheel.

Re:Apply pressure on the wheel

[PPH]

to try to steer it while AutoPilot makes you believe you're safe in it's control.

If AutoPilot is engaged and I'm hanging onto the wheel, I won't be making any steering corrections. Because the car is probably holding the lane better than I can. What it might be sensing is some resistance that my hanging on is creating to its steering. So to fool it, bungee cord tied to door handle and wheel.

A way will be figured out how to fool it. The ingenuity of stupidity knows no bounds.

Re:Apply pressure on the wheel

[CODiNE]

Yeah, but Tesla will never lose a lawsuit from someone who jury rigs a clamp to get around safety features. This puts the negligence squarely on the driver.

Sounds like a trap...

[ASDFnz]

From what the summary reads it waits until it is absolutely sure that you are not holding the steering wheel... ... and then turns off the autopilot to leave you 'hands fee' careering down the highway!

Re:Sounds like a trap...

[MouseR]

It also slows down the car.

Buzzing abound in hope that it may wake you if you fell asleep.

They are gunna do WHAT?

[wheeda]

To keep people safe from abusing the control system, they are going to turn the control system off if people don't respond? I guess this will technically reduce the number of deaths attributed to autopilot. After all, DOT investigations will show that autopilot was off when the Tesla flew off the cliff.

Re:They are gunna do WHAT?

[qzzpjs]

That's what I was thinking. Driver falls asleep since they don't have to pay attention as much, then it turns off and lets them drift into the oncoming lane.

Maybe they should just shake the car left and right a bit in the lane to jolt the driver. Or hit the brakes quickly a few times.

Re:They are gunna do WHAT?

[Gavagai80]

It should simply park itself on the shoulder the same way you would if you had a breakdown. That's the only safe way, in the event that driver is unable to respond due to passing out or having a seizure or some such issue.

Re:They are gunna do WHAT?

[oic0]

Doubt its smart enough to not park you over the edge of something steeo, in mud, glass, etc... It follows lanes and looks at cars. Not setup for off road.

Therapy bands for pressure

[ArtemaOne]

So the weak yellow therapy bands tied off on each side to apply light pressure both to the grip and the turns.

Re:Install a 120dB beeper or horn

[bigwheel]

And a seat that gives a "mild shock" to the driver.

Re:s/autopilot/driver assist

[ArtemaOne]

As mentioned over and over in this story already, it is more of an automatic pilot than the "automatic pilot" in planes that has been around for decades.

So, if I just randomly turn the wheel left & r

[Anonymous Coward]

So, if I just randomly turn the wheel left & right while watching my movie, it's all good?

I would think after a while the autopilot would notice the driver is making things worse and post something on the dashboard screen along the lines of, "Why don't you take a nap, I can do this driving thing better by myself."

so many ways to be wrong

[NotQuiteReal]

Pretty sure Or the fact that software is not warranted for its attended use.

Is not the right word, but it could be intended, unintended, unattended...

Don't pay attention and die

[HalAtWork]

"The system will disengage if you ignore those warnings for too long. Electrek reports"

So if you're not paying attention then suddenly you may go careening out of control. I'm not judging this as a good or bad solution to get the driver to participate, but it's the reality. How many people will think they can get away with this (as a couple Tesla owners already do) and then suddenly be in an accident that the autopilot could have avoided if it didn't decide to turn itself off to penalize the driver?

In any case hopefully this works as intended and doesn't leave participating drivers in an unexpected situation.

Re:s/autopilot/driver assist

[Anonymous Coward]

Since most people don't fly planes, and likely assume an "automatic pilot" will automatically pilot your plane or your car, its function relative to that of a plane is immaterial.

Oh, so like a locomotive's dead-man's switch.

[kriston]

Oh, so like a locomotive's dead-man's switch.

They should call this new feature the "dead-man's switch."

That name will fit the fate of many of their customers.

The real news here

[Black Parrot]

is that the Tesla will be running a v8.

To start....

[MitchDev]

... change the stupid name.

From www.merriam-webster.com:

autopilot
noun autopilot \o-t-p-lt\
Simple Definition of autopilot

        : a device that steers a ship, aircraft, or spacecraft in place of a person

Note the "in place of a person". Tesla autopilot is anything but actual autopilot
Prosecute them for false advertising

Re: s/autopilot/driver assist

[MitchDev]

Words have meanings:

http://www.merriam-webster.com...

Splitting Musk's Pubic Hair.

[Anonymous Coward]

Again.

It doesn't fucking matter what the state of autopilots for jetliners was a decade ago, you insipid neckbeards. It doesn't matter what you think it means.

Learn how language works, bitches. Words mean what the vox populi say they do.

Autopilot means a magical wonderment that allows humans to fuck off while things fly, or drive.

It's a shit fucking name, and your golden boy Musk, fucked the pooch when he named it.

Re:Splitting Musk's Pubic Hair.

[michelcolman]

That begs the question whether we could litteraly care less. Or something to that affect.

See how beautiful languages get if you let the idiots decide what words mean? If you change the dictionary rather than educate people?

By the way, do you really think people would use the system differently if it was called something like "gizmo to help you stay in lane"? People try out the system, see how well it appears to work, and then start to watch videos. The name has nothing to do with it.

The only difference between Tesla's autopilot and similar systems from other manufacturers is that Tesla's system works so well that people start to trust it. Mercedes, Volvo and others don't have that problem yet as they swerve all over the place so badly nobody in his right mind would even think of letting it drive by itself without watching it like a hawk. The Tesla is just in that dangerous intermediate stage where it's good enough for people to trust it but not quite good enough not to mess up occasionally.

Playing on words

[DrYak]

        : a device that steers a ship, aircraft, or spacecraft in place of a person

Note the "in place of a person".

Note also the "device that steers" (it more or less keeps a trajectory fro the plane/ship, or in the case of cars like BMW, Tesla, Mercedes-Benz, etc. it keeps a lane).

Not "device that handle entirely automatically the complete travel from point A to point B" (that would be an *AUTONOMOUS* car, like Google's, some subs in big cities, busses by other startups. Or simply horses and donkeys).

Cars' driving assistance like Tesla's Autopilot actually behave exactly like the autopilot in a plane or on a ship. You just need to actually know what an autopilot actually does.

Re:It would fail a driving test

[fluffernutter]

If it can't pass a driving test it shouldn't be driving.

I agree completely. But what would Tesla do? It wouldn't sell as many cars.

About time

[DrXym]

Driver inattentiveness has been a forseeable problem as cars strive to do more and more. It's good to see Tesla finally taking action but really it should haven't been necessary for someone to die to figure this out. Their self-drive mode is clearly limited and as such they must do everything they can to ensure the driver is ready to take over or veto the car in a split second.

This isn't just Tesla's problem either but every self-drive vehicle that only offers partial automation.

Re:What?! Sense from Tesla?

[avandesande]

The whole 'shared responsibility' idea is deeply flawed- AI interacting with human foibles is a recipe for disaster. I much prefer Google's all or nothing approach and they have logged a million+ miles with only a few minor accidents.

Don't pay attention to the article and lie

[CylanR77]

Not sure if you're trolling or just displaying average ignorance from not reading the article, but if autopilot disengages the car will slow to a crawl and not go "careening out of control".

Re:Don't pay attention to the article and lie

[swillden]

Not sure if you're trolling or just displaying average ignorance from not reading the article, but if autopilot disengages the car will slow to a crawl and not go "careening out of control".

A better solution would be to pull over to the shoulder (safely changing lanes if necessary), and slow and stop there. Slowing to a crawl in traffic on a busy (but not jammed) freeway is very dangerous.

Nothing a few cable ties won't fix

[g0tai]

Permanent pressure on the steering wheel then

Problem Solved

[cstacy]

This is nothing that can't be solved by duct taping a beer can to the steering wheel...

Re:It would fail a driving test

[minogully]

If it can't pass a driving test it should be treated like a driver with only a learner's permit and constantly monitored.

FTFY

Oh wait, that's exactly what Tesla recommends.