Slashdot Mirror
There's Growing Evidence Tesla's Autopilot Handles Lane Dividers Poorly (arstechnica.com)
An anonymous reader writes: Within the past week, two Tesla crashes have been reported while Autopilot was engaged, and both involved a Tesla vehicle slamming into a highway divider. One of the crashes resulted in the death of Walter Huang, a Tesla customer with a Model X. The other crash resulted in minor injuries to the driver, thanks largely to a working highway safety barrier in front of the concrete divider. Ars Technica reports on the growing evidence that Tesla's Autopilot handles lane dividers poorly: "The September crash isn't the only evidence that has emerged that Tesla's Autopilot feature doesn't deal well with highway lane dividers. At least two people have uploaded videos to YouTube showing their Tesla vehicles steering toward concrete barriers. One driver grabbed the wheel to prevent a collision, while the other slammed on the brakes. Tesla argues that this issue doesn't necessarily mean that Autopilot is unsafe. 'Autopilot is intended for use only with a fully attentive driver,' a Tesla spokesperson told KGO-TV. Tesla argues that Autopilot can't prevent all accidents but that it makes accidents less likely. There's some data to back this up. A 2017 study by the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (NHTSA) found that the rate of accidents dropped by 40 percent after the introduction of Autopilot. And Tesla argues that Autopilot-equipped Tesla cars have gone 320 million miles per fatality, much better than the 86 million miles for the average car. These figures don't necessarily settle the debate. That NHTSA figure doesn't break down the severity of crashes -- it's possible that Autopilot prevents relatively minor crashes but is less effective at preventing the most serious crashes. And as some Ars commenters have pointed out, luxury cars generally have fewer fatalities than the average vehicle. So it's possible that Tesla cars' low crash rates have more to do with its wealthy customer base than its Autopilot technology. What we can say, at a minimum, is that there's little evidence that Autopilot makes Tesla drivers less safe. And we can expect Tesla to steadily improve the car's capabilities over time."
You don't want to know how many accidents there were in cars with autopilot, that doesn't matter. What you want to know is miles per accident *with autopilot engaged.* Using the other number is highly misleading.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
What is the point to an autopilot if I have to be fully attentive and ready to take over? I would rather just drive then worry about missing something. This and the are still have to much uncertainty to waist my time with it. Also dammit if i'm going to die in a car, I want it to be my fault and freaking awesome. "He almost made it, if it hadn't been for that ...."
The intentionally misnamed "autopilot" may reduce the likelihood of wandering out of your well-marked lane in clear conditions at highways speed but every once in a while it'll drive you right into an obstacle. Reminds me of those "push this button and ten people with terminal cancer get cured but two other random people die from a meteor strike" questions taught in philosophy classes with the intent of humbling people who might otherwise believe they can quantify their way through every obstacle.
It seems even worse than regular driving if you have to continuously be on the look out to prevent the steering wheel suddenly sending you into a wall.
Maybe Tesla should focus on automatic braking, parallel parking, and things like that until using their Autopilot is no longer the same as playing the Russian roulette. At some point, these accidents will damage their reputation badly...
Agreed, and their stupid marketing ploy is killing people.
what about motorcycles? I know BMW's Traffic Jam Assistant doesn't do well with that since I had a BMW 750 rear-end me at about 10 MPH. The guy that hit me says it usually does a great job of going the correct speed in 0-30 MPH traffic here on I-5 in Seattle. I think it didn't see me, but instead saw the dump truck in front of me and then tried to drive through me.
What the hell does any of that have to do with purposely naming a feature in such a way that it lulls people into a false sense of security???
I'm not saying it is a bad feature that should be removed. I'm saying their purposely chosen name for the feature is needlessly dangerous. I guess "Driver Assist" just wasn't sexy enough?
And the driver who destroyed said barrier was not on autopilot. Normal human error.
Check out the intersection on Google Maps and you can see what went wrong, both for the human, and for autopilot. The left line is quite distinct. The right line is rather worn. There is no visible crosshatching at all between them. Once a vehicle crosses the fading line, what looks like a "lane" forms around them, seemingly reinforcing that this is an acceptable place to drive. This happens only seconds before the barrier is hit, so there's not that much time to react to the situation. There are no overhead signs, just the road-level sign. In dense traffic, it's not visible until you're in the invalid "lane".
Any driver, paying attention, will of course not do this. But human drivers' attentions lapse, and that's a mistake that humans can - and recently did - make.
Concerning Autopilot, there's a big question as to what versions people are running. Walter Huang, at the very least, was almost certainly running the old AP. It's not clear what versions the YouTubers were running. There was a massive AP update that just started rolling out recently that makes a huge difference in quality. To the degree that I'm actually rather concerned about it. The more imperfect the system, the more attention you pay to it. I have worries that with the new system, it's gotten good enough that it's going to cause peoples' attention to lapse. Having to touch (with torque) the wheel at regular intervals helps, but I hope Tesla gets eye tracking in place soon.
"99 dead duelists of Dios on the wall. 99 dead duelists of Dios! Take one's ring, pass it around..."
HA! I suggested the exact same name up above! Obviously, that name isn't sexy enough to sell more vehicles so it got nixed.
Statistics are only as valid as the data they're based on, and the assumptions made about the data that isn't there.
Most transportation statistics are missing a LOT of base data. Things like "miles driven per year" are guesses.
Except in the case of cars like the Tesla, where there is a black box collecting statistics. How does Tesla know that auto pilot was on or off? It's recorded. How many miles are driven with AP on or off is recorded.
Many of the details are tossed out after an interval, but Tesla can collect a whole lot of data that other manufacturers cannot.
Now, the particular problem with dividing lanes is probably tied to trying to stay between the lines, when the lines are spreading out. If you don't stick to one line or the other, you're target is what is in the middle, and it is going to hurt.
Holy crap, why do people think lane markings will EVER be 100% accurate? That's a total fucking dream; and self driving cars have better damn well work with every possibility.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
For stuffing yourself in a metal can, then propelling it at great speeds just barely passing other metal cans (within inches). Ludacris you folks are...
[($)]
Also, how many of those 86 million miles *could have been autopilot (since autopilot can opt out of conditions the driver cannot)* and how many of those if you remove cars that mechanically break (old cars, Tesla's aren't old enough yet to exhibit this), and adjust for various safety technologies (from anti-lock brakes, to airbags, to just having braking, to competitor systems that do have some sort of lane keep assist, but only for accident avoidance and otherwise doesn't help someone drive with their hands off the steering wheel).
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.