Slashdot Mirror


Tesla Rejected More Advanced Driver Monitoring Features On Its Cars, Says Report (theverge.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Verge: Engineers inside Tesla wanted to add robust driver monitoring systems to the company's cars to help make sure drivers safely use Autopilot, and Tesla even worked with suppliers on possible solutions, according to The Wall Street Journal. But those executives -- Elon Musk included -- reportedly rejected the idea out of worry that the options might not work well enough, could be expensive, and because drivers might become annoyed by an overly nagging system.

Tesla considered a few different types of monitoring: one that would track a driver's eyes using a camera and infrared sensors, and another that involved adding more sensors to the steering wheel to make sure that the driver is holding on. Both ideas would help let the car's system know if the driver has stopped paying attention, which could reduce the chance of an accident in situations where Autopilot disengages or is incapable of keeping the car from crashing. Musk later confirmed on Twitter that the eye tracking option was "rejected for being ineffective, not for cost."

5 of 143 comments (clear)

  1. Car makers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Maybe Cadillac is made by people with experience making cars? And not some Silly Valley big talker?

  2. Re:Not enough by Train0987 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If it's supposed to be assist technology then why market it as "autopilot"?

  3. Re:Not enough by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Because they call it fucking AUTOPILOT. Auto, as in automatic, not manual, no human interaction needed, done for you. You claim it's well documented it's assist technology, and if you dig into the fine print I'm sure you're right. But it's also documented very well in the goddamn name that it's not assist technology, it's automatic. Not manual. Not assist. No human interaction needed. Done for you. Auto-fucking-pilot. Fine print disclaimers do not change that.

  4. Re:The Shorts by Smidge204 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The Model 3 has an MSRP of $35K. That's significantly more on the "affordable" end of the spectrum and is on par with other EVs available now.

    The Model S and Model X are high cost to try and actually make money off of them. Pretty much the only reason Tesla has lasted this long, and gotten this far, is by aiming high and building brand reputation. There's just no margin in $35K vehicles and they'd never sell without the branding to back them up.

    It was a good strategy and it's worked out brilliantly for them. Victims of their own success at this point.
    =Smidge=

  5. Re:Not enough by Rei · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Tesla autopilot seems to require the driver's constant attention to avoid running into stationary objects that are routinely encountered on roads (gore points, fire trucks, etc...).

    Welcome back to hyperbole land.

    The average US car goes 80 million miles between fatal accidents.
    The average Tesla goes 320 million miles between fatal accidents.
    1/3rd to 1/2 of all Tesla miles are on Autopilot.

    Now let's say that all fatal Tesla accidents were on Autopilot. Let's ignore the fact most of the "The driver may have been on Autopilot!" crash reporting stories thusfar have ultimately turned out not to involve AP at all. Let's also ignore the fact that since AP driving is much more likely to involve highways and thus higher speeds, it would be expected to involve a higher share of the accidents. Let's just look at the numbers. Even with these assumptions, you would still be 33 to 100% safer driving a Tesla on AP than driving any other car. Acting like you take your attention off the road for a split second and it drives you into a post is just absurd.

    What I'm wondering is how long this media hype train can last. I mean, no freaking duh the more vehicles Tesla makes the more people are going to die while driving one. Are they seriously going to keep breathlessly reporting on every last Tesla crash - always with the no-evidence-whatsoever speculation that AP might have been in use, and no retraction whatsoever in the cases where it wasn't? 40 thousand people die on US roads every year. 1.3 million die in them worldwide. Seeing a Tesla on the roads is no longer a 1-in-a-million event; Tesla is quickly approaching 0,1% of all US vehicles on the road (nearing 200k). Believe it or not, like all vehicles, there will sometimes be Tesla crashes. And things like it being front page news that someone rear-ended a fire truck at 60 miles an hour as if there's something horribly wrong with Tesla, when the real story should be that someone hit a fire truck at 60 miles an hour and walked away with only a broken ankle, when such an accident should normally be fatal... I'm sorry, but Musk has a serious point about unfair, lopsided media coverage.

    --
    "WANTED: Sinking ship seeks rats."