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."
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."
I am loathe to link to Ars because its quality has gone down hill, but Cadillac's Supercruise is geofenced and uses eyetracking with rave reviews.
https://arstechnica.com/cars/2018/02/the-cadillac-ct6-review-super-cruise-is-a-game-changer/
Eye tracking may or may not be reliable enough. But if eye tracking is not reliable, then nagware is definitely needed.
I feel this whole auto pilot, full self driving a big distraction from the core reason why I support Tesla.:
1. Make an electric that is affordable for at least 50% of the Americans.
2. Make a no negotiation, everyone pays the same price model for the cars, price transparency (secondary minor goal)
I wish Tesla would just let someone else develop this tech and license it.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
I test drove a Nissan Leaf with ProDrive, which is a lane following assist tech. It uses steering wheel feedback to make sure you're paying attention, and it felt like I was constantly fighting the car to drive.
Maybe Cadillac is made by people with experience making cars? And not some Silly Valley big talker?
When Cadillac launches a vehicle into space then you might have a point. Tesla has its issues, but to dismiss Elon Musk as a "Silly Valley big talker" is pretty ignornant--he's achieved quite a bit more than most entrepreneurs in and out of the valley. Doesn't mean he'll manage to displace (or even join) the automotive cartel, but he's certainly more than just a "big talker."
So this information was thoughtfully reviewed, felt not to be in the driver's best interest / effective enough to integrate and wasn't. This doesn't seem like an interesting story. This isn't gross negligence, this is just decision making and business.
Elon Musk is saying it was ineffective, but he also keeps calling the system an Autopilot.
This is just more evidence that Tesla is trying to have it both ways.
Informally they say:
"Look! It's a self-driving car! You just relax and it does everything!!"
Officially they say:
"It's basically just fancy cruise control, you need to watch it like a hawk every second it's engaged!!"
In practice they want and expect people to treat it as a self-driving car, but they need to tell them it's cruise-control for legal reasons.
That's why they ditched the eye tracking and other fancy tech that would keep people engaged. The "pay attention" safeguards are in-effective by design.
I stole this Sig
How about because it is an accurate description based upon past use. Autopilot in planes and ships, they will take you on the course set, they will not avoid shit or take complex routes, you set them and away they go, don't pay attention and a plane or ship or any other obstacle gets in your path and the AUTOPILOT will stay on course, bad fucking luck, well not luck, stupidity. So it is called autopilot because that is all it is, exactly as used and described for decades. People are now just choosing to reinterpret autopilot in another way now because 'hmm', vested interests and oh yeah, dick brains.
So the design choices not around sound design but design around idiots, how to make a device idiot proof, reliable and low cost. Want to make a Tesla vehicle idiot proof, then don't install the batteries and let the idiots admire the car in their drive way and pose with it in front of passers by.
How to make cars idiot proof, don't fucking let idiots drive them. So zero driver monitoring and instruction in their use is required during driver training and then they should be tested for knowledge on autopilot systems to get their drivers licence. Autopilot https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... look it the fuck up. Do not confuse it with 'ROBOTIC' vehicles like the idiots that kill themselves with autopilot vehicles, I certainly hope you do not have one.
Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen