Tesla driver killed using autopilot mode

[Ruud Van Driver]

https://www.theguardian.com/technolo...-car-elon-musk

RIP

[TickTopia]

Rest In Peace. This is the exact reason why I refuse to use this self driving The technology is yet to have been perfected, to the point in which it's safe to use.

[SemperFi]

I don't think that I would ever be comfortable in a self driving car.

[Etschell]

It was bound to happen.

[seand442]

Technology is great, but it's no substitute for human action. Even airplanes need the pilots to monitor while in autopilot and take action if necessary. Even more important in a car.

[Tony64]

Just took delivery on the new X type and the salesman got me curious to try the autopilot. Now maybe not.

[incontrol]

My thoughts and prayers go out to the driver and his family.

Unfortunately, these are the pioneering days of autonomous driving and whoever tries the technology must remain alert. There is no way it is 100% ready, but it is very promising.

I don't think I could try it without being very tense, trying to ensure the system does not kill me.

[swatty]

Its sad this happened, the fact that you still need to pay attention whilst in self driving mode makes it seem useless to me. It seems the driver put to much trust in the technology. RIP

[subtona]

Interesting not sure 1 incident is enough to draw conclusions?

Very sad for the family. Rip.

[Abdullah71601]

Originally Posted by subtona

Interesting not sure 1 incident is enough to draw conclusions?

Very sad for the family. Rip.

It is in aviation. I'd suggest it should be when fielding new automotive technology to the general public as well.

The reported conditions of the wreck occur pretty commonly in the US. There are a lot of white trucks on the road, and a lot of overcast conditions. One would think that the basic recognition software package could distinguish a white truck from a light background.

[77T]

If 1 incident in aviation in 1916 stopped development, we'd still be in trains.

He was an enthusiast in 2016 pushing the bounds of a new technology. RIP and not trampling on him or the technology over this.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[77T]

[QUOTE=Abdullah71601;6822763



The reported conditions of the wreck occur pretty commonly in the US. There are a lot of white trucks on the road, and a lot of overcast conditions. One would think that the basic recognition software package could distinguish a white truck from a light background.[/QUOTE]


What we don't know yet is if the truck violated his right of way in such a manner that would make it impossible for either auto-pilot or ordinary driver to avoid a collision.

I'll withhold judgement for time being.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Gaijin]

This is just pure dangerous and irresponsible. This "auto pilot" car even after colliding with and going under the truck continued on barreling for awhile until it hit a pole. Some innocent people are going to be killed by people's wanting to continue to be a "look no hands !" latest gadget guy.



Just drive the freakin car.

[Boothroyd]

First of all, a tragedy for the family involved. RIP.

I can't see the customer fine-tuning such technology for the manufacturer--they owe it to the public to have a completely reliable system prior to offering it as option in my view. This reminds me of the Pinto and the Corvair in the history of US cars. Flawed designs tested on consumers.

Liability claims await those manufacturers who outsource to the public what should be internal quality control and testing processes.

My $.02.

[Abdullah71601]

Originally Posted by 77T

What we don't know yet is if the truck violated his right of way in such a manner that would make it impossible for either auto-pilot or ordinary driver to avoid a collision.

I'll withhold judgement for time being.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The article says the car was at full speed when it tried to drive under the truck. If it was a sports car or motorcycle that jumped into the path of the car I could see your point, but it was a large lumbering tractor trailer making a left turn at an uncontrolled intersection. Which, happens a lot in the US. You'd think that such a scenario would be well defined by the system.

Stating that a white truck against a bright sky was a problem for the system reveals a glaring weakness IMO. But, Tesla is already doing damage control, so I doubt we'll see an honest answer anytime soon.

[77T]

You're still jumping to a conclusion that you, as an experienced driver, could have avoided this.
Agreed that the Tesla hit at full speed. Perhaps with full brakes it would've hit slower.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Abdullah71601]

Originally Posted by 77T

You're still jumping to a conclusion that you, as an experienced driver, could have avoided this.
Agreed that the Tesla hit at full speed. Perhaps with full brakes it would've hit slower.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm jumping to the conclusion that the existing system is an inadequate defensive driver. It failed to apply any brake at all, which indicates that it was unaware that an object entered its path.

Could I have stopped? I don't know enough to say. But I do know enough to say I would have been standing on the brake pedal when an 18-wheeler entered my peripheral vision on a crossing path.

I'm not going to drink the technology Kool Aid on this one. It clearly has a weakness that should have been tested out before releasing the product to the general population. Giving Tesla a pass because this is the first fatal accident only delays the inevitable system upgrade, which puts others at risk while they dither.

FWIW, I'm not against this technology. I think it's a great idea. But, if you are promoting it as fail safe, it can't fail.

[GradyPhilpott]

I don't care what the circumstances were and even if this accident had never happened, I, or some designated human, will operate my car, not some software package.

[Knappo 1307]

For me, driving a beautiful machine is a experience I want to experience with myself at the control. What fun is it letting a computer drive for you? Just my humble opinion...

[subtona]

Originally Posted by Abdullah71601

It is in aviation. I'd suggest it should be when fielding new automotive technology to the general public as well.

The reported conditions of the wreck occur pretty commonly in the US. There are a lot of white trucks on the road, and a lot of overcast conditions. One would think that the basic recognition software package could distinguish a white truck from a light background.

Interesting point.

Could would say that human error is also capable of the same mistake? If so would it be reasonable to ask which would have a better margin of error, man vs machine?

I've responded to similar accidents where the driver had zero reaction (i.e. No idea pre impact) prior to hitting a large truck.

Sounds like the vehicle kept driving for a bit after the collision, the image of a car driving down the road with a decaptitated driver is really disturbing.

[bradj]

In other news... 23000 people died in cars driven by bad drivers last week...

[Gaijin]

Originally Posted by GradyPhilpott

I don't care what the circumstances were and even if this accident had never happened, I, or some designated human, will operate my car, not some software package.

Agreed.

[GradyPhilpott]

Originally Posted by bradj

In other news... 23000 people died in cars driven by bad drivers last week...

For me, this really isn't the point, although unless your speaking globally, that figure must be inflated for effect.

I'm just an old guy who likes to drive. Not so much as I used to when I was young and there weren't so many big rigs clogging the highways, but I do still enjoy the mechanics of operating my vehicle.

I've also experienced enough computer crashes to know how these things work.

There was evidence in one article that I read that the driver failed to apply the brakes also, so there was reason to believe that he didn't see the truck in time either.

Regardless, I prefer to be at the controls as I always have been.

[Thatguy]

Tragic but I don't believe it is accurate to say the technology is not safe to use if these numbers are correct. Granted sample size is low vs all miles driven.

Quote from article:

The first paragraph notes that this was Tesla’s first known autopilot death in some 130 million miles driven by its customers. “Among all vehicles in the US, there is a fatality every 94 million miles,” the company then notes.


I enjoy driving but I drive up to 6000 miles a month for work. I would be more than glad to share drive with a computer.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[GB-man]

Very sad. Stock will get slapped across the room tomorrow.

[GradyPhilpott]

I have a friend that has a T-6 and one day she took me up for a spin around the desert.

At one point, she let me take the controls, and she said, "Grady, this is not like driving a car on the roads where things happen so fast. There's nothing that you can do at this altitude that I can't get us out of."

She's a former member of the US Areobatic team, so I believed her, but the greater point that has stuck with me is her comparison of flying to driving.

It also leads me to believe that any comparison between aviation autopilot technology and automotive technology is not directly analogous.

[Kingair]

Of course it would happen one day . . . . sadly enough !

But to be honest . . . how many people in the USA do know how to drive a car ?

For most of them - guess 95 % - it's just a race from point A to point B - driving selfish in their cocoon with a mentality of 'I don't care for all the other drivers on the road'

Just for my safety - or our safety - I hope that the Autopilot becomes standard including whatever modifications that needs to be done on the roads !

Just my .02

[Dyim]

Originally Posted by GB-man

Very sad. Stock will get slapped across the room tomorrow.

I don't even understand how tesla will ever make $ as a company. If they are losing $ selling every model S, how are they supposed to make $ selling a much cheaper model 3?

IMO, autonomous driving makes people even less capable as a driver. More reason to get distracted since you expect the car to do everything and bail you out.

[superstarmar]

Originally Posted by subtona

Interesting not sure 1 incident is enough to draw conclusions?

Very sad for the family. Rip.

I don't care how far technology gets advanced for
Autonomous driving !!! There is absolutely no
substitute for a SOBER skilled human driver at the
Wheel !!!!

I'm a professional driver in my career and see all too often
crazy drivers cross country that would make autonomous
software run circles in accidents over and over and over .... Etc!!!
I don't foresee in my lifetime where I would ever buy and or trust
in this technology ....

[Rock]

I, and everyone I have spoken with about this 'development' agree that it is yet another nerd's solution for which there is no problem.
If you don't want to drive, take public transport or get a lift with somebody.
I can't believe that companies are wasting their time and resources on this when there are so many more pressing issues in transport and passenger logistics.
I put it into the same bag as 'self parking' cars and rain responsive windscreen wipers.
When we have successfully dumbed-down all the drivers the chaos and loss of life will be many times the current toll, whatever figures you choose to use.
Anybody seen the movie "Idiocracy"?