Tesla absolves all responsibility - or at least, is attempting to. "The driver is responsible to operate the vehicle."
|
|
|
Beware if you're around a Tesla
- Thread starter I82l8
- Start date
Obviously it still has some ways to go, but one of the goals for V2V is for vehicles to inform other vehicles about any of those obstacles they can detect
superseven
Well-known member
As always people are focusing on the negative. I ask the question, how many times did a tesla avoid a accident with a motorcycle?
While I agree they are fairly brazen in their release of the self driving feature it does not mean that the feature is statistically worse than the average driver.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
While I agree they are fairly brazen in their release of the self driving feature it does not mean that the feature is statistically worse than the average driver.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
That’s the wrong question to ask because the important part is how many times did it NOT avoid a collision with an object…car…bike…pedestrian…truck. You won’t get an answer of how many times it avoided something, and the public/legislation won’t care. Same as they don’tcare how many times YOU avoided an accident on your bike…because the importance is the FAILURE of the driver/rider/technology in avoiding a collision. That is what allows the technology to be adopted easier on a larger scale.
I don’t know enough about this incident to comment fully but I’d say it’s a pretty glaring failure of the technology where a reflection can fool the system to think there’s nothing in it’s path and drive into a transport truck. I’ve seen some test drives of Teslas with drivers literally taking their hands off the wheel and allowing the car to drive itself as it’s billed to be able to do. As long as there’s the option/requirement for the driver to have to intervene to avoid a collision or anything in it’s path this system will not be a fully driverless technology. If it is there’s no need for steering wheels or pedals at that stage, and IMO we are still many years away from this.
Last edited:
superseven
Well-known member
I can respect your opinion and can understand your view point, but I somewhat disagree that the technology is incapable of being viable in the near future. Cultural attitudes, lawyers, law makers and the need for humans to feel in control will ensure progress is slow.
If we don't look at if the technology is reducing accidents and increasing safety we may block its progress by focusing on a few bad events.
We must be careful at this time as we could considerably slow progress based on a few events and on the flip side we could allow many bad events to occur.
I guess my point is in the events where the system "caused" a accident would a human being also have had a accident under the same circumstances. For instance with the transport truck incident; if the camera system didn't see it, would the driver have if he was paying attention. I guess we must review video of these events to know.
Exciting times ahead...
All this said; it is a touchy subject and caution is needed in the systems deployment over the next several years.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
This is the billion dollar question nobody knows to answer, because nobody has tested the courts ... The lawmakers are not ready, not even close ....
The legal community claims it could be many parties on the hook .... Car manufacturer, AI software publisher, AI hardware manufacturer and the old fashioned driver (of course if there was one behind a wheel at the time) ..... Make your pick.
All it will take is one nasty, expensive lawsuit with a dead body as a result .... Or perhaps more than one will be required for the parties to wake up.
Soon the human race will be deemed incapable of wiping their bottom.
In 3rd world countries where traffic is organized chaos, rules are a suggestion and the road has several hazards including cows and impaired driving is an issue there is an excuse for accidents especially if you factor in population density.
Here in the western world with organized traffic, multi Lane highways, extremely low population density people can't manage to drive in a relatively straight line traveling in the same direction. What's the excuse? And the answer more technology?
Pfft, with that attitude you should get ready to send your entire paycheck to Kathleen Wynne and the selfie king so they can keep you safe.
The problem is people have no respect or understanding to operate heavy machinery(that's what a automobile is) like it deserves or try to understand the reason for the rules and that humping the merger lane to get ahead of 2 cars is not going to get them home any faster.
Driving test should involve with examiner checking if you know where the fluids go under the hood, that the potential driver understand how to boost the vehicle and where all the tools are for the spare tires.
Driving is not just turning the car on and go. If we treat ourselves like babies the government and other people who stand to benefit will gladly shove their hands down our posterior end take all they can.
Not that there is no need for such vehicles as it can be used by people with disabilities for instance but it is not the solution for accidents
superseven
Well-known member
I think this is a reasonable observation. I however feel it misses the point.
What driverless cars mean for me is:
1. Removing the need for everyone to Have a car. Imagine a bunch of cars that move people around from point to point for a reasonable cost. Like uber without drivers.
2. Because of this imagine having a extra bit of money available to own and drive the vehicle you love instead of having what is practical.
3. Imagine effectively using your time during the mundane and boring morning commute.
I love motors cars and honing the skills to be a competent driver. But I do not enjoy the drive to and from the office unless I am on my bike. Replacing this with a mobile office would be a better utilization of my time. It could reduce stress.
I am looking from a different perspective here; I want the only people to be actually driving those that want to and have developed the skill to drive. Currently the road is filled with those that have to and have no passion for what they are doing hence have less than stellar driving skills.
BTW - I enjoy reading all the perspectives.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Last edited:
Yep ... this is frequently mentioned as the positive of the future where there's mostly driver-less cars are on the road. If you are a fan of this idea, I am afraid it will not be as as rosy as that. Imagine that someone else will need to own the cars and that someone else will not be happy that vast majority of the cars will be needed for 1hr in the morning and 1 hr or so in the afternoon. I am not going to go into weekends where everyone is home and needs to drive somewhere out of town. It's not a trivial problem to be solved.
Another point is, the cars offered for such rides will not be what many people want to be driven in. In another word, they will be pretty much base of the bone cars. Your idea of moving "office" is a bit of a stretch when you are cramped with another guy or guys in the same car. It will nto be your personal taxi, unless you want to pay a taxi rate per ride ...
Yes there's is some people who should sign up really quickly for such service ... LOL ... that will be a good thing ... but if you can drive and drive well, I don't see why you should hurry to give that privilege up, expecting an "upgrade" in the service.
What I would very much prefer is efficient and quality public transit ... but that is seemingly even a bigger utopia in Canada than a driverless car .... :-(
There's another factor with the whole driverless car thing ... left to their own devices, people are pigs. Driverless rental/taxi shows up at your door, you get the previous renter's McDonalds wrappers, cigarette butts, and who knows what else. The interior will have to be like that on buses - emphasis on being easy to clean. Either that, or the car has to go back to home base for cleaning between every rental (more traffic, more costs). There is certainly a market for this type of service, probably even a big market, but I just can't see it replacing mainstream vehicle ownership.
Face
Well-known member
This is completely anecdotal, but it seems to me that European drivers tend to have better lane discipline and can better handle driving in traffic moving at higher speeds. Congestion that would cripple North American cities somehow still moves in Europe (I'm reminded of driving into Florence in rush hour a few years ago). Is it a coincidence that most Europeans still drive stick shifts. Its a pretty simple notion that the more you're engaged in the act of driving, the better more attentive a driver you will be.
It almost seems that the more active systems a car has to improve safety related to distraction (adaptive cruise control, lane departure and correction, etc), the more it allows drivers to be distracted. As people rely more on the car, they rely less on themselves and therefore become poorer drivers.
Will it ever become 100% car & 0% driver? Probably. But I suspect it will be well past my best-before date. And things have the potential to get worse before they get better as people rely more and more on systems that haven't quite worked the bugs out yet.
It almost seems that the more active systems a car has to improve safety related to distraction (adaptive cruise control, lane departure and correction, etc), the more it allows drivers to be distracted. As people rely more on the car, they rely less on themselves and therefore become poorer drivers.
Will it ever become 100% car & 0% driver? Probably. But I suspect it will be well past my best-before date. And things have the potential to get worse before they get better as people rely more and more on systems that haven't quite worked the bugs out yet.
Agree completely .... there's people who are thinking ... oh It will be spotless Tesla S and I will not have to own it to use it. More like Leaf or MiEv at the best for some 50$ a month fee.
Has anyone been following the release of the UBER driverless cars in Pittsburgh? I haven't but it'd be interesting to see how those cars are fairing with live traffic, and basically being in a real world application day in and day out.
superseven
Well-known member
I guess I am O.K. with a plastic seat my iPad and a trip where I asked to go.... Unless I am looking to go driving for fun. Who knew we were all driving around in our cars because of the amenities.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Found on another website:
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/jan/12/google-self-driving-cars-mistakes-data-reports
It's evident from that article that Google is reluctant to admit how many times human drivers REALLY had to take over from their "self-driving" scheme. They admit to "many thousands of times" in 424,000 miles of driving.
I'm not surprised. This is a looooooong way from being practical in the real world. I don't think Google has even attempted winter yet.
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/jan/12/google-self-driving-cars-mistakes-data-reports
It's evident from that article that Google is reluctant to admit how many times human drivers REALLY had to take over from their "self-driving" scheme. They admit to "many thousands of times" in 424,000 miles of driving.
I'm not surprised. This is a looooooong way from being practical in the real world. I don't think Google has even attempted winter yet.
Yes, but that's mostly because of the auto industry ignoring everything the IT industry has learned about security in the last twenty-odd years. Supposedly they are wising up... slowly
|
|
|
|
|