213
Tesla driver in fatal Texas crash pressed accelerator 100%, NTSB confirms | TechCrunch (techcrunch.com)
submitted 3 months ago by to c/technology@lemmy.world
96 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 41 points 3 months ago (36 children)

Shouldn't the so-called smart technology pick up on the fact that you are driving full speed into a house? Is that not an easy error to avoid?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 36 child comments
    •
  • [–] 52 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    I mean, I think the reasons that automated systems should allow for overrides by human operators should be pretty apparent.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 9 points 3 months ago (20 children)

    It's a skill issue on the driver's part... or do you want the Tesla to come to a screeching halt on the highway every time the cameras white out from the sun?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 20 child comments
    •
  • [–] 11 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    This is the system that's meant to drive the car autonomously?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago* (2 children)

    Autopilot will let a plane fly a heading, or even follow waypoints and land, but you the pilot still have to be watching the sky and the plane, ready to take over when something goes wrong. And airlines have way more stringent safety measures than cars.

    That means auto drive systems still require the meatsack to monitor the driving, ready to take over when something goes wrong.

    In this case, either the driver was hooning it and did a full send into the house, or he had a skill issue and put the brake accelerator to the floor in a panic moment.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 3 months ago (12 children)

    I want vehicles that rely on cameras for detecting obstacles to be banned.

    Anything that uses reasonable object detection methods should be banned if it lets you drive into a house. My Kia won't let me drive into a house.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (4 children)

    Honestly curious, what will your Kia do if you point it at a house and floor the accelerator from a few hundred meters away? I have no idea how my BYD would react and I'm not eager to test it. It has emergency braking, but I don't know how effective that actually is.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    if you point it at a house and floor the accelerator from a few hundred meters away?

    I don't know for sure and I can't think of a good way to test. It certainly wouldn't hit it when "driving itself" with smart cruise control or if I tried to drive into it from a few metres away.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
    • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [+] -2 points 3 months ago (4 children)
    [deleted]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    We use “cameras” for object detection

    lol

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 3 months ago

    Personally, I want cars that automate driving to use more than one type of sensor so that they react more realistically in more circumstances. Tesla going camera-only was a mistake and Elon just keeps doubling down on it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -10 points 3 months ago* (11 children)

    With how all cars are connected these days, we could easily throttle them using GPS data depending on the road you're on. I don't really get why cars can even go so fast in general, max should be twenty over the highway limit.

    Nobody really wants that though I'm guessing.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
    •
  • [–] 7 points 3 months ago (9 children)

    When you car slams on the brakes suddenly because it thinks you're suddenly driving on the jog road next to the highway, don't complain to me.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (8 children)

    The same applies to stopping it from driving full speed into a house. Hence why I said most don't want that. Some clear drawbacks.

    That being said, putting a max speed that is only a bit above highway speed is an easy win imo.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 3 months ago* (3 children)

    Slamming the brakes on the highway because either map data is incorrect, it misread a sign, or GNSS is misplacing the car is not a drawback, it's a massive fucking safety hazard.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    A massive safety hazard is a clear drawback...

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    No a drawback would be a minor nuisance. You can live with a drawback. That would not be a minor nuisance and definitely not something you could live with.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago

    You are arguing semantics and aren't even right about it. A drawback can be minor or major. We are in agreement but your being silly about the words I use even though they are completely valid. You might want a synonym that's harsher but that doesn't make the use of the word wrong.

    I'm basically saying it's a problem and you are going "no fool, it's a really really big problem", like no shit, that's what I said. I even added the word clear to show that's it's not a small drawback but a major one.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (3 children)

    The same applies to stopping it from driving full speed into a house.

    It really really really doesn't

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    If the car can't be trusted to know if it's on the highway or a residential street, it can't be trusted to know if it's on the highway or on a residential street in front of a house.

    I don't know what system would work for one but not the other.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    If your misunderstanding of how a machine works is that fundamental I don't think there's a reason to continue this.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 0 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

    It's all the same type of software that would be used and it would sometimes break randomly for no clear reason no matter the use case. Why would they tackle detection differently between being on the highway, on a residential street or on a street in front of a house? The same edge cases would apply to each (like billboards or faulty GPS signal for example).

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent