https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2024/04/28/tesla-trial-autopilot-lawsuit/
Evidence emerging in the Tesla Autopilot cases — including dash-cam video obtained by The Washington Post — offers sometimes-shocking details.
Without paywall: https://archive.ph/NGkbf
Autopilot “is not a self-driving technology and does not replace the driver,” Tesla said in response to a 2020 case filed in Florida. “The driver can and must still brake, accelerate and steer just as if the system is not engaged.”
Tesla's terminology is so confusing. If "Autopilot" isn't self-driving technology, does that mean it's different from "Full Self Driving"? And if so, is "Full Self Driving" also not a self-driving technology?
The term autopilot comes from aviation, where the only kind of problem resolution an autopilot does is turning itself off.
Other than that, it just flies from checkpoint to checkpoint.
If only we could implement similar testing protocols to the aviation version to validate it's safety!
Depends on the autopilot. There are some that are as rudimentary as a "wing leveler." They only have control of the ailerons and can level the wings and maybe make turns. Other systems have control of all three major control axes and are integrated with the navigation systems so they can do things like climb to an altitude and level off, turn to a heading, or even fly holds and approaches.
They do require training on the part of the pilot to use in flight.
Yeah, but even the best ones would happily crash into a mountain if the pilots don't set their altimeters properly (and ignore the terrain warnings).
Are you sure that it is happy? Maybe the autopilot is really sad about its inability to not fly into a mountain.
Hard to say, it might depend on the plane model. I've heard that Boeing 777s autopilots are really snarky.
Autopilot is a more basic driver assist system than FSD. FSD is what will eventually become what the name suggests but it's obviously not there yet and everyone knows this. It's just the name of the system.
Those are really crappy names. How about "driver assist" and "supervised self driving"? Drop the "supervised" once they're ready to market it as real self driving.
FSD is called Full Self-Driving (Supervised) nowdays.
Autopilot can be seen as a misleading term but that has more to do with people not understanding what autopilot on airplanes actually does which is quite similar to what it does on Teslas aswell.
Autopilot isn't being marketed to aviation enthusiasts nor is it a plane so it doesn't matter how autopilot in planes works it matters what the perception is. They could have used a more appropriate term like advanced cruise control
FSD is just a lie because its a description of a product they intend to develop not something that exists on the car you are buying now
What's your definition of self-driving system then if the current one doesn't qualify?
The car being able to get to their destination using the public road network without a single person in it, while fully complying with the law and road safety.
Well, the current version of FSD can do that. It's just not approved for unsupervised driving (level 3) so that's why the driver still needs to be there to be ready to take over at any moment. The current version of it near-perfectly mimics a human driver. I highly recommend to check reviews on YouTube for the version 12. It's quite impressive.
Yes, it can do that. Occasionally. And then it'll randomly fail in the stupidest ways.
And i've actually looked at some Tesla FSD reviews, and every review seems to be of a "2 steps forward, 2 steps back" kind. Look at all these things that improved, and then mentioning all the things that used to work that are now broken again. (of course with a lot more focus on the things that have improved, since hype pays).
I'm honestly wondering how self driving will evolve, it seems we've landed in the really hard last 10% of getting there, and it's mostly come to a stand still.
The one where Tesla is responsible if there is an accident (but this user blocks people critical of Tesla, so probably won't see this message).
Specifically Auto Pilot is lane keep and traffic aware cruise control (it will slow down if you're going faster than the car in front) FSD adds auto lane changes (it can do it by itself or the driver can initiate with the turn signals), makes turns necessary to follow navigation. It does a pretty decent job on freeways.
That they are working on now is getting FSD to work better on city streets and secondary highways
You can't call something Full Self Driving or Autopilot and then blame the driver. If you want to blame the driver then call it drive asist.
Right! That's why you have the FSD turn it over to the driver the moment a crash is unavoidable to make the driver liable.
I think Tesla should rename Auto Pilot to Darwin Award Mode.
And improve motorcycle detection as well as use LIDAR.
It's not that Teslas are killing their owners. Teslas are killing first responders to road accidents, kids getting off buses and motorcyclists. We're all exposed to the problems caused by Musk cutting out testing to save some money.
Heck, even using the same sonar/radar/whatever normal cars use other than just cameras would be a huge improvement
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.
You're also responsible for what you do when you're drunk! Guess what. You cannot purchase ethical excuses. That's YOUR Tesla. You own it. You're in charge of it regardless of whether or not Tesla makes it impossible to access the controls.
Buyer beware. Stop buying proprietary garbage, ya idiots.
Unfortunately there is no car that isn't proprietary and even ones without "auto pilot" have things like collision detection that can slam on the breaks for you.
You're clearly not looking hard enough. Maybe you just prefer a dangerous road where nobody takes responsibility?
What? No, I want people to be responsible because that is what works.
Search "car slams breaks in false positive collision detection". There are loads of stories. Mine beeps sometimes, but thankfully doesn't apply the breaks itself.
Yes and that's bad. I'm with you on all that. You CAN however find plenty of cars without all that. It just really limits your selection.
Even modern cars don't all have self drive and collision avoidance. I've driven a few new cars recently and none do more than flash messages and beep when they forsee a crash.
There are high quality reliable cars that still run great from the early to mid 2000s. They are very inexpensive compared to modern vehicles. May cost a bit more in gas.
You control them completely
Didn't he preach in the past that NOT using automated driving systems would be completely unsafe?
Confidence Man!
Even those are riddled with proprietary devices. Cars have had a CAN bus network of devices for decades. These closed smarts alone have caused things like the emissions scandal. These alone interfere with right to repair and competition. What is new is the spying and direct control, but the problem is older than that.
Good luck buying any car then. Tesla is the worst of the worst in that regard, but they’re all bad these days.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
SAN FRANCISCO — As CEO Elon Musk stakes the future of Tesla on autonomous driving, lawyers from California to Florida are picking apart the company’s most common driver assistance technology in painstaking detail, arguing that Autopilot is not safe for widespread use by the public.
Evidence emerging in the cases — including dash-cam video obtained by The Washington Post — offers sometimes-shocking details: In Phoenix, a woman allegedly relying on Autopilot plows into a disabled car and is then struck and killed by another vehicle after exiting her Tesla.
Late Thursday, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration launched a new review of Autopilot, signaling concern that a December recall failed to significantly improve misuse of the technology and that drivers are misled into thinking the “automation has greater capabilities than it does.”
The company’s decision to settle with Huang’s family — along with a ruling from a Florida judge concluding that Tesla had “knowledge” that its technology was “flawed” under certain conditions — is giving fresh momentum to cases once seen as long shots, legal experts said.
In Riverside, Calif., last year, a jury heard the case of Micah Lee, 37, who was allegedly using Autopilot when his Tesla Model 3 suddenly veered off the highway at 65 mph, crashed into a palm tree and burst into flames.
Last year, Florida Circuit Judge Reid Scott upheld a plaintiff’s request to seek punitive damages in a case concerning a fatal crash in Delray Beach, Fla., in 2019 when Jeremy Banner and his Tesla in Autopilot failed to register a semi truck crossing its path.
The original article contains 1,850 words, the summary contains 263 words. Saved 86%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
Even when the driver is fully responsible, the assistance software must work properly in all situations. And it must be tested fully.
In case the software makes severe mistakes surprisingly, normal drivers maybe don't have a chance to regain control. Normal drivers are not like educated test drivers.
The article keeps calling it “Autopilot”, which is different from “Full Self Driving”.
If they are correct, then it’s all on the driver. Autopilot is just a nicer adaptive cruise control, and should be treated as such. Many cars have them, even non-smart vehicles. Even my seven year old Subaru had similar (much dumber but similar)
That being said, people seem to confuse the names of these different functionalities all the time, including throughout this thread. However, even if they were confused and meant FSD, my car has feedback to require your hands in the wheel, so I don’t understand how you can claim ignorance
The article keeps calling it “Autopilot”, which is different from “Full Self Driving”. If they are correct, then [...]
No. That difference is meaningless, since both softwares provide autonomy level 2. The responsibilities are exactly the same.
My morality says both are accountable. The driver, and Tesla. Tesla for damage caused by their system, and the driver for and if he does not retake control of the vehicle given the chance.
But does the driver have a reasonable chance with adequate timeframe to regain control?
Like what happened with Boeing 737 Max MCAS incident, Boeing expects the pilot to disengage the trim motor in mere 4 seconds, which accoriding to a pilot "a lot to ask in an overwheming situation" or something similar.
Normal people in soon-to-crash situation are likely to freeze for a second or two, and the fear kicks up. How the driver reacts next is hard to predict. Yet, at the speed most US drivers love to go (I saw 70+ mph on freeway is the norm), the time avalible for them to make an well thought out decision I guess is quite short.
You made me think about this for a second.
In my head, the reason is not specifically to punish the driver, but to make drivers always be aware and ready to take control again. Yes 100 ppl will have 1000 different ways to react to such a software error, but you need ppl to pay attention, and in law the only way is to use punishment. Obviously this needs to be well calculated but either you have multiple lines of defense (the software, the driver, maybe even additional safety features) or you have to remove the autonomous system.
People are naturally going to pay less attention the more cars drive for them. You can't partially automate steering. Driver assisted steering is as close as it can be before the liability needs to fall on Tesla and other software manufacturers. A car isn't a plane. The driver needs to be in control when split second decisions happen, like a child running after a ball.
If I'm paying for an autopilot, I'm not the pilot. I.e., the driver. The car is. And Tesla's marketing bullshit and lawyers are going to fail here. This does not fall under puffery. It's false advertising that's causing consumers to place undue trust in a product. And the insurance industry is quite concerned just where the liability falls in all of this as well. And as they're the ones currently having to pay out claims when Tesla wins, they have a vested interest seeing that Tesla doesn't.
It doesn't matter for practical purposes you can't make people pay attention as if driving without the actual engagement of driving. There is going to be a delay in taking over and in a lot of cases it wont matter by the time the human is effectively in control.
Imagine you are going along a straight road, not too much traffic, the speed limit is high and you are enjoying it. Suddenly your assistant software decides to turn your steering wheel hard to the left.
You will have no chance.
What have you done wrong? What is it what you are accountable for?
For mine
So did the car think there was an impending collision? That should be obvious in the logs and the only reason for sudden maneuvers
I would say depends. If the user was using the feature correctly then Tesla should have some liability.
Most of the crashes I’ve seen the people were not using the feature correctly.
The vehicle prompts you to keep your eyes on the road and be prepaired to take over at any moment every single time you enable this feature. To pretend that Tesla drivers don't know this "because of false advertising" is just as fasle as the advertising itself.
Tesla marketing is their chief marketer retweeting videos of people having sex on autopilot and making jokes about it, or the doctored video on their website where the driver spends the whole drive without touching the steering wheel, or Tesla's CEO driving around in a news interview with his hands of the wheel for much of the ride, or promoting influencer videos that don't follow that guidance.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
https://piped.video/shorts/K1-d41I84kQ?si=1ZXxcrTjkyVtb_90
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.
Yes it does. I don't know how that ragebait video is supposed to prove otherwise.
You're quite openly showing your colors here. You're emotionally invested into this. You don't even care about the facts.
No, the majority of crashes I’ve seen. Nowhere does the marketing say read your email and take you hands off the wheel.
Do you think current and prospective Tesla owners could escape the online marketing system that pumps this info into their online life? One of the reasons I started countering all the Musk bullshit was because I couldn't escape their online marketing presence. It is everywhere. I might as well have fun fighting it. I'm sure that if you've clicked any Tesla marketing links, you're inundated with their BS.
Yes? I've been considering buying an EV for a while and the only spam/advertising I see are the constant non-technology posts about Musk in technology communities such as this and on reddit. I'm not sure why you're operating under the assumption that you have some secret insider knowledge about Tesla or that anyone else is too stupid to see through some BS marketing claims from years ago.
Good luck in your purchase!
I hope you don't buy from the company that had swastikas in the bathrooms and a place called the plantation where the black employees were forced to work.
For those downvoting, give this a read:
It's one of those articles that you read and think, it can't get worse than this, and it just keeps going and going.
Fsd is really sketchy. It either works like a dream or wants to kill you. It’s why you have to agree to a disclaimer when using it otherwise it’ll disable.
Autopilot if a fancy cruise control. It’s pretty solid but appears to have an issue with fire trucks. I know of one fatal accident where it drove into a firetruck without enough time to react. Tesla should be liable for that. Their product failed and they removed the radar that would have prevented that scenario.
I haven’t seen the video you are mentioning. It would be stupid for them to market that as a current feature. You must keep your hands on the wheel at all times in fsd. It might accelerate you full speed into oncoming traffic and the car is fast
I haven’t seen the video you are mentioning. It would be stupid for them to market that as a current feature.
Yeah, a responsible CEO would take measures to remove the video, makes statements about the dangers of abusing the system, etc. instead, Tesla CEO, which is also the main marketing account, makes jokes about it.
Tesla is full of "the driver is always responsible" small print, and then promoting the reckless use of the system through influencer videos and winks from the CEO saying that the legal stuff it's just due to those peaky regulators. If it wasn't for them, you wouldn't really need to keep your hands on the wheel or pay attention. The car just drives itself.
And? What the fuck does that change in regards to the lawsuit? He is the CEO and he is responsible, that's the reality right now.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tlThdr3O5Qo
A 2 minute long video of a tesla showing self driving in traffic where the driver isnt touching the wheel. From Tesla and on their official channel.
Edit: from at least 5 years ago.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
https://www.piped.video/watch?v=tlThdr3O5Qo
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.
That is a full self driving demo and has nothing to do with the Accidents. Full self driving and auto pilot are two different things. When you sign up for fsd you agree to not take your hands off the wheel and pay extra attention. Most of the accidents are autopilot which is enhanced cruise control.
I don’t really give a fuck what the terminology is to be frank. The technology leads to unsafe behavior, whether it’s FSD or autopilot.
I get it words don’t matter. Feelings are what’s important.
The autopilot on my Tesla is much better than the same technology on my Audi. Both technologies are easy to abuse. That isn’t Tesla’s fault. People need to follow the instructions.
Now there are a few cases where the technology completely failed when used correctly and that’s 100% Tesla’s fault in my opinion.
Are you arguing that it’s the people’s fault? Or are you just rambling because it’s Elon.
Or are you just arguing for god know what’s reason?
I’m saying the technology leads to more harm than good in its current implementation. I don’t care it’s better than your Audi, it still sucks overall. “Used correctly” shouldn’t be a huge factor in a good design. It should be easy to use correctly and hard to use incorrectly. This is not the current state. It’s very easy to use incorrectly, as you admit, and the accidents demonstrate this.
So I assume autopilot disconnects as soon as you take your hands off the wheel, or there’s iris tracking to ensure you’re looking at the road? It’s not like either of these is exotic technology.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
https://www.piped.video/watch?v=tlThdr3O5Qo
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.
Tesla's official channel from 5 years ago says otherwise. Its nice of them to put up incriminating material that a layman can find in 5 seconds.
Elon Musk claimed that full self driving would be ready in 2017!!
So how many false claims by Elon Musk does it take for someone to think the car can handle trivial situations?