Dude was watching Harry Potter movie....They found portable DVD player in the wrecked Model S.
Sorry but its his fault by not paying attention to the road. He could've avoided this accident with steering wheel or brake.

Another one
http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-36783345

tl;dr Tesla owners be like

http://i2.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/...52/700/390.jpg

Betta testers

In case you haven't seen it, below is a photo of the car involved in the accident. This is part of a good article on how the systems work and when they don't.

https://www.extremetech.com/wp-conte...ne-640x394.jpg

I have yet to try the autopilot myself.. but if i still have to be behind the wheel and pay attention then whats the point? the whole reason for me to have autopilot is so i can watch youtube vids and catch pokemon on my drive home.

another problem is driving through a neighborhood... lets say a kid runs out in the street to catch a basketball. The car doesn't know whether it should avoid the kid or the ball...it can't make complex split second decisions like a human yet.

One of the biggest issues in this whole thing I personally think is Tesla's choice of a name for the function. "Autopilot" makes it sound like it is autonomous which it is not, and is not intended to be. Hopefully this little bit of brainless marketing won't be too costly for Tesla.

Most people associate "autopilot" with aircraft, where those that don't know assume it basically flies the plane without intervention. To some extent it is true, and some systems can even land the plane, but that is because there is a lot more sophisticated guidance systems going on there, including outside information feed to the plane from multiple sources (GPS/ILS, etc). There is even a decent level of collision avoidance but there is also always a human overseer.

In the end no one is going to ride in the back of an airplane that doesn't have a human in the cockpit watching over the automation no matter how sophisticated it is.

Why someone would get into a car and trust the automation to this level is beyond my level of reason and comprehension.

Yup. Also, for a computer deciding whether that long shape across the road is fallen pole or a shadow of a standing pole is probably very difficult.


Maybe people get misled by use of autopilot in aviation, but they did not realize, that it operates in a much simpler environment, with more time for decisions than in a car (most of the time), and critical tasks are still not done automatically. Take-offs are never automatic, landings only rarely (and they require a lot of programming, and special certification for the plane, the airport, and the crew). Even traffic avoidance, a very important part of driving, in aviation is not done automatically, TCAS only gives warnings and advisories.

@Dadhawk


Looks like we were thinking the same things at the same time :)

This is the same argument posited by lazy clickbait journalists, it's the same thing as "dere takin' r jerbs".

The solution is the self driving car hits neither because it's traveling at a speed that allows the vehicle enough time to stop safely. It makes fewer assumptions and doesn't drive beyond it's vision, an important concept humans ignore constantly (especially enthusiasts on 'empty' roads). Because the sensor suite is much better at assessing it's surroundings than the human it will always react more quickly and it will always obey the rules instead of 99% of my neighbors who blow by the local playground at 30 mph.

I watched a great video about 2 years ago about a talk from some Google employees hosted that showed the video and sensor data, the things the car was recognizing, how it was thinking and following traffic etiquette and predicting the world around it.

I almost typed out all the highlights, but as it went on this video has covered just about everything in this thread and more, it's great if you've got an hour to spare:
Edit: 38 minutes is the 'tragic decision' philosophy question, 'which life will the car choose?'

[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uj-rK8V-rik"]Google Self-Driving Car Project | SXSW Interactive 2016 - YouTube[/ame]


Here's a shorter TED talk, interesting stuff at 7 minutes:


[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tiwVMrTLUWg"]Chris Urmson: How a driverless car sees the road - YouTube[/ame]



All those videos of shitty drivers? I recognize all of those intersections, all of those terrible scenarios I've seen first hand. At 16 minutes in the first video? I drove across that intersection yesterday for the thousandth time and it's fucking awful, I see something stupid 1/3 times I go through there.

Will it be infallible? No, but it will beat the hell out of a human well over nine times out of ten.

But fuckdamn, increase the top speed on those jellybeans to 35 or I'm going start defacing them.

NHTSA is investigating the 12th incident involving "Autopilot" and a car crash, this time the car backended a police car on the side of the road while the driver was turned around checking on his dog. Fortunately no serious injuries.

https://video.foxbusiness.com/v/6116186321001/

(can't believe this thread was 3 years ago, but I didn't want to start a new one, all comments above still apply).

These investigations go fast. The cars record everything including how long since the driver engaged with the steering wheel.

Sadly, people still don’t understand that Level 2 autonomy requires the same amount of driver awareness as Level 0 autonomy, even if driver engagement is reduced.

The name of their product and the rantings of their leader doesn't help that situation much.

you being a pilot, this comment surprised me.

i made a similar comment a few times on jalopnik, and had close to 30 comments from claimed pilots about how autopilot is not automatic in an airplane, and everyone knows this, making the name of the system on a ground vehicle perfectly reasonable...