Fatal Tesla crash, software based issue?
Discussion
skyrover said:
98elise said:
The Spruce goose said:
The roof was ripped off but it still carried on driving. i don't think i would ever use this system as it is seriously flawed.
As would any cruise control, and thats been around for decades.Some will want to use it, some not. I'm perfectly happy to use it.
This would appear to encourage the driver to let the car do the driving. Obviously there is no point if you need to sit at a fingers trigger to take control when it goes wrong.
Since the dawn of cruise control you uave needed to be ready to take control. I regularly go to the US and I don't ever remember hiring a car without it. i use it every time I'm out there and I find it very useful.
I'm pretty sure no company has a system on sale that lets you to hand control to the car.Tesla are clear that you must be ready to take control. The issue seems to be that people are reading too much into the work Autopilot. If they called it say Driver Assist then it would be more accurate.
yonex said:
98elise said:
Tesla Autopilot is not a driverless system.
Any attempt to automate driving in that degree IMO is a backwards step. Many options, which I have already listed. If you don't actually want to drive then....Is anyone actually arguing that full (safer, faster etc) autonomous driving wouldn't be an enormous advancement socially and financially from what we have now?
The Vambo said:
yonex said:
98elise said:
Tesla Autopilot is not a driverless system.
Any attempt to automate driving in that degree IMO is a backwards step. Many options, which I have already listed. If you don't actually want to drive then....Is anyone actually arguing that full (safer, faster etc) autonomous driving wouldn't be an enormous advancement socially and financially from what we have now?
The Vambo said:
Is anyone actually arguing that full (safer, faster etc) autonomous driving wouldn't be an enormous advancement socially and financially from what we have now?
Problem is the aircraft equivalent from which the moniker of this system has been stolen are engineered to standards and designed in a way which to me seems alien to the automotive industry. True dual redundant computers for example, where each one has different software and they compare solutions with each other. Another simple practical example, 4 pitot tubes in pairs of two on each side of the nose with each pair cross wired into each computer to provide maximum redundancy and fault tolerance, to do the same on a car would seem to require a quadruple replication of the radar systems. Standards such as DO-178 and DO-154, OK automotive have been developing standards but they are several decades behind the aircraft industry. Then there is the big field of Systems Safety and Systems Engineering both of which seem to be non-existent in the automotive industry despite the rapid adoption of highly integrated and complex electronics (maybe better outside the UK but here there is no such thing). Its quite something really that a whole industry is trying to surpass the aircraft industry in a fraction of the time, to solve a problem vastly more complicated than an aircraft autopilot, with solutions to be manufactured into the end product for a fraction of the cost. Frankly I find it terrifying.Here is a link to an analysis done by RAND on the approach being taken to demonstrate the safety of autonomous motor vehicle system:
http://www.rand.org/news/press/2016/04/12.html
The Vambo said:
What's wrong? Don't know how it works in real world situations, or scared to admit it doesn't work except in perfect conditions?
s off, i'm not your teacher. IMHO any system that takes away the requirement for a driver to be in charge of a 2 tonne lethal weapon is dangerous, especially so if it brands itself "Autopilot" and the manufacturer keeps on about "autonomous" cars.
As for the Tesla system the reality is it is no better than the tech fitted to a Vauxhall Insignia. The Tesla fanboys however don't like the idea that the tech in their precious "industry disrupter" is mainstream so cling to the "Autopilot" moniker despite it just being a combination of ACC, lane keep assist, and side blind zone monitoring, tech everyone else has.
The difference being the other manufacturers know how the world works, and know that branding something as something it isn't leaves them wide open. Tesla don't seem to realise that yet.
Still, at least the death of this poor guy gets them some more real world data to learn from.
Jader1973 said:
The Vambo said:
What's wrong? Don't know how it works in real world situations, or scared to admit it doesn't work except in perfect conditions?You are WAY too smart for me.
This is just a transitory temporary stage.
BWM/Intel will launch a totally self driving car in 5 years. They wont be the only ones.
http://arstechnica.com/cars/2016/07/bmw-intel-and-...
BWM/Intel will launch a totally self driving car in 5 years. They wont be the only ones.
http://arstechnica.com/cars/2016/07/bmw-intel-and-...
Sikkkbass said:
The Wookie said:
It's finally happened then. Didn't take as long as I expected
My thoughts exactly.https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/jul/01...
Ginge R said:
It did make me whine, 3 minutes of video for the sake of 5 seconds at the end. [quote]Then there is the big field of Systems Safety and Systems Engineering both of which seem to be non-existent in the automotive industry despite the rapid adoption of highly integrated and complex electronics (maybe better outside the UK but here there is no such thing).
l
[/quote]
I agree with most of your post, but not the section above. There are automotive companies in the UK investing in Systems Safety and Systems Engineering and they are applying techniques from industries such as nuclear power and aviation. This may not be across the whole industry but there are some who take it seriously.
l
[/quote]
I agree with most of your post, but not the section above. There are automotive companies in the UK investing in Systems Safety and Systems Engineering and they are applying techniques from industries such as nuclear power and aviation. This may not be across the whole industry but there are some who take it seriously.
The Vambo said:
But that is the equivalent of saying that if couldn't come up with the Iphone in 1985, they shouldn't be developing mobile phones.
Is anyone actually arguing that full (safer, faster etc) autonomous driving wouldn't be an enormous advancement socially and financially from what we have now?
Are you honestly making the tenuous between an iPhone and automated driving, as if anyone being realistic about the risks involved is a Luddite?Is anyone actually arguing that full (safer, faster etc) autonomous driving wouldn't be an enormous advancement socially and financially from what we have now?
Mr Snrub said:
The Vambo said:
yonex said:
98elise said:
Tesla Autopilot is not a driverless system.
Any attempt to automate driving in that degree IMO is a backwards step. Many options, which I have already listed. If you don't actually want to drive then....Is anyone actually arguing that full (safer, faster etc) autonomous driving wouldn't be an enormous advancement socially and financially from what we have now?
Obviously we need to see what the official investigation concludes to be sure.
When proper autonomous systems come there will still be fatal accidents, but as long as its less than when people are the wheel then it will be acceptable.
saaby93 said:
Emeye said:
I read an article the other day that said their was a plan to remove white road markings and the centre line from roads as drivers tend to drive slower when their are no white lines to follow due to more caution.
How does that work with cars that follow the lines?
Do you get out much How does that work with cars that follow the lines?
It's not a plan that may happen, its something thats in operation already.
They dont need to be removed. They naturally wear out and are not replaced. Have a look around you to see how many villages or urban streets no longer have lane markings
The only roads that don't are ones that never had them.
yonex said:
98elise said:
Tesla Autopilot is not a driverless system.
Any attempt to automate driving in that degree IMO is a backwards step. Many options, which I have already listed. If you don't actually want to drive then....There will come a time when all cars drive themselves and the roads will be safer.
yonex said:
The Vambo said:
But that is the equivalent of saying that if couldn't come up with the Iphone in 1985, they shouldn't be developing mobile phones.
Is anyone actually arguing that full (safer, faster etc) autonomous driving wouldn't be an enormous advancement socially and financially from what we have now?
Are you honestly making the tenuous between an iPhone and automated driving, as if anyone being realistic about the risks involved is a Luddite?Is anyone actually arguing that full (safer, faster etc) autonomous driving wouldn't be an enormous advancement socially and financially from what we have now?
You're not being realistic about the risks involved, you're clinging to the notion that somehow people will always be better than computers at controlling a car and driving safely. The reality is that you hold this view because you want it to be the case, not because it is the case.
Plenty of people have been killed directly and indirectly by iPhones, just google it if you want to find out.
The same goes for vaping vs smoking for example.
People will die in autonomous cars, but maybe less people will die on average than are already dying in non-autonomous cars today.
The same goes for vaping vs smoking for example.
People will die in autonomous cars, but maybe less people will die on average than are already dying in non-autonomous cars today.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff