about the accident, i don't think tesla has ever said the driver should not pay attention to the road at all... to plough straight into a tractor trailer means the driver must have been asleep or completely distracted.

very sad, but a darwin award winner nonetheless.

 

No, the Fix is to stop advertising basic hardware as "autopilot".

Hardware in Tesla is no better than one in cheap Toyotas and Nissan's and they are trying to use it as autopilot.

It was just a question of time when will this happen, and Tesla is still issuing misleading statistics such as hundreds of millions of miles driven when it is several thousand drivers using the system and someone died after few months.

Tesla needs to stop, this is not car doors sticking or batteries failing.

 

fify - fixed

 

It may not be the fault of the camera; it may be the fault of the software. It is the software that interprets the image from the detection sensors (visual camera, or radar or sonar image) and if the software cannot properly interpret the data, no upgrade of hardware will improve things.

And what exactly are the capabilities of Autopilot? Has Tesla explicitly designed, built AND tested it for those capabilities? Does Tesla publish those capabilities, especially to new owners?

Other designers of autonomous driving systems (Google, GM, Toyota, etc.) are testing, testing and testing, and refining their systems as a result of all the testing. Did Tesla do this? I did not hear of read of Tesla's Autopilot until it suddenly was made available. I sincerely hope that Tesla is not using its owners as Beta testers ("real-world" testing in an uncontrolled setting), letting owners do testing that other automakers are doing in controlled situations.

And, yes, Elon Musk must break this bad habit of always blaming owners for every accident that happens.

 

The flaw is simple, and the fix is also just as simple.
The flaw is that there are no sensors at the roof height. The trailer is just empty space between the wheels - nothing to set off the alarms.

 

I think everybody saw this coming.

While autonomous driving tech sounds great in theory it won't work in practice. There are far too many things happening on the road for the driver to just sit back and let the car do the work for him/her with 0% error.

Personally I enjoy driving and have no interest in using such technology.

 

From Tesla:

It is important to note that Tesla disables Autopilot by default and requires explicit acknowledgement that the system is new technology and still in a public beta phase before it can be enabled. When drivers activate Autopilot, the acknowledgment box explains, among other things, that Autopilot “is an assist feature that requires you to keep your hands on the steering wheel at all times," and that "you need to maintain control and responsibility for your vehicle” while using it. Additionally, every time that Autopilot is engaged, the car reminds the driver to “Always keep your hands on the wheel. Be prepared to take over at any time.” The system also makes frequent checks to ensure that the driver's hands remain on the wheel and provides visual and audible alerts if hands-on is not detected. It then gradually slows down the car until hands-on is detected again.

 

I was reading this on jalopnik, and people seem to be pointing the blame on the blindspot the system and similar systems have

http://jalopnik.com/does-teslas-semi...rom-1782935594

 

Human drivers are statistically less safe better park your car for good.

 

Why are we shooting for 0% error? Human error is much higher, and we theoretically "only" need to beat human error for auto pilot to be the better choice.

 

As much as I want to join your bandwagon, I have to disagree. To be fair, everyone including Tesla in some marketing material likes to use the word "autonomous" to every single driver aid currently on the market. The only time those who like to use the above word, refrain from such, is when it comes to liability such as legal cases, or in the writing and description of technical documents such as the manual or messages from the car to owner.

All these systems are all technically driver aids. They have not matured, nor are capable of 100% true, human inputless "autonomous" moniker some hastily add to this tech. Yet from morning till dawn, commercial to salesman, everyone in the market currently is fangirling over lane departure assist and full range stop and go cruise control as full autonomous driving. Its not. Why not market the systems as they are. Driver aids thats it.

 

your second paragraph just shows your bias, as human driving is not with 0% error either. and unlike humans, autonomous driving software can learn from the collective experience of ALL the vehicles driving on the road, so it's only a short matter of time before autonomous vehicles become the best drivers on the planet.

i am also expecting autonomous formula one races too.

just like ibm's watson easily CRUSHED the insanely successful best human jeopardy champion, and ibm's chess computer came back a couple of years after its loss to a chess champion to CRUSH him in the rematch, autonomous vehicles are coming, and will easily prove to be better drivers than humans.

remember when race car drivers only wanted manual transmissions because of their (awesome) skill in shifting vs. dumb and slow automatics? me too, and that's now a distant memory, replaced by software. sure the driver still picks the gear, but that's largely a waste of their time too.

remember when commercial pilots flew planes from take off to landing? me neither.

 

I am looking forward to the drone F1 to begin with, to be followed by Autonomous F1. But maybe it will skip the drone F1 generation and head straight out to the autonomous F1

 

You did, eh? Maybe the drivers family can sue you for withholding key innovation that could have saved his life.

 

I wonder how these autopilot systems will cope with snow covered roads, when the car is getting stuck?