[HN Gopher] Tesla on autopilot rear ends motorcycle on freeway, ...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Tesla on autopilot rear ends motorcycle on freeway, killing rider
        
       Author : justsomedood
       Score  : 40 points
       Date   : 2022-07-24 20:20 UTC (2 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.ksl.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.ksl.com)
        
       | coldtea wrote:
       | What matters is the ratio of autopilot vs human driver accidents.
       | 
       | Actually, scratch that: what matter is that the autopilot sounds
       | cool and high tech. Given that, who cares about the casualties?
        
       | slaymaker1907 wrote:
       | I always think it's weird how instead of just improving public
       | transit, we've all become fixated on self driving vehicles. Good
       | transit would mean most people don't need to operate a vehicle
       | while having a plethora of other benefits like combating climate
       | change and more efficient land use (if you live in a suburb, take
       | note of the sheer amount land dedicated to parking; it's often
       | more land than the store for retail).
       | 
       | The problem is kind of similar to people who insist on some
       | overly complicated microservice architecture when a monolith
       | would be a much better fit. I actually hope that self driving
       | technology stagnates, at least until we can start designing
       | cities for people and not just cars.
       | 
       | I live near where the accident occurred and there is definitely
       | sufficient population to support alternatives to driving.
        
         | thehappypm wrote:
         | I doubt "we" can really fix public transit. The places where
         | it's great have an immense culture towards it. Here even places
         | where the public transit network is extensive like NYC or
         | Boston still face huge funding shortfalls and a lot of
         | antagonism from their statehouses. Maybe self driving cars is
         | an easier problem.
        
         | GenerocUsername wrote:
         | Transit is not a replacement for cars in USA outside of the
         | densest urban cores, and those areas are paradoxically the
         | worst offenders for crime, drugs, and other urban issues which
         | keep many off of transit.
        
           | [deleted]
        
         | pawsforthought wrote:
         | Your analogy to microservices is apt. It's unchecked
         | technologism at its worst.
         | 
         | We already have the solutions for the future of transport, but
         | they're not sexy like self-driving cars, and they don't prop up
         | the auto industry. Walking, bikes, buses, trams, metros,
         | combined with more dense mixed-use zoning everywhere.
        
         | skybrian wrote:
         | It doesn't seem like all that many people are all that crazy
         | about self-driving cars? It's a frequent topic of conversation
         | because some companies have invested a lot of money in it. But
         | people express fairly negative sentiments about it.
         | 
         | Meanwhile, huge amounts of money is spent on improving mass
         | transit. It's fairly conventional wisdom that it's a good
         | thing. (The money doesn't seem to go very far though, compared
         | to the need.)
        
         | ideamotor wrote:
         | To a programmer every problem looks like a software problem.
         | Information technology tends to free ride on public goods,
         | essentially profiting from commons without contributing to
         | them. That's the feedback loop that is lacking. The negative
         | externality, if you will, that should be brought in.
         | 
         | If, let's say ubers and taxis paid a tax when they rode around
         | without passengers and that tax specifically went to road
         | upkeep and construction, that would close the gap. But this
         | takes policy change, and engineers not only cannot
         | independently make that fix in a democracy; they think they
         | know better than democracy because they know how to program a
         | car in a simulated road in abstraction.
         | 
         | So, not only is the focus often misplaced towards IT solutions,
         | those IT solutions often accelerate the underlying problem.
         | Whereas there are policy solutions but they require smart young
         | politicians and just flat getting out the vote and encouraging
         | optimism for progress through an imperfect but best available
         | democratic system.
         | 
         | Lets not let the amazingly fast capability of modern IT lead to
         | us to compare that with the more difficult democratic process
         | and lose faith in the more equitable practice of democracy. And
         | let us be humble enough to know when we personally are not
         | subject matter experts.
        
       | rvz wrote:
       | Oh dear. It's getting really hard for anyone to defend this
       | contraption. Perhaps that explains the silence from the Tesla
       | autopilot crowd shocked by the news of this yet another collision
       | from an unsafe piece of 'safety critical' software.
       | 
       | Both Autopilot and FSD (Fools Self Driving) needs to be
       | investigated urgently.
        
       | josephcsible wrote:
       | > The car's autopilot was on at the time of the crash, UHP said.
       | 
       | I wonder whether the UHP pulled data from the car to verify this,
       | or just took the driver's word for it.
        
         | geoah wrote:
         | The driver is still liable right? Is it still the driver's
         | responsibility or keeping aware and ready to react or is the
         | autopilot software allowed to autonomously drive these days?
        
           | Schroedingersat wrote:
           | Tesla should be liable by virtue of calling things
           | 'autopilot' or 'full self driving' which aren't.
        
             | ActorNightly wrote:
             | This is possibly the dumbest argument against Tesla one
             | could make.
             | 
             | From the origin of autopilot from its aviation history, its
             | pretty clear that autopilot was not designed to prevent you
             | from hitting things.
        
             | treesprite82 wrote:
             | Something that just flies an aircraft straight and level is
             | still an autopilot, so I don't think it's a totally
             | inaccurate metaphor.
             | 
             | Ironically in these situations a more understated name
             | would probably work better for PR. Headline of _" Tesla on
             | cruise control rear ends motorcycle on freeway, killing
             | rider"_ gives a much stronger impression of it being the
             | driver's fault.
        
               | moralestapia wrote:
               | You bring up a valid argument but, unfortunately, it cuts
               | both ways.
               | 
               | Aircraft manufacturers _are liable_ when their vehicles
               | crash due to malfunction.
        
           | josephcsible wrote:
           | The driver is indeed still liable (since it's only a level 2
           | system), but that seems like the kind of thing that a lot of
           | people would lie about anyway.
        
             | simonh wrote:
             | They wouldn't get away with it though as the car logs that
             | sort of thing.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-07-24 23:01 UTC)