[deetjohn]

Originally Posted by Bh.P

If I remember right, I was told during the test drive that the auto pilot periodically requires the driver to place a hand on the steering. If that is not done, the autopilot would disengage. Not very sure though.

That's true, Tesla is making it tougher with many over-the-air updates. But people are finding new ways to trick the system.

Watch this below!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rOST5S06F-o

[ninjatalli]

Originally Posted by GTO

Definitely needs legislation & a fool-proof system.

Originally Posted by noopster

In all this, I am puzzled that Tesla (and other autonomous car manufacturers) get away without even a reprimand. It's patently clear the autopilot technology is not failsafe. Surely their responsibility does end with putting a disclaimer that the driver needs to be attentive at all times?

Without getting into the level of auto-piloting that was done or the complexity of the route (straight empty highway vs a crowded street with turns & stops), are we expecting the manufacturers will be fined every time an idiot does something like this?

Theoretically even today, any of us with a car that has cruise control can let a running car run without a driver while sitting in the passenger seat; do we then fine the manufacturer for allowing that to happen (perfectly possible for any brand/car).

Forget making the technology failsafe, nothing can be foolproof.

[noopster]

Originally Posted by ninjatalli

Theoretically even today, any of us with a car that has cruise control can let a running car run without a driver while sitting in the passenger seat; do we then fine the manufacturer for allowing that to happen (perfectly possible for any brand/car).

Cruise control doesn’t take over control of the driving, merely the speed. You could set CC to 69 in a 70 zone and be perfectly fine as long as the sped limit doesn’t reduce. If someone steps in front of you while you are doing this, it is still your responsibility to slow down.

Forget making the technology failsafe, nothing can be foolproof.

I think that’s a cop out, frankly. Autopilot technology on aircraft is foolproof (we will leave Michael Crichton novels out of this!)

The simple fact is that you can’t unleash an unproven technology on an unsuspecting population unless you are willing to accept the collateral damage.

[ninjatalli]

Originally Posted by noopster

Cruise control doesn’t take over control of the driving, merely the speed. You could set CC to 69 in a 70 zone and be perfectly fine as long as the sped limit doesn’t reduce. If someone steps in front of you while you are doing this, it is still your responsibility to slow down.

The fact of the matter is what the user chooses to do with the product than what the product offers. We are used to the "risks" of cruise control; with the product feature being available for quite some time; that's the key difference.

In the above example, an errant driver can potentially opt to not drive and let the cars run on auto/cruise control. In fact if you google it out - a lot of the accidents (atleast in US/developed countries) happen with the drivers falling asleep or not paying attention on what's in front of them (while the car is on cruise mode) leading to crashing into stationary vehicles or veering outside the lanes and crashing. No of manufacturers being held responsible - 0

Technology is always going to go places - regulation can only set the situation. Penalty out here should be far more severe on the individual; but no matter however much we argue about it, the manufacturer (and rightly if you ask me) will not be penalised.

[noopster]

This is a silly argument. Any technology has its advantages. To use the example you quoted, setting cruise control to 64 in a 65 zone gives you a reasonable shot at not being booked for speeding, plus it gives your right foot some respite.

What possible benefit can an autopilot mode have if it isn’t a “true” autopilot but requires the driver to be “alert at all times”?

[Thilak29]

Originally Posted by noopster

This is a silly argument.

What possible benefit can an autopilot mode have if it isn't a "true" autopilot but requires the driver to be "alert at all times"?

No it's not silly, I highly recommend you read through this ( https://trib.al/9FSKHIy ) article from MIT to understand current state of affairs in so called 'autopilot' tech.

[noopster]

Originally Posted by Thilak29

No it's not silly, I highly recommend you read through this ( https://trib.al/9FSKHIy ) article from MIT to understand current state of affairs in so called 'autopilot' tech.

This article only proves my point about Tesla needing to take more responsibility
For its so-called autopilot feature:

But not all drivers are getting a clear message. “I think it’s wonderful that Tesla has gone out there with this technology, but they might have hyped Autopilot a little bit too much,” says Alain Kornhauser, director of the transportation program at Princeton University. “It doesn’t work in all circumstances. Drivers don’t necessarily know when the car goes from tracking fine to a gray area when the car is confused, and then to a situation when the car doesn’t know where it’s going. These things aren’t well-defined.” Kornhauser drives a 2014 Mercedes-Benz S-550 sedan with Distronic Plus, a suite of assisted driving technologies that closely resembles the Tesla Autopilot system. Distronic Plus has been available in S- and E-Class vehicles since 2013. Yet automakers like Mercedes commonly refer to the technology as assistive, rather than using words like “auto” or “automatic.”

Automakers and regulators have not yet defined the best way, or the required timing, to alert drivers to take control back over the vehicle. Kornhauser warns that drivers need to be very cautious. “You have to show some respect, because you’re driving a lethal weapon,” he says.

He contrasted Tesla’s approach with Google’s autonomous vehicle program. Google is committed to complete autonomy—as a means to avoid any question about when a driver needs to be attentive or not. Its self-driving cars drive themselves in all situations, and sometimes operate without any passengers (see “Lazy Humans Shaped Google’s New Autonomous Car”).

Doug Newcomb, president of the C3group, which holds conferences and offers consulting on connected cars, agrees that Google—and especially mainstream automakers—are being more careful than Tesla.

“This is Tesla’s MO,” says Newcomb. “As a technology company, they’re pushing things more than car companies.”

[GutsyGibbon]

Originally Posted by noopster

What possible benefit can an autopilot mode have if it isn’t a “true” autopilot but requires the driver to be “alert at all times”?

I have been using the Autopilot2.5 on my Model3 most of the time. It is a very useful feature in traffic, especially the freeways. It keeps the car centered in the lane, slows down if the cars ahead of you slows down, and keeps with the traffic. I stay alert and pay more attention to the behavior of other drivers. Turning on the indicators, changes the lane and turns off indicators after the merge. There are several active safety features that warn of other cars getting too close. Audible and visual warnings. Grey marker around the car is safe distance, yellow means a little too close. When its red there is an audible beep as well.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eD89Fc_ofXc

An incident similar to the above just happened to me yesterday. Autopilot knowing the objects 360 degrees around can make a judicious swerve than a panic swerve. An audible warning milliseconds ahead of normal human response can make a huge difference.

Autopilot is not autonomous driving, there are several ways this is made clear to the driver. The novelty of the Auto pilot has attracted a few boneheads to try crazy stuff that it is not capable of. Like sticking an orange in the steering wheel to fake hands. The lane keep assist and adaptive cruise is available in Cadillac and Lexus as well. Lane departure warning is available on the Corolla. Tesla is just a notch ahead of others.

Cadillac has cameras looking at eyes to disable Auto steer. Model3 has a camera near the rear mirror, that will eventually be used for such a feature. For now it requires driver to hold the steering every minute.

I did not buy a TM3 for Autopilot, but once I started using it, it has become indispensable. There are certainly roads where I absolutely like to drive it myself.

[ninjatalli]

Originally Posted by noopster

This is a silly argument.

It sounds silly because you aren't understanding the point I'm making.

And to add to the point I'm making - in the current wave of features, several if not all manufacturers are offering driver assistance features that detects stationary/distance from vehicles in front of you and also if you are veering off your lane (for e.g. link).

Manufacturers do try to make improvements; especially if there is a commercial aspect. I trust Tesla would come up with some additional safety checks; but will it be fined? Probably not.

Any technology has its advantages. To use the example you quoted, setting cruise control to 64 in a 65 zone gives you a reasonable shot at not being booked for speeding, plus it gives your right foot some respite.

This has absolutely nothing to do with the speed limits. Read my post carefully (again).