Tesla driver killed while in autopilot mode

**Berries** · 3rd July 2016, 00:01

Originally Posted by Duncan74

Oh, and as for congestion being solved by autonomous vehicles, that's an entirely separate discussion. There would need to be some significant social changes for this to be the case. A switch to car pooling in place of ownership for a start. Without social change my personal view is that autonomous vehicles would increase congestion, not reduce it.

I saw a cartoon at a presentation about the future of transport. It was of Sydney in X number of years when all the vehicles were autonomous. The one thing they never considered was pedestrian behaviour. Knowing that the vehicles were so clever they would spot the hazard ahead and not hit the twat walking across the road resulted in the obvious that all pedestrians simply started crossing the road whenever and wherever they wanted. The result was complete and total gridlock.

**huff3r** · 3rd July 2016, 09:17

I thought the cause of this accident was obvious? Tesla's "Autopilot" system is exactly that, it is NOT a self-driving car. Autopilot systems, as in aircraft, require constant monitoring and are designed to relieve the workload of a pilot/driver by maintaining navigation and speed, however they must be continuously monitored to ensure that they are maintaining the CORRECT speed/direction/altitude etc.

Even aircraft Autopilot systems require the pilot, in conjunction with ATC to maintain traffic seperation, as the Autopilot simply is not capable of doing so. Treat the Tesla the same and there will be little or no at fault accidents.

**nerrrd** · 3rd July 2016, 11:14

Originally Posted by huff3r

I thought the cause of this accident was obvious? Tesla's "Autopilot" system is exactly that, it is NOT a self-driving car....

I bet that's not how the sales guy described it, although it probably is a legal footnote in the brochure.

**Duncan74** · 3rd July 2016, 12:13

Originally Posted by TheDemonLord

In theory - Autonomous vehicles could travel both faster and closer together - increasing the throughput for a given piece of road - at the moment the 2 second rule includes a humans thinking distance/reaction time (something like 0.57 seconds) - which a computer could drop to a matter Milliseconds.

But as I say - 'In Theory'

Ok, but the trick here is to get that ALL vehicles have to be autonomous, ie no human drivers allowed. And as a social change are we prepared to ban human driving/riding/cycling on public roads. And so you could get a bit more capacity out of motorways, but urban areas , then the signals aren't going to be the place to get benefits.

On the other hand, if you could work on your laptop in a driverless car, I reckon that therewould be plenty of people who chose to sit in a car driving around the coast whilst working on a sunny day. Add in that 'you don't need to pay parking', and now we double the distance driven, as people send their cars home during the day. This latter issue is huge, as in most cases the tidal demand (into cbd in a morning, out in an evening) means that you're able to prioritie those movements. If people are sending their cars back home at 8:30, there are going to be issues. Ok , some capacity as people aren't driving around looking for parks, but will be interesting to see how peaopke are able to jump out of the car at lights, outside their office or if software will forbid this. All this of course relies on cars being able to drive empty. Now if this is forbidden, we've still got the same issues as now. If not then there is a chance that we give up on car owenership and get to pure carshare clubs, but that's a social change I can't see my generation making. Perhaps today's teens, but not mine.

Autonomous vehicles may also reverse the trend for Video Conferences and virtual meetings if it's possible to work for the 2 hours you're being driven to the meeting. So more traffic..

**bogan** · 3rd July 2016, 12:22

Originally Posted by Duncan74

Ok, but the trick here is to get that ALL vehicles have to be autonomous, ie no human drivers allowed. And as a social change are we prepared to ban human driving/riding/cycling on public roads. And so you could get a bit more capacity out of motorways, but urban areas , then the signals aren't going to be the place to get benefits.

On the other hand, if you could work on your laptop in a driverless car, I reckon that therewould be plenty of people who chose to sit in a car driving around the coast whilst working on a sunny day. Add in that 'you don't need to pay parking', and now we double the distance driven, as people send their cars home during the day. This latter issue is huge, as in most cases the tidal demand (into cbd in a morning, out in an evening) means that you're able to prioritie those movements. If people are sending their cars back home at 8:30, there are going to be issues. Ok , some capacity as people aren't driving around looking for parks, but will be interesting to see how peaopke are able to jump out of the car at lights, outside their office or if software will forbid this. All this of course relies on cars being able to drive empty. Now if this is forbidden, we've still got the same issues as now. If not then there is a chance that we give up on car owenership and get to pure carshare clubs, but that's a social change I can't see my generation making. Perhaps today's teens, but not mine.

Autonomous vehicles may also reverse the trend for Video Conferences and virtual meetings if it's possible to work for the 2 hours you're being driven to the meeting. So more traffic..

Other offsetting trends would be the people who don't bother owning cars, and instead just grab them from the wider autonamous pool (those guys sending them home to park would be happy to earn some dosh having them taxi other people around instead); in addition to greater management allowing massive increases in the amount of car-pooling. And the obvious point of car park pre-allocation, complete real time trip congestion monitoring, etc etc.

**Duncan74** · 3rd July 2016, 13:02

Originally Posted by bogan

Other offsetting trends would be the people who don't bother owning cars, and instead just grab them from the wider autonamous pool (those guys sending them home to park would be happy to earn some dosh having them taxi other people around instead); in addition to greater management allowing massive increases in the amount of car-pooling. And the obvious point of car park pre-allocation, complete real time trip congestion monitoring, etc etc.

See I hear that argument of carpooling, but do I want someone else eating their potato chips in my car, sticking gum under the seats, and all the other ways people use public transport? Or the other way, do I want to sit on cheap plastic overly squishy 'taxi' seats instead of my supportive heated leather seat? We don't really need autonomous vehicles for these things, they work fine with car pooling, car clubs, taxis but we don't. We like our personal freedom. We like the extension of our home that our cars have become, our personal space, with he seat set just so, the odd collection of half eaten mints, chocolates and crumbs in the glove box, the 15 year old CD still in the stereo, etc.

But these are to social changes I mentioned earlier. There is a possible benefit, but it still comes from a change in us, not the abilities of the cars we are able to buy.

**Woodman** · 3rd July 2016, 13:07

Lets not forget driverless cars most appealing attribute. Getting home pissed from the pub.

**huff3r** · 3rd July 2016, 13:09

Originally Posted by nerrrd

I bet that's not how the sales guy described it, although it probably is a legal footnote in the brochure.

It is very much described in the brochure, and in all Tesla media releases as an Autopilot and not a hands-off, no attention required, self-driving car. That's why it has the annoying prompts to try and maintain your attention when it has control.

Tesla requires drivers to remain engaged and aware when Autosteer is enabled. Drivers must keep their hands on the steering wheel.

https://www.teslamotors.com/presskit/autopilot

**nerrrd** · 3rd July 2016, 13:56

Originally Posted by huff3r

It is very much described in the brochure, and in all Tesla media releases as an Autopilot and not a hands-off, no attention required, self-driving car. That's why it has the annoying prompts to try and maintain your attention when it has control.

https://www.teslamotors.com/presskit/autopilot

Which this guy presumerably ignored?

**Laava** · 3rd July 2016, 17:51

Originally Posted by nerrrd

I bet that's not how the sales guy described it,

Oh, Bob? He doesn't work here anymore!

**Duncan74** · 3rd July 2016, 17:55

Originally Posted by nerrrd

Which this guy presumerably ignored?

Yeah. it's a real shame that they can invent self driving electric cars that can reach >200kph, electric windows, 18 speaker mp3 audio, Bluetooth comms, but have still got to solve the almost impossible technical challenge of detecting when a person doesn't have their hands on a steering wheel.

Perhaps in my lifetime, someone will solve that challenge.......

**Akzle** · 3rd July 2016, 18:18

shirley a bit of radar would go a long way. the signature returned even from a motorbike wheel should be enough. (peddlies can eat a bowl of dicks and die)
... relying on the colour of a truck to determine it's trucky-ness seems vf stupid.

Originally Posted by huff3r

Even aircraft Autopilot systems require the pilot, in conjunction with ATC to maintain traffic seperation, as the Autopilot simply is not capable of doing so. Treat the Tesla the same and there will be little or no at fault accidents.

so the current cause of at-fault accidents is...

Originally Posted by Duncan74

Ok, but the trick here is to get that ALL vehicles have to be autonomous, ie no human drivers allowed.

for townies, absolutely. fuck them.
for me, i'd be want the reigns when outside the municipality. wouldn't mind if, when you got to town limits i had the option of switching over to join the plebs.
any "automatic" change over system is open to abuse by tptb, l33tt h4ckz0rz, and tptb. and can consequently eat a dick.

On the other hand, if you could work on your laptop in a driverless car,

if you a) can work from your laptop and b) spend enough time in traffic for this to be relevant, then you should probably a) kill yourself.

and of course if you're punching for unpalatable beneficial societal change, surely doing away with automovehicles would be the smart maneuver

**jonbuoy** · 3rd July 2016, 21:41

Originally Posted by bogan

Other offsetting trends would be the people who don't bother owning cars, and instead just grab them from the wider autonamous pool (those guys sending them home to park would be happy to earn some dosh having them taxi other people around instead); in addition to greater management allowing massive increases in the amount of car-pooling. And the obvious point of car park pre-allocation, complete real time trip congestion monitoring, etc etc.

Exactly - don´t really need carparks anymore - just a holding/charging/maintenance area out of town. One system co-coordinating all cars and assigning them to the nearest person. Adjusting speeds and routes to maximize flow. Then there is the issue of sacrificing a single occupant car to save the lives of a group of pedestrians or a multi occupancy vehicle. And the thought that if someone wanted to hack the system during rush hour you could wipe out a decent amount of the population in one hit. Interesting times ahead.