A Post analysis reveals that people have died or been gravely injured in crashes where Tesla’s software should not have been enabled in the first place.
Tesla drivers run Autopilot where it’s not intended — with deadly consequences::undefined
To me, how is this different than someone using cruise control on a 1999 car and reading a newspaper while he blows through stop signs and smashes into a wall. Driver error, reset try again.
Difference is that Elon Musk has claimed since 2016 that this technology will be ready next year. And that it drives safer than a human. And Tesla calls it things like fully autonomous driving and autopilot. Which clearly indicates the car can drive itself safely, when it’s not even close.
You’re absolutely right, but I want to add that there are meaningful, practical differences as well.
The reality is that cruise control doesn’t tend to create accidents because by its very nature it still requires an almost constant level of engagement from the driver. There are very few places where you can run a vehicle on cruise with literally zero user input for more than a few minutes without starting to veer off the road. It assists the driver, but it doesn’t replace their role.
FSD does replace the driver, right up until the moment where the driver needs to step in and correct it. Psychologically, this is a very different interaction. Automation blindness kicks in. If we spend 99% of our time trusting the actions of the machine it becomes very, very difficult to maintain enough focus and attentiveness to recognise the 1% of times when we need to override the machine (this happens in all instances of human oversight over automated processes).
An important difference is that cruise control is simpler to understand. It’s a basic mechanic dressed up as a driver aid. A smaller slice of the population will incorrectly use cruise control.
FSD is a driver aid dressed up as… well, “Full Self-Driving.” It’s not Full, and it’s not Self-Driving. It’s mostly functional in limited circumstances and even then requires driver attention.
I think another good example is how people would never allow a Stasi agent to live in their house, unless the Stasi agent was redefined as a slew of websites, a collection of disparate laws, and multiple steps involving technology.
Which one sounds like it drives the car on its own? Which one is clearly misunderstood by the average driver due to a reference to a feature in an industry experienced by very few people by comparison?
Exactly. Or, using the adaptive cruise control and lane keeping that many cars have these days. (Regular) Autopilot is becoming less of a unique feature of Teslas.
I would like to believe (but lack data to point to to support it) that ADAS is making roads safer overall. There are cases that aren’t covered yet, and driver complacency is a problem for those, but so is complacency in a driver’s belief that they can stare at a phone in their lap but not drift out of their lane and cause an accident, which is something ADAS will protect against.
To me, how is this different than someone using cruise control on a 1999 car and reading a newspaper while he blows through stop signs and smashes into a wall. Driver error, reset try again.
Difference is that Elon Musk has claimed since 2016 that this technology will be ready next year. And that it drives safer than a human. And Tesla calls it things like fully autonomous driving and autopilot. Which clearly indicates the car can drive itself safely, when it’s not even close.
You’re absolutely right, but I want to add that there are meaningful, practical differences as well.
The reality is that cruise control doesn’t tend to create accidents because by its very nature it still requires an almost constant level of engagement from the driver. There are very few places where you can run a vehicle on cruise with literally zero user input for more than a few minutes without starting to veer off the road. It assists the driver, but it doesn’t replace their role.
FSD does replace the driver, right up until the moment where the driver needs to step in and correct it. Psychologically, this is a very different interaction. Automation blindness kicks in. If we spend 99% of our time trusting the actions of the machine it becomes very, very difficult to maintain enough focus and attentiveness to recognise the 1% of times when we need to override the machine (this happens in all instances of human oversight over automated processes).
An important difference is that cruise control is simpler to understand. It’s a basic mechanic dressed up as a driver aid. A smaller slice of the population will incorrectly use cruise control.
FSD is a driver aid dressed up as… well, “Full Self-Driving.” It’s not Full, and it’s not Self-Driving. It’s mostly functional in limited circumstances and even then requires driver attention.
I think another good example is how people would never allow a Stasi agent to live in their house, unless the Stasi agent was redefined as a slew of websites, a collection of disparate laws, and multiple steps involving technology.
This is talking about Autopilot not FSD.
Autopilot and FSD are not the same thing though. Autopilot is just TACC + lane-keeping, it’s not advertised as a full self-driving feature.
To drive a car, a driver must:
Cruise control can:
Autopilot can:
Which one sounds like it drives the car on its own? Which one is clearly misunderstood by the average driver due to a reference to a feature in an industry experienced by very few people by comparison?
Exactly. Or, using the adaptive cruise control and lane keeping that many cars have these days. (Regular) Autopilot is becoming less of a unique feature of Teslas.
I would like to believe (but lack data to point to to support it) that ADAS is making roads safer overall. There are cases that aren’t covered yet, and driver complacency is a problem for those, but so is complacency in a driver’s belief that they can stare at a phone in their lap but not drift out of their lane and cause an accident, which is something ADAS will protect against.