Uh oh, another Tesla autopilot crash fatality

[Xist]

"Teslas aren't un-crash-able." https://jalopnik.com/this-test-shows...pen-1826810902

[sendler]

That's a pretty contrived and sensational slander of a test. No human driver would avoid crashing in that scenario either.

[slowmover]

Anyone dumb enough to buy a Tesla Toaster (or any electric vehicle where the batteries aren’t fully firewalled from the passenger compartment . . . oh, that’s right, none are) is being served just desserts.

This is literally an idea good only on paper. No where else.

Rewind the clock and rebuild cities from scratch where these things are self-powered grocery carts, and it might have merit. But to replace cars in the current situation ? Ludicrous.

It’s only about control. Nothing else offers sufficient explanation given problems that tech can’t solve.

.

[RedDevil]

I've seen some gas cars burn. Gimme a Tesla any time.

[redpoint5]

Originally Posted by sendler

That's a pretty contrived and sensational slander of a test. No human driver would avoid crashing in that scenario either.

Tesla has got to get better. That scenario is fairly common, and it should be detecting those obvious obstacles.

I'm curious if it finally did stop, or if the driver had to hit the brakes.

[sendler]

Yes. we can't have cars that drive right into a barrier.
.
But that above test is a joke. encountering a car parked in the fast lane, the driver in front of you snoozing and only swerving at the last split second. Any driver will be at impossibility of avoiding that.

[freebeard]

How about passing a truck on a two lane road and having someone hang a left turn across the front of it?

In their test with little white econo-boxes a good driver would be watching though the windows of the car they're pacing and at least have a chance at situational awareness.

[redpoint5]

Originally Posted by sendler

Yes. we can't have cars that drive right into a barrier.
.
But that above test is a joke. encountering a car parked in the fast lane, the driver in front of you snoozing and only swerving at the last split second. Any driver will be at impossibility of avoiding that.

I encountered that in Canada where there was a highway where you could either travel 50 MPH in the rightmost lane, or park your car. The car ahead of me casually turns on his signal and swerves out of the lane just before getting to a parked car, and I slammed on the brakes to avoid the accident.

Proper following distance allows the driver enough time to stop even if the car ahead turns into a brick wall suddenly.

I'll follow closer if I can see through the car ahead to see what traffic is doing, but when all I can see is the car ahead, following distance increases (unless it's a semi).

This scenario is very common, and doesn't have to end in an accident for either humans or properly designed autonomous systems.

[Hersbird]

I think the test is a pretty common occurrence. The car may not be "parked" so to say, but broken down or already involved in another accident. The driver ahead of you is keeping a safe distance and has visibility to see what's going on and makes a nice merge or lane change. The guy tailgating with no visibility gets a surprise although the human still can usually brake hard enough or change lanes fast enough to avoid a collision.
One dark rainy night in Tacoma I witnessed a crash which left a car in the fast lane all lights and even reflectors destroyed. 4 more cars came up on it and ended up hitting it or each other. Every single one including the occupants of the first car fled the scene. I can only guess they were all drunk or fugitives already. In that case too bad Tesla wasn't helping them!

[sendler]

Originally Posted by Hersbird

4 more cars came up on it and ended up hitting it or each other.

Thanks, You made my point.