Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Friday May 17 2019, @09:48AM   Printer-friendly
from the keep-your-eyes-on-the-road-and-your-hands-on-the-wheel dept.

Tesla's advanced driver assist system, Autopilot, was active when a Model 3 driven by a 50-year-old Florida man crashed into the side of a tractor-trailer truck on March 1st, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) states in a report released on Thursday. Investigators reviewed video and preliminary data from the vehicle and found that neither the driver nor Autopilot "executed evasive maneuvers" before striking the truck.

[...] The driver, Jeremy Beren Banner, was killed in the crash. It is at least the fourth fatal crash of a Tesla vehicle involving Autopilot.

This crash is eerily similar to another one involving a Tesla in 2016 near Gainesville, Florida. In that incident, Joshua Brown was killed when his Model S sedan collided with a semitrailer truck on a Florida highway in May 2016, making him the first known fatality in a semi-autonomous car.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) determined that a "lack of safeguards" contributed to Brown's death. Meanwhile, today's report is just preliminary, and the NTSB declined to place blame on anyone.

Source: The Verge

Also at Ars Technica.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by edIII on Friday May 17 2019, @09:05PM (6 children)

    by edIII (791) on Friday May 17 2019, @09:05PM (#844837)

    All the more reason to restrict the testing and development close test tracks with extensive regression testing.

    --
    Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by JoeMerchant on Friday May 17 2019, @09:41PM (5 children)

    by JoeMerchant (3937) on Friday May 17 2019, @09:41PM (#844846)

    I interact with Special Needs individuals (Downs' Autism. etc.) who need to drive to support their independence. Even the Uber self-driving program isn't as scary as them, and there are tens, perhaps hundreds of thousands of them nationwide actively driving.

    What's wrong with both (automated and special people) is that they are harder to predict - when you commute on the freeway, you're out there with thousands of relatively predictable people, even if they aren't following "the rules" they are "safe" because you can reliably predict what they're going to do. It's not too different from rookie driving programs in motorsports - they learn how to compete without getting everybody killed by experience on track with the target population.

    Of course, driving in the US is "safe" like drinking water from the Ganges is "safe" - odds are not too terrible, but big risk is always out there.

    --
    🌻🌻 [google.com]
    • (Score: 3, Informative) by lentilla on Friday May 17 2019, @11:25PM (1 child)

      by lentilla (1770) on Friday May 17 2019, @11:25PM (#844877)

      Your post has me horrified. I don't care how much someone "needs" to drive to "support their independence", if they can't drive properly they should not be allowed to drive. That goes for special needs people, aged people, recalcitrant drunk drivers and those that simply can't or won't learn to drive in a moderately skilled and safe manner.

      The only reason we tolerate learners (youngsters) is that they learn quickly and are supervised whilst doing so.

      • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Saturday May 18 2019, @12:08PM

        by JoeMerchant (3937) on Saturday May 18 2019, @12:08PM (#844991)

        if they can't drive properly

        Well, that's the question, isn't it? And, the proof is in the accident rate. At least among the SN population I know, they have a roughly average "starting driver" accident rate - one or two minor collisions in the first 5 years, tapering down with experience.

        However, I think their parents/caregivers agree: it's pretty terrifying at first. On the other hand, if they live in rural Alabama and they can't drive, that makes them 100% dependent on other transportation, which - given the historical accident rate - is unjustified.

        I will say, there are some who try it and give it up, because they never do learn to drive well - which is more common among the SN population than the "normies" - there are plenty of "normies" who get into a dozen crashes or more and still drive.

        --
        🌻🌻 [google.com]
    • (Score: 2) by edIII on Saturday May 18 2019, @12:27AM (2 children)

      by edIII (791) on Saturday May 18 2019, @12:27AM (#844889)

      I am likewise horrified. Under no circumstances should somebody with special needs like that be able to drive, and their independence is a wholly insufficient reason to introduce such risks to the rest of us. People don't respect what driving *is*, period. It isn't a right, but a privilege, and absolutely must be looked at for what it truly is; The operation of a multi-ton vehicle at high speeds (30 is still a high speed).

      What the heck is wrong with disabled transit services? Like you, I've helped people with disabilities. However, I'm the one driving, not them. I helped them achieve independence by providing bus passes and teaching them the bus routes to get to where they need to go.

      Truly, I haven't been this shocked and horrified since Orange Anus was elected dictator of the US. People with Down Syndrome driving? Really? Sweet Jesus save us all.... This is why we desperately need a fundamental shift in how we construct cities and neighborhoods to encourage and allow spaces for walking, biking, etc. The people you help should find independence in a safer environment and setting than multi-ton vehicles on a freeway.

      --
      Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
      • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Saturday May 18 2019, @12:14PM

        by JoeMerchant (3937) on Saturday May 18 2019, @12:14PM (#844992)

        I am likewise horrified. Under no circumstances should somebody with special needs like that be able to drive, and their independence is a wholly insufficient reason to introduce such risks to the rest of us.

        Your prejudice is common, and completely understandable.

        Overall the special needs driving accident rate isn't much different from the general population, and there are more "non special needs" drivers in the general population with a much higher accident rate who the courts continue to allow to drive because the courts deem their independence (employability) as a wholly sufficient reason to continue giving them chances to injure the rest of us.

        As I mentioned elsewhere - the main difference I have seen, long term, in the special needs driving population is that they are more conservative when they start driving, and the ones who can't seem to manage it well are more likely to retire from driving than a "non special" person is.

        --
        🌻🌻 [google.com]
      • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Saturday May 18 2019, @12:30PM

        by JoeMerchant (3937) on Saturday May 18 2019, @12:30PM (#844994)

        What the heck is wrong with disabled transit services?

        Rural Alabama? Even in a big city with good service, what would be a 15 minute trip to the store turns into a 3 hour scheduled ordeal, with a fair chance of not happening until tomorrow, or the next day. I will say, most of the special needs drivers I know are doing it in more rural settings, though some have moved into the bigger cities successfully, and some have retired from driving when they got to city traffic.

        we desperately need a fundamental shift in how we construct cities and neighborhoods to encourage and allow spaces for walking, biking, etc. The people you help should find independence in a safer environment and setting than multi-ton vehicles on a freeway.

        Special needs has got nothing to do with it, our current city architecture is highly resource consumptive, and subjects us all to far too much risk of serious bodily harm - not to mention the daily grind (waste of time) of commuting long distances to balance home price vs location. The Police called it in 1983, and we haven't done a thing to improve it in the 36 years since:

        Another working day has ended.
        Only the rush hour hell to face.
        Packed like lemmings into shiny metal boxes.
        Contestants in a suicidal race.
        Daddy grips the wheel and stares alone into the distance,
        He knows that something somewhere has to break.
        He sees the family home now looming in his headlights,
        The pain upstairs that makes his eyeballs ache.

        --
        🌻🌻 [google.com]