First Tesla Autopilot death

[jh15]

Ethics in software design.

Related to the above cornfield vs rear-ending, There has been discussion recently on Twit Security Now pod cast just in the last weeks. I'll edit show(s) date later.

Scenario:A lady with a stroller and a flock of kids and another chasing a ball suddenly appears in front of the vehicle.

Car in the near future which may come sooner than we think.
--
The choice for the driver or car who can't possibly stop in time is to run them over or slam into a utility pole.

If the car chooses the pole, the driver could die.

Should the software protect the family and kill the driver (software user)?

Who makes the choice?

Instant statistical computation? Percent likelihood of pole causing driver death for example.

Sounds like some interesting new job fields coming up for the new players in programming.

Oh,and will I be able to set my own preferences? pole vs. ball

[JPortici]

The sooner we retire ALL the truck drivers  - especially owner drivers - and replace those 50+ ton death machines with automation, the better.

Newer generations ot truck drivers aren't that bad. they signal you that they have seen you so you can get into the road from an intersection, hell they even started using the turn signal so you know what the fuck they are going to do in highways and roundabouts!

[Junction Runner]

Ethics in software design.

Related to the above cornfield vs rear-ending, There has been discussion recently on Twit Security Now pod cast just in the last weeks. I'll edit show(s) date later.

Scenario:A lady with a stroller and a flock of kids and another chasing a ball suddenly appears in front of the vehicle.

Car in the near future which may come sooner than we think.
--
The choice for the driver or car who can't possibly stop in time is to run them over or slam into a utility pole.

If the car chooses the pole, the driver could die.

Should the software protect the family and kill the driver (software user)?

Who makes the choice?

Instant statistical computation? Percent likelihood of pole causing driver death for example.

Sounds like some interesting new job fields coming up for the new players in programming.

Oh,and will I be able to set my own preferences? pole vs. ball

Count the people, and I'm sure it can easily identify the rough shape of a stroller.

Use weight sensor to see how man are in the car (or at least front seats)

If # of people in front of car > #of  people in the car, choose pole.

If # people in front of car < # of people in the car, choose people.

If # of people in front of car = # of people in the car, use Tesla Quarterflip™ system.

[cimmo]

If the car chooses the pole, the driver could die.

Why should the driver be penalised for other people's mistakes?
No fancy decision making algorithms weighing up the values of the lives at stake are needed, the automatic system only needs to stop as soon as possible - maximum braking effort short of skidding and to not steer toward any other obstacles. If there is an out - an empty lane or road edge, then some limited avoidance action makes sense - as long as it doesn't reduce braking effectiveness, since the front tyres can't stop AND steer simultaneously.

But expecting an automated system to potentially sacrifice the driver (and occupants) to protect a pedestrian is silly.
People making bad decisions need to be accountable for their actions.
And children do not deserve special treatment - they need to be trained from a very early age to NOT PLAY ON THE ROAD.

[bitseeker]

Harvard Justice series open lecture. The same discussion was also featured in another forum thread.

Thanks for the link. Great series.

[System Error Message]

In all the time i've driven i've never scratched a car. Self driving cars take all the fun away and doesnt stop idiot drivers who drive really badly and wont even use the autopilot.

[tszaboo]

Bus drivers are required to undergo a lobotomy before they are allowed to drive a bus! Last week I nearly saw 2 busses crash into eachother on an intersection. Where I live the busses have a seperated road system through the city so they don't have to expect any other traffic at all -they think-.

If a bus or a truck is involved in an accident, I would say 95% chance the bus or truck driver was at fault. You know, they feel invincible, they control huge vehicles, that they dont understand where the boundaries are. They drive 8 hours a day, 5 days a week. You cannot concentrate for that time. And they have priority in all conditions, because if you dont like it, just crash into them, that costs zero to them, yearly salary (or your life) to you. Their motto: "I'm going this way, I dont care, you have breaks."

[GEuser]

Typing about Truck drivers , they were (the scientists) flogging off new "scientific technology" awhile back on TV for truckies , Glasses that monitor eye movements/heart rate and maybe more and could tell if the driver was getting tired or sleepy and something beeped (i don't recall it well) or whatever .

Straight away being skeptical i knew that in a few generations of that device due to "Failures" (read as accidents) that device would end up providing a electric shock to notify the driver its getting sleepy and temporarily waking it up , I'm not kidding , the way things are going is just unreal imo . SkyNet .

Stuff like that and this thread reason is totally taking away the responsibility of the operators and what would be called just life , the world is full of morons and the morons want electronics or devices to blame or control them as they they cant be a moron and its the "scientists fault" not theirs , there is no Law against/for moron .

No responsibility of Nature , exempt of natures basic instincts like getting tired or sleepy , its Natures fault . 

Even the fact that people? are discussing it or the ideas just show how Doomed your Species are Ha Ha Ha , and that is Guaranteed in where no one needs a computer or calculation of devices to come up with a scenario to say otherwise ..

Doomed !

imo of course

[zapta]

If a bus or a truck is involved in an accident, I would say 95% chance the bus or truck driver was at fault. You know, they feel invincible, they control huge vehicles, that they dont understand where the boundaries are. They drive 8 hours a day, 5 days a week. You cannot concentrate for that time. And they have priority in all conditions, because if you dont like it, just crash into them, that costs zero to them, yearly salary (or your life) to you. Their motto: "I'm going this way, I dont care, you have breaks."

No trucks, no new Teslas.

[fubar.gr]

Hi! Professional truck driver here.

Here's a video that shows how much time it takes for a semi-trailer truck to complete a left turn.



My guess is that the truck driver saw the Tesla coming from down the road and nonetheless, he carried on with the left turn, expecting the Tesla driver to slow down and let him pass.

This might sound bad, but is pretty much standard operation when driving a truck.

A semi needs a 10+ second gap in the oncoming traffic to make a clean left turn. On roads with medium to high traffic, you won't find such a gap, no matter how long you wait. So you start the maneuver when you find an 8 second gap and expect the other drivers to slow down for you.

In that scenario, in most jurisdictions, you are completely at fault if you crash into the broad side of the truck, especially if you hit it past the center point, towards the rear. This shows that there was ample time to slow down but you didn't.

Of course very little information has been released about the specifics of the accident, but it wouldn't come off as a surprise if the truck driver is cleared of all charges and the Tesla driver found completely at fault.

[cimmo]

On roads with medium to high traffic, you won't find such a gap, no matter how long you wait.

So rather that willingly break the law - to fail to yield to traffic that has the right of way, perhaps the truck driver in that scenario should continue along the road until he finds a controlled intersection - a set of traffic lights - or perhaps a roundabout - which will enable him to turn left LEGALLY and SAFELY?

So it adds a mile or two to the trip length? So what.
This excuse "everyone else does it" is pathetic.

BUT - your explanation is founded on the premise that the road involved in this crash had a level of traffic that prevented the truck driver from finding a suitable gap. IF this was the case, why does it appear that there aren't any other vehicles involved - no other witnesses in other vehicles who saw the event?
Could it be that your scenario didn't happen - that in this case, there were only two vehicles on that road (at that time), the truck and the Tesla? It would be hard to argue that the truck driver couldn't have waited until AFTER the Tesla cleared the intersection if there wasn't any other traffic of significance.

Nevertheless, I still think you might be right - the truck driver deliberately made the turn in front of the Tesla, fully expecting the Tesla to yield (even though the Tesla had the right of way and was the only car there) - in other words, the truck driver drove like an entitled asshole and FORCED his way into a section of road he had no legal right to enter.
And he did this because 'everyone else does it'.

...in most jurisdictions, you are completely at fault if you crash into the broad side of the truck,

Interesting.
Is Florida one of those jurisdictions?
If so - if the truck driver was convinced he was "in the right" and wasn't doing anything wrong, why did he state that he did not see the Tesla until it was under his trailer? If he did pull out in front of the Tesla with the expectation that if the Tesla hit him, it would be the Tesla's fault (and the legal system would absolve the trucker), why this story about the Tesla speeding so fast it wasn't seen? (Since January this year, Tesla's cannot go faster than the posted speed limit plus 5mph when on autopilot)

Nope. I'm not buying it. This truck driver knowingly fucked up and he's lying to try to cover his arse.
BTW, I'd like to see the actual wording of the road rules/laws/regulations that legally enable truck drivers to cut into oncoming traffic. Surely this isn't some word of mouth thing that truckers tell each other so they can drive like assholes guilt free, is it?

[macboy]

Bus drivers are required to undergo a lobotomy before they are allowed to drive a bus! Last week I nearly saw 2 busses crash into eachother on an intersection. Where I live the busses have a seperated road system through the city so they don't have to expect any other traffic at all -they think-.

If a bus or a truck is involved in an accident, I would say 95% chance the bus or truck driver was at fault. You know, they feel invincible, they control huge vehicles, that they dont understand where the boundaries are. They drive 8 hours a day, 5 days a week[emphasis added]. You cannot concentrate for that time. And they have priority in all conditions, because if you dont like it, just crash into them, that costs zero to them, yearly salary (or your life) to you. Their motto: "I'm going this way, I dont care, you have [brakes]."

That's a laugh... a 40 hour work week for a truck driver? Double that and it would be closer to the truth. Of course that strengthens your point.

[Augustus]

That's a laugh... a 40 hour work week for a truck driver? Double that and it would be closer to the truth. Of course that strengthens your point.

Don't worry Sir, we're from the EU. There's a regulation, of course 

http://wikipedia.qwika.com/de2en/Lenk-_und_Ruhezeiten

[edavid]

My guess is that the truck driver saw the Tesla coming from down the road and nonetheless, he carried on with the left turn, expecting the Tesla driver to slow down and let him pass.

Or suppose the speed limit was 35MPH, and he saw the Tesla 500 feet away... he would think he had the 10 seconds, but if the Tesla was actually going 70MPH...

[Brumby]

Somebody clearly hates truckers.

Put them in the driver's seat of an 18 wheeler for 3 months and see if they are a saint.

Trucks, especially things like a semi or B-double, aren't the sort of vehicle you can duck up a side road and do a quick U-turn to come back to the turn-off you needed.  They also get jammed up by car drivers that have no appreciation for the size and weight of them - and the increased distances and times involved in stopping and turning.  fubar.gr has highlighted just one of the many considerations that should be afforded to trucks, but are often not.

But again I say - let's NOT get into the argument about blame!

Things go wrong - and it's up to the driver to be able to adapt and deal with the situation safely ... and if it has to be that you slow down for a truck who's pushing his way through, then for crying out loud LET HIM THROUGH!!!  Curse and swear if you must, but don't take on a truck (that could weigh as much as a several DOZEN cars) with your comparably flimsy sedan.  You aren't going to win.

I would like to think that an 'Autopilot' system would be able to make such a judgement - rather than demand the right of way.

'Here lies the body of William Jay
Who died maintaining his right of way -
He was right, dead right, as he sped along,
But he's just as dead as if he were wrong.'

[cimmo]

and if it has to be that you slow down for a truck who's pushing his way through, then for crying out loud LET HIM THROUGH!!!

Why?
We have LAWS and REGULATIONS that dictate how EVERYONE is supposed to behave when using the public road system.
And here's a surprise - these laws are ALSO applicable to truck drivers - whether they are running late or just too precious to wait their turn.
If what you say has ANY merit whatsoever, then why isn't this behaviour you advocate codified in any law?
Since you're Australian, you full well know as well as I do that this nonsense that "if a truck turns in front of you and you hit it then it's your fault" is not applicable in Australia. But it seems to me that you advocate that truck drivers should drive as if that is the case?

Truck drivers have enough lobby power that such alterations to the law to suit themselves CAN happen - witness the 'do not overtake turning vehicles' rule. IF there is merit in what you say, why hasn't this happened?

Nope, I shall continue to assert the right of way when I have it, but even as a mere car driver, when I cannot turn right (which is the equivalent of a left for people in some countries) safely, ie when there is no gap in traffic or I cannot confirm the road is clear - in other words - when I do NOT have the right of way - I have done and will continue to do three lefts, or detour via a set of traffic lights rather than force my way in and risk a collision.

This is how the system is designed to work and sometimes the worst thing you can do is to forgo your right of way. Youtube is full of videos of someone foolishly thinking they'll be nice by waving someone else on, only for this other person to collide with someone who is actually following the rules of the road.
What you are advocating is one step short of anarchy, and just because a truck WILL win the damage game is no justification for them to try.

BTW, I do not hate truck drivers, but I do hate ALL drivers who drive like arseholes - especially when that arsehole driving results in death of others. (Arseholes who only kill themselves get all my support.)

[Brumby]

and if it has to be that you slow down for a truck who's pushing his way through, then for crying out loud LET HIM THROUGH!!!

Why?

Yield or die ... your choice.


BUT - please GET OFF this high horse!


This is an ELECTRICAL ENGINEERS FORUM.

This thread is to discuss the TECHNOLOGY of the Tesla S - and any other potential candidates - and to assess the issues and performance of that system, NOT to debate the legality or otherwise of any actions taken by other users of the road.

In this discussion, the truck was a hazard - and for the purposes of discussion of the technology, the WHY IS UNIMPORTANT.

If you really want to take up this soap box - START YOUR OWN THREAD.  Get out of this one.

[Brumby]

Nope, I shall continue to assert the right of way when I have it

Please - DON'T get a job writing software for these vehicles.  I don't want you're attitude forcing my car into a situation where I die.

[Brumby]

Nope, I shall continue to assert the right of way when I have it

Your epitaph is already written... (it's been around for years)

'Here lies the body of William Jay
Who died maintaining his right of way -
He was right, dead right, as he sped along,
But he's just as dead as if he were wrong.'



I don't want it to be mine.

I want my 'Autopilot' vehicle to safely deal with someone else being a dickhead.

[dannyf]

There is an editorial in today's nytimes about requiring a license for "auto pilot", a point I raised yesterday.

[ez24]

NOT

Are you saying NOT ?      Learned some HTML 

[cimmo]

START YOUR OWN THREAD. blah blah blah

I see it's OK for you to offer your flawed opinions about truck driving and how hard done by those precious snowflakes are and why all us evil car drivers should kowtow to their ability to kill us and get out of the way.
But when I demonstrate how flawed your thinking is, all of a sudden, this thread isn't for that discussion at all.
Hypocrisy much?

Your opinion (as butthurt as it seems to be) has been noted.


And discarded (but not without a chuckle).

[ez24]

I want my 'Autopilot' vehicle to safely deal with someone else being a dickhead.

Unfortunately this will not happen in our lifetimes.  The only way is for the dickhead to also have Autopilot and that he cannot override it.  So no human interaction.

[suicidaleggroll]

What I see in this incident is that it took 130 million miles before somebody, somewhere, FINALLY found a corner case that caused the Tesla autopilot system to not react when it should have.  As a result, the entire industry has been made fully  aware that this can happen, and as a result it will likely never happen again.  A system that was already safer than manual control will become safer yet.

There is no evidence that the outcome would have been any different had the system reacted or had the driver taken control, but either way, the software will be modified so it doesn't happen again.  That's the point of beta testing.

[iampoor]

START YOUR OWN THREAD. blah blah blah

I see it's OK for you to offer your flawed opinions about truck driving and how hard done by those precious snowflakes are and why all us evil car drivers should kowtow to their ability to kill us and get out of the way.
But when I demonstrate how flawed your thinking is, all of a sudden, this thread isn't for that discussion at all.
Hypocrisy much?

Your opinion (as butthurt as it seems to be) has been noted.


And discarded (but not without a chuckle).

cimmo, your views have been well documented in this thread, and are starting to go off topic. It sounds more like a personal rant, and your not very receptive to hearing other (equally valid) opposing viewpoints. If you want to continue ranting, start a new thread. This has nothing to do with the ethics of trucking and/or how they SHOULD drive. How they SHOULD drive is purely hypothetical. Very few people are debating that, but you are going off the deep end and masking massive assumptions. For the time being, self driving car systems will have to deal with how truck drivers DO drive. It will be interesting to see how this unfolds.

What I see in this incident is that it took 130 million miles before somebody, somewhere, FINALLY found a corner case that caused the Tesla autopilot system to not react when it should have.  As a result, the entire industry has been made fully  aware that this can happen, and as a result it will likely never happen again.  A system that was already safer than manual control will become safer yet.

There is no evidence that the outcome would have been any different had the system reacted or had the driver taken control, but either way, the software will be modified so it doesn't happen again.  That's the point of beta testing.

Exactly.  Plus, this may be the basis for a new legal precedent.....we will certainly see how it unfolds.