Tesla sued over alleged Autopilot fail in yet another fatal accident Tesla is facing a lawsuit alleging its claims about Autopilot and Full Self Driving's (FSD) capabilities contributed to a fatal crash, giving the courts yet another chance to hash out claims similar to those in previous lawsuits. In this instance, driver Genesis Giovanni Mendoza Martinez died, and his brother Caleb was …
Tell that to my Volvo which decided to engage front collision avoidance and yanked me to the next lane on the motorway. With nothing in front of it for another mile.
You do raise an important question, though, when the mandated "lane assist" again forces me to break the law by not leaving the mandatory gap between lanes for emergency vehicles, who is at fault if I get fined? Volvo or the EU which mandates this BS to be enabled every time I get in? I can't be me, I try to disable this thing every time I use the car.
If I am not allowed to be 100% in control of the car I deem it incorrect to be considered 100% responsible for what it does on the road.
Do you have a dashcam installed? If not, I would suggest one.
Why? Because if the car decides, for itself, to arbitrarily remove your control from the vehicle, I would absolutely go forward on the premise that is this 100% Volvo's fault. You, as a driver, ought to be able to choose whether or not to have varying sorts of assistance aids, but if they're going to override you, then it can no longer be considered your responsibility.
(and I'd be very inclined to return the car as not fit for purpose the first time it pulled shit like that on me)
"It slowed me to a dangerous speed causing a hazard for other drives before disengaging."
Rubbish - the other drivers were themselves causing a hazard by not leaving enough space.
It's this "oh I must do at least the speed limit otherwise someone behind me might fail to drive properly" mentality which makes roads such a dangerous place.
has a 20-30% that he :-
1) Has no license
2) The car is not insured
3) The car has no MOT
That leaves your NCP in tatters and that scumbag who his you walks away, gets in another car and does it all over again
...
A Scumbag like that ran into me while I was stopped at a set of traffic lights while riding a motorcycle. He declared personal bankruptcy to avoid paying me a penny. He was already banned for 5 years but he didn't care. Nothing was in his name..
Mine has done it on the motorway. I can see a car in the left hand lane doing around 60ish judging on the speed I am catching them up, start to indicate to move into my lane (middle lane). So I start to indicate to move to my right. If the aforementioned car then moves into my lane - and seems many drivers think "I have started to use this flashy thing that tells them i am moving across" they just go for it, my car will try to avoid / slow down. If i am now part way through me moving into the fast lane as there is a safe gap at 70mph, if my car now drops down to under 60mph (and it has), then I am a bloody hazard in the fast lane and nothing to do with my driving, it is the bloody car
Sure you can override it, but that;s not the point. You shouldn't have to override it. If the automatiion is working correctly, it won't don't something stupid in the first place. Shouldn't need to take corrective action to override its mistake.
Having the car doing something completely unexpected in the middle of a manoeuvre is never good. A thing shouldn't be mandatory and on by default if it's prone to making this kind of error.
"Having the car doing something completely unexpected in the middle of a manoeuvre is never good."
It's not, but it's hardly unexpected is it. You know that when some incompetent driver pulls in front of you that the car is going to react to maintain a safe space. That's why it's an assistance feature, not total control.
And so you apply the right pedal, which will override the car being an idiot. Of course all the cars I've had the pleasure to drive with such systems basically turn them off when I indicate.
You must have a very special car then (or you don't have one and are making this up). Indicating briefly disables the steering wheel yanker called 'lane assist' but does not affect the adaptive cruis control, which is what he is referring to.
"I can have both the power and responsibility, or neither".
You can't mix and match.
And Tesla's "Full Self Driving" **** wants to have the power but none of the responsibility.
It's why my car is as dumb as a bag of rocks. It can't steer for me, it can't accelerate for me, it can't brake for me. The smartest thing it can do is call for help (using my phone, nothing internal) if the airbag deploys.
***** Not full, not self and barely driving, not legal to use in many countries, not taking any liability and there's no such thing as a recognised full self-driving car anywhere in the world.
There should be a way to look at the logs to see what the car was reacting to and flag it for review if it was a false positive. Or better yet would be a locally stored video of the drive, with the option to share it with the manufacturer, sharing logs and video must be opt-in and only the portion needed so they can make improvements.
While I'm not fan of Musk, Tesla, or Autopilot, I'd like to relate a story which happened years before the latter two were extant which I will allow the reader to make of what they will.
Early one afternoon I had a call from one of the staffers working for me, apologizing for being late for work -- he had a bit too much celebration during his birthday the day before and was badly hung over. He was telling me he'd be in for work shortly.
A couple of hours later, the lab director came in to tell me county sheriff has just notified him that the staffer had been killed on the freeway after plowing at high speed into the rear end of a stalled truck1.
According to the sheriff's report, the visiblity was excellent and traffic was relatively light. There was no sign of either braking or attempt to steer around the stuck truck. While there was no official cause, I think one could be easily inferred.
Being human is no guarantee of safe arrival.
_______________
1 I know that road well -- it's a long, straight stretch of eight lane freeway (four each way) -- and while the posted speed limit is 70 MPH (about 110 KPH), actual speeds can easily exceed 80 MPH (about 130 KPH).
It's a horrible story. However, if someone informs you that they are going to get into a motor vehicle and drive it, when they are not in a fit state to do so, be it through inebriation, sleep deprivation, or other cause (such as suffering a serious migraine), you should do your utmost to discourage them from doing so, and certainly not reply with the equivalent of "OK, see you shortly". This is exactly the reason why.
In retrospect, yes, probably.
However, at the time, it was a short phone conversation and he sounded okay.
Another colleague of mine was murdered, perhaps because I didn't want to get into an argument with him about loading a computer into his truck to take to a demo the next day.
Hindsight is always perfect.
Life isn't.
He can select an attorney general informous for corruption, but that is more for himself than for minions. The fun comes when Trump threatens electric vehicle subsidies.
So you mean if the garage where you took your car for maintenance forgot to screw the wheels on, and they fall while you drive, it's still 100% your responsibility because you're the driver ? Interesting.
Let's also consider tbat in a modern car, you don't even own, and have very limited knowledge and control on the software bits.
So how long would you play chicken with a stationary fire truck before hitting the brakes or turning the wheel? There's blind faith in technology and there's something else. Whether it's stupidity or watching vids on your phone when you should be paying attention I don't know.
if the garage where you took your car for maintenance forgot to screw the wheels on, and they fall while you drive, it's still 100% your responsibility because you're the driver ?
Yep. You're the driver, it's your responsibility to make sure the car is safe to drive. Subcontracting work to a garage doesn't change that. It might not be your fault that the wheels fell off, but it is your responsibility.
@AC 11 Dec 09:51:
Bollocks. Your 'everthing is the driver's fault' idea is simplistic and blatantly wrong-headed. It gives no consideration to things which are unknowable and uncontrollable by a driver.
Wheels not screwed on? Sure, that's the driver's fault for not doing a walk-around inspection before setting out. Drive-by-wire firmware update botched by the repair shop? Absolutely not the driver's fault.
@AC 11 Dec/18:48:
You are correct. Mea culpa.
A problem with our society, as I see it, is that the "responsibility" in this case equates to legal and financial responsibility, with the result that we are circumstantially-forced (rich people can self-insure) to spend money on insurance to mitigate our risks against claims against our finances for things that were/are not our fault. I find that galling.
On the second claw, it doesn't seem fair to make the injured party have to wait for lengthy court procedings to conclude, "It was the repair shop's fault." -- and then wait even longer while they sue the repair shop. The injured party has medical and food bills now, before they can be paid. Insurance companies theoretically provide a one-stop-shop via which injured parties will quickly be paid.
But, on the third claw, it doesn't happen that way. Our government runs an industrial-accident insurance fund. My mum worked for years at a small solicitors' office. One of the solicitors there handles legal matters for injured clients, suing the insurance fund, because the fund's modus operendi is to deny every claim, no matter how obviously-justified that claim is. Not only does the injured party have to wait for frequently-lengthy legal and bureaucratic procedings to complete before/if they are paid, they also have to (effectively) spend money on a solicitor to represent them.
“if the garage where you took your car for maintenance forgot to screw the wheels on, and they fall while you drive, it's still 100% your responsibility because you're the driver ?”
This happened to a coworker, last week. He went to commute to work, but the front right tire broke off the car on the driveway in the middle of the night. It seems 3 of the 5 lug nuts had disappeared since the tires last got installed, and the remaining 2 fastened studs had fatigued and fractured.
"It seems 3 of the 5 lug nuts had disappeared since the tires last got installed, and the remaining 2 fastened studs had fatigued and fractured."
The shop should lose it's license. I know my local tire shop has a rule. The wheel is off or it's on with all nuts in place and correctly torqued before walking away. I have a similar rule about doors on my home. They are either open or closed and locked if I am inside. They can be closed and unlocked if I'm out working in the garden and going in and out. I went on a trip one weekend and discovered my back door had been left unlocked for days before and after. A worry would be intruders while I'm asleep since I can imitate a rock when I'm exceptionally tired.
"So you mean if the garage where you took your car for maintenance forgot to screw the wheels on, and they fall while you drive, it's still 100% your responsibility because you're the driver ?"
In the UK, yes. Well, perhaps not always 100% but that's the grey area where lawyers would need to be involved to figure that out. As the driver, the final responsibility is yours and in the event of something like you describe, you would have to show you took every reasonable care to ensure that the wheels were screwed on. You can delegate that task but you can't delegate your legal responsibility to ensure that the vehicle you are driving is in a roadworthy condition.
"In the UK the fitters are so paranoid about the wheels being on right that they over tighten every bolt/lug with air tools and when you need to get the wheel off yourself you need a lot of leverage."
I don't know about them being over torqued, I've not experienced that, but any time a wheel has had to be taken off, the receipt and/or report always has a note on to re-check the wheel nuts after some number of miles travel.
Trust me, the first time my car slammed on the anchors it was Hard, and that was on a motorway - nearly new pants time.
It has also, on a few occasions, decided to abruptly turn the wheel to avoid I know not what,which is not a lot of fun and is quite aggresive especially when you are getting used to how light modern car steering is even compared to slightly older power steering
"How come the Fire Department isnt suing Tesla for destroying their vehicle ?"
I suppose the drivers insurance paid. No need to prove it was Tesla's fault.
But insurance is third party liability and the driver is not a "third partty", so they wouldn't pay the driver's damage. Only Tesla might.
Does not sound like the type of driver I'd like to be around on the road, with or without Autopilot.
It's not a bug, it's a feature. Soon, Full Self-Darwin will be perfected and safely euthanise Tesla and other EV drivers. It's no suprise that the UK government is currently promoting assisted suicide and AI. Soon, FSD will be able to implement this, with the AI writing 'Goodbye, cruel world' messages to all the drivers 'social' media accounts, and navigating the driver off the nearest cliff. Snag at the moment seems to be an order-of-operation issue where contacting emergency services is occuring before the FSD routine.
(Yes, this is sarcasm, although also a danger that's been demonstrated in books, movies and DefCon events. The rush to flog 'driver aids' where the driver is no longer in control of their vehicle is rather premature.)
Not that I would touch anything remotely associated with Space Karen and certainly not a Tesla infested with dodgy software all round but I assume that it's possible to turn to this autopilot/FSD nonsense off which seem to me advisable.
Or at least some sort of advisory mode where a Kryten voice could opine "I believe, sir, that it would be advisable to avoid the fire truck ahead, or at least to engage it slightly less hastily."
Strikes me that if FSD really worked 100% of the time a Tesla packed with explosives and a store dummy in the driver's seat would make a pretty decent drone car bomb but fortunately is actually easily decoyed by a parked emergency vehicle.
"I can argue that crashing in to the fire truck is not my fault because I was using Autopilot!"
"A superlative suggestion, sir, with just two minor flaws. One, autopilot is a poor marketing gimmick and not something any sane person would put their life in the hands of, and two, autopilot is a poor marketing gimmick and not something any sane person would put their life in the hands of. Now I realise that technically speaking that's only one flaw but I thought that it was such a big one that it was worth mentioning twice."
Maybe the auto-pilot doesn't slow down to rubberneck and take photos. Maybe it leaves big enough space for traffic to merge safely without slowing to a stop. Maybe it doesn't treat a vehicle trying to merge in front of it as an affront to its honour for which it's willing to put lives at risk. Maybe it doesn't drive so close to the car in front that the slightest touch on the brakes causes traffic about half a mile back to come to a dead stop due to panic braking.
That's as maybe, but it's also dumb enough to drive into a stationary fire engine, so on balance I think I'll put up with the queues.
One of the cases it's fighting involves the 2019 death of Jeremy Banner, whose Model 3 smashed into a tractor-trailer in cross traffic. That case bears a striking similarity to the 2016 death of Joshua Brown, whose Model S also collided with a tractor-trailer crossing a highway ahead of him. Tesla claimed that it addressed the issue linked to Brown's death, but given the similarities to Banner's death, regulators have been worried the carmaker might not be doing all it can to prevent such deaths.
LIDAR..
There's a basic systemic problem with LIDAR that few people mention. If you have LIDAR and cameras, you have two separate systems. Well and good when the two systems agree on what the outside world looks like. But then, one day, they will disagree. Now, which system does the computer believe? It can't just pick one at random, so it has to just disengage at that point. Which is a problem for any company with aspirations to a Level 5 completely autonomous system.
You can work around this by adding a third system, of course, and voting on outcomes. Ultrasonics, perhaps? But it's much simpler to do what humans do, and just rely on vision, with multiple-overlapped cameras to ensure there is proper redundancy.
GJC
Yes, but that's a different point. There's a final output from the LIDAR to the driving computer. And a final output from the cameras to the driving computer. And if they disagree on what the world looks like, you've got problems.
This is all well-known stuff, going back decades. Three inputs/nodes/systems/whatever is the minimum safe level for a service provision if you want to cluster. It's often safer to move your redundancy down a level, as with a single vision system using lots of cameras, in this case.
GJC
Or you put work into determining data quality.
A camera or LIDAR image is not a single datapoint, like an angle-of-attack sensor. It's 2D/3D and continually changes. These changes can be used to determine estimates on the error rate and regions where they are higher or lower than average.
Once the two are overlaid it often becomes obvious what's noise and what isn't.
I'd expect things ought be designed so that any obstacle-detection subsystem in the car detecting an obstacle would invoke emergency-mode.
Fail-safe and all that -- though that doesn't protect you against being rear-ended by an inattentive driver's car following yours (but nothing will do that).
Sure, that's the easy answer. But then you get phantom braking, which isn't as dangerous as people sometimes claim, but is extremely irritating.
The end goal has to be a system that can perceive the outside world at least as well as a human, but without the other failures that humans have - tiredness, impairment by alcohol or drugs, anger, inattentiveness, and so on. The second half of that is easy enough, that's how computers work. The perception is getting there, but it will take a while longer to be perfect.
GJC
Perhaps the great legal might of America should be turned away from the (inexplicably) highest funded company in the nation and towards the army of shills who have been posting "This time, Autopilot can do everything!" videos and articles every time Tesla releases a minor version increment of their software.
There is a great deal of money to be made lying on behalf of Elmo - maybe it would be a good idea to give those people a dose of reality?
When I got my newish car I wanted it to have auto stop in case I suffered some issue and was no longer capable of controlling it.
No idea if it actually works, I’ve had to dial it back as many times pulling left out of junctions it would slow or stop me as cars where coming in their lane from the left.
Also it would moan on motorways if a car to my left was slowing despite my lane still flowing.
It also has delayed reactions seemingly, up to a minute, where I’m in queuing traffic & a bike / moped / pedestrian passes close by it sets off a potential collision warning despite me still being stationary and the hazard long gone. Sometimes road infrastructure sets it off too.
It’s not a Tesla but I believe it’s a Bosch derived system like many would be.
Driver aids are beneficial but driving should be left to the humans.
In the case of this tragic event, the car should have warned the driver of the potential issue and slowed the car while putting hazards on. That it didn’t demonstrates the technology isn’t ready yet.
I bought a Tesla, seven years ago - a 2014 Model S85. I can absolutely guarantee that the Autopilot is completely, 100% free of any potential failure modes, as it doesn't have anything fitted at all.
It is in many ways the nicest Tesla I've ever driven. Very few driver aids, just a big, powerful, rear-wheel-drive barge that costs pennies to run. Unfortunately it's getting rather old now, so I need to start thinking about what to do when it reaches end of life. I might just live without a car, we don't need two these days with so much work now being done from home.
GJC
... all of which are chasing the current automotive fads.
* Data-slurping, phones-home telemetry/GPS/Bluetooth boxes.
* Touch-screen controls for most functions
* Steering wheels with more buttons than a Sony PS/2 game controller (which might truly be useful if they were ergonomically-placed and not subject to accidental activation)
Mine's the one with the keys to a 1974 Super Beetle.
I'm getting to the point where I resent self-cancelling indicators. I'm perfectly capable of cancelling them myself, thank you, and I will do so at the appropriate time, not merely when it's mechanically feasible.
Self-driving cars look like some kind of product liability hell to me. For my own personal circumstances right now, I really don't get the point.
I've hired cars that tried their best to do driving stuff on their own, universally in a manner best described as utter crap.
Lane-(something)-detection. Feels like the steering wheel is falling off. Can't imagine why anyone might think that a good idea.
Automatic main/dip switching. Just rubbish. Never had so many oncoming drivers flash me.
Automatic handbrake engagement. Found myself in a snow-covered car park. The handbrake, operating on the rear wheels, refused to disengage because the rear wheels weren't turning, but sliding on the snow. Front wheels, driven, spun like mad because the handbrake on the rears wouldn't release.
I can operate the steering wheel, accelerator and brake perfectly well unaided, thanks. If you really have to do something then I am capable of ignoring your misguided recommendation to labour the engine by changing up too early.
-A.
It sounds like you need my wife’s 1959 Austin-Healey “Frogeye” Sprite:
The indicators are a non self-cancelling dashboard mounted switch. No modern, nanny-state, snowflake, safety gimmicks like ABS, side impact bars, airbags, side or rear windows, roof, roll-bars or seatbelts; all UK legal on a car that age. You don’t even have to have one of those fussy MoT inspectors crawl all over it each year*.
Driver aids like electric screen wash, power steering or synchromesh on 1st and 2nd are absent but, let’s face it, if you can’t heel-and-toe to provide the throttle blip during a double-declutch whilst braking and changing down, then you shouldn’t be driving.
It does have one modern feature: keyless entry. No key, locks or even exterior door handles; you just reach inside and open from there.
Seriously though, do we ferry our children around in it? Not a chance! But, if they want, we will teach them how to drive it when they’re old enough (and yes, the change-down whilst braking is as described).
As a daily-drive it would be hell, but as a bit of summer fun it gives you a smile to match its own.
*Despite being pre-1960, hers does need an MoT because it’s had some modifications.
I should very much like to own a spridget, should I one day live somewhere with an unfeasibly large garage to put it and all the other desirable vehicles in.
For now I appreciate driver aids that actually fix problems I actually encounter. Rear-view cameras and/or proximity sensors are brilliant. Rotating the offside mirror towards the kerb when reversing is magic. Both my current cars automatically switch on the headlights when it's dark, and it surprises me when I borrow a car which doesn't do that. One of them makes reasonable judgments about switching on the wipers, and at what speed and cadence, which I don't need, but don't resent either.
Keyless I don't get. You have to approach the vehicle anyway, to within touching distance at least. Don't you?
-A.
What if... Trump's motorcade with police outriders and attendant vehicles with lights flashing goes through an intersection on red. A Tesla on "Autopilot" fails to detect the situation and rams into "The Beast". Oops! "The Beast" and it's occupants will no doubt be uninjured - bit shaken, but not stirred. As for the Tesla - that may well burst into flames. And as for the Tesla company...
My last car was made in the 1980s, and I could confidently work all the controls, including heating/cooling, etc., without taking my eyes off the road!
To me, that seems like a basic product requirement.
I predict the next stupid car-tech fad will be voice-activated controls.
Me: Car -- high beams off.
Car: I'm sorry, I don't recognize the command, "Eye-beam soft." Would you like to try saying that again?
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
