Autonomous cars? I think not

[g-boaf]

You know it's certified in USA as well?

[Andy01]

I think it probably has a long way to go before it could be called anything like foolproof.

I know that two things that shut down my Subaru's "Eyesight" system completely (which obviously disables most/all driver aid systems) are a foggy windscreen (which tends to happen after climbing into a cold car in winter - doesn't last long, especially if the demister is used) and fairly rare instances of driving into direct sunlight when the sun is obviously just at the right angle to "blind" the cameras.

The later is probably the worst because it happens quite unexpectedly and without warning - there is a beep and warning message on the dash telling me that Eyesight has turned off. I would guess that if a car was in full autopilot and this happened, potentially a bad outcome could result. It has only happened 3-4 times for a few seconds each time in about 20 months.

For full auto driving to be foolproof there would have to be backup systems to ensure that all systems were not affected by these types of occurrences simultaneously.

[Comedian]

You know it's certified in USA as well?

Same problem .. only in a couple of states, and all the conditions.

Just as I wouldn't pay for Tesla FSD.. I can't see why people would pay for the Merc/BMW systems. So many conditions and restrictions that it's hard to see what value they have.

[Comedian]

I think it probably has a long way to go before it could be called anything like foolproof.

I know that two things that shut down my Subaru's "Eyesight" system completely (which obviously disables most/all driver aid systems) are a foggy windscreen (which tends to happen after climbing into a cold car in winter - doesn't last long, especially if the demister is used) and fairly rare instances of driving into direct sunlight when the sun is obviously just at the right angle to "blind" the cameras.

The later is probably the worst because it happens quite unexpectedly and without warning - there is a beep and warning message on the dash telling me that Eyesight has turned off. I would guess that if a car was in full autopilot and this happened, potentially a bad outcome could result. It has only happened 3-4 times for a few seconds each time in about 20 months.

For full auto driving to be foolproof there would have to be backup systems to ensure that all systems were not affected by these types of occurrences simultaneously.

In reality - it's probably unrealistic to expect FSD to be able to cope with that. If the car can't see from fog, can anyone else see the car?

Unless you want to move the cars from the roads and put them on tracks... the road is a visual environment.

[piledhigher2]

I think it probably has a long way to go before it could be called anything like foolproof.

I know that two things that shut down my Subaru's "Eyesight" system completely (which obviously disables most/all driver aid systems) are a foggy windscreen (which tends to happen after climbing into a cold car in winter - doesn't last long, especially if the demister is used) and fairly rare instances of driving into direct sunlight when the sun is obviously just at the right angle to "blind" the cameras.

The later is probably the worst because it happens quite unexpectedly and without warning - there is a beep and warning message on the dash telling me that Eyesight has turned off. I would guess that if a car was in full autopilot and this happened, potentially a bad outcome could result. It has only happened 3-4 times for a few seconds each time in about 20 months.

For full auto driving to be foolproof there would have to be backup systems to ensure that all systems were not affected by these types of occurrences simultaneously.

I've had eyesight go off due to computer overheating as well, it was a scorching day and the car had been parked in the sun.

[Comedian]

I think it probably has a long way to go before it could be called anything like foolproof.

I know that two things that shut down my Subaru's "Eyesight" system completely (which obviously disables most/all driver aid systems) are a foggy windscreen (which tends to happen after climbing into a cold car in winter - doesn't last long, especially if the demister is used) and fairly rare instances of driving into direct sunlight when the sun is obviously just at the right angle to "blind" the cameras.

The later is probably the worst because it happens quite unexpectedly and without warning - there is a beep and warning message on the dash telling me that Eyesight has turned off. I would guess that if a car was in full autopilot and this happened, potentially a bad outcome could result. It has only happened 3-4 times for a few seconds each time in about 20 months.

For full auto driving to be foolproof there would have to be backup systems to ensure that all systems were not affected by these types of occurrences simultaneously.

I've had eyesight go off due to computer overheating as well, it was a scorching day and the car had been parked in the sun.

FYI Tesla use active cooling of their computers. IE they liquid cool them which is cooled by the AC.

In thinking about this.. Personally if I have to drive to the designated Autonomous Road.. I really can't see the systems having very much appeal. Like very little advantage over the systems we have now.

[g-boaf]

I think it probably has a long way to go before it could be called anything like foolproof.

I know that two things that shut down my Subaru's "Eyesight" system completely (which obviously disables most/all driver aid systems) are a foggy windscreen (which tends to happen after climbing into a cold car in winter - doesn't last long, especially if the demister is used) and fairly rare instances of driving into direct sunlight when the sun is obviously just at the right angle to "blind" the cameras.

The later is probably the worst because it happens quite unexpectedly and without warning - there is a beep and warning message on the dash telling me that Eyesight has turned off. I would guess that if a car was in full autopilot and this happened, potentially a bad outcome could result. It has only happened 3-4 times for a few seconds each time in about 20 months.

For full auto driving to be foolproof there would have to be backup systems to ensure that all systems were not affected by these types of occurrences simultaneously.

I've had eyesight go off due to computer overheating as well, it was a scorching day and the car had been parked in the sun.

What sensors do Subaru use? I'm guessing no LIDAR? Would the camera itself have gotten too hot...

[piledhigher2]

I think it probably has a long way to go before it could be called anything like foolproof.

I know that two things that shut down my Subaru's "Eyesight" system completely (which obviously disables most/all driver aid systems) are a foggy windscreen (which tends to happen after climbing into a cold car in winter - doesn't last long, especially if the demister is used) and fairly rare instances of driving into direct sunlight when the sun is obviously just at the right angle to "blind" the cameras.

The later is probably the worst because it happens quite unexpectedly and without warning - there is a beep and warning message on the dash telling me that Eyesight has turned off. I would guess that if a car was in full autopilot and this happened, potentially a bad outcome could result. It has only happened 3-4 times for a few seconds each time in about 20 months.

For full auto driving to be foolproof there would have to be backup systems to ensure that all systems were not affected by these types of occurrences simultaneously.

I've had eyesight go off due to computer overheating as well, it was a scorching day and the car had been parked in the sun.

What sensors do Subaru use? I'm guessing no LIDAR? Would the camera itself have gotten too hot...

It said eyesight computer overheating, it has cameras in front of the rear view mirror at the top of the windscreen (hence eyesight), I presume that it is also tapped into the sensors around the car which I presume are ultrasonic.

[Andy01]

I think it probably has a long way to go before it could be called anything like foolproof.

I know that two things that shut down my Subaru's "Eyesight" system completely (which obviously disables most/all driver aid systems) are a foggy windscreen (which tends to happen after climbing into a cold car in winter - doesn't last long, especially if the demister is used) and fairly rare instances of driving into direct sunlight when the sun is obviously just at the right angle to "blind" the cameras.

The later is probably the worst because it happens quite unexpectedly and without warning - there is a beep and warning message on the dash telling me that Eyesight has turned off. I would guess that if a car was in full autopilot and this happened, potentially a bad outcome could result. It has only happened 3-4 times for a few seconds each time in about 20 months.

For full auto driving to be foolproof there would have to be backup systems to ensure that all systems were not affected by these types of occurrences simultaneously.

In reality - it's probably unrealistic to expect FSD to be able to cope with that. If the car can't see from fog, can anyone else see the car?

Unless you want to move the cars from the roads and put them on tracks... the road is a visual environment.

What tends to happen is the inside of the windscreen fogs up (no fog/mist on the outside), and because the cameras are encased in a plastic shroud (behind the rear view mirror) with just a small gap between the plastic and the glass it takes longer for the demister to clear the glass in front of the cameras.

At least that doesn't usually happen suddenly and unexpectedly, unlike the sun blindness which can suddenly turn Eyesight off. If you happened to be in "semi-auto" mode (ie. adaptive cruise, steer-assist, auto-braking etc) and relying too heavily on it (ie. foot nowhere near the brake) it could take you by surprise at an inopportune moment.

In general, the Subaru Eyesight cameras do work pretty well, but they are not infallible yet. As you say driving is a very visual skill, and machines are not perfect in this respect - mind you, neither are humans - as we are reminded on a daily basis, so I am not sure which is worse.

[Comedian]

What tends to happen is the inside of the windscreen fogs up (no fog/mist on the outside), and because the cameras are encased in a plastic shroud (behind the rear view mirror) with just a small gap between the plastic and the glass it takes longer for the demister to clear the glass in front of the cameras.

At least that doesn't usually happen suddenly and unexpectedly, unlike the sun blindness which can suddenly turn Eyesight off. If you happened to be in "semi-auto" mode (ie. adaptive cruise, steer-assist, auto-braking etc) and relying too heavily on it (ie. foot nowhere near the brake) it could take you by surprise at an inopportune moment.

In general, the Subaru Eyesight cameras do work pretty well, but they are not infallible yet. As you say driving is a very visual skill, and machines are not perfect in this respect - mind you, neither are humans - as we are reminded on a daily basis, so I am not sure which is worse.

FYI Tesla put it in a box which is sealed to the windscreen so I don't think they can ever fog up. They also put it in the swept area of the windscreen wipers. Occasionally the wipers will go to clear the camera area.

[Comedian]

What tends to happen is the inside of the windscreen fogs up (no fog/mist on the outside), and because the cameras are encased in a plastic shroud (behind the rear view mirror) with just a small gap between the plastic and the glass it takes longer for the demister to clear the glass in front of the cameras.

At least that doesn't usually happen suddenly and unexpectedly, unlike the sun blindness which can suddenly turn Eyesight off. If you happened to be in "semi-auto" mode (ie. adaptive cruise, steer-assist, auto-braking etc) and relying too heavily on it (ie. foot nowhere near the brake) it could take you by surprise at an inopportune moment.

In general, the Subaru Eyesight cameras do work pretty well, but they are not infallible yet. As you say driving is a very visual skill, and machines are not perfect in this respect - mind you, neither are humans - as we are reminded on a daily basis, so I am not sure which is worse.

FYI Tesla put it in a box which is sealed to the windscreen so I don't think they can ever fog up. They also put it in the swept area of the windscreen wipers. Occasionally the wipers will go to clear the camera area.

Aaaand... go out for a drive after the storm tonight to Aldi. It's Muggy AF. Get back from the shops and this is what I see. The only explanation is they are heating the area. Do they do this all the time? When sentry mode detects it? Dunno. But Tesla don't like their cameras fogging up and they have a way of achieving that.

[Comedian]

Lol yep tesla leave nothing to chance. I know this will be lost on the haters. But after 6 months this is my experience. Lots of clever engineering going on in the background that you don't always notice until you live with one for a while.

Sentry Mode uses the Model 3’s exterior cameras to monitor what is going on around the car when it is parked. If the system detects something suspicious, it will start recording. While the side cameras and rear camera are quite well protected from the elements, the front-facing camera at the top of the windshield could easily be covered by snow – and, wouldn’t you know it, Tesla has already thought of that.

Images recently shared by owners online reveal that the camera unit is able to heat up to melt snow that may be blocking its view. More specifically, The Drive, who published photos from Model 3 owner Jon Herrity, writes that there are defrosting lines in front of the camera unit that work like the ones you’ll find on rear windows.

https://www.carscoops.com/2021/01/tesla ... lear-view/

[Andy01]

That is handy.

In my experience it has only happened to me a handful of times in the 20 months I have had my Outback, and the window demister (AC) gets rid of it in a short time (a bit longer than the few seconds to clear the front windscreen).

This is much less of an issue I think because it doesn't happen instantly or by surprise, so I have never been caught unawares.

The sun "blinding" the cameras momentarily is a bigger issue potentially for an autonomous car - again not an issue for me because I am always driving the car myself, and it happened to me once when the adaptive cruise was on and it warned me so I took over. It usually only lasts a few seconds. This is a harder one to deal with because, as a photographer, I know that the sun hitting the camera lens at the right(or wrong) angle causes issues, and it is physics and not too much you can do about it except to have a different backup system that either uses another camera mounted at a different angle or a different technology.

[Thoglette]

Driverless cars were the future but now the truth is out: they’re on the road to nowhere
by Christian Wolmar, writing in The Guardian Wed 6 Dec 2023

For all the billions spent, the dream of these vehicles ruling the roads remains just that. It would be much smarter to focus on public transport

Talks about the fall of Uber driverless, GM's program and the issues Tesla is facing (morally, legally and technically). Closes out with a swipe at British PM Rishi Sunak, who is "to put forward a bill on autonomous vehicles while sidelining plans to reform the railways or legislate for electric scooters, which are in a legal no man’s land."

[find_bruce]

Massive recall of Teslas to fix "Autopilot" : SMH & ABC

It's the result of an investigation by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration which it said found Autopilot’s method of making sure that drivers are paying attention can be inadequate and can lead to “foreseeable misuse of the system.”

Meanwhile Tesla blames drivers for "misuse" apparently thinking that "autopilot" means self driving

[g-boaf]

Massive recall of Teslas to fix "Autopilot" : SMH & ABC

It's the result of an investigation by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration which it said found Autopilot’s method of making sure that drivers are paying attention can be inadequate and can lead to “foreseeable misuse of the system.”

Meanwhile Tesla blames drivers for "misuse" apparently thinking that "autopilot" means self driving

I posted that in the EV topic, but was wary of getting shouted at.

[Comedian]

Massive recall of Teslas to fix "Autopilot" : SMH & ABC

It's the result of an investigation by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration which it said found Autopilot’s method of making sure that drivers are paying attention can be inadequate and can lead to “foreseeable misuse of the system.”

Meanwhile Tesla blames drivers for "misuse" apparently thinking that "autopilot" means self driving

I posted that in the EV topic, but was wary of getting shouted at.

Objective analysis always welcome. Gaslighting not so much.

Latest software update. If you get five strikes Autopilot gets disabled for about a week. I'm a bit vague on it as I haven't had the update rolled to me yet.

[warthog1]

Objective analysis always welcome. Gaslighting not so much.

Latest software update. If you get five strikes Autopilot gets disabled for about a week. I'm a bit vague on it as I haven't had the update rolled to me yet.

https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/gaslighting
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaslighting

I hardly call posting flaws in Tesla cars or Tesla drivers behaviour "gaslighting".

Objective analysis has a different meaning to positive analysis.

[Duck!]

Driverless cars were the future but now the truth is out: they’re on the road to nowhere
by Christian Wolmar, writing in The Guardian Wed 6 Dec 2023

For all the billions spent, the dream of these vehicles ruling the roads remains just that. It would be much smarter to focus on public transport

Talks about the fall of Uber driverless, GM's program and the issues Tesla is facing (morally, legally and technically). Closes out with a swipe at British PM Rishi Sunak, who is "to put forward a bill on autonomous vehicles while sidelining plans to reform the railways or legislate for electric scooters, which are in a legal no man’s land."

A terminolgy that continuously bugs me, not just in the linked article (although possibly moreso given the context) but in general use is the use of the word "accident", when "incident" would be more correct.

Then there's this, from the above article....

The tech companies have constantly underestimated the sheer difficulty of matching, let alone bettering, human driving skills.

.....
and many of us here will be aware just how woeful human driving "skills" can be at times....

[LateStarter]

Then there's this, from the above article....

The tech companies have constantly underestimated the sheer difficulty of matching, let alone bettering, human driving skills.

.....
and many of us here will be aware just how woeful human driving "skills" can be at times....

I was musing on this only yesterday, IMO the difficulty is not matching human driving "skills" but matching human driving "failures". Most of the "incidents" that are highlighted in the various articles especially recent issues in SFO relate to the autonomous vehicles "freezing" when they are presented with an ambiguous situation that is beyond the current sensor/decision making algorithms. In these situations human drivers mostly just carry on without full (or any) situational awareness, ie "flying blind", mostly, with luck, they muddle through but other times like the mass fog bound pileups they don't. Autonomous vehicles recognise they have reached the limits of their ability and mostly just stop often in some inconvenient places. Google et al must have a vast library of these by now and will (?) solve them by better sensors or better algorithms or better (some) vehicle-vehicle communication / negotiation. Even now I posit that autonomous vehicles are on balance already better / safer drivers even if they sometimes do dumb things (unlike skilled humans, not)

With regard to public transport vs autonomous vehicles there is no conflict. In mass situations public transport is many many times better than private motor vehicles and autonomous vehicles should fill the a similar gap as biking or walking between the local station / stop and home. base. The idea that we will hop into our autonomous vehicles in Penrith (western Sydney) and arrive an few hours later in the CBD is fossil era thinking but not yet stamped out

[find_bruce]

Objective analysis always welcome. Gaslighting not so much.

Latest software update. If you get five strikes Autopilot gets disabled for about a week. I'm a bit vague on it as I haven't had the update rolled to me yet.

https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/gaslighting
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaslighting

I hardly call posting flaws in Tesla cars or Tesla drivers behaviour "gaslighting".

Objective analysis has a different meaning to positive analysis.

Whether criticism is "fair" or not depends on what what you're comparing it to.

Tesla calling the system autopilot and that the driver is only there for legal reasons are claims that it is an autonomous vehicle or SE level 3 or 5. This is BS & as I see it, it's entirely appropriate to call a company out for failing to live up to the expectations it created.

If you consider it as a driver support system, or SE Level 2, yes it has some flaws, such as failing to detect emergency vehicles or trucks pulling on to a highway, but is it better or worse than other systems? To me it's biggest flaw was that it is able to detect when the driver was not paying attention, but did nothing about that. To me this is an entirely valid criticism of Tesla, because in my view it's a fundamental requirement of any assist technology, that only becomes more important the better the system appears to be.

As for better than the average moron, yes there are many circumstances where it does better, but notable ones where it doesn't, as evidenced in the investigation by the US National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. As far as I know drivers failing to see a truck pulling onto a highway is not a common failure.

Maybe I've watched to much Gruen, but I would love to see the marketing along the lines of "Are you a crap driver? We're here to help. Tesla's autopilot is not perfect, but its probably better than you"

[Andy01]

Imagine if aviation autopilots "failed" as often as Tesla autopilots ?

I absolutely agree with FB - don't call it an autopilot if it isn't. Plenty of other cars have "support" systems that steer, brake, accelerate & decelerate to match traffic flow, but those systems are usually sold as "driver aids", not a self-driving system.

[find_bruce]

I should have added one thing Tesla's driver assist does significantly better than the majority of drivers is using the indicators

[g-boaf]

Imagine if aviation autopilots "failed" as often as Tesla autopilots ?

I absolutely agree with FB - don't call it an autopilot if it isn't. Plenty of other cars have "support" systems that steer, brake, accelerate & decelerate to match traffic flow, but those systems are usually sold as "driver aids", not a self-driving system.

But the manufacturers of those other cars get mud thrown at them by the Tesla crowd because they are conservative and market their driver assistance technology as “assistance”. Even Mercedes which does have actual level 3 functionality limits where and how you can use it.

Things are progressing but it’s going to be some time before all cars drive themselves. Sooner the better though.

[Comedian]

Objective analysis always welcome. Gaslighting not so much.

Latest software update. If you get five strikes Autopilot gets disabled for about a week. I'm a bit vague on it as I haven't had the update rolled to me yet.

https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/gaslighting
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaslighting

I hardly call posting flaws in Tesla cars or Tesla drivers behaviour "gaslighting".

Objective analysis has a different meaning to positive analysis.

Whether criticism is "fair" or not depends on what what you're comparing it to.

Tesla calling the system autopilot and that the driver is only there for legal reasons are claims that it is an autonomous vehicle or SE level 3 or 5. This is BS & as I see it, it's entirely appropriate to call a company out for failing to live up to the expectations it created.

If you consider it as a driver support system, or SE Level 2, yes it has some flaws, such as failing to detect emergency vehicles or trucks pulling on to a highway, but is it better or worse than other systems? To me it's biggest flaw was that it is able to detect when the driver was not paying attention, but did nothing about that. To me this is an entirely valid criticism of Tesla, because in my view it's a fundamental requirement of any assist technology, that only becomes more important the better the system appears to be.

As for better than the average moron, yes there are many circumstances where it does better, but notable ones where it doesn't, as evidenced in the investigation by the US National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. As far as I know drivers failing to see a truck pulling onto a highway is not a common failure.

Maybe I've watched to much Gruen, but I would love to see the marketing along the lines of "Are you a crap driver? We're here to help. Tesla's autopilot is not perfect, but its probably better than you"

Autopilot is actually a really good name for it. If you've ever flown a commercial jet or been in the passenger seat - airline "autopilots" are actually a very very simple systems that require big volumes of user input.

The problem is the public perception of "autopilot" is very different to reality.

I listen to people bitching about autopilot on the forums for all various reasons. At some point you've got to call it and say "it's more work operating the automation than just driving the damn car".

If it doesn't lower the pilot/driver workload then don't use it.