Cyclist Hit & Killed by a Tesla in the UK

[ripvanrando]

Originally Posted by shovelhd

As I've said all along, I will bet that the logic in these systems will prioritize protecting the occupants at all costs. If comes down to Hal .vs. something in the way, a cyclist is no different than a squirrel, turkey, or possum.

+1

Until a few highly publicized and expensive civil lawsuit are won, unfortunately.

Not a autonomous driver fanboy here.

[BobO]

Originally Posted by Vientomas

"Progress" will dictate that cyclists will be categorized as road hazards and will no longer be allowed to utilize roadways. Robotic vehicle trumps (no pun intended) humanoid cyclist. Hope ya'll have a nice MUT system nearby.

The MUTs here are still more dangerous than the roads.

[sipmeister]

Very sad to hear. Guess they rode off into the sunset?
I really don't see the appeal or attraction to electric cars. I hate charging my bike computer, lights, phone, etc. It's inconvenient yet a necessity. Better than batteries I guess. But with a car like this, it's regularly being charged when not in use. That's inconvenient. Not to mention, that energy to charge the car came from somewhere. A coal plant, a gas plant, a nuclear plant, wind power, or a hydroelectric dam. Somewhere a fossil fuel was consumed in order to create energy. Somewhere nature was harnessed to create power. With more electric cars, we will increase the demand on all these plants. And they want to reduce emissions, or demand on those plants too? Then fewer people will be "driving" and more will be walking/biking. Guess we'll be walking to grammys for Christmas?
And then there's Tesla's heavily government subsidized business model. People paying taxes so the government can hand out subsidies to those buying an electric car. Pathetic. I'm just going to keep shaking my head and remain content with my Civic.

[Anarchist]

Originally Posted by makoti

"A recent review of the BMW G32 640iGT 2017 by Honest John (link is external) reveals that when set to semi-autonomously follow road markings, the car will force drivers to execute close passes of cyclists unless they use their indicator."

Not only Tesla.

I have a Ford with lane assist - same thing. the car fights you unless you put the signal indicator on.

Remarkably stupid system.

[pasadena]

Originally Posted by shovelhd

As I've said all along, I will bet that the logic in these systems will prioritize protecting the occupants at all costs. If comes down to Hal .vs. something in the way, a cyclist is no different than a squirrel, turkey, or possum.

I read something about that, and it's true. In fact, they do prioritize occupants and will run over pedestrians, and cyclists in favor of "saving" occupants.
What qualifies as "saving" is a big question to me. When does the equation make it okay to run into bystanders?

[vqdriver]

erm. why do they have to decide who/what gets hit at all? are they not capable of tracking obstacles and simply slowing down? i get if something darts out into the road the car will opt not to veer into oncoming traffic, but it can still hit the brakes.

and fwiw, this is about autopilot, not electric cars. this incident happens to be a tesla but there's gas cars with this 'feature' as well.

[numbskull]

Originally Posted by Vientomas

"Progress" will dictate that cyclists will be categorized as road hazards and will no longer be allowed to utilize roadways. Robotic vehicle trumps (no pun intended) humanoid cyclist.

Yup. That appears highly likely in the not very distant future. There are way more drivers and passengers than there are cyclists. If technology exists that makes roads safer for drivers and passengers then it will be adopted even if it requires prohibiting cyclists from using roads.

The right of the many for increased safety will quickly trump the right of the few for recreational use.

[BobO]

Originally Posted by Anarchist

I have a Ford with lane assist - same thing. the car fights you unless you put the signal indicator on.

Remarkably stupid system.

There are preferences in the Ford system, should be able to reduce the assist.

[Anarchist]

Originally Posted by BobO

There are preferences in the Ford system, should be able to reduce the assist.

There are, and you can. It is my 'wife's" car in that she is the primary driver and it is set to what she likes. I find it so off-putting I actually try to avoid driving it.

I haven't actually asked her what she makes of it in the circumstance where she may be passing someone on the right - must do so.

the fact remains, unless you turn the system off, it fights you. Just a question of how much.

[Spaghetti Legs]

The owners manual for the Tesla autopilot is pretty clear that it should only be used on freeways. I am a Tesla owner, mine predates the autopilot, but I’ve used service loaners with the auto pilot a couple of times. It is absolutely clear from my brief experiences with it that it should not be used in non freeway driving. My guess is the guy wasn’t riding his bike on a freeway, so finger pointing needs to be at the driver and not Tesla. When the day comes for me to get a new Tesla ( not anytime soon, mine is 4.5 years and going strong) I’ve decided already to not pay for the autopilot becuase it just isn’t that useful and maybe even dangerous. I could see a use for those people who spend a couple of hours a day in bumper to bumper freeway traffic.

[azrider]

Meanwhile, over here in good ole USofA, we got bozos like this guy who smoke weed while their Tesla is on autopilot AND videoing themselves on social media at the same time.

[shovelhd]

Originally Posted by Spaghetti Legs

The owners manual for the Tesla autopilot is pretty clear that it should only be used on freeways.

Well that makes me feel safe.

[sipmeister]

Originally Posted by azrider

Meanwhile, over here in good ole USofA, we got bozos like this guy who smoke weed while their Tesla is on autopilot AND videoing themselves on social media at the same time.

Whoa, looky there, one of the country's finest!

[MattTuck]

a few things

1. Yes, not sure this was autopilot yet. But I think the article noted this is the first known fatality in a car that has an autonomous (semi) driving feature. We await more info on this.

2. From what I understand, Tesla has been aggressive (some would say reckless) about pushing the autopilot feature. This is mainly because there is not a huge demand for electric cars, and the autopilot was a real point of differentiation. So, there was a bit of over promising and hype there.

3. Tesla is not the most advanced autonomous driving system. It just happens to have been pushed the hardest and has the most brand recognition. I fully expect more advances from other manufacturers to be released when they consider it ready, in the coming years.

4. A friend drove his brother's Toyota Landcruiser (i think from 2014) which is obviously an expensive top of the line vehicle. He also drove his Dad's 2017 Honda CR-V. A $30K car. He said the lane assist in the Honda was markedly better than the few year old Landcruiser. The stuff is getting better.

5. Agree with the folks that say, despite advances, it is really not fair to be part of an experiment being conducted on public roads without any kind of informed consent or notification.

6. In the long term, I am more optimistic about autonomous cars being a net positive for the safety of all road users. In the short term, it looks a little more turbulent and probably will be for a number of years. But, as cameras, sensors, processing power, machine learning, inter-vehicle communication, etc. all improve, I am hopeful for the future of road safety. Certainly more so than if we just let people keep getting distracted by their devices.

[azrider]

Originally Posted by MattTuck

a few things

1. Yes, not sure this was autopilot yet. But I think the article noted this is the first known fatality in a car that has an autonomous (semi) driving feature. We await more info on this.

https://www.theguardian.com/technolo...r-harry-potter