# Another Tesla crash reported driving under Autopilot on Pennsylvania Turnpike



## Ca$h4 (Aug 12, 2015)

*http://www.cnet.com/roadshow/news/another-tesla-crash-reported-driving-under-autopilot/*


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

Let's see Musk spin this one.


----------



## SafeT (Nov 23, 2015)

Stupid is as stupid does. This whole driverless car myth is crashing into reality and the laws of physics. That is the only way stupid learn though unfortunately.


----------



## itsablackmarket (May 12, 2015)

Does Travis still want half a million Tesla's for Uber? Looks like Uber's game plan isn't going to work out how they thought it would, will it? I'm sure they're troubled by this, what is looking like a miserable failure for the whole concept of self driving cars. You're asking a car to be a human. Sorry, but you cannot program a computer to think how we do. You just can't.


----------



## JoeJoseph (Nov 18, 2014)

They rushed the feature, I think it will be good enough in about 5 years for the regular roads.


----------



## Ca$h4 (Aug 12, 2015)

JoeJoseph said:


> They rushed the feature, I think it will be good enough in about 5 years for the regular roads.


The world where algorithms rule. Uber will own the trucks and malevolent algorithms.

*



*


----------



## Adieu (Feb 21, 2016)

"DETROIT FREE PRESS" ... Pennsylvania Turnpike... no injuries.

Hmmm


----------



## LADriver (Aug 28, 2014)

SafeT said:


> Stupid is as stupid does. This whole driverless car myth is crashing into reality and the laws of physics. That is the only way stupid learn though unfortunately.


The whole history of auto development is filled with crashes and deaths. Not to mention the history of plane development. Which has filled up many cemeteries with dead test pilots, which really stands for death pilots. So, it's not unusual for the cutting edge of self-driving cars to be experiencing a "crash and death" phase.


----------



## RamzFanz (Jan 31, 2015)

SafeT said:


> Stupid is as stupid does. This whole driverless car myth is crashing into reality and the laws of physics. That is the only way stupid learn though unfortunately.


The Tesla X isn't driverless car, that's the myth, or didn't you read the story?

Unless the autopilot pulled the wheel out of his hands and turned him into the guardrail, all this is proving is humans can't be trusted to drive responsibly. Musk needs to stop trusting human drivers and either deactivate autopilot or force the drivers to be responsible. He's tarnishing the image of true SDCs because people see what they want to see and the press is often dishonest.


----------



## Taxi Driver in Arizona (Mar 18, 2015)

JoeJoseph said:


> They rushed the feature, I think it will be good enough in about 5 years for the regular roads.


More like 50 years, if ever.


----------



## RamzFanz (Jan 31, 2015)

Taxi Driver in Arizona said:


> More like 50 years, if ever.


2-4 years for fully autonomous according to just about everyone involved. But if you want to believe 50, nothing wrong with that. It may comfort you, but I hope you at least make plans for a life after taxis and Uber drivers.


----------



## RamzFanz (Jan 31, 2015)

LADriver said:


> The whole history of auto development is filled with crashes and deaths. Not to mention the history of plane development. Which has filled up many cemeteries with dead test pilots, which really stands for death pilots. So, it's not unusual for the cutting edge of self-driving cars to be experiencing a "crash and death" phase.


I agree until the last sentence. Teslas are not self-driving and are still far behind others like Google. Google isn't going through a "crash and death" phase because they are going for level 4 autonomy and not piecemealing lower levels with amateurs at the wheel like Musk. Not that Google won't have deaths too, but I don't think it will be anywhere near comparable to past advances.


----------



## RamzFanz (Jan 31, 2015)

JoeJoseph said:


> They rushed the feature, I think it will be good enough in about 5 years for the regular roads.


It's an interesting argument. What is good enough? Does it have to be perfect? Near perfect? Or just safer than humans?


----------



## ChortlingCrison (Mar 30, 2016)

RamzFanz said:


> It's an interesting argument. What is good enough? Does it have to be perfect? Near perfect? Or just safer than humans?


Safer then humans? oh brother


----------



## RamzFanz (Jan 31, 2015)

ChortlingCrison said:


> Safer then humans? oh brother


Yes, safer than humans. Did you not know that is the goal? Safer cars than human driven?


----------



## Ca$h4 (Aug 12, 2015)

This article and site gets my top vote on AV (autonomous vehicles). Uber needs AV myth (not reality) to keep Uber GROWTH story going to support Uber overvaluation of $65Billion. Uber's easy growth days are over. Growth is slowing in USA, Uber is banned in most of Europe, there are strong Unions in South America, and Uber is lagging in India, and China. AV on any scale is a long way off and AV is a pipe dream for Uber in the short term.

*https://sostratusworks.wordpress.com/2016/05/15/reality-and-myth-of-future-av/
*


----------



## RamzFanz (Jan 31, 2015)

Ca$h4 said:


> This article and site gets my top vote on AV (autonomous vehicles). Uber needs AV myth (not reality) to keep Uber GROWTH story going to support Uber overvaluation of $65Billion. Uber's easy growth days are over. Growth is slowing in USA, Uber is banned in most of Europe, there are strong Unions in South America, and Uber is lagging in India, and China. AV on any scale is a long way off and AV is a pipe dream for Uber in the short term.
> 
> *https://sostratusworks.wordpress.com/2016/05/15/reality-and-myth-of-future-av/*


If this guy gets your top vote, you're voting for the message over the reality. ( By the way, I know you're almost certainly the author )

That article should have been written 10 years ago so it could have had valid arguments. MIT claims to have overcome at least half of the weather issues with downward looking ground penetrating radar mapping. Engineers, many of the best in the world, with billions of dollars at their disposal, will overcome the rest, just as they have been for the last few years and at an accelerated pace.

I want to see his supporting evidence for these, or any of his laughable claims:

85% of driving is in the dust, snow, ice, cold, fog, or snow - _Come on man, that's just dumb. I mean, I drove in heavy rain ONCE this summer and zero of any of the others in the last year except cold and cold isn't going to effect these sensors. And I'm an Uber driver in the midwest._
...with built-into physical infrastructure sensors - _What? What built in sensors?! Is the author pulling straight out of his butt? What infrastructure sensors?_
Google was a pioneer in the AV development, flashed with all the Billions $ of investor money unfortunately did not achieve any dramatic breakthroughs. Even in contrast to public announcements, safety issues could not be dramatically improved. - _LOL! Was? How about IS and how about they are improving far faster than anyone expected. Their incidents of human technician take over have plummeted and he says not dramatically improved?! There's nothing NOT dramatic about their improvements._
What's disturbing is reaction of CEO of Tesla Elon Musk who, after proudly pronouncing just four months before this tragic accident that Autopilot is "probably better than a person right now." subsequently is blaming it on a driver who likely "misused" the autopilot system for AV function. - _Uhhh, yes, because it is better than human driving and it was Josh Brown's fault. He didn't drive. It's not an AV._

A very telling attitude of self-proclaimed billionaire technological guru to all little earthlings who are not as perfect as Musk's creations. _I think this, and the many references to his wealth, ignoring his huge successes and accomplishments, tells us all we need to know about this clickbait, agenda driven, unsupported and outright false claims article. Musk is the Edison of our generation and he is so far away from "self proclaimed" it's just laughable the author would say that. So far, no credibility and a lot of vitriol in this tripe._
Even before introducing a single commercial AV into US traffic, as US DOT reported, U.S. traffic deaths have declined steadily for most of the past decade, from 43,510 in 2005 to 32,675 in 2014 due to decline of economic activity. - _And they went up last year. I guess he's right, tens of thousands of deaths in the US, over a million worldwide every year, is no big deal. Let's ignore that almost all of the declines in deaths CAME FROM NEW TECHNOLOGY. Seriously, what a stupid thing to say._

A Virginia Tech University study commissioned by Google found that the company's autonomous cars crashed 3.2 times per million miles compared with 4.2 times for human drivers not a substantial improvement... - _Holy... what? That's THREE MILLION less accidents a year in the US ALONE! That's not a substantial improvement?!? OMFG._
As a matter of fact some other analysis and studies of autonomous traffic suggest that AV will substantially slow down traffic flow since it will not exceed even temporarily legal velocity, not to violate traffic laws, which commonly are factors that smooth out and increase traffic flow are often tolerated by highway law enforcement in rush hours. - _Complete lie. This is such a tired worn out lie. The Google car will absolutely break laws and rules of the road when it needs to, including speed. Does this author even know anything at all about this subject?_
If AV effect would be slowing down traffic it would decrease all accidents but not because of intelligence of AVs but a general rule of slower traffic. - _While completely untrue, I have to wonder how this is a bad thing?! Less accidents by forcing idiots to drive reasonably is a negative?! Seriously, I can't even articulate how stupid this point is._
Also already demonstrated by UT fatal flaw of GPS spoofing while military refused to allow access to secured GPS leaving autonomous driving dangerous to rely on GPS, that's why AVs are designed to not entirely rely on GPS but instead use pre-acquired and updated hi-resolution mapping data along the testing routes. - _Uhhhhh, what? The SDC doesn't rely on GPS AT ALL, but he ALMOST said that contradicting his own blabbering._
Also there is viable question if AV would break traffic laws and vehicle laws in order to try to avoid deadly collision. - _Sweet baby Jezuz, yes, this is well known and old information. YES, the Google car will break laws when needed._

A problem unresolved in human reality while non-existing in AI realm. How the AI would resolve question whether to hit a group of children or a wall when faced with such as alternative, common, bad choice, alternative in last stage of most any serious accident. - _Just dumb. Yes, it's unresolved in human reality because there is no real choice. The car will reduce the energy in the impact by choosing the least energetic impact with hard objects and choose soft objects last. Its job is not to control what other people do or make moral decisions. It's not an argument, it's trying to force a computer to play tic-tac-toe as the second person choosing._
Now after initial hype subsided and reality sink in, most of cool heads of experts do not predict mass AV production before 2035 at the earliest. - _My god, is there no lie this author won't tell? Is he expecting every reader to be that ignorant? Almost EVERY SINGLE major player in this field, and that accounts for every major technology and auto company in the world, and all of their experts, the best in the world, are predicting 2-5 years. His favorite demon Elon Musk, the first to bring a rocket back from space and land it on an autonomous barge in the ocean, says 2 years. I'm going with the genius over the convenience store clerk, call me crazy._
The telling absence of leadership on driverless cars from German companies having all the expertise and money to invest, puts a fine point of feasibility on the whole project within overall concept of transportation system. - _OK, seriously? Seriously? They have more expertise in automation and more money than apple, Microsoft, and Google? Oh, wait, EVERY major car company in the WORLD is in on this and ESPECIALLY the Germans like Volkswagen, Daimler, and BMW. WTF is he even babbling about?_! _The largest railway in the world, a GERMAN rail company, is ALSO developing AVs._

One of those reasons is a fact that either autonomous or quasi-autonomous car systems have one fatal flaw, they impair driver's (active passenger) alertness... _- Uhhh, numbnuts, autonomous means no human needed._
As experience already proved, number of accidents could be massively reduced just by road infrastructure improvements and eliminating dangerous road segments where accidents are clustered or by implementing more AI based traffic flow control._ - Wait, now he's advocating AI technology to reduce accidents?!_

So far AV it is all hype and illusion for purpose of pumping Google, Tesla and other Unicorns' stock price while in fact a stated ultimate goal is unachievable as its authors imagined and sold it to the public. _- Once again revealing a complete agenda driven bias without facts. 100% opinion and, as always throughout this clickbait article, ZERO supporting evidence, studies, or facts._
Not to mention legal and moral ramifications of life/death sacrifice algorithms run by machines_. - Facepalm. No. The car is obligated to protect its occupants first and others second. It has no responsibility to making moral decisions._
Recent death on Florida road will be for sure a legal test of a concept of autonomous and strongly assisted driving regarding manufacturer responsibility for accident caused by "normal" functioning of car's control systems in contrast to previous cases where only system malfunctions or deficiencies were subject of litigation. _- You've got to be kidding me. The car "caused" the crash? Not the truck? Not the human driver who was obligated to be driving? WTF? And now a failure of driver assist features aren't malfunctions? What does that even mean? That it functioned? What?_
Here's what I would do Ca$h4, if by any remote chance you aren't the author and if you really want to convince anyone:

1) Choose a literate author. This guy sounds like a 10th grade dropout.

2) Choose an author who has at least the slightest idea what he is talking about. This guy has no idea what has been accomplished or where the technology stands today.

3) Choose an honest person who can make logical arguments.

Why, when I read this, does "Thank you, come again" keep popping into my mind?


----------



## WeirdBob (Jan 2, 2016)

Adieu said:


> "DETROIT FREE PRESS" ... Pennsylvania Turnpike... no injuries.
> 
> Hmmm


Yes, Detroit. Motor City. Does it not make sense that almost any automobile news would be covered by Detroit local media?


----------



## Ca$h4 (Aug 12, 2015)

RamzFanz said:


> If this guy gets your top vote, you're voting for the message over the reality. ( By the way, I know you're almost certainly the author )
> 
> That article should have been written 10 years ago so it could have had valid arguments. MIT claims to have overcome at least half of the weather issues with downward looking ground penetrating radar mapping. Engineers, many of the best in the world, with billions of dollars at their disposal, will overcome the rest, just as they have been for the last few years and at an accelerated pace.


*RamzFanz*, For your information, this picture is the state of the art for robot cars, Autonomous Vehicles.










*RamzFanz*, if you want to believe robot car flim-flam that's your choice. AV WILL NOT BE A PART OF UBER'S* GROWTH PROFILE *BECAUSE MASS AV REALITY IS WAY DOWN THE ROAD. TESLA DIDN'T REPORT ACCIDENT BECAUSE THEY WERE ISSUING $2BILLION IN STOCK.

*Legal Trouble Accelerating for Tesla Motors*

*http://www.law.com/sites/almstaff/2...-autopilot-crash-victim-taps-cleveland-lawyer

The REGULATORS, YES, I SAID REGULATORS ARE GOING TO PUT THE BRAKES ON THE FREE MARKET MADNESS OF TESLA, UBER, SILICON VALLEY, ETC. AV FLIM FLAM BY DEFINING DEGREE OF AUTOMATION. UBER IS DELUDED THAT LEVEL 2 AV IS LEVEL 4 AV. SO DID THE GUY WHO WAS DRIVING THE CAR IN THE PICURE ABOVE.

US government to rule on autonomous cars

http://electrek.co/2016/06/15/fed-rule-autonomous-cars-july-road-to-commercialization/*


----------



## Adieu (Feb 21, 2016)

ON THE BRIGHT SIDE - highly flameproof front passenger door...

Didn't do much for the rest of the car.


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

This RamzFanz dude must have a lot of money invested in this junk technology to be pushing it harder than Uber does UberPool.


----------



## RamzFanz (Jan 31, 2015)

Ca$h4 said:


> *RamzFanz*, For your information, this picture is the state of the art for robot cars, Autonomous Vehicles.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That's not even an autonomous vehicle, so no, that's not "state of the art." It's not even in the same discussion (serious discussions, not hype nonsense) with self driving cars.

If you think for a second the feds are going to go against every giant tech and auto company in the world, you need to retake US history.


----------



## RamzFanz (Jan 31, 2015)

uberdriverfornow said:


> This RamzFanz dude must have a lot of money invested in this junk technology to be pushing it harder than Uber does UberPool.


Hey, turns out the autopilot wasn't even on. Also, I've already stated I don't agree with what Tesla is doing. Of course, that doesn't mean you can't keep making false claims, just thought you should know.


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

RamzFanz said:


> Hey, turns out the autopilot wasn't even on. Also, I've already stated I don't agree with what Tesla is doing. Of course, that doesn't mean you can't keep making false claims, just thought you should know.


You can keep brown-nosing Uber and this ridiculously impossible to bring to market technology all you want. That's your business. This technology can work in an area that doesn't include 2000+ pound metal vehicles with the capacity to bring large scale death to people due to a huge amount of variables that you will never be able to program into a computer, but it's clearly never going to work here. Again, you can keep living your utopian dream on behalf of Uber all you want. They must be paying you a lot of money to brown-nose them at this forum.


----------



## RamzFanz (Jan 31, 2015)

uberdriverfornow said:


> You can keep brown-nosing Uber and this ridiculously impossible to bring to market technology all you want. That's your business. This technology can work in an area that doesn't include 2000+ pound metal vehicles with the capacity to bring large scale death to people due to a huge amount of variables that you will never be able to program into a computer, but it's clearly never going to work here. Again, you can keep living your utopian dream on behalf of Uber all you want. They must be paying you a lot of money to brown-nose them at this forum.


Large scale death like 1.2M people per year? Oh, oh yeah.

I always chuckle when people make claims about SDCs killing people and having to choose between 3 nuns carrying puppies or a van load of disabled babies. Good stuff, keep it coming!

I don't brown nose or even support Uber. I despise Uber for what they have done to so many drivers. TK is an evil and greedy man. Nice try at painting me though, I never tire of pointing out your completely false statements.

This is going to sting a little, but you need to know, there are already self driving vehicles on the road carrying passengers in the Netherlands. No steering wheel, no human controls at all, nobody remote driving them. So, I wouldn't go with "never." Maybe something like "2-4 years in the US" may be more reasonable? I mean, unless you actually think all of these robotic, business, and financial experts and, dare I say, even geniuses, are all wrong and you're right. "Dang nab horseless carriages are monstrosities and will never replace Ol' Nelly by targ nabins! You think there's just going to be gasoline anywhere you go? How are ya going to even get through Donovan's pass? Dig a tunnel through a mountain?! yuk yuk yuk, dang fools can't even cipher a situation."


----------

