>

It’s not the “car’s fault” but it’s also not “self driving preventing an accident.”
It’s a half-developed feature being tested in open traffic and enabling irresponsible behavior.
For everyone who didn't bother to read the article, the driver used some tricks to fool the car into thinking he was still attentive.  He knew what he was doing and they are filing charges against him. >

Which means the cars’ need better mechanisms in place to prevent this. Tesla is still beta testing dangerous products on public roads. >

Those cheat devices don't work anymore. Newer teslas also track your eyeballs and will lock you out of autopilot if your texting or not watching the road. >

All the more reason to not buy a goddamn tesla.  That can only go so well. >

Are you upset that you have to watch the road? >

Real question because I genuinely do not know. People have mentioned that even simple things such as turning on windshield wipers entails navigating multiple menus on a touch screen that has no captive feedback, effectively forcing you to take your eyes off the road. Will the tesla start trying to pull off to the side if you are taking too long? Does it start beeping/audibly warning you before so (which isn't usually helpful in that situation, but still)? >

The wipers are automatic.  They come on as needed.  If you want to override it, you can do that in the menus.  You can also use voice control (after pushing a button on the steering wheel) to override the wiper setting.  So it's no big deal.  The real gripe is that the automatic feature uses the camera(s) to detect rain, not a dedicated sensor and in some conditions it doesn't work well (putting the wipers on too fast, or when not needed).   
A Tesla will never pull off to the side on you.  If you stop paying attention, it will gently notify you, then beep at you, and eventually if you keep breaking the rules, it will disable automatic features on you until your next trip. >


The real gripe is that the automatic feature uses the camera(s) to detect rain, not a dedicated sensor

So it's not actually no big deal. If it doesn't work flawlessly, then any obstruction to manual operation is bad.
It's not like a windshield wiper stick is complicated, or cumbersome. Or what about times when there no rain, but you need to clean the windshield? Does it sense then? Or does it sense to my preferences? >

To wash the windshield you press the end of the turn signal stalk. The auto wipers feature is awful in my experience. It doesn’t sense spray from cars in front of you or light rain, it only works in hard rain.
I rented a Model Y in Colorado for a work trip a couple of weeks ago and did over 900 miles in it. They needlessly over complicated a lot of really basic functions that we have come to take for granted. They created new problems by solving problems that didn’t exist in the first place >

That's interesting, on my M3LR I got an update that fixed/changed the windshield wipers and they work flawlessly now. 
About the same time they fixed the auto high beams. Before I'd flash everyone a few times before they would turn off. Now it works perfectly. >

Nothing is idiot proof >

They build better technology, we build even better idiots. >

I had a boss that used to say " You can out think stupid, but they just build a better idiot" 
Rang true when he said it and still chimes today. >

easily over half the time it takes to implement a new feature in a software application you spend on preventing the user from doing something rather than actually implementing the new functionality >

The good: Car didn’t crash and burn
The bad: Car didn’t pull over for the cops
The ugly: The driver was capable of convincing the system he was awake, and then went for a nap. >

The car didn't pull over because the driver is supposed to still be attentive and paying attention you're not allowed to just go to sleep >

"Full self driving" >

Regardless of the name it's not like you just jump in the car and do it you need to agree to those terms of service before you actually operate the vehicle with this full self driving >

People always read terms of services cause they aren't super long and worded in legal speak. >

Really bad title given the driver did not fall asleep but went to sleep while driving… >

What?  I don’t understand your distinction? >

I think he means he didn’t fall asleep by accident.  He intended to sleep. >

I knew that he intended to sleep but in my mind that’s still “falling asleep.”  I understand now thank you. >

I think normally in this context you assume it's an accident. I fell asleep driving, I fell asleep on the rollercoaster, she fell asleep on the ATV... When it's not a normal situation to fall asleep it's assumed it's on accident. If the context is more like, What time did you fall asleep? I fell asleep at 10pm last night. That maybe is less accident assumed. But you could also just use "go to sleep" which is definitely with the intent there. >

Perfect explanation. >

I’m not familiar with the details of how autopilot works, but couldn’t the police have just gotten in front of the car and slowed down? >

I'm not either, but that seems like what they should've done. I'm pretty sure the sensors would trigger brakes. They pit maneuver in a pursuit, but they weren't in pursuit and driver was unconscious/not actively trying to avoid arrest. Probably could've been able to box him in and let the car do the rest, but stopping a car at that speed is unpredictable and obviously super dangerous. Plus, whatever cheats he used for it may make all that useless anyway. Regardless, highway patrol training needs to be rewritten for this kind of thing, yesterday >

So the car did exactly what any other car on cruise control would do. My old Toyota had radar cruise and lane keep. It would have just kept going too except it would have just bounced from one white line to the other. >

Knowing the region, and while this is of course wrong and should not be done, this couldn't have happened on a better stretch of highway. There is almost nothing going on there while the highway is build very well >

In cars from tesla, "autopilot" is just lane keep and cruise control similar to "blue cruise" or whatever other names other manufactures use. The name is a reference to the autopilot in planes which is designed to maintain a heading and speed. It does not land or take off for the pilot. IDK, the names seems like a good pick. I wish articles for/against telsa would point this distinction out more often.
Tesla's "FSD (full self driving)" costs another 10k more at the time of purchase and that's what actually gives you a car that can navigate most things on its own. The guy in this article only had autopilot. >

Not to be that "Akshuwally" guy, but there actually is a mode of autopilot that can land the plane on most newer airliners. ILS cat II/III autolanding. Just a geewiz fact I guess >

And to pile on with the "akshuwallies" there are two alert and attentive pilots, who've run through checklists and are under sterile cockpits rules. So the plane lands itself but under very clear supervision. >

Who can sleep while letting autopilot does all the work? I can’t even sleep if my wife drives! >

As a fellow tesla driver: what an asshat. >

that goes for all Tesla drivers >

This is in Germany, and 110 is kilometers, not miles. I was confused for a second. >


Tesla Autopilot Prevents Horrible Accident When Driver Falls Asleep At The Wheel

I love hating on Tesla as much as the next guy but let's give the robots credit were it's due >


In the footwell of the car, the officers found a so-called steering wheel weight. This is to trick the security systems. It is attached to the steering wheel and suggests to the vehicle that the hands are on the wheel. According to the law, automated driving in Germany is only possible within narrow limits, and the driver must be able to take over the wheel at all times. Sleeping or distracting activities such as reading the newspaper are therefore prohibited.

So more like:

Driver uses device to trick Tesla autopilot into thinking he was awake, so he could take a nap, causing high speed chase with police.

It wasn’t a case of heroic Tesla features preventing an accident - it was a case of a driver abusing the feature in order to sleep while driving (and in the process revealed that an auto-driving Tesla won’t pull over for police).
It only stopped because the guy woke up. >

I think his point is it's not something to hate on Tesla for. >

They say “let’s give the robot credit where credit is due” as if the Tesla prevented an accident.
But the driver literally would not have been asleep at the wheel if there was no robot to self drive, and there would not have been a high speed chase if the self driving feature knew to pull over for the cops. Imo it’s less a “credit where credit is due” situation and more of a “look at the irresponsible behavior half-baked self driving features enable.”
Stories like this are a good example of why we shouldn’t be beta testing these features on open streets. >

It did prevent an accident though. The driver is responsible for their actions. The car is not responsible for the dumbass behind the wheel trying to trick the car into thinking he's awake.
I can't wrap my head around the idea that it's somehow the car's fault for what this person did. It didn't goad him into it, and he bypassed safety mechanisms.