[jijojv]

> “The driver had received several visual and one audible hands-on warning earlier in the drive"

This is completely irrelevant to the crash. Anyone who uses autopilot knows that throughout the drive even if you have two hands but don't apply enough pressure on the wheel, you will get a warning and you have to jiggle the wheel for it to recognize you're there.

[wpietri]

Related, I wondered about this bit: "Tesla said Huang had not followed guidelines intended to ensure drivers are paying attention while the vehicle is in Autopilot mode."

Even if the sensors were correct, I have deep questions about the human ability to follow instructions requiring them to be robot-like. I would love to see some studies measuring the extent to which people can really follow Tesla's guidelines to the letter for the 300-500 hours/year that somebody with this commute would be doing.

I'm sure I'm an outlier, but I would personally never use a system like Tesla's Autopilot. I already think highway driving is slightly too boring to hold my attention, so on long drives I always supplement with podcasts and audiobooks. Until I can lie down and take a nap, I'm sticking with manual driving.

[denzil_correa]

I have just seen one study (not exhaustive) that goes into some details about Tesla autopilot [0]

>Participants emphasized being alert at all times, paying attention to the road environment and keeping hands on the wheel while in autonomous driving mode.

...

> Drivers seem to enjoy these technologies, and are aware of the limitations of Autopilot and Summon. In the comments, we observed that drivers were highly motivated to use these technologies safely and have not seen indications of the concerns raised in the past such as engaging with secondary tasks while using Autopilot.

[0] https://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=3005465

[morsch]

It wasn't obvious to me from those quotes: this study is an analysis of an online survey the authors posted in Tesla forums and I suppose on Twitter. It's not based on anything like neutral observation of real behavior.

"We conducted an online survey with 162 Tesla Owners. The survey was distributed through online forums and social media during April-May 2016. The survey asked questions about drivers’ attitudes towards and experiences with two functionalities built into Tesla Model S cars: Autopilot and Summon. Questions covered frequency of use, satisfaction, ease of learning and knowledge related to Autopilot and Summon. Additionally, we asked participants to report unusual or unexpected behaviors they experienced while using these systems and what they consider a key aspect of safety. The average time to complete the survey was 9.6 minutes."

[creato]

From the abstract alone (can't access the full paper), that study seems indistinguishable from a Tesla PR puff piece.

[PhaseBlue]

The guidelines are pretty simple: When you engage autopilot it reminds you: Keep your hands on the wheel: Be prepared to take over at any time.

[jijojv]

They do for legal reasons. Are you saying autopilot is no better than adaptive cruise control and lane assist found on many cars - Not the impression they want you to have at https://www.tesla.com/autopilot ...

[wpietri]

Sure. And I'm skeptical that's really enough to keep most humans alert enough to actually be effective at taking over at any time.

Most users will say it's fine, of course. And, as here, Tesla will certainly use it to quickly blame the driver in an accident. But I'd like to see objective measures of attention compared over the long term.

[amelius]

You can't ask a human to do that. It's like selling a gun with a trigger that pulls if you wave at it.

[strathmeyer]

Didn't work for trains, now did it?

[lolc]

Exactly. Train drivers have whole protocols to counter attention issues. And they are trained professionals.

A tape repeating "put your hands back on the instruments" can only buy you that much safety.

[gsnedders]

> This is completely irrelevant and false.

I, for one, would be generally dubious about making such a strong statement against something the NTSB has stated: it may well be the case that the system as designed should work as you describe, but why do they believe otherwise? Was there some flaw in the system?

[cmurf]

Call me cynical, but it sounds like designing the wheel sensors to tend toward not sensing hands on, increases the chance the company can use the narrative being used "driver received hands-on warning and (apparently) ignored them" etc.

False negative seems likely. False positive seems unlikely, maybe nearly impossible.