[kevincox]

> Don’t want to see autopilot disabled as a result of this

I would. I think any self-driving system that expects the "driver" (passenger I guess) to take over in tough situations is bound to fail again and again. If people feel like they don't need to pay attention they won't no matter how much they know that they should.

I think that partial autonomy is a sort of uncanny valley, either side is much safer.

[prawn]

I'd prevent them from using the AutoPilot term, penalise them for marketing imagery that includes people driving with their hands off the wheel, and require hands to be on the wheel far more often.

Until it's significantly improved, it should be a backup safety system rather than a driving and safety system.

[Robotbeat]

>I'd prevent them from using the AutoPilot term

I disagree. It's the same term as in aviation and does the same thing.

> penalise them for marketing imagery that includes people driving with their hands off the wheel

That's more reasonable.

[HumanHater]

Can this "Autopilot" control altitude of the vehicle? No. Therefor it's not the same thing, it is just something similar.

What should we call car autopilot? There is more than one opinion. Some people believe in importance of some weird technical characteristics. For most people defining property of autopilot is its ability to control vehicle while pilot left the cockpit for a few minutes. So to them car autopilot must safely drive some roads and require human to take full control on the others. Taking over in case of emergency doesn't exactly fit this idea.

What looks really weird in all this discussions is their fanatical uselessness. Who would be hurt if new law would prohibit to call autopilot anything less than L5? Well probably no one. Who would benefit? Most likely a lot of people. Why would anyone oppose regulation like this? Huge question.

[hashbig]

> It's the same term as in aviation and does the same thing.

Except in aviation trained pilots with at least a decade of experience flying planes get to use it, understanding well the limitations and purpose of the technology. A teenager can use Tesla's "Autopilot".

[Robotbeat]

Incorrect. Autopilots are commonly used even in general aviation, and you can get your pilot’s license in just a month or two if you had a cooperative flight school. Heck, there are accelerated immersive programs that train you in just 14 days.

You only need ~40 hours (minimum) of flight time to get your private pilot’s license. This isn’t even much different than driving license requirements, except that planes are a lot more expensive to rent and operate.

(And for the record, teens can also use autopilots on airplanes since you can get a student pilot’s license allowing you to operate a plane by yourself at age 16. Roughly the same number of hours of supervised instructional operation as getting a driver’s license.)

[rurounijones]

I think you are nitpicking definitions here when it is not the issue.

The issue is that the general public think of "Autopilot" as the magical piece of technology that automatically pilots thing while you sip a pina colada and otherwise switch off mentally.

What the 0.5% of people who actually know what is required of the flesh and blood pilot when using an aviation autopilot is not the issue. It is what the majority understand.

Changing what Tesla is allowed to call it is the path of least resistance rather than trying to educate the general public on "what the team actually means in the industry that made the term famous and therefore should be universally applied elsewhere".

[Robotbeat]

> It is what the majority understand.

Yeah, you're going to have to provide some evidence of that, not just assertion (as common as that assertion may be on HN).

The word "autopilot" has a well-established definition. You might think "automobile" was a fully automatic vehicle.

[prawn]

As I understand it, aviation autopilot is generally used in open air where there are typically not frequent stationary objects the software is not designed to detect. Also usually sold in a different way to a different market.