There is a heck of a difference between total hits and batting average.

The problem is that there is a huge temptation to not dial in your attention. This is akin to the lowered mental alertness from texting

Tesla calls it "Autopilot". They advertise that term, Musk brags about it, he says it is already better than the average driver . . .

No one can expect an untrained driver to remain alert after hours of being a passenger on autopilot.

An insurmountable issue is the car making a moral decision.
Kid runs out in front of the car, a human swerves into oncoming traffic (risking their own lives) to avoid the kid.
Would the car?
I can also foresee scenarios where the technology would fail.
What if a dog runs out rather than a kid? How does the car reliably differentiate kid (avoid at all costs) vs dog (don't swerve, sorry Rex)?
What about scenarios where a of breaking road rules is required? (Driving through a red light to clear the way for an ambulance)?

I hope that freakshow peddler of overhyped gizmos uses his own Autopilot, if it's so righteous.

Granted, none of us know what truly transpired. At the same time, it's a bit Darwinianly stupid to do something like go down the highway in a car (while sitting in the left front seat) and not pay immediate attention to what's going on around you, Tesla-magic autopilot or not. With the new rumor that the guy may have been watching a movie on a portable DVD player, that's even more tragically sad.

Joshua Brown, RIP really should have known better. He had a YouTube channel almost entirely devoted to Tesla.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCLqNcKzWLAVb1Ez6SbshI7g

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/9I5rraWJq6E" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

I feel bad for the guy and his family but he's dead because he totally bought Tesla's BS.

Tesla shouldn't be hyping this the way they are and I sure don't want it around me when I'm driving. There are already millions of drivers who don't pay attention. And here we have a car company that actually encourages it....and a government that has given them untold millions.

Mercedes and others have similar systems. But no one, other than Tesla, calls theirs an autopilot.

Yep. What we have is big push, by Tesla, to embrace the belief in unicorns.

As in--This device will transport you and your loved ones without a worry, and w/o a drop of that evil oil. Arching Rainbows abound.

Other car companies have the product development maturity to move slowly with this type of technology. Whereas Tesla has hype technology. ...Feeding on people's desire for unicorns.

The other problem is now you'll be cruising along paying even less attention than usual, and suddenly there will be an emergency and you'll have to instantly switch on and take over from the computer, in a stressful split second critical situation. Not going to happen for most people.

I agree, they are using the wrong terminology. If you need to pay attention and be ready to take over control, as Tesla claims you do, then they are misleading people as to the the abilities of the vehicle.

The amount of external variables that need to be programmed into autonomous driving are exponentially more than the variables of today's aviation autopilots.

In my commercial UAS world, the current auto pilot capabilities are really revolutionary. No one really "flies" the UAS. It accepts a flight plan and executes it faithfully and manages wind, temperature, elevation, aircraft systems status, etc. with ease.

The next phase for us is beyond line of sight flight but that is still sooo much easier than the dynamics of driving.

As a former flight test guy, my concern is that the driver systems are not being driven and tested with the same protocols as in flight test.

The problems can be solved.

I'm sure the problems can be solved, and will be solved, and autonomous cars will be safe and widely used. Eventually. In the meantime, I'm appalled by Tesla's over confident, arrogant and cynical approach to this.
- They marketed the self driving system and called it "Autopilot", a name that invites drivers to sit back and let the car do the driving.
- They did so even though they knew the system was not fully tested, and we know that because they explicitly designated it "beta": how much more of an admission can there be?
- Musk bragged that Autopilot was better than the average driver, that it was 50% safer to use Autopilot than to drive yourself, and tweeted his approval of drivers who posted Youtube videos of their Teslas driving autonomously, including a video by the now-dead guy.
- When the accident happened, Tesla kept quiet about it, I haven't read about any change they made to Autopilot software in response to the accident, and they didn't tell owners that Autopilot couldn't cope with a big truck turning in front of the car: they let those owners go right on using Autopilot, although any one of them could have then been killed just like Howard was.
- When the news of the accident broke, they issued a statement that is disingenuous and weasely, by saying neither the driver nor the car noticed a white semi trailer against a bright sky, they are suggesting that a human wouldn't have detected the truck, so how can you blame Autopilot, but this is bull****: a human who was paying attention would easily have seen the white semi trailer turning in front of him, if he had been paying attention, and the whole point of Autopilot is that it is always paying attention - but it can't detect what a human can.

Tesla either has terrible lawyers, or they don't listen to their lawyers. Maybe Howard was such a big fan of Tesla that his family will quietly settle. But the next dead person may not be. Especially if they are in the car that the Tesla hits.

Autopilot is a name associated with a variety of flight control devices. Not all cover three axis and steering (vertical and horizontal). So I wouldn't get too hung up on the use of the term "autopilot". Sure, there are current ones with amazing abilities, but that term was used to cover single axis systems too. It is a device to reduce pilot/driver workload, not one to replace driver/pilot responsability. By the way, plenty of pilots have met their fate using autopilot in planes (e.g., controlled flight into terrain). No explainable reason why you wouldn't pay attention to your surroundings while it is engaged (in plane or car). I will lean towards the side of "pilot error" on this one.

I like the Tesla product, it is a hoot to drive.

By the way, this is what Tesla is "touting":

Autopilot allows Model*S to steer within a lane, change lanes with the simple tap of a turn signal, and manage speed by using active, traffic-aware cruise control. Digital control of motors, brakes, and steering helps avoid collisions from the front and sides, and prevents the car from wandering off the road. Autopilot also enables your car to scan for a parking space and parallel park on command. And our new Summon feature lets you "call" your car from your phone so it can come greet you at the front door in the morning.

Autopilot features are progressively enabled over time with software updates.

Interesting that they blame the lack of visual contrast, because I would be shocked if the car didn't have some sort of proximity radar system that has nothing to do with visual contrast. I suspect it is more to do with the large cavity under the truck and the fact that the car didn't pick it up.

^^ But the general, non flying public for most part equates "Auto Pilot" to mean: The machine is doing the flying (or driving).

The general "non flying" public should understand that the plane they are in can crash on autopilot (and they have and will). That is why there is a pilot or two in the cockpit. Someone needs to be paying attention. I don't blame the technology here.

Any "autopilot" is not a "close my eyes and go to sleep and I will be alright" replacement for a driver/pilot. How can anyone think it is? I can't even trust my car's cruise control. Sorry, but I hope his end was swift and painless.

So just how much TSLA do you own?

Seriously, seems you should blame BOTH the driver and the tech. This sounds like what is referred to as a double-fault condition; where both the tech failed, and the user failed.

I understand that people like to assign blame to just one item, but if the "Auto pilot" was on, but didn't help, this is clear as day, both failed.

Now one could argue that the driver made the decision to buy, drive, and auto-pilot that gear, therefore Tesla has no fault for how it's used. And we will see just how far that argument goes in court.

None that I know of, unless it is buried in a mutual fund. Not that it matters. I don't fault the technology. I, for one, am not an early adopter of any technology. Let the first users find the limitations. I still run Win7.

Let the lawyers feed on it...that is what they do and how they make their nut. They will slow down the technology gains a bit, and make it costlier, but there is a movement to autonomous travel that will find its way.

Test driver is a former S.E.A.L.

https://www.sofx.com/2016/07/02/ex-navy-seal-killed-crash-using-teslas-autopilot-u-s-stripes/

Interesting article in the Los Angeles Times this morning regarding the different ways Tesla and Google are approaching the driverless car. In the article, a Google spokesman mentioned that during their testing they noticed that within a few minutes of being in the car, drivers ignored all the specified warnings and instructions about being ready to take immediate control of the vehicle. They began diverting their attention from the direction of travel and even taking their hands off the wheel.

I am in the camp that believes this death is a result of failure of both parties--the technology and the driver. We don't know the details as yet, but it's going to be hard to argue the driver did not notice a semi turning in front of him if he was following the protocol outlined by Tesla for their "autopilot" mode. Whether or not Tesla should have made the system inoperable unless the driver did follow the protocols is a subject for lawyers.