
Troubles with Tesla's automated parking summon safety regulators - stablemap
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-tesla-safety-nhtsa/u-s-auto-safety-agency-notes-tesla-accidents-with-smart-summon-feature-idUSKBN1WH280
======
Shank
The real problem here is that Tesla is operating under the assumption that
people obey warnings they give them, and that they behave rationally around
their luxury cars. They do not. In a perfectly rational world, people would
read the warnings and understand the risks, and thus not "expect" the Tesla to
detect things that it warns that it cannot detect.

The warnings say you need direct line of sight, that the system isn't perfect,
and that it may not detect all obstacles. Even ones expected to be in parking
lots. Those warnings all make sense, but the people recording the videos don't
care. They're just pressing the button and being shocked that it doesn't work.

Ultimately, regulators will step in if they feel that people still get into
crashes despite having the warnings. If the warnings don't stop people from
doing stupid things, they'll require more warnings or kill the feature.
Unfortunately for Tesla, the regulator focus is public safety (and the
underlying statistics). If the tables turn then it doesn't matter how safe the
feature is when used correctly. Instead, it matters how safe the feature is
when used incorrectly.

And that will only hurt Tesla in the long run. And that's a shame, because it
will make true self driving cars that much harder to get to market.

~~~
new_realist
Tesla is incentivized to allow users to ignore their warnings, as it gives
them a ton of real world data with which to train their algorithms, all the
while using case law precedent around “intended use” to shield them from
actual liability, even though the abuse is totally foreseeable and easy to
prevent.

They’ve been doing this with Autopilot since the beginning: they have the
demonstrated ability to restrict Autopilot to highways, which is the only
intended use, but they choose not to flip this switch, so that they can use
customers (and you, me, and your children) as guinea pigs and collect that
sweet, sweet data, which they upload continuously to their servers.

~~~
kerng
Elon Musk just tweeted 500000+ parking summons since launch.

They certainly have the front seat compared to any other competitor when it
comes to real world scenarios.

------
pdq
Another point which needs to be brought up is insurance. If accidents are
being caused by this technology, insurers are eventually going to either:
increase rates on cars with FSD, or just stop offering insurance on cars with
FSD.

IMO if Tesla were really confident in their summon technology, they would
cover accidents with it themselves. Relying on errors with their technology to
be covered by outside insurance is reckless.

~~~
dragonwriter
> If accidents are being caused by this technology, insurers are eventually
> going to either: increase rates on cars with FSD, or just stop offering
> insurance on cars with FSD.

Or exclude use of FSD from coverage.

~~~
new_realist
It’s hard to verify Summon is in use when only Tesla has access to the data,
and they’re very uncooperative when it would make them look bad.

I wouldn’t call it “FSD” except as a joke. Tesla is 15 years away from FSD.

~~~
dragonwriter
> It’s hard to verify Summon is in use when only Tesla has access to the data

Mathematical certainty, or even criminal-style proof beyond a reasonable doubt
isn't required. The insurance company writes the rule in their policy, refuses
to pay if they think there is sufficient evidence that the policy allows it,
and if the insured disagrees they get to sue the insurance company over it,
and the case will be decided on the civil preponderance of the evidence
standard.

------
powerbroker
I tried the V10 SW a few days ago. In sunny, dry weather, with no debris and 0
traffic. In a flat, well-maintained parking lot. A dog with a paper bag over
its head would navigate better. I won't trust it until they are 10 iterations
into it.

~~~
YZF
dogs have a keen sense of smell though ;)

------
Glawen
I find it funny that the US requires to have engraved "Objects in mirror are
closer than they appear" on their mirror, and yet allow to sell cars with
dubious autonomous driving claims which are misleading.

------
underwater
"I expected the Tesla to ‘see’ it and stop, however I had to take my finger
off the (app) button when I saw that my Tesla wasn’t slowing down,”

Your car is not a fucking toy. He could have injured the occupants of the
other car while he watched and filmed because he wanted to play with a cool
feature without first learning how it works.

If you don't know what's going to happen, don't assume your automated car
knows how to avoid a collision.

------
whatever1
If I drive drunk then I have to face legal consequences, even if I don’t cause
an accident. Just because of the higher probability of causing an accident.

Tesla on the other hand can freely release half baked software killing people,
causing accidents with being 100% at fault and now threatening kids in
shopping malls without any consequences.

~~~
mrtksn
You could have done that too if you had fame and money. In fact, celebrities
get away with a lot of stuff that ordinary folks cannot.

I love what Tesla is doing to the auto industry but I don’t like the idea if a
company that’s not accountable.

------
vkou
As well they should, for a couple of reasons.

1\. Legally, just because you're a licensed driver does not mean you've been
licensed to remote-operate a car, while standing on the sideline, in a
pedestrian-heavy environment, where your line of sight, and your vehicle's
path of travel is obstructed by hazards.

2\. Teslas seem incapable of reliable collision avoidance, so you can't just
expect your car to do the right thing.

~~~
teslafanboi
Teslas seem perfectly capable of avoiding collisions so you're wrong

~~~
javagram
From the article: “ One posted a video of a Tesla striking a garage wall and
another of a Tesla being struck by a vehicle backing up.”

~~~
teslafanboi
please explain how the tesla is supposed to avoid a car backing up into it

~~~
vkou
Please explain how the Tesla was not at fault in this video:

[https://twitter.com/eiddor/status/1177749574976462848](https://twitter.com/eiddor/status/1177749574976462848)

The driver had to hit an e-stop, to prevent an accident.

And also, while we're at it, please explain how a self-driving car that is
incapable of seeing that it's going to get t-boned, if it crosses an
intersection where it does not have the right of way is in any way ready for
the public.

~~~
teslafanboi
We have no idea if the Tesla would have stopped itself - im positive the
driver releasing the button wouldn't have the reaction time the car did thus
proving the car was avoiding the accident by itself. get worked idiot

------
jmpman
Maybe Tesla is coaxing insurers into disallowing claims when using summon.
This would the force Tesla customers to switch to Tesla insurance.

------
bob33212
How much authority do they have on private property? If I buy a farm who has
the authority to stop me from driving remote control or autonomous cars on
that farm? If i make that farm accessible to the public to buy my vegetables
how does that change?

~~~
flowerlad
What happens on your private property is your business... up until the point
you allow public access. If public has access then normal laws governing motor
vehicles are applicable even on your private property.

~~~
slg
>If public has access then normal laws governing motor vehicles are applicable

Laws certainly apply, but not necessarily "normal laws governing motor
vehicles". For example, you probably can't be ticketed for running a stop sign
in a parking lot on private property. However, you would almost certainly be
liable for damage if running that stop sign caused an accident and you could
be potentially charged with some type of generic reckless driving offense.
Obviously the laws vary by jurisdiction.

~~~
bigiain
As you say, it depends on the jurisdiction.

Here (Australia) the rules define "road related areas" as including private
property that does not have a "normally locked gate" protecting access.

This means all road rules (including stop signs, alcohol/drug rules, mobile
phone use, and speed limits) apply in places like publicly accessible carparks
on private property, and homeowner's driveways if they do not have a "normally
locked gate". People have been booked for drink driving and mobile phone use
sitting in their cars in their own driveways here (almost certainly after
"failing the attitude test" and pissing a cop off enough for them to
punitively enforce a stupid interpretation of a poorly written law, but that's
a different rant...)

------
tibbydudeza
Yet another dumb boneheaded Elon move from Tesla ... cars are not browsers.

It is one thing to test "beta" software on your PC but it is a totally another
thing when it can actually kill people.

They should look at how medical devices are developed and certified.

------
dang
Recent and related:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21105388](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21105388)

------
sschueller
So everyone who has this feature purchased the full autonomous future upgrade
for $6000.

Does anyone really think that will become a reality before the cars end of
life?

