Comment by bit_logic | Hacker News Reader

Comment by bit_logic | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

I think we need to add a new level 2 assisted driving skills section to driving tests. Level 2 can be safer but it really requires understanding how level 2 works and limitations. For example, when I use level 2 (mine is Honda but applies to other level 2 as well since they mostly share the same vendor), these are the rules I follow:

- Car switching in/out of my lane, I manually take over

- Tight curve in the freeway, manually take over

- Very frequently check the dashboard indicator that shows if the sensors "sees" the car front or not

- Anything unusual like construction, cones, car on shoulder, manually take over

- Anything that looks difficult like weird merging lanes, manually take over

- Any bad weather or condition like sun directly in front, manual drive

- Frequently adjusting max speed setting on ACC. It's safer to not be too much above the prevailing speeds. Otherwise, if ACC suddenly becomes blind, it can accelerate dangerously as it tries to reach max set speed.

- I don't trust lane keep much, it's mostly a backup for my own steering and making my arms less tired turning the wheel

The key thing is to recognize just how dumb this technology is. It's not smart, it's not AI. It's just a bit above the old cruise control. With that mindset it can be used safely.

If level 2 requires such handholding, what’s the point? Seems to me like it just leads to a false sense of security, giving drivers the feeling that they can trust the self-driving system a lot more than they safely can.

It's basically ultra advanced cruise control that can also handle stop and go traffic on a well marked road. That frees the driver up to dedicate more of the situational awareness budget to other things.

If you use it that way it's fine. If you expect it to be as smart as a student driver it's not fine.

The point is that it makes driving on the highway easier, just like automatic transmissions, power steering, etc. I'm sure early critics of all of these technologies have said things like "but if the driver doesn't need to spend mental and physical energy to that this they will stop paying attention to the road and will be less safe."

You’re sure? Perhaps you could find where somebody actually said that.

I meant it sarcastically. Perhaps no one did say that at the time. My point was that it would obviously be ridiculous if they did.

100% ...

I'd rather at least get the pleasure of driving, rather than basically becoming the supervisor for my car. Quartlery performance reviews, checking on KPI's.

Autopilot and the like are absolutely not on my list of features I'm looking for when buying a new car. Crusie-control? Handy. AP, waste of (my) time.

Seems like it's easier just to drive regularly. This sounds very distracted

> Level 2 can be safer but [...]

I think that requires more numerate analysis than you're giving though. The data from the story is a sample size of 11 crashes over three years (I think). If that's really the size of the effect, then your "but [...]" clause seems very suspect.

There are almost two million of these cars on the roads now. It seems extremely likely that the number of accidents prevented by AP dwarfs this effect, so arguing against it even by implication as you do here seems likely to be doing more harm than good.

That doesn't mean it's not worth investigating what seems like an identifiable edge case in the AP obstacle detection. But that's a bug fix, not an argument about "Level 2 Autonomy" in general.

I think it's early to be adding stuff like that to government mandated driving tests when these cars are only theoretically available to the ever dwindling middle class and above. Unless my circumstances change there's no chance I'll be in one for at least 10-15 years.

I wonder if some sort of standard display showing what the vehicle "sees" and is predicted to do will be regulated. For example, if the display shows the vehicle doesn't understand a firetruck parked half way in the lane or the tight curve on the freeway, at least the driver can validate on the display and have some time to react.

I would strongly prefer a car with such features.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com