The valet probably had visions of Ferris Bueller's Day Out, but it didn't quite go as planned.
Man has to be cut from Porsche he was trying to valet park outside luxury Sydney hotel.

---

Grant
Darwin NT

MotoGP practice crash.
Looks like too much front brake & couldn't recover resulting in a bad highside accident.

Pirro was knocked unconscious when he hit the ground, but by the time he was taken to the circuit medical centre for checks, he had regained consciousness, according to motorsport.com.
...taken to a Florence hospital by helicopter for further examinations.
“Michele recognises people and can talk. He doesn’t remember anything."
“He can move his legs and arms, but he could have a problem with the shoulder, so they are going to check it in a hospital in Florence with an MRI to make sure nothing is broken.”

---

Grant
Darwin NT

Any landing you can walk away from ...
http://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-us-canada-44342250/plane-makes-emergency-landing-on-busy-los-angeles-road

---

The Scandal of an Outdated Air Traffic Control System

Did you know when you text someone that you’ve landed at the airport, you’re using far more advanced technology than your plane’s air traffic controller?

It’s a shameful fact that some of the methods they rely on today have not changed since the 1930s. Over 60 countries—including all the developed nations—have modernized their systems but ours is stuck in the past thanks to politics and special-interest turf wars.

To find out why, I asked Bob Poole.

... He describes an antiquated air traffic control system that costs airlines and passengers $33 billion per year in wasted time and excess operating costs. It’s also making us less safe.

---

Feeble excuse cost $310

All vehicles I've driven over the last 2 decades had a clock on the dash & pretty certain most of them before that time had an analogue clock :-)

What some people do to get a Darwin Award nomination

sentenced to a year in a young offenders institution and banned from driving for two-and-a-half years.

Not much of a penalty for such dangerous acts of stupidity.

---

Grant
Darwin NT

Crappy IoT on the high seas: Holes punched in hull of maritime security
Researchers: We can nudge ships off course

Infosec Europe Years-old security issues mostly stamped out in enterprise technology remain in maritime environments, leaving ships vulnerable to hacking, tracking, and worse.

A demo at the Infosecurity Europe conference in London by Ken Munro and Iian Lewis of Pen Test Partners (PTP) demonstrated multiple methods to interrupt and disrupt the shipping industry.

Weak default passwords, failure to apply software updates, and a lack of encryption – all reminding us of crappy IoT kit – enable a variety of attacks against shipping vessels and related operations, the conference's audience was told.

---

Forget the political slant of the following report. 22 years? Will the infrastructure be there & will technology be up to it is the question.

No petrol or diesel from 2040

Cars swerve to avoid woman found sleeping on FM 1093 in Fulshear, Texas

Fulshear Police Department dashcam video shows cars swerving to avoid a woman sleeping on the edge of FM 1093. An officer helps the woman, who was uninjured, to safety.

---

Stolen SUV driven by 15-year-old crashes, killing 3 teens, police say

Three teenagers were ejected and killed from a stolen SUV on Friday when an underage driver lost control of the speeding vehicle on a New York highway and it rolled over several times, authorities said.

Nine teenagers and an infant were packed inside the Chevy Trailblazer as it erratically sped and swerved in and out of traffic on Long Island’s Meadowbrook Parkway just before noon, New York State Police said at a news conference.

The driver was a 15-year-old girl from Uniondale, a Nassau County suburb about 30 miles from Manhattan, FOX 5 New York reported.

---

NTSB's Tesla fatal crash report: Autopilot sped up, no braking in final seconds
Report details the final seconds of the autonomous Tesla Model X that crashed, killing an Apple engineer.

The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) has released its preliminary report of its investigation into the Tesla Model X crash in Autopilot that killed an Apple engineer.

The NTSB's preliminary findings (pdf) of the investigation from which it excluded Tesla don't look good for Elon Musk's electric-vehicle company. However, the report also notes that key external factors may have contributed to the fatality.

The agency found no evidence that the vehicle's crash-avoidance systems kicked in before the horrific crash, which sheared off the front-end of the Model X and killed its 38-year-old driver, Apple engineer Wei 'Walter' Huang.

"At three seconds prior to the crash and up to the time of impact with the crash attenuator, the Tesla's speed increased from 62 to 70.8mph, with no precrash braking or evasive steering movement detected," the report notes.

---

The NTSB's preliminary findings (pdf) of the investigation from which it excluded Tesla don't look good for Elon Musk's electric-vehicle company. However, the report also notes that key external factors may have contributed to the fatality.

Huang’s family told the Mercury News that he took the vehicle to the Tesla dealership several times because the Autopilot would veer the car into the same divider at that location on the highway.
38-year-old Apple software engineer Wei “Walter” Huang — had five seconds and 150 meters (492 feet) to take control before colliding with a concrete divider, but logs show that no action was taken. Prior to the crash, Autopilot was engaged and several visual with one audio warnings were issued to the driver, but the logs showed no hands were put on the steering wheel for six seconds before the Model X slammed into the divider.

Not to speak ill of the dead, but seriously- The speed limit on the area of roadway was 65 mph. Preliminary recorded data indicate that the traffic-aware cruise control speed was set to 75 mph at the time of the crash. He knew there was an issue at that location. He ignored visual & audio warnings to take control. The driver died due to his own laziness/stupidity/negligence or whatever you care to call it.
The automatic emergency braking should have triggered the brakes, but that can be disabled by the driver. And it only operates under certain conditions, and even when the function is enabled, it can be over ridden/disabled by certain actions by the driver.
And then, even if it isn't affected by the drivers actions, it is only set to reduce the speed of the vehicle by 40km/h after which it then stops braking. A collision will still occur without the input of the driver to stop it from happening.

Tesla need to accept that people have a certain pre-conceived idea of what an Auto Pilot is that has no relationship with reality & they would be better off just calling it Driver Assistant, as most people aren't smart enough to actually read the owner's manual- where it states repeatedly- that the Auto Pilot function isn't there to drive the vehicle without driver input, but to assist them with their driving.
These safety features would be a good thing, if people were rational. They're not. While they're meant to make driving safer by helping people drive, people tend to be lazy & stupid & expect such features to do everything for them- even if the manual tells them that they're not there for that purpose. That is what an autonomous car is meant to do, not a car that is meant to be driven by a person- regardless of whatever assistance it might provide them.

---

Grant
Darwin NT

Tesla need to accept that people have a certain pre-conceived idea of what an Auto Pilot is that has no relationship with reality

It was a marketing decision to call it Auto Pilot precisely because people have a per-conceived idea of what an Auto Pilot is. No amount of legalese can absolve Tesla.

Tesla need to accept that people have a certain pre-conceived idea of what an Auto Pilot is that has no relationship with reality

It was a marketing decision to call it Auto Pilot precisely because people have a per-conceived idea of what an Auto Pilot is. No amount of legalese can absolve Tesla.

It's not a matter of legalese, it's a matter of fact.
The Tesla is not an autonomous car. The driver is the one responsible for being in control of the car. And the driver is responsible for their action or inaction.
If an accident were to be the result of a failure of the car eg brake failure, cruise control not releasing when brakes applied, Lane Assist stopping or interfering with the driver avoiding a dangerous situation, then the manufacturer bares responsibility. If the Auto Pilot functions didn't work within their stated capabilities, and they contributed to an accident, then the manufacturer bares responsibility.
But if the car worked as described in the owner's manual in accordance with it's abilities & limits, and there was no failure of any part or system of the car, then it just comes down to the driver being responsible.
It all comes down to people being responsible for their actions.

If you really feel a need to get in to the responsibilities of people & corporations, then do as i suggested in the other thread & start a Philosophy thread so this one (like the other) doesn't get swamped in that discussion, if others feel the need to take it up.

---

Grant
Darwin NT

If Tesla called the type on this web page purple and the background orange, and explained what purple was and orange was in legalese they would still be wrong. A lawyer, or a team of them, can't redefine words. Never mind the owners manual wasn't being handed out each and every time they ran a commercial touting their auto-pilot, thus creating the expectation the legalese in the manual must be in error. The word has a meaning and if that isn't what you intend to say, use a different word. They will hang for this sooner rather than later. Even if only deceptive advertising.

If Tesla called the type on this web page purple and the background orange, and explained what purple was and orange was in legalese they would still be wrong. A lawyer, or a team of them, can't redefine words.

They aren't trying to redefine the meaning of the term, they are using it correctly.

"An autopilot is a system used to control the trajectory of an aircraft without constant 'hands-on' control by a human operator being required. Autopilots do not replace human operators, but instead they assist them in controlling the aircraft."
(bolding and italics mine).

The Auto Pilot in a Tesla is just like the Auto Pilot in an aircraft- it is there to assist the driver, not replace them.
There are many things corporations should be held accountable for, the stupidity and/or negligence of the people that use their products isn't one of them.*
*Like most things, there are always exceptions. This case isn't one of them.

Never mind the owners manual wasn't being handed out each and every time they ran a commercial touting their auto-pilot, thus creating the expectation the legalese in the manual must be in error.

If people are so stupid as to think advertising takes precedence over a manual, then they shouldn't be allowed out in public without a responsible adult to look after them.

The word has a meaning and if that isn't what you intend to say, use a different word.

And as I have pointed out, they have used the term correctly and in accordance with it's definition and usage.

They will hang for this sooner rather than later. Even if only deceptive advertising.

Yes, their advertising is misleading- so they could be done for misleading advertising. They are responsible for their advertising, they are responsible for the function & reliability of their vehicles (unless a 3rd party has modified it in which case the 3rd party assumes liability for the effects of that modification). They are not responsible for the people that drive their vehicles.

---

Grant
Darwin NT

Grant, ask someone born after 1990 what it means and you will get a very different answer than someone born in the 1960's.

A wing leveler was an autopilot in the 60's. No human in the aircraft is an autopilot today. Military has drones that make aircraft carrier landings without a human pilot. Computers and senors have changed expectations drastically. Dictionaries are behind the times.

Product, a space heater. Required warning sticker, "Caution gets hot in use."

I'm not debating who should be at fault, I telling you what a jury will find and why. People who design products and name features must always realize a moronic idiot will be a user and design it so he can use it and not kill himself or others.

Tesla's big mistake is the system can tell when the driver is ignoring it**. The software must go into a fail safe mode and bring the vehicle to a stop and if no action is taken then call 911, assuming a medical emergency, just like OnStar calls 911 if the airbags deploy.
If action is taken after going into fail safe the system should disengage completely* and stay disengaged for some length of time to make even moronic idiots realize they must actually drive the car.

Finally with today's morons on cell phones, a less then fully autonomous system called autopilot is like letting a herd of drunk drivers on the road.

Also I note in some crashes the system was on but the road wasn't one where it should have been on. Doesn't that car come with a GPS so that shouldn't happen?


*not to include emergency collision avoidance by breaking, traction control and the like which should operate all the time.

**I hope Tesla and others make their software smart enough to tell when drunks or sleepy drivers are behind the wheel and refuse to be part of a suicide.