Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Minneapolis Star Tribune)   Man mistakenly claims autopilot made his Tesla tip over and sink into a swamp, thankfully he was rescued by Sir Lancelot and plans to try again   ( startribune.com) divider line
    More: Fail, autopilot feature, Automobile, Tesla, Driving, Tesla spokeswoman Keely, Steering, autopilot technology, Sheriff  
•       •       •

3355 clicks; posted to Main » on 17 Jul 2017 at 6:20 PM (21 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



51 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2017-07-17 02:01:04 PM  
Until his car testifies against him.
 
2017-07-17 02:40:09 PM  
"Twin Cities man says he's to blame, not Tesla autopilot, for crash into marsh"
 I know it's traditional to not read the article before posting but did you not even read the headline?
 
2017-07-17 02:45:28 PM  
This is as bad a headline fail as we get given that the first sentence of TFA is the polar opposite of what the headline stated.
 
2017-07-17 02:47:04 PM  
AND the headline of TFA, thank you Voice.
 
2017-07-17 03:41:35 PM  
img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2017-07-17 04:34:16 PM  
But the forth car stayed up and that's what you're going to get son, the strongest car on the road.
 
2017-07-17 04:52:55 PM  
Considering the "auto-pilot" (from the last I read) was only supposed to be used on main roads - aka not "a country road " - this is a big fail all around.  If the guy in the picture is the actual driver - he's even more a farking idiot.  You're still supposed to keep your hands on the wheel.
 
2017-07-17 06:23:02 PM  

Voiceofreason01: "Twin Cities man says he's to blame, not Tesla autopilot, for crash into marsh"
 I know it's traditional to not read the article before posting but did you not even read the headline?


Yesterday he was claiming it was the car and autopilot. Today after Tesla started to pull vehicle logs to see how it went wrong he now is saying it wasn't on.
 
2017-07-17 06:23:50 PM  
This guy seems overly apologetic.

Does Tesla blacklist people from buying their cars due to bad publicity?
 
2017-07-17 06:25:12 PM  
Good thing it wasn't brave Sir Robin.

i.ytimg.comView Full Size
 
2017-07-17 06:26:43 PM  
Artists re-creation of the incident:
i.ytimg.comView Full Size
 
2017-07-17 06:31:04 PM  

Gilligann: This guy seems overly apologetic.

Does Tesla blacklist people from buying their cars due to bad publicity?


I'll take a wild guess that if he's unfairly laying the blame on the company it might open him up to legal action.

I can't freaking wait until all cars are autonomous, and there's no farking controls inside. Humans are the weak link in these systems. We so stupid shiat all the time, and many of us will lie like we breathe.
 
2017-07-17 06:31:35 PM  
I read the headline as "Man mistakenly claims auto-pilot made his tea tip over" and was sorely disappointed it was not the most English of articles :(
 
2017-07-17 06:36:23 PM  
He should've listened when Lancelot said it was too perilous.
 
2017-07-17 06:38:42 PM  
img.fark.netView Full Size


Poor dude in the photo has nothing to with the story, but people are going to think he's the moron

OK, " President of the Los Angeles Tesla Club" does kind of hint that he might possibly be an asshole. But still, he has nothing to do with this story.
 
2017-07-17 06:39:50 PM  

Gilligann: This guy seems overly apologetic.

Does Tesla blacklist people from buying their cars due to bad publicity?


Since autonomous driving is regularly touted by local "news" outlets as the big baddie that's going to rape your dog and eat your children, the manufacturers are more than a little eager to make an example of at-fault drivers who would blame the car rather than own up to their incompetence.

In this case, between the time of the initial police report and the article being published, the guy realized just how farked he would be if he became that example.
 
2017-07-17 06:42:15 PM  

Astorix: But the forth car stayed up and that's what you're going to get son, the strongest car on the road.


M-but I don't want a car! I want...the transportation that I choose to have...a CERTAIN...SPECIAL...*SOMETHIN'*!
 
2017-07-17 06:42:50 PM  

mongbiohazard: . Humans are the weak link in these systems.


Morons are the weak link in these systems. It will be decades(if it ever happens)before any autonomous car is doing the things I do on a daily basis.
 
2017-07-17 06:44:20 PM  
TFA: The Sheriff's Office gave this description of the crash along eastbound 172nd Avenue NE.: "Clark stated that when he engaged the autopilot feature that the vehicle suddenly accelerated, causing the car to leave the roadway and overturn."
...
Clark told the Star Tribune Monday that he is trying to get the Sheriff's Office to change its account to what he says actually happened "as we were traveling back from our lake place" with two of his nephews and others.


The guy DID initially claim that the autopilot was at fault, but he's now backpedaling since he knows what would happen if his initial report sticks as his official statement.
 
2017-07-17 06:54:05 PM  

Voiceofreason01: mongbiohazard: . Humans are the weak link in these systems.

Morons are the weak link in these systems. It will be decades(if it ever happens)before any autonomous car is doing the things I do on a daily basis.


That's the rub...... oodles of us are morons. A significant percentage of us. Since we can't just stop all the morons from driving, we can at least make it safer by letting machines do the job better and safer than we do.

And I think you're underestimating the current state of the technology.
 
2017-07-17 06:54:33 PM  

Voiceofreason01: mongbiohazard: . Humans are the weak link in these systems.

Morons are the weak link in these systems. It will be decades(if it ever happens)before any autonomous car is doing the things I do on a daily basis.


And morons will be farking up the workings of autonomous car systems as bad or worse than they manage with manual controls.

Read up on the history of airbus and it's fly-by-wire system. In the end it has probably caused as many crashes as it prevented.
 
2017-07-17 06:57:32 PM  

mongbiohazard: Voiceofreason01: mongbiohazard: . Humans are the weak link in these systems.

Morons are the weak link in these systems. It will be decades(if it ever happens)before any autonomous car is doing the things I do on a daily basis.

That's the rub...... oodles of us are morons. A significant percentage of us. Since we can't just stop all the morons from driving, we can at least make it safer by letting machines do the job better and safer than we do.

And I think you're underestimating the current state of the technology.


Nope. While autonomous cars can make reactions faster than you can blink, they are actually much slower at signal processing and pattern recognition. Efforts to speed that up require shortcuts that produce... shall we say "interesting" results?

And throwing more hardware at the problem doesn't speed things up. Reality still only happens one second at a time.
 
2017-07-17 06:58:10 PM  
img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2017-07-17 06:58:14 PM  

mongbiohazard: Voiceofreason01: mongbiohazard: . Humans are the weak link in these systems.

Morons are the weak link in these systems. It will be decades(if it ever happens)before any autonomous car is doing the things I do on a daily basis.

That's the rub...... oodles of us are morons. A significant percentage of us. Since we can't just stop all the morons from driving, we can at least make it safer by letting machines do the job better and safer than we do.

And I think you're underestimating the current state of the technology.


That's the thing though we already have a very low accident rate for the number of hours Americans drive and better driver aids(auto braking, advanced cruise control, etc) that are already available will improve that further. Self-driving cars are a marketing gimmick, not a safety device.
 
2017-07-17 07:22:36 PM  

Voiceofreason01: "Twin Cities man says he's to blame, not Tesla autopilot, for crash into marsh"
 I know it's traditional to not read the article before posting but did you not even read the headline?


Are you not familiar with the general level of intelligence here?
 
2017-07-17 07:23:06 PM  
Toyota never had a problem with sticking accelerators either.
Fark auto driving cars.
And Farm auto correct phones.
 
2017-07-17 07:26:19 PM  
img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2017-07-17 07:33:59 PM  
In an e-mail sent late Sunday to the responding deputy, Quinton Pomplun, and shared with the Star Tribune, Clark said, "I did not intend to put the blame [on] Tesla or the autopilot system."

The most Dickensian name you'll see today.
 
2017-07-17 07:39:15 PM  
Good to know it ended well...

img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2017-07-17 07:43:37 PM  
Laugh while we can, and drive our sporty and performance vehicles while the sun shines.  It seems obvious to me, with the history of auto safety since the 1960's, that when something proves that it reduces injuries and deaths per passenger mile, it eventually becomes mandatory for cars sold in the US.  Examples are four-wheel hydraulic brakes, inside and outside rear-view mirrors, stop lights, CHMSL, seat belts, air bags, ABS, and electronic stability control.

Eventually, AI-driven cars and vans will be come significantly safer than human-driven cars.  They may be restricted to certain prepared roads that have supporting infrastructure, such as buried cables that are detectable as the lane markers, and some of them may be off-limits for human-driven cars, but the time will eventually come when traveling by AI-driven car is the rule rather than the exception, and from that point forward, human-driven cars, and roads that they are allowed on, will start to become less common.
 
2017-07-17 07:55:03 PM  
Way to link to a giant full page ad.
No, I didn't click-through.
 
2017-07-17 07:55:52 PM  

Voiceofreason01: That's the thing though we already have a very low accident rate for the number of hours Americans drive and better driver aids(auto braking, advanced cruise control, etc) that are already available will improve that further. Self-driving cars are a marketing gimmick, not a safety device.


What's nice is in a few decades it won't matter what you people think.
 
2017-07-17 07:57:26 PM  

WordsnCollision: Good to know it ended well...

[img.fark.net image 850x460]


They'll see and they'll know, and they'll say, "Why, WordsnCollisionwouldn't even harm a fly."
 
2017-07-17 08:10:55 PM  

strathmeyer: Voiceofreason01: That's the thing though we already have a very low accident rate for the number of hours Americans drive and better driver aids(auto braking, advanced cruise control, etc) that are already available will improve that further. Self-driving cars are a marketing gimmick, not a safety device.

What's nice is in a few decades it won't matter what you people think.


Enjoy your mortgage-payment sized membership fee to Uber that guarantees you a car in 60 minutes or less but only in the metro area you live in and only if there's no snow, rain or major sporting events. Coming soon: an optional upcharge to avoid that stale pee and vomit smell.
 
2017-07-17 09:27:55 PM  

Voiceofreason01: Enjoy your mortgage-payment sized membership fee to Uber that guarantees you a car in 60 minutes or less but only in the metro area you live in and only if there's no snow, rain or major sporting events. Coming soon: an optional upcharge to avoid that stale pee and vomit smell.


Well I'm not an idiot so I'm going to own my own fleet of self driving cars until they find some governmental way to squeeze out the little guy.
 
2017-07-17 09:30:35 PM  
People always blame "sudden acceleration" on the car until they learn that cars store logs in a black box.
 
2017-07-17 09:38:26 PM  

the ha ha guy: TFA: The Sheriff's Office gave this description of the crash along eastbound 172nd Avenue NE.: "Clark stated that when he engaged the autopilot feature that the vehicle suddenly accelerated, causing the car to leave the roadway and overturn."
...
Clark told the Star Tribune Monday that he is trying to get the Sheriff's Office to change its account to what he says actually happened "as we were traveling back from our lake place" with two of his nephews and others.

The guy DID initially claim that the autopilot was at fault, but he's now backpedaling since he knows what would happen if his initial report sticks as his official statement.


My guess is the 'sudden acceleration' was caused by the fact that he was showing off to 4 of his friends on a country road and hit the accelerator.  Nothing like a full g of acceleration into a turn to sorta throw you off.
 
2017-07-17 10:23:30 PM  

Voiceofreason01: mongbiohazard: . Humans are the weak link in these systems.

Morons are the weak link in these systems. It will be decades(if it ever happens)before any autonomous car is doing the things I do on a daily basis.


I just hope it can automate a big middle finger to let the morons know they are being terrible drivers.
 
2017-07-17 10:31:53 PM  
sounds like a case for LANCELOT CHIMP!!!
 
2017-07-18 09:18:02 AM  

sardonicobserver: Laugh while we can, and drive our sporty and performance vehicles while the sun shines.  It seems obvious to me, with the history of auto safety since the 1960's, that when something proves that it reduces injuries and deaths per passenger mile, it eventually becomes mandatory for cars sold in the US.  Examples are four-wheel hydraulic brakes, inside and outside rear-view mirrors, stop lights, CHMSL, seat belts, air bags, ABS, and electronic stability control.

Eventually, AI-driven cars and vans will be come significantly safer than human-driven cars.  They may be restricted to certain prepared roads that have supporting infrastructure, such as buried cables that are detectable as the lane markers, and some of them may be off-limits for human-driven cars, but the time will eventually come when traveling by AI-driven car is the rule rather than the exception, and from that point forward, human-driven cars, and roads that they are allowed on, will start to become less common.


Nope, liability laws will always blame the human for not intervening. At least for the foreseeable future.Think people are distracted now? Wait till the car does all the driving and thinking for them. And the human will always be to blame unless they have their hands on the wheel and eyes on the road ready to take over.   At that point you might as well just drive yourself. What happens when weather/road conditions go to shiat and the human is forced to take over?  Except it's a human with very little driving experience because the car almost always does it. As for as I'm concerned I've been working with computers way too long. The driving AI is written by programmers and they are some of the stupidest people I've met. Plus hardware dies. Don't want to be riding along spaced out when the car suddenly decides to throw an nmi error or divide by 0.  My mom has a car with an emergency braking system. twice it slammed on the brakes while going down the highway for no reason. Luckily there were no other vehicles around but if car manufactures can't even get that right I'd say you're a good 30 to 40 years from an autopilot you can explicitly trust not to kill you.
 
2017-07-18 11:51:59 AM  

Prince George: sardonicobserver: Laugh while we can, and drive our sporty and performance vehicles while the sun shines.  It seems obvious to me, with the history of auto safety since the 1960's, that when something proves that it reduces injuries and deaths per passenger mile, it eventually becomes mandatory for cars sold in the US.  Examples are four-wheel hydraulic brakes, inside and outside rear-view mirrors, stop lights, CHMSL, seat belts, air bags, ABS, and electronic stability control.

Eventually, AI-driven cars and vans will be come significantly safer than human-driven cars.  They may be restricted to certain prepared roads that have supporting infrastructure, such as buried cables that are detectable as the lane markers, and some of them may be off-limits for human-driven cars, but the time will eventually come when traveling by AI-driven car is the rule rather than the exception, and from that point forward, human-driven cars, and roads that they are allowed on, will start to become less common.

Nope, liability laws will always blame the human for not intervening. At least for the foreseeable future.Think people are distracted now? Wait till the car does all the driving and thinking for them. And the human will always be to blame unless they have their hands on the wheel and eyes on the road ready to take over.   At that point you might as well just drive yourself. What happens when weather/road conditions go to shiat and the human is forced to take over?  Except it's a human with very little driving experience because the car almost always does it. As for as I'm concerned I've been working with computers way too long. The driving AI is written by programmers and they are some of the stupidest people I've met. Plus hardware dies. Don't want to be riding along spaced out when the car suddenly decides to throw an nmi error or divide by 0.  My mom has a car with an emergency braking system. twice it slammed on the brakes while going down the highway for no reason. Luckil ...


You're right for the *foreseeable* future, and thanks for bringing in the insurance angle.  The insurance company lobbies are very effective in getting good, inexpensive safety improvements into motor vehicle laws.  I'm speculating about what happens when all the practical problems are done.  Electronic stability control was a race car and high performance street car thing for years, then trickled down through the premium car market and got enough numbers to get the attention of the IIHS/HLDI and the NHTSA.  If you have ABS, you add gyros and accelerometers (these are in all smartphones) and another computer module in the ABS, and you have everything save the software for electronic stability control, so it is mandatory in all cars sold in the US for 2012 models forward.  The result:
img.fark.netView Full Size

By Dennis Bratland - Own work, CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=17092427

I'm speculating that once we have the safety kinks worked out, we will have data history to show that AI-driven cars are safer than human-driven cars, and even if it takes special roads that aren't available to human-driven cars, this will become a norm.  It will start with buses and light trucks and work down from there.  As you say, this isn't going to happen in the *foreseeable* future, but I believe that there is a danger that it *will* happen, starting in 20 years or less.

Maybe I'm just paranoid because I like sports cars and high performance street cars, and performance motorcycles, and I personally see such a future of motor vehicles as dystopian.  I hope you're right, and it never happens at all.  But I fear that it will, and I believe that it will become inevitable, as ubiquitous hybrid and electric cars are now.  I do hope to drive an electric or hybrid street car with a 0-60 mph time of under 3 seconds while they will still let me drive it myself.
 
2017-07-18 12:01:29 PM  
 
2017-07-18 12:23:50 PM  

sardonicobserver: Whoops, the driver recanted:
http://www.foxnews.com/auto/2017/07/18/tesla-driver-recants-says-autop​ilot-not-to-blame-for-crash.html


Nice scoop.
 
2017-07-18 12:48:04 PM  

LordOfThePings: sardonicobserver: Whoops, the driver recanted:
http://www.foxnews.com/auto/2017/07/18/tesla-driver-recants-says-autop​ilot-not-to-blame-for-crash.html

Nice scoop.


Coincidence, luck.  I just noticed that and came back to FARK.  I figure that he must have listened to his lawyer, because the BS level was so thick in his story that the news report made FARK and was greenllit instantly.  After all, FARK is a humor site...
 
2017-07-18 01:09:33 PM  

sardonicobserver: LordOfThePings: sardonicobserver: Whoops, the driver recanted:
http://www.foxnews.com/auto/2017/07/18/tesla-driver-recants-says-autop​ilot-not-to-blame-for-crash.html

Nice scoop.

Coincidence, luck.  I just noticed that and came back to FARK.  I figure that he must have listened to his lawyer, because the BS level was so thick in his story that the news report made FARK and was greenllit instantly.  After all, FARK is a humor site...


Did you happen to read TFA? Fark headlines don't always reflect the content.
 
2017-07-18 02:08:10 PM  
sardonicobserver:I'm speculating that once we have the safety kinks worked out, we will have data history to show that AI-driven cars are safer than human-driven cars, and even if it takes special roads that aren't available to human-driven cars

We have those.  :)
People use them now all they want and stay off the roads.  And their self driving cars wont be in my way.
rtd-fastracks.comView Full Size
 
2017-07-18 02:08:25 PM  

LordOfThePings: sardonicobserver: LordOfThePings: sardonicobserver: Whoops, the driver recanted:
http://www.foxnews.com/auto/2017/07/18/tesla-driver-recants-says-autop​ilot-not-to-blame-for-crash.html

Nice scoop.

Coincidence, luck.  I just noticed that and came back to FARK.  I figure that he must have listened to his lawyer, because the BS level was so thick in his story that the news report made FARK and was greenllit instantly.  After all, FARK is a humor site...

Did you happen to read TFA? Fark headlines don't always reflect the content.


Yes, I read the original article.  He was already reported as trying to get the sheriff's report to omit his BS in writing, but had not publicly admitted that the autopilot excuse was bogus.  Tesla had the black box and said that the autopilot was not on during the incident.  In the second article, he says that he pressed the accelerator, which disengaged the autopilot, and the car got away from him.  That last part sounds more like it.

A huge number of supercars are squirreled into spinning off the road and into things; YouTube is full of them.  Search on "Coffee and Cars" (for some reason most of those videos are Mustangs).  The electronic stability control will keep this from happening if you don't disengage it, but a lot of idiots turn that and the traction control off and nail it.  My favorite is a 250K Ferrari in Dubai or some such where a teenager drove out the dealership driveway with a brand new one and nailed it, lost it, and T-boned a parked car a few feed down the road.  But ESC or no, nothing can help you if you drive into a curve way too fast and there isn't enough traction for Father Physics to keep you on the road.
 
2017-07-18 02:22:26 PM  

sardonicobserver: He was already reported as trying to get the sheriff's report to omit his BS in writing, but had not publicly admitted that the autopilot excuse was bogus.


Both articles use the same email as source material (or two different emails with the same relevant text, as quoted). But he didn't publicly admit anything until you read it on Fox News. Whatever, bud. Stay in your bubble and enjoy yourself.
 
2017-07-18 03:03:12 PM  

LordOfThePings: sardonicobserver: He was already reported as trying to get the sheriff's report to omit his BS in writing, but had not publicly admitted that the autopilot excuse was bogus.

Both articles use the same email as source material (or two different emails with the same relevant text, as quoted). But he didn't publicly admit anything until you read it on Fox News. Whatever, bud. Stay in your bubble and enjoy yourself.


As a matter of policy, I don't reply to snark, but, yes, I do read other sources, and I don't live in a bubble.  Sorry you see Fox News links as an indication that someone lives in a bubble.  We should be more tolerant of other FARKers, I think.  Too many flame threads; those are often irritating (but sometimes popcorn-inciting) to readers and usually contain little humor or information, the two things that a lot of people come to FARK for.  It makes no difference to me personally what someone else's politics are and everyone is welcome to their own opinions; maybe I'm a bit cynical but I think that 99% of what you read about politics is BS or at best spin, regardless of source.

Article at link I sent above, 3rd paragraph, begins "But in an email sent Monday afternoon to the sheriff's office, Clark said he was confused in the moments after the crash..." which refers to a new e-mail.
 
2017-07-18 03:06:47 PM  

sardonicobserver: Article at link I sent above, 3rd paragraph, begins "But in an email sent Monday afternoon to the sheriff's office, Clark said he was confused in the moments after the crash..." which refers to a new e-mail.


Yes, I saw that. I also noted the quoted text is the same as the StarTrib article. Do you have something new to share with us? If not, I'll bid you good day.
 
Displayed 50 of 51 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report