Teslas can be programmed to break the law.

Mike Sales
Posts: 7882
Joined: 7 Mar 2009, 3:31pm

Re: Teslas can be programmed to break the law.

Post by Mike Sales »

pete75 wrote: 14 Jan 2022, 1:56pm
Mike Sales wrote: 14 Jan 2022, 1:01pm
pete75 wrote: 14 Jan 2022, 12:57pm If, as many claim, these things will be safer than human drivers there will be less need to separate cyclists and pedestrians from cars.
So, instead of risking a close pass in marginal circumstances, a Tesla will wait behind until the road is wide and clear? Even when in "assertive" mode?
I've no idea and that's why I started my sentence with If. Ask those who confidently claim they will be safer than human drivers.
I quite understood that. I was following up your implications.
It's the same the whole world over
It's the poor what gets the blame
It's the rich what gets the pleasure
Isn't it a blooming shame?
fastpedaller
Posts: 3435
Joined: 10 Jul 2014, 1:12pm
Location: Norfolk

Re: Teslas can be programmed to break the law.

Post by fastpedaller »

Bonefishblues wrote: 14 Jan 2022, 1:39pm
fastpedaller wrote: 14 Jan 2022, 1:06pm
Mike Sales wrote: 13 Jan 2022, 6:37pm

The car driver is most likely to be hurt?!
I am a pedestrian and cyclist, and I cannot agree. Car occupants are protected by much technology which I do not have.
Many drivers assume only motorised road users count. Don't fall into that error.
Absolutely. It's also worth noting that those involved with selling or otherwise promoting the technology seem to have a 'religious' narrative that it can do no wrong, and must be better 'because it's technology'. Take an example of a narrow and muddy country lane with high hedges ........ An astute driver may drive slowly in anticipation, whereas a pilot of a 'self-driver' may plough (no pun intended) on regardless, and the ABS brakes be applied far too late to have any effect. We mustn't fall into the trap "because it's new/sophisticated it MUST be better"
Apologies, to anyone of religion amongst us, as no offence is intended by using the word 'religious', it's just intended to explain the level of belief some have for tech.
Is this knowledge on your part, or speculation? Seems to me that the AI parameters could very easily be set to mitigate the "I know this road' syndrome for instance - amongst many scenarios which can lead to excessive speed in a particular situation.
Why ask the question when I have said it is an example, and I've used the word 'may' in the narrative?
Would the AI parameters only learn of the "I know this road" level of care needed, only after collisions have occurred in the same way that local councils and highways will only recognise an accident black spot or need for road alteration after several people have been injured?
(Serious question).
Bonefishblues
Posts: 11009
Joined: 7 Jul 2014, 9:45pm
Location: Near Bicester Oxon

Re: Teslas can be programmed to break the law.

Post by Bonefishblues »

Mike Sales wrote: 14 Jan 2022, 2:00pm
Bonefishblues wrote: 14 Jan 2022, 1:52pm Of course people will want to get to their destinations speedily, but it would be an act of remarkable commercial stupidity to program[sic] the cars such that they didn't do that safely. Musk is an eccentric, but not a stupid one, I think.
You might think so, but read again (?) the first paragraph of the article.
housands of Teslas are now being equipped with a feature that prompts the car to break common traffic laws — and the revelation is prompting some advocates to question the safety benefits of automated vehicle technology when unsafe human drivers are allowed to program it to do things that endanger other road users.
Above you will find a discussion which seems to conclude that the programming is not an offence. The law breaking only occurs when the driver is actually caught transgressing, and as we know, enforcement is lax.
My bold refers. The two aren't synonymous, I think law-breaking is a different debate.
Bmblbzzz
Posts: 6258
Joined: 18 May 2012, 7:56pm
Location: From here to there.

Re: Teslas can be programmed to break the law.

Post by Bmblbzzz »

thirdcrank wrote: 14 Jan 2022, 12:27pm Re autonomous vehicles on minor roads etc., where the current national limit is 60mph, then there's already plenty of room for improvement and little obvious official appetite for change. I could imagine some system whereby these "silent" - apart from tyre and wind noise - vehicles make a noise, trumpeted as a safety improvement.
Just as electric cars already do on European (this includes UK) models up to 30km/h.
pete75
Posts: 16370
Joined: 24 Jul 2007, 2:37pm

Re: Teslas can be programmed to break the law.

Post by pete75 »

Mike Sales wrote: 14 Jan 2022, 2:00pm

Above you will find a discussion which seems to conclude that the programming is not an offence. The law breaking only occurs when the driver is actually caught transgressing, and as we know, enforcement is lax.


Reprogramming currently isn't an offence. No one can be caught transgressing because it isn't illegal. It may invalidate the insurance if a vehicle owner doesn't declare the programming to his insurance company if asked about any modifications. The Road Traffic Act part of the policy will not be affected until or unless the company actually cancels the policy though.

There are government proposals to make "tampering" with vehicle systems illegal - scroll down to the Tackling Tampering section here https://www.gov.uk/government/consultat ... -standards
'Give me my bike, a bit of sunshine - and a stop-off for a lunchtime pint - and I'm a happy man.' - Reg Baker
Bonefishblues
Posts: 11009
Joined: 7 Jul 2014, 9:45pm
Location: Near Bicester Oxon

Re: Teslas can be programmed to break the law.

Post by Bonefishblues »

fastpedaller wrote: 14 Jan 2022, 2:08pm
Bonefishblues wrote: 14 Jan 2022, 1:39pm
fastpedaller wrote: 14 Jan 2022, 1:06pm
Absolutely. It's also worth noting that those involved with selling or otherwise promoting the technology seem to have a 'religious' narrative that it can do no wrong, and must be better 'because it's technology'. Take an example of a narrow and muddy country lane with high hedges ........ An astute driver may drive slowly in anticipation, whereas a pilot of a 'self-driver' may plough (no pun intended) on regardless, and the ABS brakes be applied far too late to have any effect. We mustn't fall into the trap "because it's new/sophisticated it MUST be better"
Apologies, to anyone of religion amongst us, as no offence is intended by using the word 'religious', it's just intended to explain the level of belief some have for tech.
Is this knowledge on your part, or speculation? Seems to me that the AI parameters could very easily be set to mitigate the "I know this road' syndrome for instance - amongst many scenarios which can lead to excessive speed in a particular situation.
Why ask the question when I have said it is an example, and I've used the word 'may' in the narrative?
Would the AI parameters only learn of the "I know this road" level of care needed, only after collisions have occurred in the same way that local councils and highways will only recognise an accident black spot or need for road alteration after several people have been injured?
(Serious question).
I'm asking the question to open debate.

Why would AI need to wait for collisions before it learns? As a for instance, the car knows what it can see ahead, it knows what road conditions are, it knows what the ambient temperature is, it knows what the performance parameters of its brakes and tyres are. That data combined (and I'm sure there are other pieces - many of them) can be used now, not after the event. The bigger problem may be the human intervening because it is smarter than the vehicle, it thinks.
fastpedaller
Posts: 3435
Joined: 10 Jul 2014, 1:12pm
Location: Norfolk

Re: Teslas can be programmed to break the law.

Post by fastpedaller »

Bonefishblues wrote: 14 Jan 2022, 2:54pm
fastpedaller wrote: 14 Jan 2022, 2:08pm
Bonefishblues wrote: 14 Jan 2022, 1:39pm
Is this knowledge on your part, or speculation? Seems to me that the AI parameters could very easily be set to mitigate the "I know this road' syndrome for instance - amongst many scenarios which can lead to excessive speed in a particular situation.
Why ask the question when I have said it is an example, and I've used the word 'may' in the narrative?
Would the AI parameters only learn of the "I know this road" level of care needed, only after collisions have occurred in the same way that local councils and highways will only recognise an accident black spot or need for road alteration after several people have been injured?
(Serious question).
I'm asking the question to open debate.

Why would AI need to wait for collisions before it learns? As a for instance, the car knows what it can see ahead, it knows what road conditions are, it knows what the ambient temperature is, it knows what the performance parameters of its brakes and tyres are. That data combined (and I'm sure there are other pieces - many of them) can be used now, not after the event. The bigger problem may be the human intervening because it is smarter than the vehicle, it thinks.
Genuine question.... So if it "knows what it can see ahead" is a blind bend, will it slow to maybe 15MPH, stop. or what?

Crikey I've just had to do 3 spelling corrections in that last sentence because the AI thinks it knows better :lol:
Bonefishblues
Posts: 11009
Joined: 7 Jul 2014, 9:45pm
Location: Near Bicester Oxon

Re: Teslas can be programmed to break the law.

Post by Bonefishblues »

fastpedaller wrote: 14 Jan 2022, 3:29pm
Bonefishblues wrote: 14 Jan 2022, 2:54pm
fastpedaller wrote: 14 Jan 2022, 2:08pm
Why ask the question when I have said it is an example, and I've used the word 'may' in the narrative?
Would the AI parameters only learn of the "I know this road" level of care needed, only after collisions have occurred in the same way that local councils and highways will only recognise an accident black spot or need for road alteration after several people have been injured?
(Serious question).
I'm asking the question to open debate.

Why would AI need to wait for collisions before it learns? As a for instance, the car knows what it can see ahead, it knows what road conditions are, it knows what the ambient temperature is, it knows what the performance parameters of its brakes and tyres are. That data combined (and I'm sure there are other pieces - many of them) can be used now, not after the event. The bigger problem may be the human intervening because it is smarter than the vehicle, it thinks.
Genuine question.... So if it "knows what it can see ahead" is a blind bend, will it slow to maybe 15MPH, stop. or what?

Crikey I've just had to do 3 spelling corrections in that last sentence because the AI thinks it knows better :lol:
Whatever you tell it to do. In that scenario - such as when driving in Cornwall I'm regularly at that sort of speed. I do meet people behaving differently, often on tractors and in vans and so on.
User avatar
mjr
Posts: 20308
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Teslas can be programmed to break the law.

Post by mjr »

Bmblbzzz wrote: 14 Jan 2022, 2:44pm
thirdcrank wrote: 14 Jan 2022, 12:27pm I could imagine some system whereby these "silent" - apart from tyre and wind noise - vehicles make a noise, trumpeted as a safety improvement.
Just as electric cars already do on European (this includes UK) models up to 30km/h.
Because we want the most noise to be inflicted in places with dense housing and residents must not get a noise pollution reduction from the switch to EVs? :roll:

Does it at least deactivate 11.30pm-7am (the hours when sounding a car horn is mostly illegal) so people in such areas can sleep more easily?
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
thirdcrank
Posts: 36776
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Teslas can be programmed to break the law.

Post by thirdcrank »

One other point may be that if somebody driving one of these does break the law, then if the charge is for an indictable offence, the jury may find them NOT GUILTY.
Bmblbzzz
Posts: 6258
Joined: 18 May 2012, 7:56pm
Location: From here to there.

Re: Teslas can be programmed to break the law.

Post by Bmblbzzz »

mjr wrote: 14 Jan 2022, 4:09pm
Bmblbzzz wrote: 14 Jan 2022, 2:44pm
thirdcrank wrote: 14 Jan 2022, 12:27pm I could imagine some system whereby these "silent" - apart from tyre and wind noise - vehicles make a noise, trumpeted as a safety improvement.
Just as electric cars already do on European (this includes UK) models up to 30km/h.
Because we want the most noise to be inflicted in places with dense housing and residents must not get a noise pollution reduction from the switch to EVs? :roll:

Does it at least deactivate 11.30pm-7am (the hours when sounding a car horn is mostly illegal) so people in such areas can sleep more easily?
The idea is to replace engine noise for the benefit of blind and/or visually impaired persons, so no it doesn't.
User avatar
mjr
Posts: 20308
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Teslas can be programmed to break the law.

Post by mjr »

Bmblbzzz wrote: 14 Jan 2022, 4:36pm
mjr wrote: 14 Jan 2022, 4:09pm
Bmblbzzz wrote: 14 Jan 2022, 2:44pm
Just as electric cars already do on European (this includes UK) models up to 30km/h.
Because we want the most noise to be inflicted in places with dense housing and residents must not get a noise pollution reduction from the switch to EVs? :roll:

Does it at least deactivate 11.30pm-7am (the hours when sounding a car horn is mostly illegal) so people in such areas can sleep more easily?
The idea is to replace engine noise for the benefit of blind and/or visually impaired persons, so no it doesn't.
It seems a tragedy that some other method to benefit them is not being implemented, so everyone, visually-impaired or not, must not get the benefit of quieter cars and better sleep.
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
pete75
Posts: 16370
Joined: 24 Jul 2007, 2:37pm

Re: Teslas can be programmed to break the law.

Post by pete75 »

thirdcrank wrote: 14 Jan 2022, 4:17pm One other point may be that if somebody driving one of these does break the law, then if the charge is for an indictable offence, the jury may find them NOT GUILTY.
We're talking about self driving cars so all inside will be passengers. BTW some people are found not guilty in magistrates courts. A guilty verdict in all cases may well be a certainty with a traditional bench but many mags court cases are now decided by a professional district judge who will consider the evidence before coming to a decision.
'Give me my bike, a bit of sunshine - and a stop-off for a lunchtime pint - and I'm a happy man.' - Reg Baker
thirdcrank
Posts: 36776
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Teslas can be programmed to break the law.

Post by thirdcrank »

I thought the point of this thread, which isn't the first on the broad topic of self-driving cars, was the suggestion that users could use a setting to allow some of them to break the law. (As in the thread title.) I intentionally used the term "indictable offence" in my remark about a jury.
pete75
Posts: 16370
Joined: 24 Jul 2007, 2:37pm

Re: Teslas can be programmed to break the law.

Post by pete75 »

thirdcrank wrote: 14 Jan 2022, 5:36pm I thought the point of this thread, which isn't the first on the broad topic of self-driving cars, was the suggestion that users could use a setting to allow some of them to break the law. (As in the thread title.) I intentionally used the term "indictable offence" in my remark about a jury.
Indictable offence because as an ex copper you know a defendant has damn all chance of being found not guilty by a traditional bench of magistrates. I was pointing out that because professional district judges are now sitting in a lot of courts people have a chance of a not guilty verdict on non indictable offences.
'Give me my bike, a bit of sunshine - and a stop-off for a lunchtime pint - and I'm a happy man.' - Reg Baker
Post Reply