Naming the feature "autopilot" is dangerously misleading.

"Self-driving" and "autonomous" are dangerously misleading, "autopilot" has exactly the right connotation: something which can help to achieve and maintain some kind of equilibrium (heading, altitude, lane placement, following distance) but is not smart enough to be left alone.

It's exactly the right connotation for people who know the connotation. I suspect a large fraction of the population thinks that "autopilot" means "no human pilot needed."

Why do they think that?

It's unreasonable to assume that. Autopilot is a term most people would he familiar from where? Commercial aviation, right?

I would argue most people know it's not a system that achieves that goal. Just ask yourself. Do you think airline passengers would feel comfortable if a cabin announcement told passengers: Both pilots are going to take a nap now for the next 10 hours.

I do think Tesla should do a better job making sure it's understood that there are limitations. I don't think they need to change the name of the feature because some people claim to have a certain expectation of it which at closer inspection is not justified.

Most people don't learn the term from commercial aviation, they learn they term from movies where someone turns on the "autopilot" then goes to handle whatever is happening at the back of the plane.

I assumed autopilots in planes could actually fly by themselves and the pilots were really only there for take-off, landing and turbulence.

Planes can actually land themselves with ILS and MLS systems. Autoland is usually used during bad weather or poor visibility.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autoland https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V0OJ-rPDXNs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=151fGX4xazs

And some cars can auto-park nowadays: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automatic_parking

But neither planes nor cars with autopilot + autoland/park functionality are fully autonomous.

The only place where we have this today is on some on rails systems (trains like in Paris, buses on fixed rails like in Tokyo's Yurikamome or some amusement parks, etc.).

But for this they depend on a lot of (expensive) ground infrastructure, that is not available on roads.

That's in the context of an action film though, if people based their ideas on those we would live in a strange world indeed. Hmmm, actually come to think of it...

Nevertheless it's true. Autopilot as seen in countless movies now means "set it and forget it" to more people than a rudimentary aeronautical cruise control.

"Why do they think that? It's unreasonable to assume that. Autopilot is a term most people would he familiar from where? Commercial aviation, right?"

When you think of 'most people' - think 'Grade 9 education'.

Swaths of Americans grauduate HS with difficulty reading.

I used to market to retail mobile stores, like Sprint, and store managers had difficulty understanding the concept of 'percentage'.

The lowest common denominator is low, and when it comes to safety ... it's the fool among us (or within us because we all have faults) that is the target.

I think it should just be called 'cruise control' and that's that. Tesla can market it as being 'better' but that's about it.

I cringe every time I hear the term autopilot used in that context.

“Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.” - George Carlin

65% of Americans believe they are above average intelligence. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal...

Not understanding percentage though... yeah, things are not great.

So the arguments against my comment (and downvotes) so far have been about how people are stupid or how they base their reality on action movie knowledge.

I don't think people are that stupid, really. And I don't think they don't understand that Tesla's autopilot is not a chauffeur.

As I said, I do think Tesla can do a better job and hey they should probably consider a new name just to get this over with, but I simply cannot agree with everyone in all these threads going on and on about the name being at fault.

People would find some other thing to blame if the name were drive assistant or cruise control, as long as Tesla is advertising or wants to advertise the more modern features of it. Say Tesla says it's advanced cruise control doing a, b, and c that others don't provide, people will still blame a, b, or c when those linked with driver neglect cause an accident.

Note, I'm also not saying Tesla is great here and not at fault. If their systems don't do a, b, and c properly or steer you into a concrete wall then it's their fault. But IMO it's just not because it's called autopilot.

What I think instead is that the fact that there is a system that let's people zone out in 90 per cent of traffic without annoying the driver about paying attention is the issue. It really doesn't matter what the name is as long as there are measures in place to keep the driver focused.

I think the whole issue clashes though. It's difficult to have these auto-steering features for comfort but then demand reduced comfort. So bottom line for me is that those systems all aren't ready and the naming is simple a bikeshedding topic because it is easy to attack and also brings put this "people are stupid" superiority feeling in people.

I think the easiest way to make it understood that there are limitations is to avoid the word "auto". It seems easier.

Kinda hard to avoid the word "auto" when you're making cars...

Autopilot means automatic pilot to every layperson on the street. It doesn't mean maintain heading at this altitude under these specific circumstances. It means the plane flies itself.

It's like trying to argue that a smartphone is a computer. Technically it is but nobody other than those from a technology background would agree.

This is only because Tesla changed the meaning with its "fully self-driving but the government won't let us" marketing lies.

In the common parlance, saying "someone is running on autopilot" means they are going through the usual motions but not really paying attention to what happening or responsive to surprises. Pretty close to the aviation meaning and what Tesla car does.

I believe the point is nobody expects planes, where a layperson would know the term autopilot from, to be left unattended by the pilots. So why should this be assumed on the road?

Because human nature. No matter what they call it, the better it works the more the human driver will relax and let the machine take over. No matter how many times you warn them that that's inappropriate or unsafe.

Really isn't a hard concept to understand.

Autopilot means that the plane flies itself. Pilot is there in case it catastrophically fails.

You mean like how the driver is in the Tesla for if/when it catastrophically fails?

In naming Autopilot, Tesla very well knew that most people would equate it with Full-Self Driving.

Tesla knew what autopilot means: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autopilot

Cars already have a name for that: cruise control.

Cruise control maintains cruising speed. It doesn't even try to steer.

Correct. Which correctly conveys the accurate impression that it is a technology which makes the driving experience somewhat easier in a limited number of ways.

Which is why Cadillac calling their autopilot "Super Cruise" accurately conveyed what it does and doesn't do, and doesn't have an endless news cycle about how the "automatic pilot" is neither.

So you're saying if they call it "self piloting" and not "self driving" it gets the meaning across?

If it maintained following distance (or at least tried to) we wouldn't be having this discussion.

If you go back through the Wayback Machine’s archive of Tesla’s “autopilot” page it’s sickening how misleading their advertising of that feature used to be. They even worded it perfectly so they could weasel their way out of it when any average person would have a completely different interpretation.

Also the Tesla network. While they were happy to make it seem like it would be driverless and was covered so in the media. On the website it never cared to clarify that. It could have been just a rent your car to a stranger app.

don't forget the moniker "full self driving"

And then saying that "all our cars have full self driving hardware". I know people who thought that they had it basically done, and only a few regulatory approvals were left.

Everyone in this thread knows at least one such person.

Is it?

What differs between Tesla's autopilot and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autopilot

Do we have any evidence that shows 8 year olds can't drive if given enough practice? I mean as long as they can see and reach the pedal I'd say driving is simple enough that they could do it if there aren't any distractions.

I’ve had an interest in cars for longer than I can remember. Around when I was 8, my father would kindly let me drive the family car around a deserted (private property) car park as a treat. Basic car control was pretty easy to pick up. Avoiding stationary toppled-over trucks on a clear motorway, like the Tesla failed to do, would also be an easily avoidable situation for child driving.

I think the hardest part of driving is learning the psychology of other road users and understanding both the positive and negative consequences of your actions. This requires experience and practice.

There was an incident just a few weeks ago where a 5-year-old in Utah took his parents' SUV for a joyride and managed to make it to the interstate before getting pulled over.

Based on the police footage, he wasn't doing a very good job of maintaining his lane, but he apparently managed to avoid hitting any stationary objects, so... go figure?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C-W-ySng2t8

Formula 1 driver Lewis Hamilton started competitive go-kart racing at age 8, after getting a go-kart for Christmas age 6:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lewis_Hamilton#1993%E2%80%9320...

Driving lessons pretty much assume an adult can control a car, they're mostly about how to safely and legally drive on shared public roads, and that's where I'd expect an 8 year old to be significantly less capable, without evidence to support it except - if 8 year olds were as capable of dealing with situations as adults are, we'd call them adults.

Special interest groups spent the 1930s-50s hand wringing over young kids driving (which was a pretty rare thing anyway) and got a bunch of laws written so clearly some kids were driving just fine at some point. It wasn't decades later when seat-belts came along and alcohol got taken seriously that the roads got appreciably safer so it's not like they were dangerous enough to have an affect despite being rare.

8 year olds can drive just fine https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q2EFsD80nUA

I'd be interested in whether dogs could be trained. I know they have literally been trained to drive cars but not as far as I'm aware to such a level that you'd let them on the highway. But my impression is that they are better at focusing on the task than humans, when well trained, and maybe would out perform them, given some navigational guidance. Seems like something for a steam punk novel to have.

> I'd be interested in whether dogs could be trained

Trained? Don't think so. I mean, there are dogs riding skateboards, so I believe that, given the proper ergonomic controls, they could learn how to drive a vehicle.

Driving a vehicle safely (as in, not stopping in the middle of a highway to investigate an interesting object) would be a greater challenge.

But as far as navigating a space? Sure, they are amazing at that and far better than anything we can come up with in the near future. Heck, if you hook up an insect brain inputs and outputs, you would have a system that's better than what we currently use.

similarly, cultured rat neurons can operate a mall robotics and avoid obstacles.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-0eZytv6Qk

https://youtu.be/BWAK0J8Uhzk - dogs operating a car with a trainer issuing instructions

Forget 8 year olds, my 3.5 year old can drive a tractor through the woods no problem. We obviously only let him steer and have someone else on the throttle, but he can keep it centered, turn around, avoid obstacles, etc just fine. Kids can handle bipedal locomotion just fine, it's not like they don't have the ability to make rapid decisions to avoid obstacles or correct their position. Steering is no different, it just takes some practice and experience to adapt to it. It's the higher functions that children aren't suited to do.

I wouldn't expect an eight year old to be able to maintain focus, no matter how well they can operate the car. It's hard enough for adults to focus.

LOL An 8 year old would have at least yelled there's a fucking thing on the road first before driving head-on into it.

They should actually call it “8 year old driver” or “learners permit”. Then you’d know exactly how to treat it.