German court bans Tesla ad statements related to autonomous driving • Hacker News Board

Re: German court bans Tesla ad statements related to autonomous driving

#181

Post by hudon » Tue, Jul 14, 2020, 6:04 PM UTC

I own a Tesla and love it. Having said that, “full self driving” is so far off what it actually does it’s actually not just a marketing issue, it is a safety issue. I’ve had my Tesla drive towards an incoming lane, slam on the breaks in the middle of the highway with no cars in front of us, swerve into another lane with no warning, and probably other hiccups I don’t remember.

I know now I not only need to keep my hands on the wheel but I need to actively make sure the car doesn’t kill us. And I know the car warned me the feature required awareness, but its name made me think it was way more developed and safe than it actually is, and that disconnect will surely cause other drivers to trust it more than they should.

Re: German court bans Tesla ad statements related to autonomous driving

#182

Post by jdminhbg » Tue, Jul 14, 2020, 6:05 PM UTC

bra-ket wrote: post #136

jdminhbg wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's also almost certainly true. Whether you think LIDAR-based systems are the way to go, there's no doubt that full self-driving based on cameras is possible given the right software. That's what humans are, after all, so it's "just" a matter of building the software to drive that hardware.

the "right software" is nowhere to be found though

They don’t claim to have it. I’m just pointing out that the claim as written is true.

Re: German court bans Tesla ad statements related to autonomous driving

#183

Post by bdonlan » Tue, Jul 14, 2020, 6:06 PM UTC

outworlder wrote: post #114

rhino369 wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But autopilot in a plane doesn't require the pilot to take over in a split second. Keeping you level, at the right speed, in the right direction, etc. is enough to keep the plane safe. Pilots have tens of seconds to reorient themselves to avert any disaster. In contrast, Telsa "autopilot" requires constant vigilance since you might have to take over without any warning.

> But autopilot in a plane doesn't require the pilot to take over in a split second. That's a very broad statement. Autopilots can disengage at any time and you are supposed to take control pretty much immediately.

Where immediately is generally measured in seconds (with the exception of perhaps autoland). Normally the autopilot will have the plane trimmed at all times, so the plane will continue flying its current course for some time without control inputs.

Re: German court bans Tesla ad statements related to autonomous driving

#184

Post by drcross » Tue, Jul 14, 2020, 6:06 PM UTC

dave5104 wrote: post #163

dreamer7 wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It is true that highly knowledgeable people know that Musk is an idiot conman Sorry to nitpick but highly knowledgeable people will surely never claim Musk is an idiot anything. He is definitely a genius in several ways. For something so technologically advanced as self-driving cars, his stuttering style seems to convey more sincerity to the general public than Steve Job's glib speech ever would

Musk isn't an idiot, he's overseen some great things at the companies he runs, and I hope the companies he's running continue pushing technology forward. But Musk as a human isn't so great. He'd do better to keep his mouth shut sometimes, and lay off Twitter every now and again. Between falsely accusing people of being pedophiles, claiming to take Tesla private in a tweet, and various other "incidents", he's kind of…

>But Musk as a human isn't so great.

I would be very hesitant to criticise someone who has arguably done/will do more for the continuation for humanity than anyone else who has ever lived.

Maybe it's your definition of "isn't great" that needs re-calibration.

Re: German court bans Tesla ad statements related to autonomous driving

#185

Post by typon » Tue, Jul 14, 2020, 6:07 PM UTC

smnrchrds wrote: post #122

jdminhbg wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's also almost certainly true. Whether you think LIDAR-based systems are the way to go, there's no doubt that full self-driving based on cameras is possible given the right software. That's what humans are, after all, so it's "just" a matter of building the software to drive that hardware.

Apple, HP, etc should take note and sell their laptops as "have the hardware needed for full AGI capability." Chemistry kits with a sample of every element in the periodic table should advertise them as "have all the materials needed for COVID-19 vaccine."

Beaches are just unrealized silicon chips

Re: German court bans Tesla ad statements related to autonomous driving

#186

Post by drcross » Tue, Jul 14, 2020, 6:08 PM UTC

JJMcJ wrote: post #75

dkonofalski wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think it's dangerous, necessarily, unless you ignore people's personal responsibility in the situation as well. As currently designed, "Autopilot" requires you to keep your hands on the steering wheel, provide rotational counter-weight on it, and you have to agree to safety and attention disclaimers before you can even enable the features. Yes, there are absolutely misconceptions that may happen with the gene…

But autopilot is explicitly a term for hands off operation. In general, in driving, things happen too fast for any control assist system to allow hands off driving. EDIT: Any existing control assist system And I don't think we are that close, since "self driving cars" still seem to be limited to "driving at 25 MPH around Mountain View and Sunnyvale where the curbs and streets have been pre-mapped to within inches".

>But autopilot is explicitly a term for hands off operation.

I see you've never skippered a boat.

Re: German court bans Tesla ad statements related to autonomous driving

#187

Post by AnthonyMouse » Tue, Jul 14, 2020, 6:09 PM UTC

dx87 wrote: post #133

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Apparently, the dictionaries are in conspiracy with the general public, as they also define autopilot as "a device that keeps aircraft, spacecraft, and ships moving in a particular direction without human involvement". This is describing cruise control.

Cruise control just maintains speed, not direction. It'll happily plow you into an obstacle without human intervention.

Plowing you into an obstacle is what you get when you maintain your existing course and speed without regard for what's in front of you. "Forward" is a direction.

And whether you call it cruise control or not, the definition still matches a thing the car actually does. It has lane keep assist too.

Re: German court bans Tesla ad statements related to autonomous driving

#188

Post by Robotbeat » Tue, Jul 14, 2020, 6:10 PM UTC

I think it’s poor for “autopilot.” That word has a long history. It really is the best existing word to use.

But a fair ruling for “autonomous.” And I think the concerns HN people have with “autopilot” are in part due to the fact that the terms have not been properly contrasted by Tesla. Being more careful with “autonomous” and “self-driving” would help a lot with the confusion with the word “autopilot.”

Re: German court bans Tesla ad statements related to autonomous driving

#189

Post by DasIch » Tue, Jul 14, 2020, 6:10 PM UTC

filoleg wrote: post #145

chki wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm sure the fact that BMW/Daimler/VW have completely botched their EV/Autonomous vehicle strategy and the automotive industry is Germany's cash cow has nothing at all to do with the court's decision. What are you implying? That the German Court felt pressured by the Auto Lobby to take this decision? That the judges were biased? Bribed? Vague statements like this are very unhelpful, because you can't argue against…

> That the German Court felt pressured by the Auto Lobby to take this decision? Probably that + the constituents. When a very large chunk of your constituents are employed by local car manufacturing companies, letting those companies fail and lose to a foreign competitor not only loses money for those companies, it also puts a threat of unemployment on your voting population. Lobbying from local car companies + your…

Judges in Germany generally aren’t elected. The few that are cannot be re-elected and have fairly long terms.

The voting population in this case would consist of politicians in the legislative branch.

Re: German court bans Tesla ad statements related to autonomous driving

#190

Post by dragontamer » Tue, Jul 14, 2020, 6:11 PM UTC

Robotbeat wrote: post #188

I think it’s poor for “autopilot.” That word has a long history. It really is the best existing word to use. But a fair ruling for “autonomous.” And I think the concerns HN people have with “autopilot” are in part due to the fact that the terms have not been properly contrasted by Tesla. Being more careful with “autonomous” and “self-driving” would help a lot with the confusion with the word “autopilot.”

Tesla's not only calling their stuff "autopilot", but also "full self driving", which is probably the wrong way to describe their current implementation.

Its a bit annoying to see people so fixated on the word "autopilot" when its clear that "full self driving" is complete and utter vaporware, a $5000 lie sold by the company.