Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Tesla loses U.S. designation for some advanced safety features

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 379 posts

Re: Tesla loses U.S. designation for some advanced safety features

#241

Post by gmadsen »

clouddrover wrote: post #221
gmadsen wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is disingenuous to equate general self driving with tesla autopilot. The idea the full AGI is required is silly and incorrect. Waymo does not have these issues at all. It couldn't happen either. You don't need AGI to have a detailed map, you don't need AGI to properly localize to a detailed map. these are problems Tesla is giving itself

> Waymo does not have these issues at all. False: https://jalopnik.com/watch-a-waymo-av-get-freaked-out-by-tra...

did you read the article?

that is not related to the tesla issue at all. Furthermore, this article just described bad decision making with regards to traffic cones, however was not dangerous. It was aware of drivable surfaces and direction of traffic... because it has a map

Do you see how these are different situations?

1. Telsa swerving into an oncoming lane 2. Waymo coming to a controlled stop in front of a traffic cone, then thinks it is blocked and needs help

Re: Tesla loses U.S. designation for some advanced safety features

#242

Post by ffggvv »

xvector wrote: post #231
ffggvv wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

their decision to sell their auto kill software at all kills people. but they don’t care. as long as elon gets his pumps

This is correct. Tesla’s MO is implementing the “move fast and break things” methodology on real human beings in safety-critical situations. I don’t understand how anyone can support this. It should be illegal. I own a Model 3 and it will be my last Tesla.

its a shame because its a solid car if they didnt focus on all the lies, bad business practices, killing people etc and instead just focused on making it cheaper and better.

Re: Tesla loses U.S. designation for some advanced safety features

#243

Post by takeda »

bengale wrote: post #128
takeda wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From what I understand they are transitioning from radar do vision only. The problem was that software engineers missed the deadline. They will provide that in a software update, it will be just a period of time for new Teslas where the feature is not available. There's no point to wait, since you will eventually get it in update, and if you want the radar you will have to buy used model. Personally I don't believe v…

> The argument could be that drivers also only use vision, but other cars do come with radars to supplement driver's vision. I don’t buy this argument at all, a lot of drivers are absolutely terrible. I think we should be making automated vehicles better than humans.

You've been drinking kool aid, because right now self driving cars are much worse than humans. Maybe in future, but we are not there yet. We are discussing about he change happening right now.

Re: Tesla loses U.S. designation for some advanced safety features

#244

Post by xvector »

graiz wrote: post #123

Tesla is a great at many things but managing customer/media expectations isn't among them. I'm sure Elon has the data and will tweet why vision is better, he may even back it up with really good data, but it's reactionary media management rather than preventative. How hard would it have been to write a press release explaining why they are removing radar, what it means to safety, and how it impacts the future of self…

> Elon has the data and will tweet why vision is better, he may even back it up with really good data

I doubt Elon has any sort of data. This is a way to maintain Tesla’s brand image during the radar chip shortage, and continue selling cars.

Hell, even Tesla says vision-based proximity might not be fully functional for some time for new Tesla’s. Clear evidence that this is rushed and not ready.

Re: Tesla loses U.S. designation for some advanced safety features

#245

Post by osmarks »

wearywanderer wrote: post #217
osmarks wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The brain has hyperspecialized and hyperoptimized single-purpose hardware. Human AI systems run on more general-purpose machines with a few decades spent improving the hardware. Blaming the software is silly.

I'm not talking about running general purpose CPUs. I'm talking about the most high end specialized silicon we have. Throw the best TPUs ever made at the problem and you still won't get anywhere even remotely close to what the squishy pink meat can do. The power gap is so huge, our software simply must be inadequate. We're talking about a power gap wider than the gap between my toaster oven and the Saturn V.

I rechecked some random internet articles, and the brain contains about 10^15 synapses. They operate at about 10Hz (~10 PFLOPS). If we arbitrarily assume that each synapse operation is equivalent to 1 floating point operation on a computer, then this is about 3 orders of magnitude more than a good GPU (~10 TFLOPS). Which is actually a lot less than I thought. Still, the brain's basic structures have been optimized over ridiculous amounts of time, the training data those get while you exist is years of high-resolution images/sound/etc, and being a smaller in-skull device it has advantages of lower latency than, say, a cluster used to train ML models.

Re: Tesla loses U.S. designation for some advanced safety features

#246

Post by spsful »

dhbanes wrote: post #133
paxys wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FYI Tesla has already told regulators that it won't be able to deliver FSD by the end of 2021, which it had earlier committed to. If you are still holding your breath on it, it's probably time to give it up.

How is it a loan? Can he recover the principle?

It's a cash payment to Tesla for a feature that doesn't yet exist, so technically they owe you something until they deliver FSD. If you bought this, you would have been owed $10k but in the form of a self-driving feature. So until they deliver that they technically owe you money, but they owe it to you in the form of FSD.

Re: Tesla loses U.S. designation for some advanced safety features

#247

Post by dangrossman »

JoshTko wrote: post #235
justapassenger wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They already recognized large part of that revenue. That was the main reason for them to release half baked party tricks, like smart summon, or weird ones like traffic light control (that will stop your on green light). They used it to recognize more FSD revenue. In 2020 they booked over $250M of that revenue, to help them boost profits. Don't underestimate power of accounting, mixed with loose ethics.

Interesting. Do you have a source that confirms this?

I searched "Tesla recognizes FSD revenue" and found several immediately.

https://www.tesmanian.com/blogs/tesmanian-blog/tesla-autopil...

https://loupventures.com/teslas-software-advantage-is-clear-....

Re: Tesla loses U.S. designation for some advanced safety features

#248

Post by what_ever »

jfrunyon wrote: post #236
wpietri wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yup. Rodney Brooks, famed robot scientist and iRobot founder, says not to expect driverless taxis in cities earlier than 2035: https://rodneybrooks.com/my-dated-predictions/ I don't think we quite need AGI to make something like a commercial urban taxi service work. For any given place, we can substitute a very large amount of training data. And I think we can get there through an approach like Waymo, where the taxi'…

We've already seen several instances of Waymo's approach not working. I agree that ultimately they need a significant amount of local training data. But I believe they would be better off having a human drive a car around to map things out, run their 'AI' on the results, and then manually review/correct lower confidence results. Or, better yet, make a database and have cities provide feeds of changes/permits/closures…

> We've already seen several instances of Waymo's approach not working.

Define -

1. Several.

2. Not working.

Disc: Googler but I don't know if that's necessary since I don't work at Waymo.

Re: Tesla loses U.S. designation for some advanced safety features

#249

Post by masklinn »

notJim wrote: post #165
masklinn wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They are in severe danger of being disrupted by the very automakers they took on. The worst part is they’re nowhere near: the effective strength of Tesla is that they built a large and reliable network of fast chargers. I don’t know how non-Tesla charging is in the US, but in Europe it’s still a complete mess of half-assed crap, meaning if you don’t have a Tesla you either simply can’t make trips beyond a single-ch…

I've been following the situation via a few Youtube folks with non-Tesla charging, and I think your description is a bit exaggerated for the US, but not entirely. It seems like many routes (not all though) along interstates have enough Electrify America fast chargers that the mere existence is adequate. However, the charging experience is very buggy and unreliable. Cars randomly refuse to charge, charge much slower t…

> Cars randomly refuse to charge, charge much slower than they should, etc. And it's not rare, it's likely that this will happen multiple times on a trip, from what I've seen.

Indeed that seems to be very common around here hence my mentioning fallback chargers: you can’t currently rely on a specific charger working, so you must plan for an alternative or two at every charging stop.

Re: Tesla loses U.S. designation for some advanced safety features

#250

Post by JoshGlazebrook »

As someone who has had the auto emergency braking (radar based) engage while the car was already on autopilot, I find this scary. Had it not been on, autopilot would have not slowed down fast enough and hit the vehicle in front of me.

Also the fact that without radar they are limiting vehicles to 75mph means it's useless in Texas and many other states.

Post reply on HN