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

Scenarios in which Tesla FSD Beta 9.0 fails

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 502 posts

Re: Scenarios in which Tesla FSD Beta 9.0 fails

#231

Post by mosselman »

LeoPanthera wrote: post #113
Syonyk wrote: post #11

I don't understand how something this broken is allowed to operate on public roads. If I drove like Tesla's FSD seems to based on the videos I've seen, I'd be pulled out of my car and arrested on (well founded) suspicions of "driving while hammered." After a decade of work, it's not capable of doing much beyond "blundering around a city mostly without hitting stuff, but pay attention, because it'll try to hit the mos…

> I don't understand how something this broken is allowed to operate on public roads. It's important to point out that this software is currently only offered as a private beta to deliberately selected testers. Now, maybe they shouldn't be using it on public roads either, but at least it's not available to the general public.

Because the self driving stuff in the other Teslas works well?

Re: Scenarios in which Tesla FSD Beta 9.0 fails

#232

Post by jazzyjackson »

Theodores wrote: post #184
Syonyk wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The history of human machine interactions makes it clear that if you have the human as the primary control (in the main decision loop, operating things) and the automation watching over their shoulders, it works pretty well. The opposite - where the automation handles the common case, with the human watching, simply does not work. It's not worked in aviation, it's not worked in industrial systems, it's not worked in…

A century ago horses had Full Self Driving with the human having to be vigilant and in charge. The horse could go crazy in scary situations endangering others but you could train that out and make a good war horse. Basic stuff like following the road around a bend was something the horse could do but you could not tell it to autonomously go across town to pick someone up. People were okay with horses and knew what to…

Horses could at least make their own way back home, and they were self-fueling to boot!

Re: Scenarios in which Tesla FSD Beta 9.0 fails

#233

Post by emodendroket »

w0m wrote: post #58
toomuchtodo wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't understand how something this broken is allowed to operate on public roads. Also out in a rural area. Running out to pickup lunch a few minutes ago, a young man flipped their old pickup truck on its side in an intersection, having hit the median for some reason. I too don't understand how humans are allowed to operate on public roads. Most of them are terrible at it. About 35k people a year die in motor veh…

dinddingding. Self Driving cars (Tesla; who is faaaar from it, among others) will kill people. But people are shitty drivers on their own; has to start somewhere and Tesla is the first to get anything close to this level in the hands of the general population (kind of, beta program is still limited in release))

This runs into the same problem that led to the regulation of medicine: people can put all kinds of supposed remedies out there which may or may not do anything at all to solve the problem and may have worse consequences than the thing they're meant to cure.

Re: Scenarios in which Tesla FSD Beta 9.0 fails

#234

Post by BugsJustFindMe »

flowerlad wrote: post #222
BugsJustFindMe wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They should be trivially handled by stereopsis and structure from motion as well. Stereo+time photogrammetry has been solved well enough to not steer directly towards large obstacles for decades. Overreliance on machine learning pixel models to classify everything in view is the real problem.

Why not have redundant sensors and crosscheck them? Boeing 737 Max had only one AOA sensor [1], and that wasn't a great idea. https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/30/politics/boeing-sensor-737-ma...

No great reason not to _plan_ to use them. I mean, lidar is still kinda not great right now, but I'm sure it will be great at some point. But they could already be doing better with just cameras than they're currently doing, so why not fix that?

Re: Scenarios in which Tesla FSD Beta 9.0 fails

#235

Post by cs702 »

rhinoceraptor wrote: post #136
cs702 wrote: post #120

Many of the comments here seem a bit... unfair to me, considering that these clips were handpicked. I watched (and fast-forwarded) through a few of the original, full-length videos from which these clips were taken. The full-length videos show long drives (in some cases, hours long) almost entirely without human intervention, under conditions explicitly meant to be difficult for self-driving vehicles. One thing I rea…

The fact that it 'only' requires human intervention so rarely is still incredibly dangerous. You can't ask a human to have complete focus for hours on end when they're not making any inputs, and then require them to intervene at a moment's notice. That's not how humans work. Also, the fact that they're distributing safety critical software to the public as a 'beta' is just insanity. How many more people need to die a…

> You can't ask a human to have complete focus for hours on end when they're not making any inputs, and then require them to intervene at a moment's notice. That's not how humans work.

I agree. Everyone agrees. That's why FSD Beta 9 is closed to the public. My understanding is that only a few thousand approved drivers can use it.

> Also, the fact that they're distributing safety critical software to the public as a 'beta' is just insanity. How many more people need to die as a result of Autopilot?

FSD 9 isn't being "distributed to the public." It's a closed Beta. Please don't attack a straw-man.

Re: Scenarios in which Tesla FSD Beta 9.0 fails

#236

Post by sidibe »

bsagdiyev wrote: post #51

Why are there so many comments from seemingly different posters all saying the same thing on this, "I don't understand why humans are allowed to drive cars"? It feels kinda... culty? Or too similar to be a coincidence. It honestly probably is but these Tesla posts always bring out those types and it confuses me. Humans kill humans, do we want machines to start doing it on the road automatically now too?

These people seem to be under the illusion that FSD is getting near to being only as flawed as humans who can drive hundreds of thousands of miles without incident. By contrast from the couple dozen FSD Beta drivers who upload to youtube FSD Beta has a near-miss every couple minutes.

Re: Scenarios in which Tesla FSD Beta 9.0 fails

#237

Post by nradov »

wedn3sday wrote: post #176
throwaway0a5e wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact that a presumably average or not too far from average human can "weave at 90 mph through traffic yesterday, swerving back and forth between lanes inches from other peoples cars" should tell you how wide of a gulf there is between human operators and current FSD tech, which will dodge road debris only if it looks like a car, person, cyclist or traffic cone.

Yes, Im "pearl clutching" because some ahole decided to put hundreds of peoples lives at risk so he (and its always a he) could have a little thrill. There is a wide gulf now between human skill and robo-driver skill, just as 50 years ago it was much faster to call someone then send them a message in the mail. Now we have email, and in the future we will have (actual, real) full self driving.

Is that the same future where we'll have fusion power and colonies on Mars?

Re: Scenarios in which Tesla FSD Beta 9.0 fails

#238

Post by the8472 »

foepys wrote: post #165
bob33212 wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People will die today because a driver was drunk/distracted/suicidal/rode raged or had a medical problem. Are you OK with that or do you think we should attempt to fix that with software? If you do think you should attempt to fix that, do you understand that software engineering is a iterative process? It gets safer overtime.

> People will die today because a driver was drunk/distracted/suicidal/rode raged or had a medical problem. That's a straw man argument. Mandatory breathalyzer tests before every engine start and yearly medical and psychological check-ups would solve a lot of these problems as well. > It gets safer overtime. There is no evidence of this happening yet. It's still trying to drive people into concrete pillars. Remember…

> It's still trying to drive people into concrete pillars.

That in itself doesn't constitute evidence that it isn't getting safer. After all humans occasionally drive into concrete pillars too.

What matters is that the distance traveled without incident goes up in a super-linear fashion over time. It would be nice if someone had hard numbers on that.

Re: Scenarios in which Tesla FSD Beta 9.0 fails

#239

Post by wiz21c »

BugsJustFindMe wrote: post #215
moralestapia wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The monorail video is jaw-dropping. Who needs radar right? A few cameras are enough to discern gray concrete structures in the night, oh wait ...

They probably would be if they stopped using such shitty cameras. It always blows my mind that the cameras they use appear to be quite bad for the job. > in the night Purpose-built cameras can see better in the dark than humans can.

But we have a working brain to interpret those images.

Re: Scenarios in which Tesla FSD Beta 9.0 fails

#240

Post by jazzyjackson »

colinmhayes wrote: post #210
camjohnson26 wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And what if it gets stuck in a local maximum and never improves? Then you lost those extra lives for no reason, which consequently is what I believe has happened. At least 4 people are dead in preventable autopilot crashes, and the real number is probably over 10. For the number of Tesla’s on the road that number is way too high. https://tesladeaths.com

4 deaths is worth a 1% increased chance of achieving self driving a month earlier. Way more than 400 people a month die in car accidents.

I just don’t understand why people think a robot can improve on this.

If you want to save lives, lower speed limits, build out public transit, and don’t hand out drivers licenses like candy.

Post reply on HN