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

301–310 of 502 posts

Re: Scenarios in which Tesla FSD Beta 9.0 fails

#301

Post by CyanLite2 »

viraptor wrote: post #265
brianwawok wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, so what happens when one says wall, and one says clear air? You brake? That is what happens now with phantom braking. Approaching a bridge? camera sees air, radar sees wall, slam on brakes. You want the best sensor type over a high-fidelity sensor and a lower fidelity sensor. The Tesla system has 8 cameras (3 forward), so they def have overlap between what they are considering better cameras. Time will prove w…

> Approaching a bridge? camera sees air, radar sees wall, slam on brakes. That's simplifying the situation a bit too much. The camera can give more results than air/not-air. Specifically in this case it could detect a bridge. Same applies to the radar really - you'll get measurements from multiple heights which would tell you that it may be an inclined street, not a wall.

This is where pre-mapped roadways help. Just an internal GPS database sent down to your car that says "Hey, at this GPS coordinate, there's a bridge here. Here's how to navigate over it." Everywhere else the cars can use radar+camera. GM (SuperCruise) and Ford (BlueCruise) do this today.

Re: Scenarios in which Tesla FSD Beta 9.0 fails

#302

Post by moralestapia »

mcguire wrote: post #269
Syonyk wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, radar can easily detect stationary objects. Tesla's implementation of their radar processing drops all returns from anything stationary, given the forward speed of the car. In the context of a Tesla thread, I didn't think that needed to be specifically stated, but will do so in the future.

Because, clearly, anything stationary is ground clutter that can be ignored.

Particularly if you're traveling towards it at 60 mph.

Re: Scenarios in which Tesla FSD Beta 9.0 fails

#303

Post by sidewndr46 »

jazzyjackson wrote: post #289
timroman wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IMHO they're the same thing. Automate all cars to get around the right of way and high construction costs that limit rail development. I think the upgrades needed to roads are minimal in comparison. Maybe some sensors and signals but it may be just perfecting signage, lines, etc.

Pavement holds up a lot better in rain and snow than electronics, and still needs to be replaced every few years. Agreed that it should be a bare minimum expectation to have the roads painted clearly, but there are plenty of roads in eg Chicago where I don’t think there is an official number of lanes, it’s just kind of a free for all. Just going through the whole system and deciding where the boundaries are is a garg…

Yeah, I was visiting Tucson recently and discovered they have lots of roads with no lines at all. Surprisingly, it may have actually made traffic substantially more relaxed as I think everyone was paying more attention.

Re: Scenarios in which Tesla FSD Beta 9.0 fails

#304

Post by lp0_on_fire »

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…

People who drink and drive may very well be perfect sober drivers 99.9% of the time but that doesn't excuse the .1% of the time that they're running into things.

Also, this beta isn't "closed-to-the-public". The "public" is an active and unwilling participant in it.

Re: Scenarios in which Tesla FSD Beta 9.0 fails

#305

Post by dillondoyle »

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…

At least for me it's because these highlighted errors are so egregious and so obvious for humans. Don't swerve into the giant concrete polls.

The 99% of 'good' doesn't matter if you keep driving into giant barriers.

Re: Scenarios in which Tesla FSD Beta 9.0 fails

#306

Post by dillondoyle »

throwaway-8c93 wrote: post #187
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…

FSD occasionally requesting driver to take over in genuinely difficult situations would be completely fine. The videos in the Twitter feed are nothing like that. The car makes potentially catastrophic blunders, like driving straight into a concrete pylon, with 100% confidence.

I'm with you on the second point strongly.

But IMHO it's not full self driving if it requests the driver to take over even once.

If there's an insane storm or something then it's ok for FSD to know it should disable and then you have to drive 100% control. The middle ground is more like assisted driving which doesn't seem safe according to most HN comments.

Re: Scenarios in which Tesla FSD Beta 9.0 fails

#307

Post by baud147258 »

bumby wrote: post #290
brianwawok wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, so what happens when one says wall, and one says clear air? You brake? That is what happens now with phantom braking. Approaching a bridge? camera sees air, radar sees wall, slam on brakes. You want the best sensor type over a high-fidelity sensor and a lower fidelity sensor. The Tesla system has 8 cameras (3 forward), so they def have overlap between what they are considering better cameras. Time will prove w…

> That is what happens now with phantom braking. Uber seemed to have programmed an artificial delay when the system got confused. There's a good breakdown of the timeline showing how the system kept misclassifying the bicyclist who was killed, but I couldn't immediately find it. That breakdown shows their strategy at implementing delays in the decision process. According to the NTSB report[1]: > "According to Uber, e…

> "we wanted to avoid nuisance braking so we put in a delay when the system was confused." As someone who used to work in safety-critical software, it blows my mind that you would deliberately hobble one of your main risk mitigations because your system gets confused

Maybe it was put in place to avoid erratic braking in absence of obstacle, in order to avoid getting hit in the rear by other vehicles (whose driver wouldn't see any obstacle and be unprepared for the Tesla car braking).

Re: Scenarios in which Tesla FSD Beta 9.0 fails

#308

Post by paxys »

darknavi wrote: post #6
nikhizzle wrote: post #3

Does anyone have any insight as to why regulators allow a beta like this on the road with drivers who are not trained to specifically respond to it's mistakes? IMHO this puts everybody and their children at risk so Tesla can beta test earlier, but I would love to corrected.

> drivers who are not trained to specifically respond to it's mistakes What would this entail? Perhaps some sort of "license" which allows the user to operator a motor vehicle?

What part of the driving test covers taking over control from an automated vehicle with a split second notice?

Re: Scenarios in which Tesla FSD Beta 9.0 fails

#309

Post by baud147258 »

brianwawok wrote: post #273
BugsJustFindMe wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The post I was responding to said lidar, not radar. But if you want to switch to radar, we can talk about that too. > camera sees air, radar sees wall, slam on brakes Seeing bridges as walls is not a fundamental property of radar. That's an implementation problem. If cars are doing radar poorly, maybe the fix is to start doing it less poorly instead of throwing it away entirely.

Well, that was specifically about blending two different sensors with different characteristics. For you walking, it would be like blending your eyes with your nose. If your eyes tells you the floor is safe, and your nose smells something bad, do you stop? Anytime you have two different sensors with different characteristics, you want "the best". Your body uses your eyes to see where to walk, and your nose to test if…

> If your eyes tells you the floor is safe, and your nose smells something bad

well, if I'm smelling gas, I know the situation isn't safe… (and thus my nose is giving me an information my eyes might not have detected)

Re: Scenarios in which Tesla FSD Beta 9.0 fails

#310

Post by Invictus0 »

CyanLite2 wrote: post #296
Animats wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The monorail video is jaw-dropping. Yes. Pause the video and look at the car's screen. There's no indication on screen of the columns. A car on the other side of the row of columns is recognized, but not the columns. It's clear that Tesla has a special-purpose recognizer for "car". The columns are a solid obstacle almost impinging into the road, one that doesn't look like a car. That's the standard Tesla fail. Most h…

LIDAR cost is coming down, but Tesla has almost no margins on cars. So adding a $500 part per car for LIDAR is out of the question. Even the cheap radar parts were removed from production going forward. However, it's good to see other automakers like Volvo going the LIDAR route on their 2022 electric models and are offering Level3 autonomous driving.

Tesla's Full Self Driving package was between 8 and 10,000 dollars per vehicle. That should cover it.
Post reply on HN