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

451–460 of 502 posts

Re: Scenarios in which Tesla FSD Beta 9.0 fails

#451

Post by soco »

Doxin wrote: post #449
soco wrote: post #434

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh but that's what basically every gps software is doing - one moment you're slowly trailing on the highway, the other you're placed on the bridge above.

Most GPS software is smart enough to not flicker between the highway and the bridge repeatedly though. It's not like this category of problems is a wholly new thing. The car needing to switch lanes twice a second like in one of those videos is fairly unlikely, so if the ML is spitting out that it should, there probably ought to be a layer on top of that that's interpreting the ML output that can take the decision to…

I don't know about "most gps software" but I have a Garmin doing that and Google Maps does the same. So in my experience it's 100%. Now if such well established software products didn't figure out such basic stuff, either we're calling it wrongly "basic" (and it's a difficult problem) or the responsible factors just don't bother. The major difference is though, while gps navigation can do with frequent recalculations, realtime obstacle avoidance less so.

Re: Scenarios in which Tesla FSD Beta 9.0 fails

#452

Post by the8472 »

amanaplanacanal wrote: post #414
the8472 wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

I’d say if we compare Tesla self driving numbers with human drivers driving similar cars, and count every disengagement as an accident, it would be a fair comparison. Tesla wouldn’t come out looking very good with those numbers though.

These rules seem quite stacked, we could also count every human crossing a red light or texting while driving as an accident.

But that's besides the point. I was arguing about the trend line. It may seem silly now, but if the error rate is roughly a straight line on a logarithmic graph then we'll get there soon enough. If it isn't then tesla at very least would have to admit they have a problem and explain how they'll get out of it.

Re: Scenarios in which Tesla FSD Beta 9.0 fails

#453

Post by jjeaff »

ChuckNorris89 wrote: post #447
BugsJustFindMe wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

>Purpose-built cameras can see better in the dark than humans can. Define "see better". Human eyes have way more dynamic range (30 f stops) than even the best cinema camera sensors (14 f stops), and I highly doubt the sensors Tesla use are anywhere close to the gigantic expensive sensors used in cinema cameras and are most likely closer to the sensors in your mobile phone (11 f stops). So no, no camera sensor can cur…

I can't find any source that puts the dynamic range of the human eye at 30 stops. The most i found was around 20. But camera apertures are often as low as f1.8 where the human eye is probably 2.5 to 3.5 at the lowest.

Re: Scenarios in which Tesla FSD Beta 9.0 fails

#454

Post by SirZimzim »

steelframe wrote: post #253
cs702 wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 '…

What are the qualifications of the people selected to participate in the Beta? Do they have any particular experience or receive special training that would set them apart from the general public?

Yes, even if it's a limited release unless these people are professional drivers or Tesla employees these are just people from the public.

Re: Scenarios in which Tesla FSD Beta 9.0 fails

#455

Post by SirZimzim »

ASalazarMX wrote: post #79
avalys wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because America does not yet require that its citizens ask mommy and daddy for permission for every thing they do.

Such crude trolling. Build a new house without a permit and see how that freedom feels.

Yes, you have to get a driver's license and also register your car. If that isn't asking for permission then I don't know. Although it's a stretch to assume this permission includes self driving cars.

Re: Scenarios in which Tesla FSD Beta 9.0 fails

#456

Post by zaroth »

studentrob wrote: post #391
zaroth wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We have actual statistics on how well humans do with Tesla ADAS and it’s remarkably well. The accident rate numbers are hard to compare apples-to-apples since miles driven with all ADAS features active are different from miles driven without the full ADAS active, but the numbers show that the software is absolutely not “1000x more dangerous”. > In the 1st quarter [2021], we registered one accident for every 4.19 mill…

The rub in Tesla's safety report is it compares Teslas to all makes of vehicles, including motorcycles and trucks, and all costs. A fair comparison would be to newer vehicles in a similar price range. Their autopilot stat is also misleading because AP will most likely be engaged only in ideal weather conditions on divided roads.

Yes, this is the retort every time someone posts these numbers, which is why I said they are not apples to apples comparisons. But in the context of the OP comment that Tesla ADAS software makes driving 1000x more dangerous it is clear evidence to the contrary.

Mostly the Tesla numbers are comparing accident rates of just Teslas. You can ignore average accident rate across all vehicles if you like.

If would be truly great if the NHTSA could publish accident rates broken down is various ways like by road type and weather conditions. I’ve never been able to find this data.

Re: Scenarios in which Tesla FSD Beta 9.0 fails

#457

Post by bumby »

pas wrote: post #416
bumby wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Boeing 737 Max had only one AOA sensor Just a small nit-pick but it makes the case against Boeing worse. The airframe had multiple AOA sensors but the base software only used one sensor reading. Note the image in [1] shows readings from both a "left" and "right" AOA. From your link: > software design for relying on data from a single AOA sensor Boeing sold a software upgrade to read both AOA devices. (This still le…

The high level problem was the whole mess that Boeing and the FAA forced themselves into by lying to pilots about the plane being like the old plane. This motivated Boeing to solve everything in a sort of clandestine way, which meant there was no proper error handling, and Boeing simply covered their asses by pointing to the runaway stabilizer checklist, which they claimed was sufficient to handle MCAS problems. This…

It's the unfortunate case that they succumbed to schedule pressure. This is similar to the Space Shuttle Challenger decision that led to catastrophe.

I think "lying" may be too strong of a word, but they were certainly incentivized to believe it was just a modification of an existing airframe. If I remember correctly, Boeing was essentially told by an airline that if they don't come up with a design quickly the airline would instead move their business to airbus. Certifying a modification to an existing design is much faster than certifying a brand new design, so every management decision was made with that lens. Add to it the political side where the competitor is a non-US company and it gets more complicated. Add to that the FAA is likely too understaffed to provide adequate oversight so they instead delegate it to the manufacturer.

This will be another case study in misaligned incentives and the tradeoffs of engineering decisions under uncertainty of both business and design risk.

Re: Scenarios in which Tesla FSD Beta 9.0 fails

#458

Post by nexuist »

fnoof wrote: post #298
BugsJustFindMe wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> As I've been saying for years now, the first job is to determine that the road ahead is flat enough to drive on. Then decide where you want to drive. I did the DARPA Grand Challenge 16 years ago, which was off-road, so that was the first problem to solve. Tesla has lane-following and smart cruise control, like other automakers, to which they've added some hacks to create the illusion of self-driving. But they just…

The flickering is concerning. Kind of suggests their NN hasn’t learned basic object persistence yet.

IIRC this is the stated reason they're dropping radar, the camera network maintains object persistence but the radar disagrees very frequently with the camera network causing the flickering because the system doesn't know which input to trust. Apparently by throwing out radar signals they get smoother object recognition.

Re: Scenarios in which Tesla FSD Beta 9.0 fails

#459

Post by nexuist »

spywaregorilla wrote: post #402
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…

Would the screen show the column if functioning correctly? I don't know this ui.

It's possible they have no classifier for "monorail column" so I don't think anything would show up even if it recognized an obstacle was in the way.

Re: Scenarios in which Tesla FSD Beta 9.0 fails

#460

Post by nexuist »

atoav wrote: post #326
cs702 wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What do the people sign that share the roads with those people? Some of the videos show drivers having to agree to take full responsibility for all driving.

That disn't answer my question. A private company should test their product on private roads.

Nobody signed a waiver to drive next to Joe Blow hauling a mattress in his 82 VW Golf, yet he can do it every day. I don't see how FSD is any different than driving a car with aftermarket modifications. It's not like any of that stuff has to go through NHTSA certification to be road legal.
Post reply on HN