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

Tesla FSD Beta 10 veers into pedestrians with illegal right turn

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 130 posts

Re: Tesla FSD Beta 10 veers into pedestrians with illegal right turn

#91

Post by GravitasFailure »

BugsJustFindMe wrote: post #69
GravitasFailure wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've dealt with similar but less extreme behavior in lane keeping systems where it senses the right-side reference veering away so it "corrects" and follows, causing a veer to the right, so it might not have been trying to turn but instead drive next to the crosswalk at the same distance it was from the curb. Regardless of what happened, that's a really bad bug to have.

Interesting. This could explain why it doesn't signal. But honestly even veering like that should elicit a turn signal to notify other drivers of the move.

I'm not sure an extra alert would be helpful since it's either going to alert constantly on streets that twist and turn or it's going to think it's doing nothing wrong and not alert. Same for the turn signal.

Re: Tesla FSD Beta 10 veers into pedestrians with illegal right turn

#92

Post by tzs »

I wonder how well it does with stopping for school buses?

Here in Washington I see people getting that wrong all the time, usually in the direction of stopping when they do not have to.

The rule is that when a school bus has its flashers on and/or its stop sign out you stop unless:

1. You are going in the opposite direction, and

2. The road is either a divided road (separated by a median or a barrier) or has at least 3 lanes.

I see people going the opposite direction often stop on three or four lane roads.

(The reason you do not have to stop on a 3+ lane road or divided road is that the law requires that if school has students from both sides of such a road the school must have separate bus stops on each side, so that no child has to cross such a road. School bus stops can only serve both sides of a road if the road is 2 or fewer lanes).

(I've not been able to find a definitive answer on whether or not a road with one lane in each direction and a center turn lane counts as a 3 lane road).

Re: Tesla FSD Beta 10 veers into pedestrians with illegal right turn

#93

Post by GravitasFailure »

diggernet wrote: post #80
GravitasFailure wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've dealt with similar but less extreme behavior in lane keeping systems where it senses the right-side reference veering away so it "corrects" and follows, causing a veer to the right, so it might not have been trying to turn but instead drive next to the crosswalk at the same distance it was from the curb. Regardless of what happened, that's a really bad bug to have.

Nope. Watch the dotted line ahead of the car on the left side of the screen. At the last moment, it suddenly removes the "continue on this road" line, and replaces it with a "go down the road to the right" line. It literally decided to make a sudden turn. You might also notice that while pedestrians and other vehicles are displayed on-screen, not a single one of the solid concrete pillars are displayed. That car is c…

Ah, good catch, I didn't see that before. Since it was signaling and displaying a lane change to the left just before that I wonder why it didn't signal a sharp right turn then. Maybe it thought that's how the road went?

Re: Tesla FSD Beta 10 veers into pedestrians with illegal right turn

#94

Post by BugsJustFindMe »

gruez wrote: post #38
BugsJustFindMe wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Not an illegal turn. [edit] I linked to the law from the wrong state. Here's the right one: https://app.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=46.61.305 RCWs > Title 46 > Chapter 46.61 > Section 46.61.305 (1) No person shall turn a vehicle or move right or left upon a roadway unless and until such movement can be made with reasonable safety nor without giving an appropriate signal in the manner hereinafter provided. (2)…

Isn't that just "failing to signal a turn"? If you told me someone made an "illegal turn", I'd think they made right on a intersection with a non right turn sign.

> Isn't that just "failing to signal a turn"?

You mean "making the turn illegally"? Potato potato.

Re: Tesla FSD Beta 10 veers into pedestrians with illegal right turn

#95

Post by BugsJustFindMe »

GravitasFailure wrote: post #91
BugsJustFindMe wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting. This could explain why it doesn't signal. But honestly even veering like that should elicit a turn signal to notify other drivers of the move.

I'm not sure an extra alert would be helpful since it's either going to alert constantly on streets that twist and turn or it's going to think it's doing nothing wrong and not alert. Same for the turn signal.

I think it should. Having a car in front of you means that part of the view of the road is obstructed. IMO the veering car has a moral duty to signal to the next car especially if the veering is unexpected. Now the state law on signaling says "No person shall turn a vehicle..." but I can't find what the definition for "turn" is, so there may be no legal obligation, but I do see a social obligation.

Re: Tesla FSD Beta 10 veers into pedestrians with illegal right turn

#96

Post by ahahahahah »

woofyman wrote: post #40
ogwh wrote: post #34

Why is everyone freaking out over a beta test with a driver at the wheel ready to take over immediately? It's a beta test, finding bugs is kind of the point. Or have we truly reached the point now where we expect "stable" software to be of the same calibre as beta software so nobody makes a distinction between the two?

Because it’s a 5000 lb weapon and the pedestrians didn’t consent to the beta.

In addition, and unlike every other serious company in the space, Tesla is using random untrained drivers for testing this crap.

Re: Tesla FSD Beta 10 veers into pedestrians with illegal right turn

#97

Post by mikequinlan »

Alupis wrote: post #16
gpm wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's also a sign on this half of the traffic wire that looks like it might be saying "yes turns" (low resolution, but I can't imagine what the sign says with an arrow pointing right other then that)

That sign says "One Way". Not "yes turns"... I don't think I've ever seen a sign saying that, actually, it's either "No Turns" or no sign at all, since by default turns are allowed.

>by default turns are allowed.

It depends on where you live. In downtown Vancouver there were arrows at each intersection telling you what directions of travel were legal.

Re: Tesla FSD Beta 10 veers into pedestrians with illegal right turn

#98

Post by jdminhbg »

notJim wrote: post #47
jdminhbg wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a one-way to the right but there's a no right turn sign on the pillar to the left of the street as you approach it. Not signed great, but still not a legal turn.

I think that sign applies to the left lane only. It's to stop you from turning right from the left lane. I think turning right from the lane the car is in is legal.

Oh, I think you’re right. Good call.

Re: Tesla FSD Beta 10 veers into pedestrians with illegal right turn

#100

Post by lmilcin »

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #89
rndmind wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just to clarify here. no pedestrians were hit, and no one died. I am curious how many people died on the first airplanes and commercial airline travel ( from 1900 - 1950's ) Do you suggest that the government should have made commercial airline travel illegal until there were zero accidents?

No, lmilcin didn't suggest that. And your analogy is imperfect. How many people died on the ground from airplane crashes from 1900-1950? Probably, not very many. (Why does the difference matter? The passengers got on the plane, knowing - at least approximately - what the risks were. The people on the ground didn't voluntarily accept any risk.)

I assume everybody understands there WILL be deaths due to AI making some kind of mistake.

It is just a consequence of billions of cars making trillions of trips.

But at the very least we should have a clear, reliable solution for all the easy cases. Let's summarize:

- clear, sunny day -- check, - but not blinded by the sun -- check, - slow speeds -- check, - clearly marked intersection -- check, - pedestrians not acting stupid -- check, - not trying to avoid hitting another vehicle -- check.

Just make sure under no circumstances the car is allowed to turn into a path of a pedestrians like that.

And if it can't reliably detect pedestrians or their path in perfect conditions like these I can only conclude it is far from being ready.

Post reply on HN