[deleted]
DMV ‘revisiting’ its approach to regulating Tesla’s public self-driving test
41–50 of 106 posts
Re: DMV ‘revisiting’ its approach to regulating Tesla’s public self-driving test
#42This topic aside, I guess I just feel like if the Hacker community is saying “don’t build things! It’s dangerous! What if someone gets hurt! Go DMV! Put a stop to that!”, then maybe I don’t want to be a Hacker anymore.
Can you point me to a time where $BIGCORP leveraging mass public testing of 5,000 lb heavy machinery to get around actually having to pay for testers was considered part of the hacker ethos?
What percentage of cars is enough for you to say "mass public testing"?
Re: DMV ‘revisiting’ its approach to regulating Tesla’s public self-driving test
#43Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s a new technology which no one else is testing in the real world with actual drivers at such a scale. Onus is on Tesla to provide data for others to verify the claim that it’s safe.
I don't think this is a good faith answer; feels more like "I don't have a good answer for why this is a problem, so I'm going to punt it onto you to convince me"
The only ones who have the hard data are Tesla and you are expecting somebody else to provide it. Are you serious?
Re: DMV ‘revisiting’ its approach to regulating Tesla’s public self-driving test
#44Earlier quoted context omitted.
I didn't realise part of being a hacker was being okay with endangering lives.
We all endanger lives every time we get behind the wheel of a manually driven car.
If you endanger lives every time you get behind the wheel of a car, you shouldn't be driving.
Millions of people are able to drive safely, and do, every minute of every day.
Re: DMV ‘revisiting’ its approach to regulating Tesla’s public self-driving test
#45This topic aside, I guess I just feel like if the Hacker community is saying “don’t build things! It’s dangerous! What if someone gets hurt! Go DMV! Put a stop to that!”, then maybe I don’t want to be a Hacker anymore.
How does revisiting approach to regulate public self-driving test translate to dont build things in your opinion? To me if looks like no one has issues with building or testing, its just the public testing that there are concerns about.
Re: DMV ‘revisiting’ its approach to regulating Tesla’s public self-driving test
#46Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can you point me to a time where $BIGCORP leveraging mass public testing of 5,000 lb heavy machinery to get around actually having to pay for testers was considered part of the hacker ethos?
What percentage of cars is enough for you to say "mass public testing"?
Why on earth is it supposed to be a percentage of all cars on the road?
If I say I just ate a lot of rice, do I define how much rice I ate by the percentage of global rice consumption I accounted for?
-
Please, 2,000 cars is mass testing.
Re: DMV ‘revisiting’ its approach to regulating Tesla’s public self-driving test
#47Does anyone have good data on comparing deaths per mile driven between various auto brands? This data, https://www.tesladeaths.com/ , doesn't tell us much if accurate, other than Tesla crashes don't seem to be any kind of real problem in an absolute sense.
>Does anyone have good data on comparing deaths per mile driven between various auto brands?
Hopefully this evaluation will force Tesla to share the data as the other companies, hopefully the army of fanboys have nothing against transparency.
Re: DMV ‘revisiting’ its approach to regulating Tesla’s public self-driving test
#48Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ok, still, try to compare it to equivalent brands and socio-economic groups. My point is that anti Tesla self driving sentiment is almost exclusively driven by emotion, not hard data. Show me the data that justifies why I need to be afraid of public FSD.
On an absolute basis , Tesla has more self-driving-related deaths than every other automaker in the world, combined. That doesn't scare you? On a relative basis, it's even scarier: scaled up to Toyota or GM numbers (in terms of vehicles sold), hundreds of people would be dying each year from self-driving crashes.
A few hundred people have died on a 5km stretch of road near me in the last couple of years. None of them driving Teslas. Most of them drunk or driving far too fast (50km/h is safe, people often drive 150km/h because shortcut and the stretch literally drives like a race course).
Re: DMV ‘revisiting’ its approach to regulating Tesla’s public self-driving test
#49This topic aside, I guess I just feel like if the Hacker community is saying “don’t build things! It’s dangerous! What if someone gets hurt! Go DMV! Put a stop to that!”, then maybe I don’t want to be a Hacker anymore.
Sure, why do we even need DMV and driver's license. Anyone and of any age should be allowed to drive, since who cares it's dangerous since hackers want it that way. Who is DMV to tell someone whether they can or cannot drive.
While we're at it, let's argue that FDA shouldn't worry about drug/vaccine trials? Perhaps as soon as a company makes something, it should be given to the people, since hackers. I'm sure pharma companies will love that, human lives be damned.
Re: DMV ‘revisiting’ its approach to regulating Tesla’s public self-driving test
#50Earlier quoted context omitted.
> We have limited problem solving resources, which means we need to be smart about how we use those resources to solve the problems that legitimately have the biggest impact on human suffering. Sounds great in principle, but how do self-driving cars fit into that picture?
It fits because humans are objectively shit drives who cause massive amounts of death, suffering, and property damage through car crashes all the time. Unless there's hard data that FSD is worse than the status quo, attempts to curtail it's use is not only a waste of time, but potentially actively contributing to unnecessary suffering if in fact it's contributing to fewer accidents.
>It fits because humans are objectively shit drives who cause massive amounts of death,
Why not maybe don't allow bad drivers to drive at all? Like don't give a license without 40 hours of driving school with a professor, have a test with traffic rules, then have a final test with an official. Have the drivers provide medical proof they are capable, Each time a driver does something dangerous like speeding remove his driving license for a few months, etc. Btw don't give driving licenses to kids could also work.
It is not like we the ONLY solution is AI driven cars, there are a lot of more cheaper solutions, even tech ones like identifying drunk drivers, speed limiting cars to match the road limits etc.