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

Tesla investigation deepens after more than a dozen US ‘Autopilot’ crashes

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 124 posts

Re: Tesla investigation deepens after more than a dozen US ‘Autopilot’ crashes

#81

Post by D13Fd »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #8
MBCook wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If this was happening as often on Volvos or GM vehicles don’t you think they would be looking into it too?

Other automaker AEB (automatic emergency braking) systems have the same stationary object detection deficiency and specifically indicate that the system can fail under these circumstances [1]. Tesla gets called out because their autosteer is so good at lane keeping, comparatively speaking. Their new high resolution radar [2] (Phoenix) they’ve registered with the FCC, as well as a retrofit campaign across the fleet, w…

It’s not just the feature that’s unsafe, it’s the feature plus the marketing.

If the other manufacturers start throwing “full self-driving” around to describe their cruise control/lane keeping/automatic breaking, and people start crashing because they rely on that, then yes. I expect there would be some regulatory activity.

Re: Tesla investigation deepens after more than a dozen US ‘Autopilot’ crashes

#82

Post by [deleted] »

mlyle wrote: post #42
Manuel_D wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is this actually a problem with tesla marketing? Or is it a problem with people being dumb? An aircraft autopilot will happily fly you straight into a mountain. It just holds altitude and bearing. Everyone I know with a Tesla exclusively uses autopilot on the highway in between exits. I'm pretty baffled as to how some people think it's fully autonomous driving, and I'm dubious as to how culpable Tesla is for that ign…

> Everyone I know with a Tesla exclusively uses autopilot on the highway in between exits. Tesla touts (and sells as a separate option) "full self-driving" capability. They tout that it can make turns on city streets, obey street lights, yield to city traffic, change lanes, park, etc. This is not intended for the use case of on the highway, well-supervised, between exits.

[deleted]

Re: Tesla investigation deepens after more than a dozen US ‘Autopilot’ crashes

#83

Post by Domenic_S »

Sakos wrote: post #13
renewiltord wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We all benefited from our ancestors killing opposing tribes so I'm going to ignore that too. If everyone you know is pure, you're doing better than me. No one mentioned racism? Then what's apartheid, mate. Come off it.

Our ancestors, sure. But my dad wasn't a rich white guy from apartheid SA who invested in my first company and financed who knows what else. ... you're saying it's racist of me to mention he's from an extremely racist system that reserved land and particular careers for members of a particular racial classification? Are you okay? Are you on the right site?

Maybe he was rich maybe not, but this is what Elon has to say:

> “One thing he [Musk's father] claims is he gave us a whole bunch of money to start, my brother and I, to start up our first company [Zip2, which provided online city guides to newspapers]. This is not true,” Musk says. “He was irrelevant. He paid nothing for college. My brother and I paid for college through scholarships, loans and working two jobs simultaneously. The funding we raised for our first company came from a small group of random angel investors in Silicon Valley.” [0]

Errol invested between 20-30k well after Zip2 was on it's way and they closed a huge round weeks after. His father took credit for helping him but the Musk brothers strongly deny it [0], and Elon literally slept in the office and showered in the local YMCA to get off the ground [1]

Even Elon's wiki page misreports this, but the Zip2 wiki page has it right.

[0] https://web.archive.org/web/20200817165150/https://www.rolli...

[1] https://www.businessinsider.com/the-rise-of-elon-musk-2016-7...

Re: Tesla investigation deepens after more than a dozen US ‘Autopilot’ crashes

#84

Post by alphabettsy »

dekhn wrote: post #76
Manuel_D wrote: post #2

I wonder how many people turn on traditional cruise control and then crash due to neglectful driving. That's what we should be comparing Tesla Autopilot against, we should compare it against the status quo.

My most recent car has adaptive cruise control (tries to keep a speed, and break/resume if it can't). And it also has some lane detector that pushes the car gently back into the lane if you don't apply pressure. I used it for about 10 minutes before I had to prevent it from making a very serious accident. I would never compare that to Autopilot, which can go many hours before making a very serious accident.

> Autopilot, which can go many hours before making a very serious accident.

Does it concern you that it might provide a false sense of security?

Re: Tesla investigation deepens after more than a dozen US ‘Autopilot’ crashes

#85

Post by alphabettsy »

aeternum wrote: post #80
PKop wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tesla is building "full self driving" using a feature called "Autopilot". You're playing stupid but nobody is fooled by this sophistry.

Doesn't Ford call their version Co-pilot360 or something? What are your thoughts on that?

How might the average person see the difference between a copilot and autopilot?

Re: Tesla investigation deepens after more than a dozen US ‘Autopilot’ crashes

#86

Post by aeternum »

alphabettsy wrote: post #85
aeternum wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn't Ford call their version Co-pilot360 or something? What are your thoughts on that?

How might the average person see the difference between a copilot and autopilot?

I think most people understand that a copilot is fully able to fly the plane themselves whereas an autopilot requires being monitored.

Re: Tesla investigation deepens after more than a dozen US ‘Autopilot’ crashes

#87

Post by gkop »

InitialLastName wrote: post #67
gkop wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

0 > 0*n == false

To be fair, they didn't say Tesla has delivered any self-driving cars. Everyone knows a huckster is at their happiest with an internet horde making excuses for their incapacity to fulfill their promises.

Heh, good point. The best correct is technically correct and all that.

Re: Tesla investigation deepens after more than a dozen US ‘Autopilot’ crashes

#88

Post by dekhn »

alphabettsy wrote: post #84
dekhn wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My most recent car has adaptive cruise control (tries to keep a speed, and break/resume if it can't). And it also has some lane detector that pushes the car gently back into the lane if you don't apply pressure. I used it for about 10 minutes before I had to prevent it from making a very serious accident. I would never compare that to Autopilot, which can go many hours before making a very serious accident.

> Autopilot, which can go many hours before making a very serious accident. Does it concern you that it might provide a false sense of security?

Yes- that's my point. It took me ten minutes to realize my car's technology is unsafe, but from what I can tell, lots of people used FSD Beta enough to consider it reliable enough after a few hours of watching it work more or less OK on a freeway to completely disengage from driving.

Re: Tesla investigation deepens after more than a dozen US ‘Autopilot’ crashes

#89

Post by clouddrover »

ActorNightly wrote: post #72
jdsully wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most of these other implementations have radar and LiDAR. Teslas is the inferior solution. That’s why if you order one you see a disclaimer that it is vision only.

You have no basis for saying its inferior.

Tesla says it is inferior because they are bringing radar back:

https://electrek.co/2022/06/08/tesla-files-use-new-radar-con...

Re: Tesla investigation deepens after more than a dozen US ‘Autopilot’ crashes

#90

Post by Domenic_S »

warning26 wrote: post #43
concinds wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fundamental problem is that Tesla's Autopilot is defective. It has repeatedly steered people into highway barriers, and sometimes has no clue which lane it's in or where it's going. See the opening of this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sMvdI8nSAJE An Apple employee was killed by his Tesla, which always veered into a highway barrier after an OTA update (he was distracted one day and didn't prevent the cra…

What is the benefit of an auto-drive function if you have to pay constant attention to it? Essentially, autopilot's main value proposition is that you don't need to pay attention to it -- and that's what makes it so dangerous.

As a bay-area commuter, the value prop is not having to micromanage the accelerator/brake/steering wheel in stop-and-go traffic. I did the commute for years in "regular" cars, and I've done it for years with autopilot, and autopilot is without a question a much easier commute.

There is a continuum between actively driving the car and falling asleep in the back seat, and AP puts you somewhere on the left side of the middle. It's generally great stuff.

All the point-to-point full-self-driving BS is meh, I don't really care about it, but give me world-class TACC and lane keeping (original autopilot) and I'm a happy commuter.

Post reply on HN