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

Tesla Autopilot Almost Steers Model 3 into Oncoming Train

thedrive.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 328 posts

Re: Tesla Autopilot Almost Steers Model 3 into Oncoming Train

#291

Post by D-Coder »

sirsinsalot wrote: post #276
deng wrote: post #80

Actually, that steering into the oncoming train is just one of several severe instances in that video: * Almost driving right into a barrier because road is closed: https://youtu.be/yxX4tDkSc_g?t=426 * Choosing the wrong lane and getting confused: https://youtu.be/yxX4tDkSc_g?t=666 * Trying to run a red light, right into traffic: https://youtu.be/yxX4tDkSc_g?t=732 * Stopping in the middle of an intersection without r…

The issue with these AI systems is that the corner cases in the real-world can be fatal. Humans are pretty good, on the whole, at dealing with corner cases.

On the other hand, each human needs to individually figure out (or be taught) how to deal with each corner case.

When an AI system learns it, the company can "teach" the entire fleet all at once.

Re: Tesla Autopilot Almost Steers Model 3 into Oncoming Train

#292

Post by bamboozled »

mancerayder wrote: post #62
bamboozled wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I understand you correctly, you're arguing that having machines making mistakes maybe ok if it's statistically less likely to happen than humans?

I'm asking the question of how common it is. If I understand you correctly, self-driving should be banned if there's 1 error?

No, I was just trying to work out what you were saying.

I do however think that it's wrong, why? Because human error is enough to deal with, couple this with now AI error. It makes society, crash investigation, designing roads way way more complicated.

Maybe if we ban human drivers 100% and optimize for cars then it would be a good idea. I just can't see cars not needing supervision for a very long time.

I doubt people are going to buy cars that might kill them by making "mistakes". We will see but I think it's going to be a hard sell. People can easily accept their own mistakes. A computer though?

Re: Tesla Autopilot Almost Steers Model 3 into Oncoming Train

#293

Post by rad_gruchalski »

D-Coder wrote: post #291
sirsinsalot wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The issue with these AI systems is that the corner cases in the real-world can be fatal. Humans are pretty good, on the whole, at dealing with corner cases.

On the other hand, each human needs to individually figure out (or be taught) how to deal with each corner case. When an AI system learns it, the company can "teach" the entire fleet all at once.

And yet, all these individual Teslas make the same basic mistakes. What is it: lowest common denominator?

Re: Tesla Autopilot Almost Steers Model 3 into Oncoming Train

#294

Post by rad_gruchalski »

shiftpgdn wrote: post #68
ncmncm wrote: post #2

??? I thought that was what it was for. Or maybe for making wacky collision vids on YouTube? Tesla just closed their whole self-driving office in San Mateo, and fired ("for poor performance") most of the staff, directing some to come to work across the bay. For now. People still employed on that activity would best update their résumés. People who paid for self-driving already? I would ask for a refund, in your shoes…

That’s a misleading headline. Tesla let go of their labeling team because they weren’t needed anymore.

Why weren’t they needed anymore? Do they now have an AI labelling for another AI? Or are they dropping this joke of fsd?

Re: Tesla Autopilot Almost Steers Model 3 into Oncoming Train

#295

Post by mwint »

kadoban wrote: post #281
mwint wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So FSD beta testing has been around for what, a couple years? To continue the tortured analogy: We’ve been playing this Russian roulette for millions of miles. How many times to people have to be “almost” shot, but not actually shot, before we concede that maybe the gun has no bullets?

> How many times to people have to be “almost” shot, but not actually shot, before we concede that maybe the gun has no bullets? You say that like we have anything like good data. We have pretty much what Tesla's marketing team put together on their website, and _maybe_ what some cities or states have cobbled together. And before we assume that Telsa wouldn't lie, let's remember that they call this "Full Self-Driving…

We all know that a real accident would be all over YouTube, and front page of HN for about a week straight.

That we have so many “almost” videos, and a couple “it hit a cone”, but no real collisions seems telling.

Re: Tesla Autopilot Almost Steers Model 3 into Oncoming Train

#296

Post by kadoban »

mwint wrote: post #295
kadoban wrote: post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How many times to people have to be “almost” shot, but not actually shot, before we concede that maybe the gun has no bullets? You say that like we have anything like good data. We have pretty much what Tesla's marketing team put together on their website, and _maybe_ what some cities or states have cobbled together. And before we assume that Telsa wouldn't lie, let's remember that they call this "Full Self-Driving…

We all know that a real accident would be all over YouTube, and front page of HN for about a week straight. That we have so many “almost” videos, and a couple “it hit a cone”, but no real collisions seems telling.

There's all kinds of Tesla crash news. Here's one of hundreds of results. https://www.cnn.com/2022/05/19/cars/nhtsa-tesla-crash-califo...

Which ones are in which terribly-named driving mode? Who knows, Tesla doesn't seem to be saying.

Re: Tesla Autopilot Almost Steers Model 3 into Oncoming Train

#297

Post by pyinstallwoes »

ncmncm wrote: post #266
pyinstallwoes wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, really. The world is obese with fantastical conclusions propagated by terrible practice of first hand experience and thus spreads rumors and worse.

You know this for an absolute fact and swear to it on first hand knowledge?

Yes, it is a certainty. Abundantly clear from direct experience myself, and consistent evidence between other experiences that it is at least a descriptor of a symptom of the increasing concern of conflict in our zeitgeist.

Speak of what you know, for what you don't, be quiet. Something like that.

Re: Tesla Autopilot Almost Steers Model 3 into Oncoming Train

#298

Post by capitalsigma »

yladiz wrote: post #237
Someone wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They phrase it weirdly (accidentally/possibly/probably/certainly (take your pick) in order to confuse the readers), but all that says is that they eventually will provide the software running on the hardware you buy today to actually do it.

I disagree. When I read this: > Tesla cars come standard with advanced hardware capable of providing Autopilot features, and full self-driving capabilities—through software updates designed to improve functionality over time. What I understand is this: Tesla cars come with hardware capable of providing features for the Autopilot system and come with full self driving capabilities. The functionality related to these c…

It is intended to be parsed as:

The cars come with advanced hardware. What is the hardware capable of? It is capable of self driving. How will the hardware achieve the thing it is capable of? Through software updates (that have not yet landed)

Re: Tesla Autopilot Almost Steers Model 3 into Oncoming Train

#299

Post by tintor »

petilon wrote: post #203
tintor wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you believe that Tesla is behind? Tesla is selling a large number of vehicles with FSD, used across a large operational design domain. Cruise isn't selling cars. Small fleet, that can operate at limited hours at night, at limited locations in San Francisco. Small scale and limited operational design domain compared to Tesla's.

> Why do you believe that Tesla is behind? Because Cruise does not need a back-up human driver present. Tesla seems far behind because as this story indicates, a human needs to be paying close attention when Tesla is in charge. Overall, Cruise/Waymo appear to have the better approach. I would rather start with a system that works and is reliable and expand its capabilities, than start with a system that barely works…

Roller-coaster rides don't need a backup human driver. Are they ahead of Tesla in tech?

You can't buy Cruise / Waymo car or use it like you can with Tesla.

Re: Tesla Autopilot Almost Steers Model 3 into Oncoming Train

#300

Post by gamblor956 »

tintor wrote: post #299
petilon wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why do you believe that Tesla is behind? Because Cruise does not need a back-up human driver present. Tesla seems far behind because as this story indicates, a human needs to be paying close attention when Tesla is in charge. Overall, Cruise/Waymo appear to have the better approach. I would rather start with a system that works and is reliable and expand its capabilities, than start with a system that barely works…

Roller-coaster rides don't need a backup human driver. Are they ahead of Tesla in tech? You can't buy Cruise / Waymo car or use it like you can with Tesla.

Roller coasters don't crash into emergency vehicles... so yes.
Post reply on HN