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

California DMV accuses Tesla of making false claims about Autopilot and FSD

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 85 posts

Re: California DMV accuses Tesla of making false claims about Autopilot and FSD

#41

Post by simion314 »

toolz wrote: post #40
simion314 wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The issue is that you have fanboys that are idiots and they will conclude this Human + Autopilot > Human => (implies) AI is better then human FSD > Autopilot Conclusion FSD is better then humans. Nobody said that installing a good drive assistant is less safe, the issue is with idiots using this stats to imply the AI itself is better then human drivers wich is a bad conclusion to draw from this. To prove FSD is bette…

They already have a safety score you have to maintain in order to qualify for FSD beta, so this seems like an imagined non-issue. Simply don't allow FSD for people who drive recklessly.

You are one of the people that seem not to understand statistics, how can you answer if FSD is safe if the only data is when FSD is baby-sited by a human with a high score?

Go to Tesla subbreddit are all hard core fans are and read about this topic, you will see many example of users having issues with this feature, the FSD is not safe, it will kill you if you don't pay attention, it might kill some innocent person because some random dude is alpha testing updates and maybe is also live streaming it for fun.

I REPEAT, Tesla is not sharing the data so if someone is telling you that the AI alone is better then a human then he is lying, there is no data to show this.

I would bet Autopilot/FSD is unsafe alone(without the human ) and the issue then raises because of marketing where someone say rents a Tesla, he believes Elon and does not pay attention and kills someone. I seen even Tesla fanbos acknowledging that FSD is not safe and just read a comment where one such fanboy had to explain his relative that FSD is a scam and not to buy it. Also there is a post ATM on Tesla reddit about someone that does not trust his relative driving his car with the autopilot because this person is failing to pay attention when using the AI, the dude was asking how could he make it impossible for this relative that shares the car with to use the AI.

Re: California DMV accuses Tesla of making false claims about Autopilot and FSD

#42

Post by ra7 »

toolz wrote: post #36
mikestew wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

...because it isn't perfect yet? No, because it hasn't been demonstrated to even work as promised, let alone "isn't perfect".

They release quarterly data that shows it works as promised and is much safer than human drivers on highways.

Those statistics are for Autopilot only. They hide FSD data.

That data is also super misleading as they compare Autopilot highway crash rates with statistics for an average car (which is older and has fewer safety features than newer cars) that includes city driving (which is much less safe than highway driving). It's designed to advertise Autopilot as safer than it really is. In reality, it's about as safe as any new car with standard safety features (AEB, collision avoidance, lane keep etc).

Re: California DMV accuses Tesla of making false claims about Autopilot and FSD

#43

Post by andrewmcwatters »

Tesla is the only company that seems to have this issue considering many big players have some form of ACC and LKAS.

You just don’t hear Toyota calling their self-driving “Toyota Autosteer.”

This all seems to be driven by arrogance and marketing.

Re: California DMV accuses Tesla of making false claims about Autopilot and FSD

#44

Post by BoorishBears »

toolz wrote: post #35
simion314 wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We can't know, Tesla is secret about the real data. From what we see in videos where people are testing FSD and the human had to save teh day many times in 30 minutes. So for just that 1 car you would have had 1 death if the human was not there. IF we would have the number of how many times the driver would have been hurt if he did not take control then we could have a better guess how many kilometers a Tesla would s…

Tesla isn't hiding data, they simply only have autopilot data on highways, which their autopilot data suggests it's safer than human pilots on highways. Which to me suggests we should be putting social effort behind making autopilot (on the highway, at least) the norm. Perfection is not a requirement for advancement.

> Tesla isn't hiding data

No they are. They won't break out FSD and they 100% could

> their autopilot data suggests it's safer than human pilots on highways

Their autopilot data compared to every single type of car, with every single type of driver, only on highways.

So we're comparing every 1994 Corolla with a teenage driver to every 2021 EV with a 30 yr old driver.

The reality is AP should really be compared to modern cars which tend to come with LKAS and AEBm and stats should be adjusted to reflect the differing driver populations.

But Tesla would rather throw up comparisons that make themselves look good, but only past muster if you don't think about it too much.

Re: California DMV accuses Tesla of making false claims about Autopilot and FSD

#45

Post by x86x87 »

toolz wrote: post #35
simion314 wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We can't know, Tesla is secret about the real data. From what we see in videos where people are testing FSD and the human had to save teh day many times in 30 minutes. So for just that 1 car you would have had 1 death if the human was not there. IF we would have the number of how many times the driver would have been hurt if he did not take control then we could have a better guess how many kilometers a Tesla would s…

Tesla isn't hiding data, they simply only have autopilot data on highways, which their autopilot data suggests it's safer than human pilots on highways. Which to me suggests we should be putting social effort behind making autopilot (on the highway, at least) the norm. Perfection is not a requirement for advancement.

Nah. Tesla has a trust problem. I don't trust them.

Also: you already have autopilot on the freeway: it's called cruise control + lane assist. That's not as sexy as saying autopilot though.

Re: California DMV accuses Tesla of making false claims about Autopilot and FSD

#46

Post by nradov »

ra7 wrote: post #30
culi wrote: post #20

Before Tesla came out with autopilot, Google had done extensive user research on "autopilot" cars and found that no matter how many times you tell users that they must be fully attentive, people WILL go on their phones or stop paying attention. It's the entire reason Google didn't go to market with their technology before Tesla Then Musk came along and completely ignored the research (which he must've been really awa…

Here is the video of that Google experiment you mentioned: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ePWBBrWSzo Google had hands-free driving working on highways a decade ago, but decided they didn't want to take the incremental approach of L2 -> L3 -> L4 exactly for the reasons you mentioned and jumped straight to making L4 (fully driverless) work.

GM has taken the incremental approach and has been selling the L2 Super Cruise feature for several years. So far it seems to have a good safety record. They plan to start selling an "Ultra Cruise" system next year with autonomous driving on a wider range of roads, but it will still be L2.

Mercedes-Benz had hands-free driving working on highways in 1987 (before Google even existed). However, their approach relied on expensive specialized hardware and wasn't commercially practical.

Re: California DMV accuses Tesla of making false claims about Autopilot and FSD

#47

Post by acdha »

ra7 wrote: post #32
misiti3780 wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So just so I understand, you think there are Tesla owners that think they have Full self driving because the Tesla website calls it FSD?

But why even call it FSD if it's not fully self driving? There's no reason to use a misleading name in the first place.

The absurdity of that point becomes obvious when you look at it from a business perspective: Tesla’s marketing department wants that there because it sounds better than what their competitors offer. They wouldn’t make it so prominent if they didn’t want you to take exactly that impression.

Re: California DMV accuses Tesla of making false claims about Autopilot and FSD

#48

Post by gamblor956 »

culi wrote: post #20

Before Tesla came out with autopilot, Google had done extensive user research on "autopilot" cars and found that no matter how many times you tell users that they must be fully attentive, people WILL go on their phones or stop paying attention. It's the entire reason Google didn't go to market with their technology before Tesla Then Musk came along and completely ignored the research (which he must've been really awa…

IMO the blood of the 15 people who have died due to autopilot is directly on his hands

It's up to 21 now, including the 2 fatal motorcycle accidents referred to in the Ars Technica article from this weekend.

Re: California DMV accuses Tesla of making false claims about Autopilot and FSD

#49

Post by gamblor956 »

chmod600 wrote: post #26
culi wrote: post #20

Before Tesla came out with autopilot, Google had done extensive user research on "autopilot" cars and found that no matter how many times you tell users that they must be fully attentive, people WILL go on their phones or stop paying attention. It's the entire reason Google didn't go to market with their technology before Tesla Then Musk came along and completely ignored the research (which he must've been really awa…

Are Teslas more lethal per mile than other cars?

Yes. With 21 known fatalities in the U.S. alone, Tesla has more advanced driving system deaths than every other carmaker in the world, combined. (For the record, the combined total for every other manufacturer is 1: the Uber pedestrian fatality that doomed Uber's self-driving program.)

Re: California DMV accuses Tesla of making false claims about Autopilot and FSD

#50

Post by gamblor956 »

toolz wrote: post #36
mikestew wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

...because it isn't perfect yet? No, because it hasn't been demonstrated to even work as promised, let alone "isn't perfect".

They release quarterly data that shows it works as promised and is much safer than human drivers on highways.

I have to drive with Teslas every day on my way to work.

Teslas drive like drunk drivers, whether using AP or FSD.

Tesla fans might feel like they are safer, but from the perspective of someone else on the road, they are objectively less safe, unless you consider swerving, randomly slamming on the brakes, and tailgating to be examples of safe driving.

And Tesla's AP system has more recorded fatalities than all of their competitors, combined. By the numbers, NHTSA data shows that Teslas are 50x more likely to get into an accident using AP or FSD than a Ford or Toyota; and the nearest legacy automaker is still 1/3rd as likely to get into an accident as a Tesla using AP/FSD.

Post reply on HN