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

California passes law banning Tesla from calling software FSD

teslarati.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

431–440 of 672 posts

Re: California passes law banning Tesla from calling software FSD

#431

Post by rootusrootus »

okwubodu wrote: post #416
rootusrootus wrote: post #387

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like Uber? Real FSD would just give us the same result as ride sharing, but on a far grander scale. In other words, gridlock.

Isn’t most traffic caused by cascading human error? I assumed true FSD would be a mesh net where every car broadcasts its next move to its neighbors.

Only if humans are banished altogether from the roads. In which case the current attempts at FSD are pointless anyway and we should focus on building the infrastructure for simpler automated cars. As it stands today, every current automated car in existence is quite a lot more timid than a typical human and will cause gridlock very quickly as a result. An awful lot of driving relies on behavior assumptions that computers aren't good at making yet.

Re: California passes law banning Tesla from calling software FSD

#432

Post by peteradio »

93po wrote: post #348
t0mas88 wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are many videos on YouTube with it failing these kinds of examples indeed.

There are also a lot of videos of humans failing these examples.

Yes and when they do they are ticketed or otherwise charged. Who holds liability when someone purchases a package that is supposed to do this for them.

Re: California passes law banning Tesla from calling software FSD

#433

Post by samtho »

tnel77 wrote: post #322
astral303 wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t think self-driving cars lead to fewer people owning cars, in fact it’s quite the opposite. With FSD, those who don’t like driving can deal with owning a car to do necessary transportation tasks (e.g. commuting), instead of giving it up for alternative methods because they don’t want to drive consciously/presently.

I think it goes both ways and we won’t know for sure until it comes to fruition. Personally, I hate owning vehicles and desperately want a self-driving taxi service that I can order via an app to get me and my family around.

> Personally, I hate owning vehicles and desperately want a self-driving taxi service that I can order via an app to get me and my family around.

This future sounds great until you consider what it really means to let “someone else” become the arbiter of you being able to get around.

If I have a car in my driveway, I can make sure it is charged/fueled for whenever I need it and I can just turn it on and go. Compare that to a system who’s goal is not specifically moving you, but keeping cars/assets always on paid trips. Sure, you may in luck if you live in a well-off areas where many trips are taken, but I fear peak hours will become something of a bidding war where nobody wins.

If you do not control your means of transport, someone else does and they can take it away from you at any time. This “rent seeking” is one of the biggest cancers on our society and I will be no part of it given the choice.

Re: California passes law banning Tesla from calling software FSD

#434

Post by [deleted] »

okwubodu wrote: post #416
rootusrootus wrote: post #387

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like Uber? Real FSD would just give us the same result as ride sharing, but on a far grander scale. In other words, gridlock.

Isn’t most traffic caused by cascading human error? I assumed true FSD would be a mesh net where every car broadcasts its next move to its neighbors.

[deleted]

Re: California passes law banning Tesla from calling software FSD

#435

Post by wpietri »

logifail wrote: post #424
rzimmerman wrote: post #323

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I also love my Model Y. It’s by far the best car I’ve ever owned or driven. But the software has stagnated in favor of “FSD” beta releases. Autopilot on freeways is great. I use it all the time and it works. I wish Tesla would focus on getting that to a level 3-type system - something where I can take my hands off the wheel and just be ready to take over after 10-15 seconds. It feels close enough that it could be don…

> But the software has stagnated [..] I've only owned ICE vehicles (lifetime total: 3, 2 of which are parked outside right now), and have only ever rented ICE vehicles (lifetime total: several hundred, the latest of which is in the long-stay at London Heathrow right now...) I'm unable to get my head around talk of a vehicle's software "stagnating"? AFAIK none of the vehicles I've ever driven had OTA updates, and from…

I think the implication is that the current software is just not very good.

It's obviously fine for techie early adopters, who like the new shiny and are willing to put up with a lot. But it sounds like from the perspective of a normal person's sustained daily use, the gee-whiz feelings wear off and leave you with annoying issues.

But it could also partly be a case of differing expectations. The web has trained us all that software generally gets better over time. I never expect a car's too-low doorframes to make room for my head. But on an ICE car when I'm confronted with, say, the same clunky dashboard nav system, it seems more frustrating that, year after year, it's still just as bad. In fact, I ended up paying good money to replace the car stereo with something that was compatible with Android Auto mainly so I could have an ever-improving Google Maps in the same spot on my dashboard.

Re: California passes law banning Tesla from calling software FSD

#436

Post by simondotau »

BoorishBears wrote: post #394
93po wrote: post #344

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I just wish Tesla would focus on this stuff without hyping an AI feature that can never happen. Why can that never happen?

Arbitrary limitations on the sensor suite because "we figured it out, humans only need cameras" are one reason. Tesla is not running in the same race as actual AV companies.

All of the "actual AV companies" have only released curated marketing videos and/or restrict operation to curated geofenced areas. Meanwhile we've seen exactly one company's autonomy technology exposed to unsupervised and uncontrolled adversarial conditions across hundreds of wildly diverse cities in the USA. Whether you are impressed with their state of progress or not, there's nobody you can compare them to.

Operators like Waymo do look plausible while operating within their tiny geofence. Driving pre-validated roads is impressive in its own way. Right now if you dropped a Waymo and Tesla FSD on an unsealed road in Michigan, one of them will drive at least as well as a human learner driver and the other will probably refuse to move.

The point is, I agree that there could be many firms which are far ahead of Tesla, but there isn't enough information in the public domain to say this with any confidence. Right now Tesla's is the only major system which can be assessed with critical objectively.

Re: California passes law banning Tesla from calling software FSD

#437

Post by colejohnson66 »

teraflop wrote: post #321
colejohnson66 wrote: post #315

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? The whole idea of neural nets is based on mimicking the brain. It's even in the name: neural (for neuron).

Yeah, and the name of "Full Self-Driving" tells you that it can drive "by itself" i.e. without human intervention. But names aren't everything, and artificial neutral networks are "inspired by" but in truth drastically different from human brains.

How so?

Re: California passes law banning Tesla from calling software FSD

#438

Post by bhauer »

bilsbie wrote: post #312
bilsbie wrote: post #297

The latest self driving videos are looking really impressive. Maybe we’re getting close.

Wow what did I say. Guess I’m not hating the right things?

It is very much against the prevailing HN narrative to have an optimistic view on autonomy in general, and Tesla's efforts in that space in particular. The approved HN narrative is that autonomous driving is far too complex for computers and cameras, and Tesla's FSD is endlessly crashing into everything. Oh and it's somehow more dangerous to be near a Tesla on FSD than any other driver on the road, data be damned.

Re: California passes law banning Tesla from calling software FSD

#439

Post by simondotau »

samtho wrote: post #433
tnel77 wrote: post #322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it goes both ways and we won’t know for sure until it comes to fruition. Personally, I hate owning vehicles and desperately want a self-driving taxi service that I can order via an app to get me and my family around.

> Personally, I hate owning vehicles and desperately want a self-driving taxi service that I can order via an app to get me and my family around. This future sounds great until you consider what it really means to let “someone else” become the arbiter of you being able to get around. If I have a car in my driveway, I can make sure it is charged/fueled for whenever I need it and I can just turn it on and go. Compare t…

> This future sounds great until you consider what it really means to let “someone else” become the arbiter of you being able to get around.

Assuming we're discounting things like bicycles, family member's vehicles and company-owned vehicles, this is present day reality for the overwhelming majority of people on this planet.

(It's also debatable whether a car truly eliminates other people from being an arbiter of "being able to get around" if you are still reliant on a fossil fuel supply chain. By comparison an EV charged with a domestic solar array would probably more liberating.)

Re: California passes law banning Tesla from calling software FSD

#440

Post by dreamcompiler »

93po wrote: post #344
dreamcompiler wrote: post #307

Should have happened sooner. I love my Model Y. It's the most fun car I've ever owned. It's also the most comfortable on long road trips and I can sleep in it in climate-controlled comfort without generating a gas that could kill me. I leave the house every morning with a full tank and never have to stop at a gas station. And my cost per mile is 1/4 what it was with an ICE car. I just wish Tesla would focus on this s…

> I just wish Tesla would focus on this stuff without hyping an AI feature that can never happen. Why can that never happen?

No lidar or sonar, not enough sweating of the thousands of dangerous edge cases, and an insistence on a software architecture whose failure modes cannot be adequately characterized.
Post reply on HN