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

501–510 of 672 posts

Re: California passes law banning Tesla from calling software FSD

#501

Post by samwillis »

mgiannopoulos wrote: post #422
samwillis wrote: post #121

FSD is a Boondoggle. (Collision/accident avoidance and driver assist systems are not) I don't think we will see a legitimate L5 automation in our lifetimes. Take my 1.5 mile journey to do the morning school run, in a small UK town: - Getting off the driveway, there is a wall that creates a blind spot behind it, often other parents are walking small kids who are shorter than that wall. I can't see behind it. I check d…

You don’t really need it to work 100% of the time for it to be helpful. Users of FSD Beta report not driving manually 90-95% of the time, which sounds amazing to me.

Agreed, but that's not the mystical "L5" FSD that everyone is aiming for. It's that that I think is a pipe dream.

Re: California passes law banning Tesla from calling software FSD

#502

Post by ryandrake »

2pEXgD0fZ5cF wrote: post #461
janalsncm wrote: post #442

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Elon’s claim of “humans drive with eyes so a car can drive with cameras” is naive. Humans drive with our eyes and we’re pretty bad at driving. We should want systems with redundancy and using multiple modalities so that a car crash isn’t an accident, it’s a choice.

> we’re pretty bad at driving Are we? I know it is a fashionable thing to say, but I am personally fascinated by the relatively low number of accidents given how omnipresent cars are. For germany it's ~5 dead / 100000 motorized vehicles, and ~4 dead / 100000 inhabitants. [1] More anecdotal: Growing up I lived near a pretty busy street and never personally witnessed an accident there. Makes me think that we are actual…

When measured by deaths per passenger mile, passenger vehicles are, by a large factor, the most deadly mode of transportation[1].

1: https://injuryfacts.nsc.org/home-and-community/safety-topics...

Re: California passes law banning Tesla from calling software FSD

#503

Post by jimkleiber »

bluGill wrote: post #326
jimkleiber wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I assume if there were more self-driving cars, fewer people would own cars. I think more people would take Ubers, Lyfts, and other ride sharing services. So I think that could reduce the need for parking and the amount of traffic just by increasing the utilization rate of cars.

i don't think so. when you own a car you can keep stuff in the car. Your golf clubs for an after work game, or those prizes you won at the circus while enjoying the meal after.

Fair point. If there are lots of self-driving taxi cars, there could be a market for storage lockers to store golf clubs or other things, however, I understand that may not provide the same benefit, namely not having to move this stuff all the time.

Re: California passes law banning Tesla from calling software FSD

#504

Post by diffxx »

thrashh wrote: post #485
CSMastermind wrote: post #476

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Humans drive with our eyes and we’re pretty bad at driving. I disagree that humans are bad at driving. Let me ask you this, how many miles would a fully autonomous self-driving car need to drive without a fatality for you to be able to reasonably claim that it's statistically a better driver than a human? And feel free just to round to an order of magnitude here. 2.75 x 10^z In 2013 in the US there were 32,719 cras…

Not all humans are the same either Some people can flawlessly do stunts with their car after driving for a few years and have a perfect driving record Others make you shake in fear every time you sit with them as you see them fail to notice other cars when they change lanes, despite driving for 10 years It’s a bell curve and I think the median is better than current car driving AI, even with LIDAR, can achieve But co…

I think part of the problem is the lax licensing standards in the US. For everyone's benefit, we should have higher standards. There also can and should be regional differences. Someone who has learned to drive in a rural or suburban area has not necessarily had the training and experience necessary to safely drive in a city alongside pedestrians and cyclists.

Re: California passes law banning Tesla from calling software FSD

#505

Post by jimkleiber »

clouddrover wrote: post #363
jimkleiber wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I assume if there were more self-driving cars, fewer people would own cars. I think more people would take Ubers, Lyfts, and other ride sharing services. So I think that could reduce the need for parking and the amount of traffic just by increasing the utilization rate of cars.

Adding more taxis increases traffic: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-08-05/uber-and-... https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2020-02-21/cities-tra... https://www.cnet.com/roadshow/news/uber-lyft-traffic-congest...

Adding more human-driven taxis has increased traffic.

I don't think that necessarily means adding more self-driven taxis would increase traffic.

Perhaps, but I don't think it's a given.

Re: California passes law banning Tesla from calling software FSD

#506

Post by jasonhansel »

endisneigh wrote: post #16

Mainstream full self driving would just create massive traffic and gridlock - pointless in the end. The induced demand would outweigh the benefits. States are better off acknowledging that sprawling car dependent cities are not sustainable. High frequency busses in the interim with rail transit is the real solution. Current self driving technology plus some key infrastructure changes with dedicated bus lanes and prio…

I think Elon's biggest problem with mass transit is just that he doesn't like the masses. As he once tweeted:

> I think public transport is painful. It sucks. Why do you want to get on something with a lot of other people[...]And there’s like a bunch of random strangers, one of who might be a serial killer, OK, great.

Not the only problem he cites there (note the "[...]"). But I'm pretty sure there's a reason it's the most prominent.

(Incidentally, given the demographics of those most reliant on mass transit, one wonders why exactly he thinks that they are so likely to be serial killers.)

Re: California passes law banning Tesla from calling software FSD

#507

Post by ec109685 »

m463 wrote: post #488
dagmx wrote: post #444

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To add to one of your points, The Tesla auto park is legitimately awful. https://youtu.be/nsb2XBAIWyA Every time we try it for a spot to reverse into, the linear regression it must be doing is so apparent. It violently tries to turn left and right rapidly trying to straighten itself. It works better for parallel spots but often gives up half way because it made a bad angle choice. We’ve tried it in various models in…

I think parallel parking works wonderfully (only know autopilot 1) Remember it uses sonar to park, not the lines. Strangely, I've never tried backing into a spot - I guess because the backup camera is great at seeing the lines and I can back in quickly.

They’re switching to lines.

Re: California passes law banning Tesla from calling software FSD

#508

Post by TaylorAlexander »

ChuckNorris89 wrote: post #483
miketery wrote: post #452

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is kind of scary, it seems they’re trying to use black box Ai/ml for parking where a simple PID controller would do excellent given an input of a target box and current location.

Indeed. Why do Tesla go for ML to poorly solve problems long solved by well understood PID controllers? The cynical in me feels this is to do with employees at Tesla want to work with new and shiny ML instead of old boring PID tech for the sake of "resume driven engineering".

I suspect these decisions are driven from the top down. We know who loves a shiny tech choice at Tesla. The company has been quite proud of their end to end ML system in presentations. But it sounds like they’re struggling with execution.

Re: California passes law banning Tesla from calling software FSD

#509

Post by andbberger »

simondotau wrote: post #436
BoorishBears wrote: post #394

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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. Operat…

> one of them will drive at least as well as a human learner driver and the other will probably refuse to move.

refusing to move is a feature not a bug. and human learners don't slam into a jersey barrier because there's some glare.

why tesla bros continue to insist that they have a good vision stack while they can't even do contrast adaptation is beyond me. the dril tweet comes to mind

Re: California passes law banning Tesla from calling software FSD

#510

Post by dagmx »

kwhitefoot wrote: post #490
dagmx wrote: post #444

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To add to one of your points, The Tesla auto park is legitimately awful. https://youtu.be/nsb2XBAIWyA Every time we try it for a spot to reverse into, the linear regression it must be doing is so apparent. It violently tries to turn left and right rapidly trying to straighten itself. It works better for parallel spots but often gives up half way because it made a bad angle choice. We’ve tried it in various models in…

That's odd. My 2015 Model S auto-parks very well, faster and neater than I can do it myself.

Is that the older Mobileye stack? It had much better autopilot than Teslas solution.

In the video I linked, you can see it out perform Tesla’s implementation.

Post reply on HN