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

641–650 of 672 posts

Re: California passes law banning Tesla from calling software FSD

#641

Post by Fatnino »

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.

That's embarrassing for you, no?

Re: California passes law banning Tesla from calling software FSD

#642

Post by danny_codes »

drstewart wrote: post #634
8note wrote: post #570

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So what?

So what? Why don't rural Canadian indigenous villages have rail service, since Canada and other non-US countries love the general welfare so much?

Most of Canada has the same planning problems as the US. Namely, car-dependency. Toronto and Montreal are exceptions, but most of the country follows the same development pattern as the us.

But I think you're thinking about this wrong. Sprawl and transport policy are intimately related. If we do car-dependent development, you get a development pattern that requires cars. Then of course you look at the population distribution and say, it's hard to serve this with trains. But if you started with trains, the development pattern would mirror the transit, and you'd say, wow, trains really solved the problem.

America unfortunately went down the car path and faces a painful correction back to sanity. As we move towards transit and factor in car-driving externalities into the cost of driving, communities that can t feasibly be serviced with rail will die out, as is natural.

But that doesn't mean small villages won't exist. They will just be forced to exist where it is reasonable, instead of in unsustainable locations as they do today.

Re: California passes law banning Tesla from calling software FSD

#643

Post by danny_codes »

rad_gruchalski wrote: post #421
danny_codes wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know about the rural-need-car argument. In Switzerland even little villages have rail connections. Imo it's about planning and values. America just doesn't value spending on general welfare. We'd prefer to have wealth hoarded behind closed gates it seems.

Do you know how big Texas is? Texas is almost twice as big as Germany. Switzerland is 11% the size of Germany.

Size doesn't really matter. It's where and how you develop. Take Dallas for example. You drive for 2 hours at full highway speed, and you're still in Dallas. Why? Because it's built for cars and around cheap, suburban growth.

Let's say instead Dallas was built around rail. You'd see a completely different development pattern. Shopping, business, and recreation would be concentrated around metro/rail stops. Dallas would be a city instead of a blob of suburbs. People would live near rail, facilitating their easy transport to recreation, shops, and their jobs.

The absolute size of your area isn't really relevant, it's where you allocate the population. Suburbia is the worst allocation.

Texas is in for a painful correction once they figure that out. Though more likely it'll just de-populate/be abandoned once the infrastructure maintenance bills come due in 30 year and other cities built out sane rail-based density.

Re: California passes law banning Tesla from calling software FSD

#644

Post by danny_codes »

dinkumthinkum wrote: post #283
danny_codes wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know about the rural-need-car argument. In Switzerland even little villages have rail connections. Imo it's about planning and values. America just doesn't value spending on general welfare. We'd prefer to have wealth hoarded behind closed gates it seems.

What’s the regather size difference between Switzerland and the US?

You can take China as a more size equivalent example if you like. Land size doesn't really matter though, it's where you decide to build (aka, density and land use).

Re: California passes law banning Tesla from calling software FSD

#645

Post by onlyrealcuzzo »

marvin wrote: post #600
cactusplant7374 wrote: post #309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a feeling that I know this argument. The argument is that FSD is general purpose and Waymo is geofenced?

Tesla attempts to solve self-driving by generating a sufficiently-accurate world model in the moment, relying very heavily on vision. Waymo solves self-driving with a centimeter-level precision pre-scanned map of all the places it can drive, relying very heavily on point clouds and LIDAR. The latter model doesn’t scale, and can’t handle surprises. Or who knows, maybe it could scale if you had a global fleet of specia…

That's not how Waymo works, and it handles surprises far better than Tesla.

Re: California passes law banning Tesla from calling software FSD

#646

Post by pnt12 »

dmix wrote: post #540
calgarymicro wrote: post #404

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Being "pretty clear" in the fine print doesn't help when your product is called "Full Self Driving". > But Musk bought Twitter. The bill was introduced in mid-February and was presumably drafted over the preceding months. Musk made his very first Tweet about buying Twitter in mid-April. Not sure what connection you're trying to make here.

> Being "pretty clear" in the fine print doesn't help when your product is called "Full Self Driving". The likely chose the FSD branding with good intentions. Tesla just had some over-optimistic projections of what it will be in the near future and they weren't the only ones being optimistic in 2015-2016 when it launched (you can find plenty of Youtube interviews from other car companies at the time projecting The pl…

That's a very charitable interpretation.

Another, which I find more likely when there's lots of money involved, is that there was deception to feed the hype machine which caused profits of millions.

Re: California passes law banning Tesla from calling software FSD

#647

Post by drstewart »

danny_codes wrote: post #642
drstewart wrote: post #634

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So what? Why don't rural Canadian indigenous villages have rail service, since Canada and other non-US countries love the general welfare so much?

Most of Canada has the same planning problems as the US. Namely, car-dependency. Toronto and Montreal are exceptions, but most of the country follows the same development pattern as the us. But I think you're thinking about this wrong. Sprawl and transport policy are intimately related. If we do car-dependent development, you get a development pattern that requires cars. Then of course you look at the population dist…

Just to be clear, Canada does not value spending on the general welfare then? How about Australia? New Zealand?

>communities that can t feasibly be serviced with rail will die out, as is natural.

"Some of you may die, but that is a sacrifice I am willing to make"

Re: California passes law banning Tesla from calling software FSD

#648

Post by rad_gruchalski »

danny_codes wrote: post #643
rad_gruchalski wrote: post #421

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you know how big Texas is? Texas is almost twice as big as Germany. Switzerland is 11% the size of Germany.

Size doesn't really matter. It's where and how you develop. Take Dallas for example. You drive for 2 hours at full highway speed, and you're still in Dallas. Why? Because it's built for cars and around cheap, suburban growth. Let's say instead Dallas was built around rail. You'd see a completely different development pattern. Shopping, business, and recreation would be concentrated around metro/rail stops. Dallas wou…

Dallas metro population: 6.488m. Switzerland population: 8.6m.

Re: California passes law banning Tesla from calling software FSD

#649

Post by simondotau »

sidibe wrote: post #524
simondotau wrote: post #436

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> 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 One will drive and likely get into an accident, and the other will responsibly not do what it wasn't designed for. But if you took away Waymo's responsible disposition, I'm sure it would drive better than the Tesla, because it's…

> One will drive and likely get into an accident

What are you basing this prediction on? There is extensive independent documented video evidence of FSD beta driving and navigating on unsealed roads in Michigan with no human intervention required. This includes driving at night, in the rain, and with a diverse array of obstacles.

> [Waymo is] just way further along in development

This may well be true. However there's no publicly available information to make any objective assessment. For better or worse (and I see valid arguments both ways) Tesla is airing their dirty laundry in public for all to see. It can be assessed by objective third parties in privately owned vehicles without the blessing or oversight of the parent company.

By comparison we have no way of assessing Waymo's stack objectively. For example we don't know to what extent corner cases are embedded into the software or handled by humans remotely. Was the 15th Avenue incident resolved by human intervention or an improvement to the stack? To what extent is their vision and planning stacks capable of universality or over-fitted to regional specifics? No objective analysis is possible, so no comparison is possible.

Re: California passes law banning Tesla from calling software FSD

#650

Post by simondotau »

andbberger wrote: post #509
simondotau wrote: post #436

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Instances of "slamming into a jersey barrier" are on highways and by definition involve the legacy Autopilot stack and not the FSD beta vision stack. I agree that the tesla bros are extremely cringe, but I'm equally unimpressed with criticisms that rely upon ignorance of basic facts about the thing being criticised. Tesla is deserving of a lot of criticism for a lot of things, but they are clear about the distinction between Autopilot and FSD. Eliding this distinction in one's criticism gives the appearance of being uninformed.

Also your claim about contrast adaptation seems awfully specific, enough that I'm interested in a citation. There's plenty of evidence that their imaging sensors do adapt well in high dynamic range circumstances.

Post reply on HN