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

Mercedes beats Tesla to autonomous driving in California

theregister.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 778 posts

Re: Mercedes beats Tesla to autonomous driving in California

#181

Post by jeremyjh »

karaterobot wrote: post #166
gzer0 wrote: post #43

Friendly reminder that this system is HEAVILY limited, with the following restrictions: - Must be under 40 mph - Only during the daylight and only on certain highways - CANNOT be operated on city/country streets - CANNOT be operated in construction zones - CANNOT be during heavy rain or fog or flood roads And for comparison: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DjZSZTKYEU4 Tesla FSD navigating the complex city streets of…

Skeptical but genuine question here: if Tesla's Level 3 system is more advanced, why don't they have authorization to release it? And why does the article quote Tesla as saying they only have a level 2 system?

They aren’t pursuing it, and stopped publicly reporting disengagement data. They found out their stans are happy to buy the cars and use FSD without liability protection or safety data, so why bother? Whenever one crashes it’s the driver’s fault by definition.

Re: Mercedes beats Tesla to autonomous driving in California

#182

Post by adsfgiodsnrio »

zaroth wrote: post #35
ethanbond wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but the system as a whole is far less capable than Tesla FSD, the renowned “exaggerator” told me so We actually have no idea what Benz et al.’s systems are capable of if they were to deploy them with the same recklessness as Tesla.

This statement makes no logical sense. Their systems are “capable of” what they can be used to achieve in actual operation. It’s not like it’s this massively sophisticated system for FSD with most of the code commented out. These are purpose-built and heavily tested to a specification - that’s how engineering works. The Mercedes system specification is extremely limited in practice, but gives them the marketing win o…

Tesla's system can be used to achieve nothing in actual operation. It makes constant mistakes and requires an ever-vigilant human to take over in a fraction of a second when it does. There is no advantage over manual driving, let alone manual driving with modern driver assistance.

Re: Mercedes beats Tesla to autonomous driving in California

#183

Post by fallingknife »

justapassenger wrote: post #53
elif wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You really think Mercedes legal filings guarantee a safer system? It is more important to focus on the technical capabilities of the systems than who can add more asterisks to their crash statistics. You are comparing a mature system with billions of miles of testing to a system which you will struggle to keep engaged for 2 mile intervals.

Ok, let’s focus on the technical aspects. Tesla has no safety life cycle process and as a result FSD is inherently unsafe, from the engineering point of view. You can try to hand wave over that, but if you are an engineer working on the safety critical systems (it’s an actual engineering field), that’s all you need to know about FSD.

You are not actually focusing on technical aspects. You are focusing on regulatory credentials and bureaucratic process. Focusing on technical aspects would mean looking at actual data from on road performance.

Re: Mercedes beats Tesla to autonomous driving in California

#184

Post by toast0 »

jondwillis wrote: post #130
zaroth wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a great example! I hope people will take the time to click and watch it drive. I think it’s a tough call in this case. The Tesla is trying not to block an intersection where a light is green but there’s no room to clear the intersection on the other side due to traffic ahead. In fact an oncoming car is able to turn left in front of the Tesla because it waited. Probably the law is that you should NOT enter the…

LA has an unwritten law where 2-3 cars make unprotected lefts after oncoming traffic has cleared on yellow/red lights. Letting FSD drive, it can’t honor this “cultural” (technically illegal) behavior. If I am operating it, off goes FSD in that moment.

Dude it's totally following the law. You're allowed to enter the intersection for an unprotected left even if it's not clear to turn (possibly not if the end of the intersection you're going to is full of cars). If you are in the intersection, you're allowed to clear when possible regardless of the color of your light.

Most intersections with unprotected left turns let you fit at least a whole car, sometimes two in the intersection to wait, and the third car has its front wheels on the paint, so it's totally in the intersection.

Re: Mercedes beats Tesla to autonomous driving in California

#185

Post by KennyBlanken »

gzer0 wrote: post #43

Friendly reminder that this system is HEAVILY limited, with the following restrictions: - Must be under 40 mph - Only during the daylight and only on certain highways - CANNOT be operated on city/country streets - CANNOT be operated in construction zones - CANNOT be during heavy rain or fog or flood roads And for comparison: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DjZSZTKYEU4 Tesla FSD navigating the complex city streets of…

For comparison, Tesla FSD veering directly at a cyclist, who was saved only by the driver's lightning reflexes: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a5wkENwrp_k

For comparison, Tesla FSD cruising right through a crossswalk with pedestrians and the driver is gleeful about it: https://arstechnica.com/cars/2023/05/teslas-full-self-drivin...

For comparison, Tesla FSD veering into oncoming traffic https://www.reddit.com/r/teslamotors/comments/128zncy/fsd_te...

I remember seeing a video where Tesla FSD veered right at an island/telephone pole. Another where it veered at a crowd of pedestrians on the corner of a signalized intersection waiting to cross.

A reminder that the software has been buggy for years and Tesla is somehow being allowed to "beta test" it in public among people who did not consent to the risk.

Re: Mercedes beats Tesla to autonomous driving in California

#186

Post by KennyBlanken »

belter wrote: post #75
gzer0 wrote: post #43

Friendly reminder that this system is HEAVILY limited, with the following restrictions: - Must be under 40 mph - Only during the daylight and only on certain highways - CANNOT be operated on city/country streets - CANNOT be operated in construction zones - CANNOT be during heavy rain or fog or flood roads And for comparison: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DjZSZTKYEU4 Tesla FSD navigating the complex city streets of…

Took me less than a few minutes, to find in the same channel, FSD failing and the human having to intervene. Here it is at the proper time and for a video uploaded 10 hours ago... - https://youtu.be/KG4yABOlNjk?t=995 And even worst failures...looking at all these I simply do not believe the videos posted are not edited or a selection of a success out of many failed ones. https://youtu.be/KG4yABOlNjk?t=1252 https://yo…

Tesla not only isn't putting their money where their mouth is, they have a lond-standing history of using illegal DMCA takedowns to remove these sorts of videos from Twitter, reddit, Facebook, etc.

Re: Mercedes beats Tesla to autonomous driving in California

#187

Post by jeffreygoesto »

ChuckNorris89 wrote: post #103
radomir_cernoch wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> [...] blows what Mercedes has built out of the water. Mercedes FSD prototype, 10 years ago: https://youtu.be/G5kJ_8JAp-w

>Mercedes FSD prototype, 10 years ago: Mercedes FSD prototype 1986 to 1994 via the 400 Million Euro EU funded Prometheus project https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I39sxwYKlEE It's funny that German, and Italian researchers and car makers had the early lead on self driving tech and then lost it by shelving the tech. Oof. Which reinforces my earlier point I made in another thread here today, that innovation only happens…

Ernst Dickmanns. Legend. Sat close to him at a CVPR and he could not resist to rant about "How's that new? We did that in the 90es!" =:-D

Re: Mercedes beats Tesla to autonomous driving in California

#188

Post by piotrkaminski »

ajross wrote: post #180
piotrkaminski wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There were a ton of articles around 2022-03-20 (e.g., [1]) that had a line like this: > Once you engage Drive Pilot, you are no longer legally liable for the car's operation until it disengages. Not quite a press release but given that Mercedes never denied the claims it's pretty close. It'll be interesting to see how this is implemented legally, of course. [1] https://www.roadandtrack.com/news/a39481699/what-happens…

That was a German product though. The press release about the american rollout is notably missing that language.

Hmm, the latest article [1] specifically about the California authorization says:

> When active, Mercedes takes responsibility for Drive Pilot's actions.

and

> "Mercedes-Benz Drive Pilot is the world's only SAE Level 3 system with internationally valid type approval," Mercedes CTO Markus Schäfer said in a statement.

Not as clear-cut as you'd want it to be but certainly leaning towards the claim. I guess we'll know for sure once the cars actually go on sale in California.

[1] https://www.roadandtrack.com/news/a44139131/mercedes-benz-se...

Re: Mercedes beats Tesla to autonomous driving in California

#189

Post by toast0 »

ra7 wrote: post #144
ajross wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> However Mercedes are taking liability whilst their system is in use Are they? This press release doesn't actually say so. There was an announcement a while back when they deployed this system in Germany, but that's obviously a different legal environment. FWIW, this is mostly spin anyway. Liability isn't generally something that is granted, it's either there or not. If Tesla FSD causes an accident, they can absolut…

> Liability isn't generally something that is granted, it's either there or not. If Tesla FSD causes an accident, they can absolutely be sued for that in the US. That’s not what liability means here. Assuming the story is true, it means Mercedes is responsible for damages caused when the system is engaged and the users know that when they buy the car. Being sued afterwards is not the same thing. > The reason that "Te…

> Not to mention, Tesla is openly violating at least CA DMV regulations that require reporting of all disengagements and contact events.

Tesla letters to CA DMV claim they don't participate because their system isn't a self-driving system. Which is fine, other than they're telling customers it is at the same time.

Re: Mercedes beats Tesla to autonomous driving in California

#190

Post by jeremyjh »

justapassenger wrote: post #81
elif wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How will you discretely identify every problem to be solved in the domain of live real drivers in real world conditions? Applying a model of an industrial plant where machines interface with machines, and occasionally humans in prescribed and orderly functions, will not get you any closer to safety. What will get you closer to safety is insanely large corpus of real world data being trained on in a continuous feedbac…

Ask Boeing how ignoring it works out.

Which Boeing execs ended their career in disgrace after killing hundreds of people in pursuit of lower training costs ?
Post reply on HN