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

331–340 of 778 posts

Re: Mercedes beats Tesla to autonomous driving in California

#331

Post by natch »

jondwillis wrote: post #128
belter wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Anecdotally, in LA, I turn off FSD basically every minute while trying to use it, due to it doing something slightly “inhuman” or not ideal/too to the letter of the law, signaling incorrectly while staying in a lane that curves slightly, etc. I can’t imagine letting it go for a full hour without causing some road rage or traffic blockage. To be clear there is a definite driving “culture” in LA that is very permissive…

Every time you disengage it invites you to leave immediate voice feedback as to why, and presumably they are using all this feedback in conjunction with camera and data feeds from cars that are opted in (which includes all FSD beta cars I believe).

So, they are getting what they need to make it better.

Re: Mercedes beats Tesla to autonomous driving in California

#333

Post by jondwillis »

LeoPanthera wrote: post #147
jondwillis wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anecdotally, in LA, I turn off FSD basically every minute while trying to use it, due to it doing something slightly “inhuman” or not ideal/too to the letter of the law, signaling incorrectly while staying in a lane that curves slightly, etc. I can’t imagine letting it go for a full hour without causing some road rage or traffic blockage. To be clear there is a definite driving “culture” in LA that is very permissive…

> signaling incorrectly while staying in a lane that curves slightly This is super annoying, but the most recent FSD update seems to have mostly fixed that. It's still pretty crappy in a lot of other ways, but at least that improved.

I only started noticing it since the Autopilot/FSD fusion update a month or two ago. I haven’t been driving much the past few weeks so maybe it has been fixed.

Re: Mercedes beats Tesla to autonomous driving in California

#335

Post by enragedcacti »

ajross wrote: post #161
justapassenger wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only people who don’t understand problem domain think it’s not a technical achievement.

I'll give you 2:1 odds that before this reaches market (looks like end of the year for deliveries per the article) Tesla will duplicate the stunt and lift the driver monitoring requirements in similar situations. (Edit: two replies here playing gotcha games with prior FSD announcements. But I'm serious: Tesla can do what this Mercedes does already, essentially perfectly, and has been for the two years I've operated t…

> I'll give you 2:1 odds that before this reaches market (looks like end of the year for deliveries per the article) Tesla will duplicate the stunt and lift the driver monitoring requirements in similar situations.

I'll put $100 to the charity of your choice.

Re: Mercedes beats Tesla to autonomous driving in California

#336

Post by DaiPlusPlus »

BoorishBears wrote: post #304
oxfordmale wrote: post #299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mercedes accepts legal liability for collisions if the system is used under these stringent conditions. Tesla doesn't do this. It also doesn't mean it doesn't have the technical capability to drive through the streets of LA for 60 minutes. https://www.thatcham.org/mercedes-to-accept-liability-for-ac...

Working in the AV space, it's really frustrating how confidently people who have no idea about what's hard and what isn't go off about Tesla right now. Mercedes has soundly beaten the last decade of Tesla efforts by reaching L3. I've personally watched FSD go off the rails and into a crash situation within 60 seconds of being turned on three times this month (I have a friend who loves to try it in San Francisco) Had…

> People also don't seem to understand Mercedes has a separate L2 system that works above 45 mph that already scores better than AP by consumer reports

Isn't Mercedes' L2 system non-upgradable, though? i.e. people with Merc's L2 system today won't be able to upgrade to L3+ later on, they'll need to buy a whole new car - right?

I bring this up only because I bought my X in 2018 with FSD prepaid - it's 5 years old now, and thanks to the gratis retrofitted computer upgrades it has the same level of FSD functionality as a factory-new Model Y purchased today - and I value that level of commitment to their carbuyers - whereas all the other carmakers I've ever dealt-with are the type that gladly charg $lots just for annual updates to the navigation maps SD card.

(I don't want to be seen defending Tesla, let alone Elon Musk here, but Tesla has avoided plenty of the worst practices of traditional automakers (okayokay, excepting the heated-seats thing).

Re: Mercedes beats Tesla to autonomous driving in California

#337

Post by simondotau »

justapassenger wrote: post #134
zaroth wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually they are both legally autonomously driving according to SAE. You should read up on it! “SAE International is the world’s leading authority in mobility standards development.” Forgive me if I’ll take their internationally recognized standards over your characterization. Certainly only one of the systems accepts liability for accidents while it’s enabled, but liability for accidents is just one component of au…

Ok, you’ve convinced me. I’ll go drive in FSD Tesla and be certain that you and Musk will personally guarantee safety of it and pickup the bill if something happens. Also, please actually go read the standard, and talk about design intent, and which main way to differentiate the systems.

Your sarcastic retort is not consistent with anything anyone is arguing. Nobody has said FSD is ready to be relied upon, least of all Tesla, who still calls it a "beta". This isn't what I said. This isn't what zaroth said. Nobody said it. So why did you say it?

I realise this isn't a simple argument, but let me try again:

DRIVE PILOT is ~100% capable of limited self-driving on ~0.01% of roads (a curated set of slow highways in California, unless rainy, foggy or dark).

FSD Beta is ~90% capable of full self-driving on ~99% of roads.

Different ambitions at different levels of completion. The comparisons you've been trying to make are, I'm sorry to say, fanboy-esque. "N64 Mario would definitely beat 16-bit Sonic in a game of tennis."

Re: Mercedes beats Tesla to autonomous driving in California

#338

Post by worik »

rl3 wrote: post #288
hristov wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For person like me that takes very light naps when sitting, 10 seconds is plenty to wake up and take control. Also if I am using a tablet doing email or browsing or even playing games, 10 seconds is plenty of time to put the tablet away and grab the wheel.

> For person like me that takes very light naps when sitting, 10 seconds is plenty to wake up and take control. I'd argue that isn't remotely enough time to safely take control. You're betting your brain wakes up sufficiently in that time, and if it doesn't the consequences are potentially deadly. > Also if I am using a tablet doing email or browsing or even playing games, 10 seconds is plenty of time to put the tabl…

>>Also if I am using a tablet doing email or browsing or even playing games, 10 seconds is plenty of time

> That's a bit better from an alertness standpoint

How do you know?

Subjective measurement of time is very inaccurate. I have experienced this, when I timed some regular activities I undertook every day, total habit. I would have said they took me ten seconds. When I timed them, it was forty five seconds.

I have no faith in anybodies' perception of how long they can switch context like this unless they have objectively measured it

I have heard that this has been studied, a quick web search turned up just this: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/000169...

Re: Mercedes beats Tesla to autonomous driving in California

#339

Post by meghan_rain »

natch wrote: post #331
jondwillis wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anecdotally, in LA, I turn off FSD basically every minute while trying to use it, due to it doing something slightly “inhuman” or not ideal/too to the letter of the law, signaling incorrectly while staying in a lane that curves slightly, etc. I can’t imagine letting it go for a full hour without causing some road rage or traffic blockage. To be clear there is a definite driving “culture” in LA that is very permissive…

Every time you disengage it invites you to leave immediate voice feedback as to why, and presumably they are using all this feedback in conjunction with camera and data feeds from cars that are opted in (which includes all FSD beta cars I believe). So, they are getting what they need to make it better.

> Every time you disengage it invites you to leave immediate voice feedback as to why

lmao do people do this for free?

Re: Mercedes beats Tesla to autonomous driving in California

#340

Post by rl3 »

worik wrote: post #338
rl3 wrote: post #288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> For person like me that takes very light naps when sitting, 10 seconds is plenty to wake up and take control. I'd argue that isn't remotely enough time to safely take control. You're betting your brain wakes up sufficiently in that time, and if it doesn't the consequences are potentially deadly. > Also if I am using a tablet doing email or browsing or even playing games, 10 seconds is plenty of time to put the tabl…

>>Also if I am using a tablet doing email or browsing or even playing games, 10 seconds is plenty of time > That's a bit better from an alertness standpoint How do you know? Subjective measurement of time is very inaccurate. I have experienced this, when I timed some regular activities I undertook every day, total habit. I would have said they took me ten seconds. When I timed them, it was forty five seconds. I have…

>How do you know?

That's a good point. On the face of it, I'd assumed an awake person already engaging their brain would perform better than a person just waking up in that context, but perahps not.

>I have no faith in anybodies' perception of how long they can switch context like this unless they have objectively measured it

Agreed. Moreover, I'd say that the risk for faulty information processing or incorrect preconceptions is higher if the person is distracted but awake.

Post reply on HN