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

Tesla worker killed in fiery crash may be first 'Full Self-Driving' fatality

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 315 posts

Re: Tesla worker killed in fiery crash may be first 'Full Self-Driving' fatality

#191

Post by klyrs »

kube-system wrote: post #110
basisword wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It should be illegal for them to call it full self drive. It's 100% false advertising not to mention the 'danger' that people will assume it is what it says it is.

It should be illegal for them to call it even 1% self driving. Because it is no more than 0% self driving. There is no mode of operation in any Tesla where the human is ever, at any moment, not responsible for safely navigating the vehicle.

Like "full self-driving" but where you're fully driving yourself? I had a '53 Studebaker with that feature.

(this is a lie; never share car ownership details online, banks still don't know that we drive them in public)

Re: Tesla worker killed in fiery crash may be first 'Full Self-Driving' fatality

#192

Post by samatman »

ra7 wrote: post #8
redserk wrote: post #3

> Von Ohain and Rossiter had been drinking, and an autopsy found that von Ohain died with a blood alcohol level of 0.26 — more than three times the legal limit — a level of intoxication that would have hampered his ability to maintain control of the car, experts said. The details make this seem less of an autonomous driving issue and more of an incredibly irresponsible operation issue.

These two were idiots, but this highlights the dangers of L2 driver assistance systems (misleadingly marketed as "Full Self Driving") that requires driver attention at all times to prevent accidents. It gives you a false sense of security and there's no guarantee you'll take over in time to prevent an accident. If you give dumb toys to people, they will use it in dumb ways. This is why Waymo/Google abandoned their dr…

This is a question with intersecting margins, and those are fiendishly hard to answer.

Here's what I mean. There are people who will drive drunk. At the margin, there are people who will not drive drunk, but who will drive drunk using FSD. But how many? How much more drunk are they willing to be?

On the other side, driving drunk with FSD is safer than doing it without. Criminally irresponsible, yes, but I think reasonable people will agree that it's somewhat safer, FSD has a better track record than drunk drivers. But how much safer?

Depending on how the margins intersect, FSD is either more dangerous or less so. I suspect the answer is less so, that is, there aren't that many people who would only drive drunk with FSD, and FSD is good enough at what it does to lead to fewer accidents. But I can't prove it, and reasonable people might come to a different conclusion. Practically speaking, it's impossible to get data which would settle this question.

Re: Tesla worker killed in fiery crash may be first 'Full Self-Driving' fatality

#193

Post by itishappy »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #190
itishappy wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe 2 lines down will clear things up? > The currently enabled Autopilot, Enhanced Autopilot and Full Self-Driving features require active driver supervision and do not make the vehicle autonomous.

Using the correct words would not require another 2 lines to clear things up. The only reason to label it incorrectly is to falsely advertise.

The Model S Plaid is also not plaid.

I believe this is invented outrage, their actual capabilities are made very clear.

Re: Tesla worker killed in fiery crash may be first 'Full Self-Driving' fatality

#194

Post by samatman »

itsoktocry wrote: post #118
redserk wrote: post #3

> Von Ohain and Rossiter had been drinking, and an autopsy found that von Ohain died with a blood alcohol level of 0.26 — more than three times the legal limit — a level of intoxication that would have hampered his ability to maintain control of the car, experts said. The details make this seem less of an autonomous driving issue and more of an incredibly irresponsible operation issue.

> The details make this seem less of an autonomous driving issue and more of an incredibly irresponsible operation issue. In every single discussion with Tesla fans re: FSD, we hear that "FSD is safer NOW than human drivers", but every time there's an accident it's the driver's fault. At what point are Tesla accountable for the mixed messaging around this product?

Those two facts are not necessarily contradictory.

Re: Tesla worker killed in fiery crash may be first 'Full Self-Driving' fatality

#195

Post by itishappy »

sokoloff wrote: post #181
itishappy wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe 2 lines down will clear things up? > The currently enabled Autopilot, Enhanced Autopilot and Full Self-Driving features require active driver supervision and do not make the vehicle autonomous.

If they also changed "Full" to "Limited" (or "Not Full"), it would be cleared up. "Full Self Driving" and "vehicle is not autonomous" is still confusing to English speakers, IMO.

Sure, which is why they have dedicated entire sections to outlining it's exact capabilities, as well as software alerts and warnings you must accept before enabling the feature.

> Before enabling Autopilot, the driver first needs to agree to “keep your hands on the steering wheel at all times” and to always “maintain control and responsibility for your vehicle.” Subsequently, every time the driver engages Autopilot, they are shown a visual reminder to “keep your hands on the wheel."

If you bought this car without realizing how it worked... I sympathize, but the info was provided.

If you enabled this feature without understanding how it worked... that's now on you.

Re: Tesla worker killed in fiery crash may be first 'Full Self-Driving' fatality

#197

Post by bluGill »

avgDev wrote: post #185
bluGill wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I trust humans even less than software. At least software can be debugged over time and is consistent so if we get it working...

I would imagine debugging something like FSD might be difficult. Not sure what kind of data they store, but no situation might be the same.

Every try to debug a human? Worse, humans are not copies so making one better doesn't make it easy to upgrade the rest of us.

Re: Tesla worker killed in fiery crash may be first 'Full Self-Driving' fatality

#198

Post by mannyv »

The article totally ignores the fact that there have been 900 crashes reported since 2021, which is a ridiculously low number of crashes.

This is basically a Tesla hit piece. Teslas are safer than human drivers by far, even when the systems are abused by their drivers.

Using 2020 stats (Forbes) there were an estimated 5,250,837 car crashes in 2020. Of those, https://www.forbes.com/advisor/legal/car-accident-statistics...

Re: Tesla worker killed in fiery crash may be first 'Full Self-Driving' fatality

#199

Post by Gud »

FSD is such a strange hill for Tesla to die on, reputation wise.

They already revolutionised the world with the electric car, killing a 100 years reliance of gasoline.

So why make such bold(and outright wrong) claims about a feature that is at best secondary?

Makes no sense to me.

Re: Tesla worker killed in fiery crash may be first 'Full Self-Driving' fatality

#200

Post by pavel_lishin »

WirelessGigabit wrote: post #47

While I don't know how good Tesla's self-driving is, I do have experience with a limited keep-your-lane system in a BMW. The one that actually steers. It requires a lot of force to override it. And remember, it requires you to keep the hands on the wheel. But you are not expecting to have to fight it, so there are some delays there. Then you're fighting a system that you don't know how much force it takes to override…

> And it happens more then you expect. Every time the car mis-calculates the actual lines on the road it'll do it. Changes in paint where the old one is still there for example. Or just faded paint and all of the sudden it detects a diagonally going split between 2 slabs of concrete as the lane separator.

Our Subaru came with "lane assist" enabled by default, and I turned it off in under a week after it kept trying to "assist" me on New Jersey's highways right across a lane of traffic in construction zones.

Post reply on HN