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

201–210 of 315 posts

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

#201

Post by StackRanker3000 »

itishappy wrote: post #163
xenadu02 wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Full disclosure: participated in Tesla's IPO, own a Tesla. Tesla should be doing two things that would greatly reduce their liability while also keeping customers happy. Overall I think it wouldn't change the number of people buying into FSD anyway so there wouldn't be much downside for them. 1. Offer refunds for those for paid for FSD. Full refund until FSD has been enabled for a year and used more than N times, pro…

> Be clearer in their marketing and on the purchase page about the feature. Do you have any examples in mind of where this feature was billed confusingly? The product page and Model S purchase page both include clear disclaimers in both the first sentence or directly below the bulleted feature list. > Full Self Driving > Your vehicle will be able to drive itself almost anywhere with minimal driver intervention and wi…

> Do you have any examples in mind of where this feature was billed confusingly?

Yes, when they started calling it full self driving, which by any reasonable person’s definition it isn’t. That deception is not entirely ameliorated by using more correct language in other places.

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

#202

Post by 93po »

mannyv wrote: post #198

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-statistic…

There's ridiculous bias in the writing and presentation along with rage-bait, of course it's a hit piece. Corporate journalism is a joke.

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

#203

Post by pavel_lishin »

brewdad wrote: post #187
kristjansson wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you don't turn on your turn signal ... the car will literally steer back This kills me about BMW's lane-keep system. It doesn't just lane-keep in the absence of input, it actively fights driver input that would take it over the lane lines.

To be fair, that is the point of lane-keep assist. To keep an inattentive driver from drifting out of their lane. Without any input to the contrary, it should assume a car leaving its lane is unintentional and try to correct it. That what it is designed to do. My Volvo has an early version of lane-keep assist (2017 model first introduced in 2015). It will fight me when it thinks I'm out of a lane. Fortunately, it doe…

> To be fair, that is the point of lane-keep assist. To keep an inattentive driver from drifting out of their lane. Without any input to the contrary, it should assume a car leaving its lane is unintentional and try to correct it. That what it is designed to do.

But the whole point was that the driver explicitly turned the wheel in order to partially leave their lane, in order to give bicyclists space. They weren't drifting - they were actively steering.

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

#204

Post by 93po »

seles wrote: post #26

One thing I hate about Musk saying things like "They have fewer accidents than people" is that it is only able to be engaged in the easiest of scenarios. So per mile, self driving on the easiest roads barely has less accidents than a human in adverse conditions? That doesn't seem to actually be better than people yet.

> is that it is only able to be engaged in the easiest of scenarios.

what? it works in basically all conditions and situations though not flawlessly of course

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

#205

Post by Exoristos »

itsoktocry wrote: post #124
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Totally agree. As a driver with a car with advanced "driver assistance features", I honestly don't understand how people get value out of most of these. That is, I'd rather just use a system where I know I have to be in control at all times, vs one where "You only have to be in control 1% of the time, oh and if you miss that 1%, you're dead." For example, I recently tried using the adaptive cruise control/lane center…

> I honestly don't understand how people get value out of most of these. That is, I'd rather just use a system where I know I have to be in control at all times, vs one where "You only have to be in control 1% of the time, oh and if you miss that 1%, you're dead." A lot of accidents happen from a split second of lack of attention. Lane keep prevents you from inadvertently drifting over the centre line into traffic. R…

I prefer my Tacoma's approach, which is just audible and visual alerts if these start to happen.

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

#206

Post by bradjohnson »

robertlagrant wrote: post #176
KaiserPro wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it really does. For example kinder eggs are illegal in the USA, because even though the small(ish) plastic parts are inside a plastic inedible case, too many kids ate the small plastic parts. Now, the vast majority of people eating kinder eggs, don't eat the toy. However because its reasonable that an unsupervised child would eat the plastic, they were banned. But. The point of FSD is that it is safe. If its safe…

The driver in question worked for Tesla and would be aware to not trust the marketing name of the feature. That's why it doesn't apply.

What? Why? The driver is also a target of marketing, as evidenced by the fact that they owned a Tesla. They aren't personally responsible for, or privy to, the lies of marketing. Employment at a corporation also doesn't grant you intimate knowledge of all parts of the corporate machine, in fact it might indicate that you are more susceptible to the corporate messaging.

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

#207

Post by 93po »

kramerger wrote: post #186

How can this be the first death? Tesla is involved in 700+ court cases covering multiple deaths [1]. Tesla drivers are involved in more accidents for some reason [2]. I suspect the first death happened far before this. [1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2023/06/10/tesla-a... [2] https://www.lendingtree.com/insurance/brand-incidents-study/

It's pretty shitty journalism in general. The claim that it was on FSD mode was by a drunken, shell-shocked passenger. And the zero injuries and deaths was based on:

> Two years ago, a Tesla shareholder tweeted that there “has not been one accident or injury” involving Full Self-Driving, to which Musk responded: “Correct.”

And wapo clearly did zero research or effort beyond this statement.

The key here is likely "FSD" versus "autopilot" and playing loose of the definition of when it's engaged. Does FSD disengage and tell the driver "good luck" immediately before 99% of accidents? If so it's not technically and FSD accident/injury/death, maybe?

Elon is being misleading, WaPo is pushing shitty bias, and the journalist is being deliberately lazy for a better clickbait headline

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

#208

Post by 1970-01-01 »

mannyv wrote: post #198

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-statistic…

Correct take. Go and look up their fire statistics, and you'll get a similar conclusion. Its getting much better YoY.

https://insideevs.com/news/501729/number-tesla-vehicle-fires...

https://www.businessinsider.com/tesla-deaths?op=1

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

#209

Post by 93po »

dncornholio wrote: post #9

I have the opinion that if a self driving car is not able to prevent driving into a tree or any other static object, it should not be on the road. It doesn't matter to me if the driver was drunk. Maybe he was drunk because he depended on autopilot to get home. Maybe he would have not had an accident if he drove home himself. We don't know. All I know is drunk driving is dumb and autopilot sucks ass.

The allegation that it was on FSD mode was made by a drunk and shell-shocked passenger, and his statement wasn't clearly stating it was on at the time of the accident. FSD has problems for sure but don't draw conclusions from this shitty journalism

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

#210

Post by lotsofpulp »

itishappy wrote: post #193
lotsofpulp wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Model S Plaid is not describing the paint scheme of the vehicle. Full Self Driving is the name of the feature specifically chosen to mislead about its capabilities.
Post reply on HN