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

Tesla Robotaxi

tesla.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

671–680 of 788 posts

Re: Tesla Robotaxi

#671

Post by stackghost »

mavhc wrote: post #610
stackghost wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The future I was promised was utopian, and instead my appliances all play ads and spy on me, and the robber barons at the top of the heap will use their billions that they got selling my personal data to advertising scum to leave legacy trusts that will continue to erode the fabric of society and increase wealth disparity long after said billionaires are dead and buried. But sure, your Tesla has a good infotainment s…

Which Tesla car plays ads?

Which CEO is leaning into far-right conspiracy theories and using Twitter to boost the electoral chances of the most dangerous US presidential candidate in history?

Re: Tesla Robotaxi

#672

Post by mavhc »

roughly wrote: post #131

This is not a serious proposal. It's a cool little sports car looking design. It looks very future-y. It's the kind of thing someone would step out of in a sci-fi movie. That's how you know it's not an actual well-thought-out design. This isn't a taxi, it's the torment nexus in car form. Taxis are not sexy, taxis are utility vehicles. Taxis carry people and goods. Taxis carry more than one person. Taxis carry disable…

They should have put a massive trunk in the back to carry goods, and more than 1 seat, and not banned old people from taking trips, those bastards

And if you wanted to use inductive charging why didn't you acquire a company that does that a few years ago, you can't just announce things with no experience in the area, that would be madness

Re: Tesla Robotaxi

#673

Post by jrflowers »

forgot-im-old wrote: post #638
red-iron-pine wrote: post #623

Earlier quoted context omitted.

debatable given how much he's been cozying up to the Russians and Saudis betcha in 10 years time we'll learn about all of the ITAR violations and other shady behavior

That's typical smoke screening when your'e working with the CIA as the link implies Don't have to wait 10 years if you read the WikiLeaks above.

Wait is the “Wikileaks” here the Reddit post or is the “Wikileaks” the couple of links to public news sites?

Re: Tesla Robotaxi

#674

Post by FireBeyond »

vessenes wrote: post #431
14 wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is interesting that you are confident in that matter. But you have been playing with it for a long time. Someone like myself with zero experience with it am very skeptical about how much I can trust it. We have seen several accidents over the years in the news. How do we convince the masses that this car is safe and this car will not suddenly drive off the road? I do think self driving cars are as a whole a lot sa…

I've had FSD (as branded by Tesla) for probably five years; it's gone from "actively trying to kill you constantly" to "very, very, good" to "probably safer than my teenager (who is a good driver)". I banned my current youngest driver from using the old version, but encourage use of the latest version for night driving -- it's really excellent. In most circumstances, it's probably a better driver than me. That said,…

> and needed a quick recovery. We seem to be at stuff like that every thousand or so miles, down from every mile five years ago. it is WAY WAY WAY ahead of any other car I've driven or ridden in that can be bought.

That's orders of magnitudes better than other FSD users.

Independent testing of over 1,000 miles through Southern California required 77 interventions, at an average of once every 13 miles.

I suspect your "one intervention every one thousand miles" might be a little optimistic.

Re: Tesla Robotaxi

#675

Post by mavhc »

randerson wrote: post #481
throwaway48476 wrote: post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

High latency distributed with low security requirements. Until homomophic encryption works.

And resilient enough to handle nodes having an accident, catching fire in a flood, parking underground with no signal for days, pausing to be used as a car... This is an unreliable spot instance at best, with none of the features one can normally attach to an instance (like storage, managed databases, ...). How fast can its Internet be? Will owners need to pay for Starlink too? (What about when parked indoors?) It wo…

Doesn't distributed computing generally cope with nodes going offline?

The point is it's just a way to use free compute that's sitting around, if you want to sign up to use it you'd obviously make sure it was in wifi range

Re: Tesla Robotaxi

#676

Post by mavhc »

stackghost wrote: post #671
mavhc wrote: post #610

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which Tesla car plays ads?

Which CEO is leaning into far-right conspiracy theories and using Twitter to boost the electoral chances of the most dangerous US presidential candidate in history?

The Twitter that's barely used by anyone and thus isn't important?

Surely they should be using facebook, that's already proven to be great at helping with genocides

Re: Tesla Robotaxi

#677

Post by FireBeyond »

grecy wrote: post #606
modeless wrote: post #441

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree that Tesla's biggest mistake was doing Cybertruck before the $25k car. But if they solve autonomy and/or succeed with Optimus then everything else becomes irrelevant.

> I agree that Tesla's biggest mistake was doing Cybertruck before the $25k car. While a $25k EV seems to be what we all want and is almost guaranteed to be a massive hit, there is no evidence such a thing can be done yet without losing money on every sale. Why isn’t any other car company doing it? Rivian are losing money on every car sold at 4 times the price.

> Why isn’t any other car company doing it?

No other car company offers it, or promises it's coming next year, or ...

Similarly, who actually believes a $39,000 CyberTruck will EVER appear?

Crickets?

Re: Tesla Robotaxi

#678

Post by p_j_w »

pr337h4m wrote: post #330
fshbbdssbbgdd wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The idea that Tesla would win the robotaxi race by not needing LiDAR died sometime between when LiDAR cost $100k and when it cost $1k. Now it’s just Elon being intransigent.

Humans don’t use lidar, which clearly shows that a vision-only robotaxi is very much feasible.

Humans use our brains to drive. Unless you're planning on popping an actual human brain or something that can perform equivalently into the car, you'd do well to consider more superior sensor suites.

Re: Tesla Robotaxi

#679

Post by FireBeyond »

kmlx wrote: post #567
lawn wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Running compute nodes in cars is honestly an even dumber idea than renting out your own car as a taxi.

> dumber idea than renting out your own car as a taxi. your car is doing nothing for most of it’s lifetime. renting it out via turo or as a taxi makes sense.

> your car is doing nothing for most of it’s lifetime. renting it out via turo or as a taxi makes sense.

A lifetime that will be massively shortened by it running as a taxi 20 hours a day.

Re: Tesla Robotaxi

#680

Post by e_y_ »

threeseed wrote: post #455
pr337h4m wrote: post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Humans don’t use lidar, which clearly shows that a vision-only robotaxi is very much feasible.

Humans continuously move their heads in three dimensions to infer depth. Cars can't do this. And not surprisingly the biggest problem with FSD is the accuracy of its bounding boxes.

Citation? Humans are not constantly moving their heads to the degree that chickens do, and I find it doubtful that the micro movements from our head (which our eyes have to adjust for with the vestibulo-ocular reflex so things aren't blurry, similar to image stabilization in cameras) are large enough to infer depth.
Post reply on HN