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

Self-Driving Teslas Are Fatally Rear-Ending Motorcyclists More Than Any Other

fuelarc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 449 posts

Re: Self-Driving Teslas Are Fatally Rear-Ending Motorcyclists More Than Any Other

#141

Post by bryanlarsen »

skybrian wrote: post #118
bryanlarsen wrote: post #92

Prediction: over the next 4 years we're going to see lots of stories like this. Some of the stories will be fair, some won't. "Musk bad" stories get clicks. The next administration will be very anti-Tesla. Coincidentally, by that time self-driving will be considered mature enough to warrant proper regulation, rather than the experimental regulation status we have now. Combine the two, and the regulations will be writ…

Maybe, but why couldn’t a competitor prove their system works using safety drivers? If a competitor resold their system to other car companies, another possible scenario might be a duopoly like Apple versus Android.

By that time Waymo will likely be over a billion miles of data, and you're likely going to need similar amounts of mileage to prove that your safety margin is >> 10X better than human.

Re: Self-Driving Teslas Are Fatally Rear-Ending Motorcyclists More Than Any Other

#142

Post by toddmorey »

xbmcuser wrote: post #22

The point I soured on Musk was when he ditched radar/lidar and tried to go with camera's alone. This made me realize he is not the genius he is made out to be but instead he is a fraud/charlatan and over the years his statements on different topics have only hardened that belief. Why the fuck would you want ai cars to be the same as humans you should want them to be many times better and radarr/lidar sonarr type tech…

This was purely an effort to improve margins on the cars that they tried to sell with other types of rationale. From the way I've seen him operate his companies, treat his employees, and now work with the government, he has a high tolerance for risk paired with a very low tolerance for perceived inefficiencies plus too little patience to fully understand the problem.

He really embodies the ethos of "move fast and break things". So let's fire 80% of the staff, see what falls down, and rehire where we made "mistakes". I really think he has an alarmingly high threshold for the number of lives we can lose if it accelerates the pace of progress.

Re: Self-Driving Teslas Are Fatally Rear-Ending Motorcyclists More Than Any Other

#143

Post by nicbou »

pelagic_sky wrote: post #8

When I used to ride, getting rear ended at a stop was one of my biggest fears other than people blowing stop signs. I always left more space in front of me that would give me room to maneuver as I watched for the car behind me to make the stop.

Mine was and still is people cutting into my lane when cornering. You turn a corner and bam, incoming car.

Still, I always leave the bike in gear until the car behind me has stopped, and if I can, I stop slightly diagonally with enough space to move left or right to avoid getting sandwiched.

Re: Self-Driving Teslas Are Fatally Rear-Ending Motorcyclists More Than Any Other

#144

Post by bryanlarsen »

hiddencost wrote: post #112
bryanlarsen wrote: post #92

Prediction: over the next 4 years we're going to see lots of stories like this. Some of the stories will be fair, some won't. "Musk bad" stories get clicks. The next administration will be very anti-Tesla. Coincidentally, by that time self-driving will be considered mature enough to warrant proper regulation, rather than the experimental regulation status we have now. Combine the two, and the regulations will be writ…

[flagged]

I still think we're going to get a next administration. But I think that getting there will make Jan 6 look extremely minor.

Re: Self-Driving Teslas Are Fatally Rear-Ending Motorcyclists More Than Any Other

#145

Post by Workaccount2 »

xbmcuser wrote: post #22

The point I soured on Musk was when he ditched radar/lidar and tried to go with camera's alone. This made me realize he is not the genius he is made out to be but instead he is a fraud/charlatan and over the years his statements on different topics have only hardened that belief. Why the fuck would you want ai cars to be the same as humans you should want them to be many times better and radarr/lidar sonarr type tech…

It's because the sensor suite for lidar is expensive and HD cameras are basically a commodity at this point.

So if your goal is to pump out $20k self driving cars, then you need cameras to be good enough. So the logic becomes "If humans can do it, so can cameras, otherwise we have no product, no promise."

Re: Self-Driving Teslas Are Fatally Rear-Ending Motorcyclists More Than Any Other

#146

Post by Retric »

jfengel wrote: post #133
energy123 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Multiple independent sensor streams is like having multiple pilots fly a plane instead of just one pilot. The chance of a fatal error (false negative identification of an object near the car) decreases from p to p^n. The size of that decrease is not intuitive: if p=0.0001 it now becomes a much smaller number with the introduction of a second pilot or second independent sensor stream (0.0001^2). Now the errors are not…

I misread your first sentence, in that having multiple pilots is not necessarily a good thing, like multiple cooks. You have a main and a backup pilot, but either one must be 100% capable of doing it on their own. The backup is silently double checking, but their assignments are more about ensuring that the copilot doesn't just check out because they're human. If the copilot ever has to say "don't do that it's going…

Cars unlike aircraft don’t need to move forward to maintain safety. If the lidar normally has very good uptime but happens to break, you need to safely come to a complete stop and that’s basically it.

Trusting vision systems for 30 seconds or even 30 minutes over the lifetime of a car is very different than trusting them for 30,000 hours. So for edge cases sure, add a “this is an emergency drive to a hospital without LiDAR” mode but you don’t need to handle normal driving without them.

Re: Self-Driving Teslas Are Fatally Rear-Ending Motorcyclists More Than Any Other

#147

Post by empressplay »

YawningAngel wrote: post #75
alesso_x wrote: post #69

The article gives a pretty misleading impression of where FSD stands today. It treats highway behavior as if nothing has changed, but that’s not accurate. Before October 2024, the highway stack was still running on Tesla’s older software. A major shift happened with version 12.5.6, which brought the end-to-end neural network to highways for the first time. Then in December, version 13.2.2 pushed things even further b…

The responsibility does not rest solely with the person behind the wheel. Tesla know or should know how people use this system, and engineer it such that it doesn't kill people when the end user does what they are foreseeably going to do.

If that was true then all cars should have ignition interlock devices, because it's easy for a manufacturer to foresee a user driving drunk.

But they don't, and I'm not sure if there have been many successful cases of suing car manufacturers because their cars let people drive drunk(?)

Re: Self-Driving Teslas Are Fatally Rear-Ending Motorcyclists More Than Any Other

#148

Post by vachina »

audunw wrote: post #66
dagw wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Without knowing how many FSD miles Teslas have done compared to other brands, it's hard to judge. It could just be that Tesla owners are far more likely to trust and use their cars FSD capabilities, and thus end up in more FSD accidents. Other brands might have so bad FSD that people simply not trust it and basically never use it, and thus never get into an FSD accident.

I don’t see any way you can spin this in a positive light. Yeah, there may be many more FSD miles on Tesla, but if that leads to a bunch of motorcyclists getting hit, then maybe that’s exactly the problem. We know this is one of the core issues of Tesla FSD: its capabilities have been hyped and over promised time and time again. We have countless examples of drivers trusting it far more than they should. And who’s to…

It’s not hyped. You can literally watch how FSD perform all readily live on YouTube, and despite these shortcomings, they’re lightyears ahead of any self driving systems. And it’s going to just get better as they account for all these corner cases.

Tesla is a victim of their own success, they’ve set the bar so high people now expect it to have 0.0000% failure rate.

Re: Self-Driving Teslas Are Fatally Rear-Ending Motorcyclists More Than Any Other

#149

Post by snozolli »

whartung wrote: post #95
petra303 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lane filtering solves this fear. Should be legal nation wide.

Nobody is going to cite you for filtering if you move into the gap to avoid a collision.

Filtering as a matter of habit eliminates the risk. That's OP's point, not that motorcyclists should watch their mirrors like a hawk and jump between lanes when they decide that the driver behind them might not stop.

Re: Self-Driving Teslas Are Fatally Rear-Ending Motorcyclists More Than Any Other

#150

Post by lucianbr »

swid wrote: post #71
Gud wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not at all. The car should be smart enough to figure out which sensor is faulty. Otherwise, the car should not be driving itself at all. It's more like, a pilot has access to multiple sensors. Which they do.

The comment you are replying to is saying the chance of error decreases with more pilots since there is redundancy. They are not saying it’s like too many chefs in a kitchen.

The comment really needs the words "each pilot acts as a backup for the other pilots" added, or something similar.
Post reply on HN