161–170 of 449 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Tesla’s valuation isn’t based on their ability to make a BEV.
Isn't it? Seems to be what they do.
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…
How do those changes address these specific accidents?
Lane changes used to feel robotic. Speed had to be adjusted manually all the time just to feel comfortable.
The new system feels much more human. It has driving profiles and adapts based on traffic, which makes the experience way smoother.
Have you tried fsd? I use it almost everyday. I’m more arguing that the article is misleading about the current version of fsd. I do not doubt that the accidents happened on the older version.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
They do if they're crossing railroad tracks.
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…
Doesn't even seem that crazy when you consider the government is already licensing them to be able to use their private data anyway. Biggest issue is someone didn't set it up this way from the start.
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…
[0] https://x.com/SethAbramson/status/1892710698683142638Earlier quoted context omitted.
let's experiment. i'll reduce your vision quality, then you try driving
It's pretty obvious from the context of the thread that "vision quality" refers to LIDAR vs cameras, and that human vision is good enough, not that being legally blind doesn't somehow doesn't affect driving quality.
Everyone comparing autonomous vehicles to non autonomous vehicles and number of accidents misses one important impediment to people’s and the government’s acceptance of accidents for the former. Currently over 40K people are killed in the US every year from automobile fatalities and people think that’s just the price we pay for driving. I am not making a value judgement about that statistic. But if even 1 person dies…
But isn't that also because it's new? Plenty of people die in work accidents because equipment malfunctions, but unless it's a specific type of equipment blowing up at alarming rates, nobody asks to pause e.g. all power-drills. I believe that has been pretty much figured out, and insurance companies offer policies that cover it. Sure, they are usually not "intelligent", but are auto-pilots in cars?
Also dangerous workplaces are carefully controlled access environments where only the people that work there are in danger.
Imagine if airplane fatalities happen even 1% as often as car fatalities? Right now the ratio is around 770:1 per passenger mile.
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…
> Musk did not understand this. more likely he is a ruthless ** who doesn't care about people dying and slightly increasing the profit margin is for him worth more then a some people dying regulators/law allowing self driving companies to wriggle out of responsibility didn't help either lidar was interesting for him as long as it seemed light Tesla could maybe dominate the self driving marked through technological ex…
Someone said in an interview “Elon desperately wants the world saved. But only if by him.”
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…