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

201–210 of 449 posts

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

#201

Post by lynndotpy »

honeybadger1 wrote: post #151
cpncrunch wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“This issue is unique to Tesla. Other self-driving manufacturers have logged zero motorcycle fatalities in the same time frame” Doesnt give number of driving hours for Tesla vs others though.

yes, it's missing the millions of FSD miles vs the minutes of drives of all of the rest combined.

This is not the case. Waymo alone has claimed 50 million rider-only miles as of December 2024. That would mean Waymo travelled at least 833,000 miles per hour on its driverless miles! (Unless you mean "minutes" in the literal sense, which can be any amount of time, and would apply to every vehicle.)

It's worth noting Waymo's rider-only miles is a stronger claim than "FSD" miles. "Fully self driving" is Tesla branding (and very misleading, and expects an attentive human behind the wheel ready to take over in a split second.)

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

#202

Post by sergiotapia »

dingnuts wrote: post #27
usrusr wrote: post #10

[flagged]

"crippleds"? Jesus Christ I know the zeitgeist is a cultural backlash against political correctness but goddamn we're getting a little cavalier using 1930s-esque language about non minority groups here aren't we? You couldn't have said serious injuries vs deaths? Or deaths vs maimings?

Cut it out

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

#203

Post by harimau777 »

pfannkuchen wrote: post #77
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…

You do want them to be better than humans, but vision quality is not really a major source of human accidents. Accidents are typically caused by driving technique, inattention, or a failure to accurately model the behavior of other drivers. Put another way - would giving humans superhuman vision significantly reduce the accident rate? The issue here is that the vision based system failed to even match human capabilit…

Isn't radar/lidar less like super vision and more like spidey sense? I'd love to give human drivers an innate sense of exactly how far away things are and how fast they are closing.

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

#204

Post by BeetleB »

btrettel wrote: post #122
BeetleB wrote: post #105

The other comment pointing this out has been (ridiculously) flagged, so I'll repeat the point that was made: The analysis is useless if it doesn't account for the base rate fallacy ( https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Base_rate_fallacy ) The first thing I thought before even reading the analysis was "Does the author account for it?" And indeed he makes no mention that he did. So after reading the whole article I have no…

The base rate was discussed early in the article, but not by that name: > It’s not just that self-driving cars in general are dangerous for motorcycles, either: this problem is unique to Tesla. Not a single other automobile manufacturer or ADAS self-driving technology provider reported a single motorcycle fatality in the same time frame.

That is not addressing the base rate.

To take a hypothetical extreme: If all cars but one on the road were Teslas, it would not be meaningful to point out that there have been far more fatalities with Teslas.

Even more illustrative, if 10 people on motorcycles had died from Teslas, and 1 person had died from that sole non-Tesla, then that non-Tesla would be deemed much, much more dangerous than Tesla.

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

#205

Post by stephenapple »

watwut wrote: post #157
rayiner wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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. Yeah, he was arguably wrong about one thing so his building both the world's leading EV company and the world's leading private rocket co…

He was not wrong about one thing, he was frequently wrong. He is highly charizmatic bullshitter that gets away with fraud and lies, that can secure help from people when he needs. But, he is frequently wrong, it just does not matter. He was occasionally right, like with Tesla back then.

Of total road deaths per year, 14% are Motorcycles, and the 5 Tesla fatalities are 0.0008% of motorcycle deaths. I think a more poignant subject is how did they have us arguing over this so quickly? Most posts are just anti-Elon. Boggling...

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

#206

Post by sergiotapia »

Mistletoe wrote: post #4

Visual detection only doesn’t work and the man that forced Tesla to use it is now in control of government “efficiency”. This decade’s very dark humor just keeps getting worse.

Been driving my new model Y with FSD since Monday and it's really cool works great. Just drove from home to a restaurant without touching the steering wheel. It does work I'm livin it.

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

#207

Post by smrtinsert »

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…

What's the hard part? Maybe Tesla should stop pretending it doesn't need lidar?

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

#208

Post by kjkjadksj »

ModernMech wrote: post #181
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…

I'm a roboticist who had learned from researchers involved in the 2007 DARPA urban challenge. The key takeaway from that event was that every single car that finished the race was equipped with the 3D velodyne LIDAR. It was that technology that enabled driverless cars to work as a concept. Why? Because it provided information that people had to infer, and that you couldn't easily get from camera. So absent the human…

I mean what does lidar do but tell you distance? A rangefinder optic from 1940 can also tell you distance with two little offset windows purely optically and accurately. Millions of rolls of films shot on this principle of optical distance finding. And yet, this is no good now, because IMO its musks idea and thats enough to poison it among the armchair engineers than any other reason. Telling to this point is how everyone just parrots the same comment that optical self driving is bad without actually providing evidence to support their point. Just arguing on precedent established in forums and social media.

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

#209

Post by drowsspa »

ReptileMan wrote: post #25
Mistletoe wrote: post #4

Visual detection only doesn’t work and the man that forced Tesla to use it is now in control of government “efficiency”. This decade’s very dark humor just keeps getting worse.

We have more than 100 years of proof that visual detection works quite well. The problem is that we don't have certification process before a tech is deployed on the streets - your AV must pass this and this tests before you are allowed to use it. We don't care how you got there lidar, gps/astrology, camera/ai are all ok as long as you pass

Does Tesla accept liability for any accidents while FSD is enabled?

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

#210

Post by treis »

energy123 wrote: post #30
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…

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…

He's just saying whatever will let him sell cars.
Post reply on HN