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

211–220 of 449 posts

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

#211

Post by layer8 »

maxerickson wrote: post #88
pfannkuchen wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

The improved sensors improve awareness, improving situational awareness of human drivers would have a huge impact.

Humans have limited awareness bandwidth. I’m doubtful that improved “sensors” would change the fact that one can only take in and focus on very few things at a time. If anything, filtering down the input to the relevant features would consume more brain resources and possibly take longer.

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

#214

Post by redox99 »

dharmab wrote: post #46
redox99 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Considering how much FSD has improved in the last few months, a 2 year old video is not relevant.

The main critique in the video is related to the hardware, specifically the lack of LIDAR.

It's just like Mark Robers video[1], where he makes all these wild claims that you can't solve X issue without LIDAR and tests an old version of Autopilot. When another user correctly tests with the latest hardware and software, it passes the test[2].

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IQJL3htsDyQ&pp=ygUQbWFyayByb...

[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TzZhIsGFL6g

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

#215

Post by outer_web »

kjkjadksj wrote: post #199
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…

Everyone is harping on the engineering. It is a marketing reason first and foremost. Lidar units are ugly as hell. No consumer would ever buy one of those waymo jaguars even if its better if tesla can do 95% of that without looking like a beluga whale.

Didn't early Teslas have lidar? They didn't look like AWACS.

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

#216

Post by crote »

ravenstine wrote: post #130
glitchc wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not dubious. He was rich to begin with and used that wealth to make more.

Yes, though he wouldn't be relevant if people didn't believe he is a genius.

A lot of people believe you need to be a hard-working genius to get rich, so anyone rich must logically be a hard-working genius. Similarly, they believe anyone poor must be a lazy idiot.

In reality getting rich has more to do with opportunity, connections, and luck - but accepting that means you've got to accept that the American Dream has always been a lie. It's much easier to convince yourself that people like Elon are geniuses.

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

#217

Post by janice1999 »

FireBeyond wrote: post #169
dathinab wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

Right, he despises environmental regulations because he’s “trying to get us to a new home”, so who cares what happens to this one? Especially if it delays him doing so. Someone said in an interview “Elon desperately wants the world saved. But only if by him.”

> “Elon desperately wants the world saved. But only if by him.”

I believe that's also Lex Luthor's motivation in All Star (?) Superman.

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

#218

Post by david38 »

larvaetron wrote: post #164
Retric wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> Cars unlike aircraft don’t need to move forward to maintain safety. They do if they're crossing railroad tracks.

A narrow case easily accounted for

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

#219

Post by mitthrowaway2 »

fsh wrote: post #20

This problem has been solved more than a decade ago by radar sensors (standard on many mid-range cars at the time). They detect imminent collisions with almost perfect accuracy and very little false positives. Having better sensor data is always going to beat trying to massage crappy data into something useful.

Radar is great for detecting cars, not as great for detecting pedestrians.

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

#220

Post by btrettel »

BeetleB wrote: post #204
btrettel wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

It does address the base rate, though not in a fully satisfactory way. You're correct to point out the number of Teslas on the road vs. other vehicles, as is this person who mentions driving hours: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43601681

The replies to my comment seem to me to be addressing the question of what the appropriate reference class is, not the base rate fallacy.

Post reply on HN