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

251–260 of 449 posts

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

#251

Post by honeybadger1 »

lynndotpy wrote: post #201
honeybadger1 wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

tesla is almost at 4 billion fsd miles, its public, you can query the API yourself.

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

#252

Post by marxisttemp »

Workaccount2 wrote: post #156
erikpukinskis wrote: post #5

I’m normally quite skeptical of these kinds of “Tesla More Dangerous Than Other Brands” headlines since they tend to be B.S. But this seems like a pretty legitimate accusation, and certainly a well researched write-up at the very least.

What gets me is that there are no other brands in Tesla's league. Tesla is the only consumer car that has "FSD" level ability. The competitors have to use pre-mapped roads and availability is spotty at best. There is also risk as Chevy already deprecated their first gen "FSD", leaving early adopters with gimped ability and shutout from future expansions.

[flagged]

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

#253

Post by usrusr »

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?

It's a terrible thing to happen to a person. Language that minimizes negativity has great value when talking about (or with) persons in the post accident state. But here in this context, where we are talking about the event, in the abstract. That same minimization of negativity would only serve those willing to trade other people's safety for personal convenience. 1930s-esque language by the way excelled at glossing over horrors.

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

#254

Post by smallmancontrov »

daveguy wrote: post #234
smallmancontrov wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The irony is almost palpable, invoking this quote against a system that is driving 600 million miles a quarter without the 8 deaths a human would cause over the same distance.

[citation needed] Tesla releases all self driving statistics including time since disengagement of self-driving before accident, right?

https://www.nhtsa.gov/laws-regulations/standing-general-orde...

The numbers include all incidents where self-driving was active within 30 seconds of the crash, because of course they do. The meme that Tesla is allowed to simply bypass reporting on a technicality would be absurd if it weren't so voraciously spread by post-truth luddites. Look, if you want to dunk on Elon, I get it, but he does so many real shitty things that I would ask you to focus on those and not make shit up.

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

#255

Post by bink »

BeetleB wrote: post #242
outer_web wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To add, even if the fatality numbers are small, accelerating into a person is a pretty outrageous failure mode.

My Subaru has done this many times, and with regular cars, not motorcycles.

Your car has accelerated into a person many times and yet you continue to use this feature/car?

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

#256

Post by breadwinner »

timschmidt wrote: post #78
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 thought it was consensus that the move away from lidar was driven by a lack of supply compared to desired EV production numbers, and the things said about making vision only work have all been about coping with that reality.

Lidar was expensive a few years ago, but it is around $1K now.

https://www.wired.com/story/lidar-cheap-make-self-driving-re...

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

#257

Post by cannonpr »

It often surprises me that people think Tesla's sensor suite is sufficient for safe self driving, with quotes like "well humans rely on vision."

Human vision is nothing like the cameras on a Tesla. Our eyes have far more advanced systems including the ability to microscan, pivot, capture polarisation, and a much more sophisticated field of depth. Frankly, current generation cameras are in many ways far more primitive than human eyes. And that's not even considering the over 20% of our brain mass dedicated to post processing.

All because Musk wants to pad his profits and keep the hype without paying for a lidar.

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

#258

Post by timschmidt »

michaelt wrote: post #226
timschmidt wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Engineering entirely new things isn't like making another set of silverware, there are unforeseeable complications, and all forward looking statements are estimates or projections at best. Success seems to depend most on how many times you're able to try. Maybe I'm just old, but development roadmaps are always vapor, until they aren't, which happens sometimes. Always been that way. To be clear, I'd much rather my veh…

By traditional measures like profit-to-equity ratio, Tesla is overpriced coated to the likes of Toyota, Ford and BMW. And not just a little bit - it’s way overpriced. There are a bunch of possible explanations for this. One is that investors believe full self driving will come out really soon and work really well.

I've followed EV development since the 90s, with great excitement and sadness around the EV1, and I built and daily drove EVs before I could find one to buy commercially. I appreciate that Tesla (and now BYD) have forced the hands of the traditional ICE vehicle manufacturers who were content in their partnerships with the oil industry and planned obsolescence.

I own a 1978 Suzuki Carry and a Miles Electric ZX40ST.

I have watched a fair amount of https://www.youtube.com/@MunroLive with interest about the implementations from all manufacturers. Sandy is in my home state of Michigan, birthplace of the auto industry, in which I've been multi-generationally involved, and he knows his stuff. He has criticisms for all manufacturers, but over the years Tesla seem to have listened more than most, to the point of Elon speaking for hours with Sandy on podcasts about technical aspects of the vehicles and production. I also appreciate that Tesla seem to make more of their cars in the US than any other manufacturer. Honda seems to be the only one comparable. I think the future's electric. I don't really care who makes it, but I'd like it to be well engineered, and made locally.

I'd personally probably think traditional ICE manufacturers and oil industries are overvalued, but I'm probably wrong as there's clearly lots of business for those industries which doesn't seem to be going anywhere.

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

#259

Post by labrador »

kelipso wrote: post #244
toddmorey wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 bre…

It's pretty funny because lidar used to be many thousands of dollars and now it's down to hundreds and they're still sticking to just regular cameras. Funny in the sense that Teslas are many times more dangerous than lidar enabled cars but anyway.

Yes, it's become clear to me that it's only a matter of time before Tesla adds LiDAR and says that was the plan all along. Meanwhile, what better way to test vision-only than by releasing it to the beta testing public? Elon Musk knows people will die but in his ketamine addled brain he's convinced himself that a vision only self-driving Tesla is safer than a human driver so it's ok. People were going to die anyway statistically speaking.

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

#260

Post by alesso_x »

alesso_x wrote: post #163
don_neufeld wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do those changes address these specific accidents?

It’s a completely different system. Comparing it to the old one is like comparing apples to oranges. The original highway stack didn’t feel natural at all. It was like every move was hard-coded. 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…

> The self-driving subject vehicle is a 2020 Tesla Model 3. The Tesla fatally struck a motorcyclist from behind at above 100MPH on a 45MPH speed limit road

FSD cannot be turned on above 85 mph. If you try to accelerate above 85 mph it disengages.

> That’s how you would strike a motorcyclist at such extreme speed, simply press the accelerator and all other inputs are apparently overridden.

If the user is pressing the accelerator pedal, it overrides the autopilot. I’m not sure how FSD could reasonably be blamed in that situation.

The article also talks about Traffic Aware Cruise Control (TACC). There is a nuance between the different systems. This is not Full Self-Driving (FSD). It is an older system that Tesla provides for free. All it does is try to maintain a set speed, and you still have to steer. If the user is pressing the accelerator pedal, it overrides the system. I am not sure how FSD could reasonably be blamed in that situation.

Post reply on HN