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

When Tesla's FSD works well, it gets credit. When it doesn't, you get blamed

electrek.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 149 posts

Re: When Tesla's FSD works well, it gets credit. When it doesn't, you get blamed

#51

Post by energy123 »

vessenes wrote: post #45
Animats wrote: post #10

As time goes on, Tesla's fiasco becomes more and more embarrassing. Waymos are all over the place in the cities they serve, doing pretty much what they're supposed to do. Nuro has some fully autonomous vehicles running around. Baidu's Apollo Go is deployed in 16 cities in China, although they use remote driving as a backup. Tesla, though, is still hyping a technology that seems to have maxed out years ago.

Sorry but while I am a happy Waymo user, this is overblown and just incorrect. Waymo has datacenter oversight. (which, who cares, the product is great). Tesla FSD 12 -> 13 was a massive jump that happened earlier this year. 14 is still rolling out. Testing out 13 this weekend, it drove on country roads, noticed a road closure, rerouted, did 7 miles on non divided highways, navigated a town and chose a parking space a…

  > It was genuinely good.
You lack data to draw this conclusion. The most important factor is deaths per mile, which is sparse, so it requires aggregating data from many drivers before you have enough statistical power.

Re: When Tesla's FSD works well, it gets credit. When it doesn't, you get blamed

#52

Post by paul7986 »

coliveira wrote: post #21
lukax wrote: post #7

Kind of similar to Agentic coding. The code works? Yay, well done, AI. It't doesn't? You didn't prompt it correctly.

This scam is true for all AI technologies. It only "works" as far as we interpret it as working. LLMs generate text. If it answers our question, we say that the LLM works. If it doesn't, we say that it is "hallucinating".

Im sorta beginning to think some LLM/AI stuff is the Wizard of Oz(a fake it before you make it facade).

Like why can an LLM create a nicely designed website for me but asking it to do edits and changes to the design is a complete joke. Lots of the time it creates another brand new design (not what i asked all) and it's attempts at editing it LOL. It makes me think it does no design at all rather it just went and grab one from the ethers of the Internet acting like it created it.

Re: When Tesla's FSD works well, it gets credit. When it doesn't, you get blamed

#53

Post by romaaeterna »

> So, for example, when a Florida driver on Autopilot drops his phone and blows through a stop sign, hitting a car which then hits two pedestrians, killing one, Tesla will claim “this driver was solely at fault.” In that case, a judge agreed that the driver was mostly at fault, but still assigned 33% of blame to Tesla, resulting in a $243 million judgment against the company.

His foot was on the gas though

Looking at this author's other articles, he seems more than a bit unhinged when it comes to Tesla: https://electrek.co/author/jamesondow/ Has Hacker News fallen for clickbait? (Don't answer)

Re: When Tesla's FSD works well, it gets credit. When it doesn't, you get blamed

#54

Post by paulryanrogers »

jonway wrote: post #15
weirdindiankid wrote: post #9

I’m still perplexed by the utter lack of regulatory action in both the U.S. and Canada with FSD. Its inconsistency and Tesla’s “seat of the pants” approach to safety have gotten enough people injured to where I’d have expected someone to take notice by now. Don’t get me wrong, when it works, it’s amazing but there’s no way to reliably establish that it works on the same route twice.

This is a fairly weak shower thought, but it was interesting to note (anecdotally) people's propensity to rigidly prioritize safety in some, but not all circumstances. For example, I've had numerous conversations where people will point to safety rating in vehicles to defend their purchasing decisions. Its simple to understand really, I want the safest car for my family/child etc, that is why I refuse to buy an older…

Shame they don't reduce safety ratings for the bigger vehicles with worse visibility that are more likely to kill pedestrians/bicyclists and cause more respiratory problems than smaller vehicles.

Re: When Tesla's FSD works well, it gets credit. When it doesn't, you get blamed

#55

Post by buran77 »

vessenes wrote: post #42
bastawhiz wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can imagine it doing fine on highways for a thousand miles. FSD has literally never managed to complete a trip involving city driving for me without disengaging or me having to stop it from doing something illegal. I'm not sure how many attempts I'm supposed to give it. Hell, autopilot doesn't even manage to consistently stay safely in a lane on I-40 between Durham and Asheville.

have you tried fsd 13/14 yet? I just upgraded to 13 from 12 and it's a massssive improvement. Not sure what 14 s like. It's definitely added a 9 in the last year.

> have you tried

I've heard this so many times it's starting to be a meme. The system was claimed to be very capable from the beginning, then every version was a massive improvement, and yet we're always still in very dangerous, and honestly underwhelming territory.

Teslas keep racking up straight line highway miles where every intervention probably counts at most as 1 mile deducted from the total in the stats. Have one cross a busy city without interventions or accidents like a normal human driver is expected to.

Re: When Tesla's FSD works well, it gets credit. When it doesn't, you get blamed

#57

Post by tippytippytango »

Ultimately, anecdotes and testimonials of a product like this are irrelevant. But the public discourse hasn't caught up with it. People talk about it like it's a new game console or app, giving their positive or negative testimonials, as if this is the correct way to validate the product.

Only rigorous, continual, third party validation that the system is effective and safe would be relevant. It should be evaluated more like a medical treatment.

This gets especially relevant when it gets into an intermediate regime where it can go 10,000 miles without a catastrophic incident. At that level of reliability you can find lots of people who claim "it's driven me around for 2 years without any problem, what are you complaining about?"

10,000 mile per incident fault rate is actually catastrophic. That means the average driver has a serious, life threatening incident every year at an average driving rate. That would be a public safety crisis.

We run into the problem again in the 100,000 mile per incident range. This is still not safe. Yet, that's reliable enough where you can find many people who can potentially get lucky and live their whole life and not see the system cause a catastrophic incident. Yet, it's still 2-5x worse than the average driver.

Re: When Tesla's FSD works well, it gets credit. When it doesn't, you get blamed

#58

Post by SoftTalker »

kevincrane wrote: post #32
twostorytower wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would at least like to use it for stop and go traffic, which is about the only thing I trust FSD for.

Just pull over if you have things to text that can’t wait

Actually just wait. Pulling over on a busy road creates its own hazards.

Re: When Tesla's FSD works well, it gets credit. When it doesn't, you get blamed

#59

Post by culi »

Animats wrote: post #10

As time goes on, Tesla's fiasco becomes more and more embarrassing. Waymos are all over the place in the cities they serve, doing pretty much what they're supposed to do. Nuro has some fully autonomous vehicles running around. Baidu's Apollo Go is deployed in 16 cities in China, although they use remote driving as a backup. Tesla, though, is still hyping a technology that seems to have maxed out years ago.

Tesla's FSD has indeed made significant improvements in the past year (still way behind where it was promised to be even half a decade ago), but they are FAR from being able to operate an actual robotaxi service. Austin is an embarrassment. It seems that tesla believes they can make more money on fooling investors than they can on any core business model

Re: When Tesla's FSD works well, it gets credit. When it doesn't, you get blamed

#60

Post by terminalshort »

energy123 wrote: post #51
vessenes wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry but while I am a happy Waymo user, this is overblown and just incorrect. Waymo has datacenter oversight. (which, who cares, the product is great). Tesla FSD 12 -> 13 was a massive jump that happened earlier this year. 14 is still rolling out. Testing out 13 this weekend, it drove on country roads, noticed a road closure, rerouted, did 7 miles on non divided highways, navigated a town and chose a parking space a…

> It was genuinely good. You lack data to draw this conclusion. The most important factor is deaths per mile, which is sparse, so it requires aggregating data from many drivers before you have enough statistical power.

[flagged]
Post reply on HN