Live data from Hacker News

Tesla reports another Robotaxi crash

electrek.co

11–20 of 165 posts

Re: Tesla reports another Robotaxi crash

#13
This is the sort of thing that occurs when the interests of the public become subordinate to the interests of a lawless aristocracy. Financial, social and public safety considerations are costs that can be transferred to the public to preserve the wealth of a few individuals.

Re: Tesla reports another Robotaxi crash

#15

When you have a CEO like Elon who swears up and down that you only need cameras for autonomous driving vehicles, and skimping out on crucial extras like Li-DAR, can anyone be surprised by this result? Tesla also likes to take the motto of "move fast and break things" to a fault.

The more I've looked into the topic the less I think the removal of lidar was a cost issue. I think there are a lot of benefits to simplifying your sensor tech stack, and while I won't pretend to know the best solution removing things like lidar and ultrasonic sensors seem to have been a decision about improving performance. By doubling down on cameras your technical team can remain focused on certain sensor technology, and you don't have to deal with data priority and trust in the same way you do when you have a variety of sensors.

The only real test will be who creates the best product, and while waymo seems to have the lead it's arguably too soon to tell.

Re: Tesla reports another Robotaxi crash

#16
IMHO, this is not too bad! But obviously, coming from the software product industry, everyone knows that building features isn't the same as operating in practice and optimizing based on the use case, which takes a ton of time.

Waymo has a huge head start, and it is evident that the "fully autonomous" robotaxi date is far behind what Elon is saying publicly. They will do it, but it is not as close as the hype suggests.

Re: Tesla reports another Robotaxi crash

#17
The most damning thing is that the most advanced version, with the most modern hardware, with perfectly maintained vehicles, running in a pre-trained geofence that is pre-selected to work well [1] with trained, professional safety drivers, with scrutinized data and reporting average a upper bound of 40,000 miles per collision (assuming the mileage numbers were not puffery [3]).

Yet somehow they claim that old versions, using old hardware, on arbitrary roads, using untrained customers as safety drivers somehow average 2.9 million miles per collision in non-highway environments [2], a ~72.5x difference in collision frequency, and 5.1 million miles per collision in all environments, a ~175x(!) difference in collision frequency, when their reporting and data are not scrutinized.

I guess their most advanced software and hardware and professional safety drivers just make it 175x more dangerous.

[1] https://techcrunch.com/2025/05/20/musk-says-teslas-self-driv...

[2] https://www.tesla.com/fsd/safety

[3] https://www.forbes.com/sites/alanohnsman/2025/08/20/elon-mus...

[3.a] Tesla own attorneys have argued that statements by Tesla executives are such nonsense that no reasonable person would believe them.

Re: Tesla reports another Robotaxi crash

#18
Most minor fender benders are not reported by the involved people, whereas even the most minor ones often caused by other humans must be assiduously reported by any company doing such a rollout.

A responsible journalist with half a clue would mention that, and tell us how that distorts the numbers. If we correct for this distortion, it’s clear that the truth would come out in Tesla’s favor here.

Instead the writer embraces the distortion, trying to make Tesla look bad, and one is left to wonder if they are intentionally pushing a biased narrative.

Re: Tesla reports another Robotaxi crash

#19
How many more people have to die?

In the past it took a lot less to get the situation fixed… and these were horrendous situations! [1][2] And yet tesla is a factor of 10 worse!

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Pinto

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firestone_and_Ford_tire_contro...

Re: Tesla reports another Robotaxi crash

#20

When you have a CEO like Elon who swears up and down that you only need cameras for autonomous driving vehicles, and skimping out on crucial extras like Li-DAR, can anyone be surprised by this result? Tesla also likes to take the motto of "move fast and break things" to a fault.

The more I've looked into the topic the less I think the removal of lidar was a cost issue. I think there are a lot of benefits to simplifying your sensor tech stack, and while I won't pretend to know the best solution removing things like lidar and ultrasonic sensors seem to have been a decision about improving performance. By doubling down on cameras your technical team can remain focused on certain sensor technolo…

Usually you would go in with the max amount of sensors and data, make it work and then see what can be left out. It seems dumb to limit yourself from beginning if you don’t know yet what really works. But then I am not a multi billionaire so what do i know?
Post reply on HN