Live data from Hacker News

US probes Tesla's Full Self-Driving software after fatal crash

reuters.com

121–130 of 1001 posts

Re: US probes Tesla's Full Self-Driving software after fatal crash

#121

"Tesla says on its website its FSD software in on-road vehicles requires active driver supervision and does not make vehicles autonomous." Despite it being called "Full Self-Driving." Tesla should be sued out of existence.

[flagged]

I think you mean fortunately?

Re: US probes Tesla's Full Self-Driving software after fatal crash

#122
post #47

My Tesla routinely tries to kill me on absolutely normal California roads in normal sunny conditions, especially when there are cars parked on the side of the road (it often brakes thinking I'm about to crash into them, or even swerves into them thinking that's the "real" lane). Elon's Unsupervised FSD dreams are a good bit off. I do hope they happen though.

That’s hilariously ironic because I have a pretty standard newish Japanese petrol car (I’m not mentioning the brand because my point isn’t that brand x is better than brand y), and it has no ai self driving functions just pretty basic radar adaptive cruise control and emergency brake assist where it will stop if there’s a car brake hard in front of you… and it does a remarkable job at rejecting cars which are slowing down or stopped in other lanes, even when you’re going around a corner and the car is pointing straight towards the other cars but not actually heading towards them since it’s turning. I assume they are using the steering input to help reject other vehicles and dopler effects to detect differences in speed, but it’s remarkable how accurate it is at matching the speed of the car in front of you and only the car in front of you, even when that car is over 15 seconds in front of you. If teslas can’t beat that, it’s sad

Re: US probes Tesla's Full Self-Driving software after fatal crash

#123
post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nuclear power adoption is the largest force to combat climate change.

Historically, hydro has prevented for more CO2 than nuclear by a wide margin. https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/electricity-prod-source-s... Looking forward Nuclear isn’t moving the needle. Solar grew more in 2023 alone than nuclear has grown since 1995. Worse nuclear can’t ramp up significantly in the next decade simply due to construction bottlenecks. 40 years ago nuclear could have played a larger role, but we wa…

That just goes to show how incredibly short sighted humanity is. We new about the risk of massive CO2 emissions from burning fossil fuels but just ignored it while irrationally demonizing nuclear energy because it is scawy. If humans were sane and able to plan earth would be getting 100% of all electricity from super-efficient 7th generation nuclear reactors.

Re: US probes Tesla's Full Self-Driving software after fatal crash

#124
post #40

Will the review assess overall mortality of the vehicles compared to similar cars, and overall mortality while FSD is in use?

Fatalities per passenger mile driven is the only statistic that would matter. I actually doubt this figure differs much, either way, from the overall fleet of vehicles.

This is because "inattentive driving" is _rarely_ the cause of fatalities on the road. The winner there is, and probably always will be, Alcohol.

Re: US probes Tesla's Full Self-Driving software after fatal crash

#126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nuclear power adoption is the largest force to combat climate change.

Are you proposing that cars should have nuclear reactors in them? Teslas run great on nuclear power, unlike fossil fuel ICE cars.

Of course not.

Re: US probes Tesla's Full Self-Driving software after fatal crash

#127
post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those numbers aren't all the fatalities associated with tesla cars; IE, you can't compare the 45K/year (roughly 1 per 100M miles driven) to the limited number of reports. What they are looking for is whether there are systematic issues with the design and implementation that make it unsafe.

Unsafe relative to what? Certainly not to normal human drivers in normal cars. Those are killing people left and right.

No they're not. And if you do look at human drivers you're likely to see a Pareto distribution where 20% of drivers cause most of the accidents. This is completely unlike something like FSD where accidents would be more evenly distributed. It's entirely possible that FSD would make 20% of the drivers safer and ~80% less safe even if the overall accident rate was lower.

Re: US probes Tesla's Full Self-Driving software after fatal crash

#128
post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On many roads if a deer jumps across the road at the wrong time there’s literally nothing you can do. You can’t always drive at 30mph on back country roads just because a deer might hop out at you.

World of difference between, 30, 40, 50 and 60. Feels like something I have noticed between west and east coast drivers. Latter really send it on country turns and just trust the road. West coast, particularly montana, when vision is reduced, speed slows down. Just too many animals or road obstacles (eg: rocks, planks of wood) to just trust the road.

Road obstacles are static and can be seen by not “out driving your headlights”. Animals flinging themselves into the road cannot, in many instances.

Re: US probes Tesla's Full Self-Driving software after fatal crash

#129
post #90

I worked in 18 a wheeler automation unicorn. Never rode in one once for a reason.

Automate the transfer yards, shipping docks, and trucking terminals. Make movement of cargo across these limited use areas entirely automated and as smooth as butter. Queue drivers up and have their loads automatically placed up front so they can drop and hook in a few minutes and get back on the road.

I honestly think that's the _easier_ problem to solve by at least two orders of magnitude.

Re: US probes Tesla's Full Self-Driving software after fatal crash

#130
post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it takes 3 months to approve where steel rocket falls you might as well give up iterating something as complex as FSD.

Drive it in larger and larger closed courses. Expand to neighboring areas with consent of the communities involved. Agree on limited conditions until enough data has been gathered to expand those conditions.

While controlled conditions promote safety, they do not yield effective training data.
Post reply on HN