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

Elizabeth Holmes loses bid to stay out of prison

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 315 posts

Re: Elizabeth Holmes loses bid to stay out of prison

#211

Post by LanceJones »

ok_dad wrote: post #188
LanceJones wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are 400,000+ Beta users currently (US and Canada). You are being fooled by the headlines. The people in the EU have a legitimate beef (not being able to use the functionality). "test a system with our own lives" is silly hyperbole and you know it.

> "test a system with our own lives" is silly hyperbole and you know it. No, I actually believe that, because I have some morals and ethics around introducing dangerous and untested black-box AI into a several-ton machine with no physical consrtaints as to it's location (aka: a moving car), as in I wouldn't do it myself nor use a product like Tesla that was developed in such a shoddy manner. It's pretty fucking rude…

If I got that wrong, then I apologize.

Re: Elizabeth Holmes loses bid to stay out of prison

#212

Post by 00F_ »

ceejayoz wrote: post #150
LanceJones wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are 400,000+ Beta users currently (US and Canada). You are being fooled by the headlines. The people in the EU have a legitimate beef (not being able to use the functionality). "test a system with our own lives" is silly hyperbole and you know it.

"test a system with our own lives" is actually an understatement; FSD Beta is being tested on other peoples' lives without their consent . Other drivers, pedestrians, etc.

so when you have a student driver, or a new driver, the lives of not just them but the people around them are being risked just to test a system. so we should just stop all new drivers. no more new drivers. because a new driver, especially a teenage one, is orders of magnitude more dangerous than the current fsd.

Re: Elizabeth Holmes loses bid to stay out of prison

#213

Post by singleshot_ »

falseeq wrote: post #157
figassis wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't think this is the point. Calling something Oranges, and then saying "they're not really oranges, but an approximation, but we call them oranges bc it sounds cool" is still fraudulent in my view.

No that’s not fraud. Fraud requires a lie and justifiable , detrimental reliance on that lie by a victim.

Hi, welcome to hacker news.

Why wouldn’t a buyer be justified in relying upon a sellers description of the goods for sale?

Re: Elizabeth Holmes loses bid to stay out of prison

#214

Post by rurp »

morelisp wrote: post #145
luckylion wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

There are at least four replies at this moment missing the point entirely, it's incredible how knee-jerk these are to defend Tesla against a defense of Tesla .

I'm well acquainted with the Theranos story and still had no idea what the VW comment meant until I read the replies. It's a pretty tenuous joke, and given the other responses I'm clearly not the only one who thought so.

Being aghast at people for misunderstanding is silly.

Re: Elizabeth Holmes loses bid to stay out of prison

#215

Post by ok_dad »

LanceJones wrote: post #208
ok_dad wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "test a system with our own lives" is silly hyperbole and you know it. No, I actually believe that, because I have some morals and ethics around introducing dangerous and untested black-box AI into a several-ton machine with no physical consrtaints as to it's location (aka: a moving car), as in I wouldn't do it myself nor use a product like Tesla that was developed in such a shoddy manner. It's pretty fucking rude…

It's ADAS Level 2. Tesla is one of many. And are you equally concerned aboout parents who allow their 15 and 16 year olds to drive on the same streets with no-to-little training... and where the parent cannot easily grab the steering wheel or press the brake?

15 and 16 year olds, in many states, are required to drive with a fully-licensed individual until they are 18 or even older! I'm not as worried about a teenage driver, though, because they are humans and we have a lot of experience as humans on how to teach other humans to drive. Not so much with a black-box neural net AI!

Re: Elizabeth Holmes loses bid to stay out of prison

#217

Post by ok_dad »

LanceJones wrote: post #211
ok_dad wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "test a system with our own lives" is silly hyperbole and you know it. No, I actually believe that, because I have some morals and ethics around introducing dangerous and untested black-box AI into a several-ton machine with no physical consrtaints as to it's location (aka: a moving car), as in I wouldn't do it myself nor use a product like Tesla that was developed in such a shoddy manner. It's pretty fucking rude…

If I got that wrong, then I apologize.

Thanks. In the future, try to be charitable and assume people are telling their true feelings on HN, and not being trolls or dickheads. Most people here are pretty good about that, I find.

Re: Elizabeth Holmes loses bid to stay out of prison

#219

Post by ceejayoz »

00F_ wrote: post #212
ceejayoz wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"test a system with our own lives" is actually an understatement; FSD Beta is being tested on other peoples' lives without their consent . Other drivers, pedestrians, etc.

so when you have a student driver, or a new driver, the lives of not just them but the people around them are being risked just to test a system. so we should just stop all new drivers. no more new drivers. because a new driver, especially a teenage one, is orders of magnitude more dangerous than the current fsd.

Student drivers are typically subject to significant limitations - no other kids in car, no driving past certain hours, parental supervision for a certain period of time, etc. They're not learning for a billionaire's profit, and they're fairly unlikely to get a software update that causes a whole bunch of them to make the same mistake in a short period of time.

Re: Elizabeth Holmes loses bid to stay out of prison

#220

Post by JumpCrisscross »

pclmulqdq wrote: post #209
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> when you don't know that a product definitely can do something, you don't sell it saying that it has the "capability" to do it. That's fraud. Capability is defined as "the facility or potential for an indicated use or deployment" [1]. There are other definitions. But selling capability based on future potential is not fraudulent, unless you say the capability is present. [1] https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictiona…

I think you're reading the word "potential" incorrectly for the context. Dictionaries are tricky things to read, because they tend to incorrectly communicate nuances. The capability to do something means that it can be done, not that it might be able to be done. Otherwise, my Honda has the capability to fly.

> my Honda has the capability to fly

No, because there is no reasonable potential for it to generate enough thrust to be a lifting body. We understand aerodynamics enough to say that. We don’t understand self-driving cars enough to rule out the sensors on today’s Teslas being adequate, given the right software.

Saying someone is capable of climbing a mountain, conditioned on training, isn’t a lie. The caveat is important. I think Tesla has played fast and loose with its caveats in a way that produces civil liability. But it doesn’t appear to be wilfully defrauding its customers, who are more or less happy with their cars.

Post reply on HN