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

Tesla’s autonomous vehicles are crashing at a rate much higher tha human drivers

electrek.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 286 posts

Re: Tesla’s autonomous vehicles are crashing at a rate much higher tha human drivers

#231

Post by user34283 »

krisoft wrote: post #225
user34283 wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I strongly oppose the constant slander and the litany of lies partisan commenters post about Musk. You don't get to throw out "fondness for throwing Nazi salutes" slander, based on an hoax immediately debunked at the time, and then act like you're doing democracy a favor. Try to stick to the facts. Regarding the journalist discussed here, I had a look at his X account, and he posted no less than 20 posts attacking Te…

> You don't get to throw out "fondness for throwing Nazi salutes" slander, based on an hoax immediately debunked at the time, and then act like you're doing democracy a favor. Just to clarify. This is the video context: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-VfYjPzj1Xw Are you claiming that this is not an accurate depiction of what happened on stage? (That is the video is in some form fake. A deep fake, or special effects,…

Yes, "nazi salute" is obviously not an accurate description of the gesture Musk performed before saying "my heart goes out to you".

Re: Tesla’s autonomous vehicles are crashing at a rate much higher tha human drivers

#232

Post by overfeed »

kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #203
bluGill wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That was 10-15 years ago, but back then Musk appeared different, and Telsa was new. Today you can buy a Tesla, they are no longer the status symbol they once were. A 15 year old Mercedes is a status symbol in the US, a 15 year old Tesla is not, Tesla didn't capture the status symbol market (which might have been a good decision - what wasn't a good decision was for the CEO to go public about political views that are…

A 15 year old Mercedes is a falling apart PoS maintenance nightmare driven by someone with a lack of common sense.

They still look like luxury, though. Here's a 2011 entry-level Mercedes https://www.edmunds.com/assets/m/for-sale/38-wddgf8bb5br1533...

Re: Tesla’s autonomous vehicles are crashing at a rate much higher tha human drivers

#233

Post by overfeed »

_ea1k wrote: post #164

TBH, the comments here amaze me. The claim is that a human being paid to monitor a driver assistance feature is 3x more likely to crash than a human alone. That needs extraordinary evidence. Instead the evidence is misleading guesses.

> That needs extraordinary evidence.

Waymo studied this back when it was a Google moonshot, and concluded that going full automation is safer than human supervision. A driving system that mostly works lulls the driver into complacency.

Besides automation failure, driver complacency was a big component[1] of the fatal accident that led to the shuttering of Ubers self-driving efforts - the safety driver was looking at her phone for minutes in the lead up. It is also the reason why driver attention is monitored in L2

Re: Tesla’s autonomous vehicles are crashing at a rate much higher tha human drivers

#234

Post by pardon_me »

tsimionescu wrote: post #162
mcpar-land wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm glad Tesla is pivoting to a product that can drop your bag of groceries in the worst case, instead of one that can slam you into a concrete divider at 75mph.

In general, any robot that has servos powerful enough to be any of use is surprisingly dangerous to be around. While it's much easier to apply various limiters, the raw power in those engines will always pose a significant level of risk if anything goes wrong. If you're hovering above a human who sits up suddenly, you might get your nose broken. If it's a robot instead, it will have the strength and mass to easily mu…

I used to be an adventurer like you, then I took a roundhouse kick to the head. Never let your humanoid robot watch TV!

Re: Tesla’s autonomous vehicles are crashing at a rate much higher tha human drivers

#235

Post by UltraSane »

zemvpferreira wrote: post #117
UltraSane wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really hope I live to see Tesla stock crash to a reasonable valuation.

I dislike Tesla/Elon but would prefer the reality where they innovate until their worth matches their current price. I suspect yours is more likely to happen.

That is actually impossible.

Re: Tesla’s autonomous vehicles are crashing at a rate much higher tha human drivers

#236

Post by UltraSane »

awakeasleep wrote: post #118
UltraSane wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because it is fraud trying to inflate Tesla stock price.

The real term is “marketing puffery.” It’s a fun, legally specific way to describe a company bullshitting to hype its product.

A robotaxi rollout where each car needs a safety driver is fraud.

Re: Tesla’s autonomous vehicles are crashing at a rate much higher tha human drivers

#237

Post by pardon_me »

overfeed wrote: post #233
_ea1k wrote: post #164

TBH, the comments here amaze me. The claim is that a human being paid to monitor a driver assistance feature is 3x more likely to crash than a human alone. That needs extraordinary evidence. Instead the evidence is misleading guesses.

> That needs extraordinary evidence. Waymo studied this back when it was a Google moonshot, and concluded that going full automation is safer than human supervision. A driving system that mostly works lulls the driver into complacency. Besides automation failure, driver complacency was a big component[1] of the fatal accident that led to the shuttering of Ubers self-driving efforts - the safety driver was looking at…

If rider and pedestrian safety is the main concern, the automated assistance and safety systems that car manufacturers were already developing make the most sense. They either warn or intervene in situations the human may not realize they are in danger and/or do not respond in time. Developing these solves the harder problems first, automation is easy in comparison.

The idea that mostly-automating the system because it's statistically better than humans, but requiring human-assistance to monitor and respond in these exact situations, was flawed logic to begin with. Comparisons of statistics should be made like-for-like, given these are scenarios we can easily control.

For example, a robotic taxis should at least be compared to professional drivers on similar routes, roads, vehicles, and times of day. Not just comparing "all drivers in all vehicles in all scenarios over time" with private company data that cherry-picks "automated driving" miles on highways etc. (where existing assistance systems could already achieve near-perfect results).

Companies testing autonomy on the public should be forced to upload all crash data to investigators as part of their licensing. The vehicles already have extremely detailed sensor and video data to operate. The fact that we have no verified data to compare to existing human statistics is damning. It's a farce.

Re: Tesla’s autonomous vehicles are crashing at a rate much higher tha human drivers

#239

Post by pardon_me »

serf wrote: post #33
rich_sasha wrote: post #17

As much as I'd love to pile in on Tesla, it's unclear to me the severity of the incidents (I know they are listed) and if human drivers would report such things. "Rear collision while backing" could mean they tapped a bollard. Doesn't sound like a crash. A human driver might never even report this. What does "Incident at 18 mph" even mean? By my own subjective count, only three descriptions sound unambiguously bad, a…

>they tapped a bollard If a human had eyes on every angle of their car and they still did that it would represent a lapse in focus or control -- humans don't have the same advantages here. With that said : i would be more concerned about what it represents when my sensor covered auto-car makes an error like that, it would make me presume there was an error in detection -- a big problem.

Lapse in focus is such a great point. If we looked at the number of accidents caused by very human errors such as "lapse in focus" and "sudden medical events" etc. which we would 100% expect to go away when offloading tasks to any computer, the statistics of accidents remaining becomes the bare minimum for what computer-based automated driving must achieve.

This is compounded by the system mistakes likely being hard-errors. A computer hard-error vs. human lapse of judgement is potentially the difference between the vehicle slowly crushing a small child as they scream and beg for help vs. a human stopping as soon as they felt/heard something. Context matters.

The compared error-rates must consider if it could have been avoided or mitigated, the near misses, the human vs. computer type of error, and how hard-errors may lead to horrifying scenarios.

Re: Tesla’s autonomous vehicles are crashing at a rate much higher tha human drivers

#240

Post by pardon_me »

peebeebee wrote: post #129
lvl155 wrote: post #23

I am so tired of people defending Tesla. I’ve wrote off Tesla long time ago but what gets me are the people defending their tech. We all can go see the products and experience them. The tech needs to be at least 100x more error free vs humans. It cannot be on par with human error rate.

Tesla was THE company that started the EV-revolution, while VW was actively manipulating emission data. I don't like Elon and his politics, but I'm very grateful for Tesla to have shaken up the car industry. Everyone is better for it.

How do we know everyone's better for it? Massive amounts of public and private funding went into it and we still haven't seen the outcome, it's too soon.

Consider how many car manufacturers are backtracking, the fact that China will now win the EV race, utility energy prices have skyrocketed, and the damage done not only to the brand but people's view towards EVs in general.

Forcing this play happened too soon.

Post reply on HN