261–270 of 315 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe 2 lines down will clear things up? > The currently enabled Autopilot, Enhanced Autopilot and Full Self-Driving features require active driver supervision and do not make the vehicle autonomous.
If they also changed "Full" to "Limited" (or "Not Full"), it would be cleared up. "Full Self Driving" and "vehicle is not autonomous" is still confusing to English speakers, IMO.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
YES. Thank you. I rode in a Model Y last year and just could not believe the mistakes it was making. Disappearing and reappearing cars; the semi in front of us was apparently straddling the lane line for a few miles; somehow an early-2000s Dodge Ram was classified as a small sedan – the list goes on, and this was only a ~10-minute ride. I would be absolutely mortified if a product of mine ended up in front of a custo…
I spent a decade working on commercial computer vision applications that, among other things, had to recognize and track cars. Those are exactly the sort of transient errors you'd expect to see in shipping products and they usually have heuristics to "smooth" over those sorts of problems. That said, would I ever trust my life to a system like that? No.
But the display itself serves basically no purpose besides looking cool, and it just fails pretty badly at that. Also yeah, it made me maybe a little more nervous about being on the road with a Tesla than it should’ve…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I spent a decade working on commercial computer vision applications that, among other things, had to recognize and track cars. Those are exactly the sort of transient errors you'd expect to see in shipping products and they usually have heuristics to "smooth" over those sorts of problems. That said, would I ever trust my life to a system like that? No.
Don’t get me wrong, my background is also pretty CV-heavy, and I don’t expect perfection by any means. But the display itself serves basically no purpose besides looking cool, and it just fails pretty badly at that. Also yeah, it made me maybe a little more nervous about being on the road with a Tesla than it should’ve…
If anything, if you've got self-driving on in a Tesla, you're not being nervous enough. :)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is it? I'd heard Tesla was being too tight lipped for any conclusions to be made at this point, but if you've got a study or source I'd love to see it!
Their safety report is a joke and their methodology is full of holes. There are a bunch of replies to this comment that explain why: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39359437 As far as proving how unsafe it is, no one can do it unless Tesla is transparent with their data. Deliberately hiding that data doesn't automatically mean it's safer than humans, so yes, their claims are indeed highly misleading.
Look, these are the most popular vehicles on the road. Where are the wrecks? Where are the bodies? Surely if these were significant there would at least be a bunch of anecdata showing suspicious behavior. And there isn't. And you know that, which is why you're arguing so strongly here.
Just chill out. The system is safe. It is not perfect, but it is safe. And no amount of whatifery will make it otherwise.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is it? I'd heard Tesla was being too tight lipped for any conclusions to be made at this point, but if you've got a study or source I'd love to see it!
Their safety report is a joke and their methodology is full of holes. There are a bunch of replies to this comment that explain why: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39359437 As far as proving how unsafe it is, no one can do it unless Tesla is transparent with their data. Deliberately hiding that data doesn't automatically mean it's safer than humans, so yes, their claims are indeed highly misleading.
> You're essentially telling us that drivers driving Teslas with active autopilot (i.e. limited to great weather conditions on high quality roads) have fewer accidents than those without active autopilot (e.g. driving in poor weather conditions, or on bad roads). That's not much of an insight.
FSD refusing to engage in unsafe driving conditions does not compromise the system's safety. In fact, it's the safest possible option, and something I wish more humans (myself included) would do.
> As far as proving how unsafe it is, no one can do it unless Tesla is transparent with their data.
Right, so how are you confidently discounting Elon's claim without data?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Correct take. Go and look up their fire statistics, and you'll get a similar conclusion. Its getting much better YoY. https://insideevs.com/news/501729/number-tesla-vehicle-fires... https://www.businessinsider.com/tesla-deaths?op=1
Okay, now do the statistics for the number of people who burned to death. Actually, no need, I have them right here. The NFPA (the same organization Tesla is quoting for vehicle fire counts) estimates 560 fire deaths per year in the US over 290 million registered vehicle years [2] or ~1.93 deaths per million vehicle-years. Third party reports show at least 20 people burned to death in their Tesla's in the US in 2022…
I started fact checking [1], and stopped when there was only 1 death in 2022: a cat. Many of "your" fires are indirectly related to Tesla (e.x. bad EVSE wiring job), so please link me to anything I may have missed and I'll continue.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The Model S Plaid is also not plaid. I believe this is invented outrage, their actual capabilities are made very clear.
Model S Plaid is not describing the paint scheme of the vehicle. Full Self Driving is the name of the feature specifically chosen to mislead about its capabilities.
Full Self Driving was chosen to describe its intended capabilities exactly.
Was the SLS misleading before its first flight in 2022 because it had yet to launch to space? Were the James Webb or Hubble falsely advertised during production? "They want us to call that thing a 'Space Telescope' when it's obviously a pile of mirrors on the ground..."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Their safety report is a joke and their methodology is full of holes. There are a bunch of replies to this comment that explain why: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39359437 As far as proving how unsafe it is, no one can do it unless Tesla is transparent with their data. Deliberately hiding that data doesn't automatically mean it's safer than humans, so yes, their claims are indeed highly misleading.
You were asked for any evidence that it's unsafe, and you don't have it. The linked article is the only fatal accident you can even point to, and even that one is (1) only a suspected FSD accident based on previous driver statements and (2) really obviously a DUI anyway. Look, these are the most popular vehicles on the road. Where are the wrecks? Where are the bodies? Surely if these were significant there would at l…
It’s telling that you want to rely on anecdata and news reports as proof rather than asking Tesla to be forthcoming.
To call a system safe and more specifically safer than human, you need data and you don’t have it. Plain and simple. The burden of proof is on you.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Using the correct words would not require another 2 lines to clear things up. The only reason to label it incorrectly is to falsely advertise.
The Model S Plaid is also not plaid. I believe this is invented outrage, their actual capabilities are made very clear.
Nobody would be griping about the name being misleading if it was marketed as Tesla Tartan or something.