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

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

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 1001 posts

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

#261

Post by jakelazaroff »

AlchemistCamp wrote: post #226

The interesting question is how good self-driving has to be before people tolerate it. It's clear that having half the casualty rate per distance traveled of the median human driver isn't acceptable. How about a quarter? Or a tenth? Accidents caused by human drivers are one of the largest causes of injury and death, but they're not newsworthy the way an accident involving automated driving is. It's all too easy to se…

I think we should not be satisfied with merely “better than a human”. Flying is so safe precisely because we treat any casualty as unacceptable. We should aspire to make automobiles at least that safe.

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

#262

Post by frabjoused »

bastawhiz wrote: post #257

Lots of people are asking how good the self driving has to be before we tolerate it. I got a one month free trial of FSD and turned it off after two weeks. Quite simply: it's dangerous. - It failed with a cryptic system error while driving - It started making a left turn far too early that would have scraped the left side of the car on a sign. I had to manually intervene. - In my opinion, the default setting accelera…

The thing that doesn't make sense is the numbers. If it is dangerous in your anecdotes, why don't the reported numbers show more accidents when FSD is on?

When I did the trial on my Tesla, I also noted these kinds of things and felt like I had to take control.

But at the end of the day, only the numbers matter.

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

#263

Post by yieldcrv »

Come on US, regulate interstate commerce and tell them to delete these cameras

Lidar is goated and if tesla didn’t want that they can pursue a different perception solution, allowing for innovation

But just visual cameras aiming to replicate us, ban that

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

#264

Post by frabjoused »

bastawhiz wrote: post #260
frabjoused wrote: post #232

I don't understand why this debate/probing is not just data driven. Driving is all big data. https://www.tesla.com/VehicleSafetyReport This report does not include fatalities, which seems to be the key point in question. Unless the above report has some bias or is false, Teslas in autopilot appear 10 times safer than the US average. Is there public data on deaths reported by Tesla? And otherwise, if the stats say it…

Autopilot is not FSD.

That's a good point. Are there no published numbers on FSD?

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

#265

Post by bastawhiz »

jfoster wrote: post #250
danans wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Pedestrian' in this context seems pretty misleading What's misleading? The full quote: "A red Tesla Model Y then hit the 4Runner and one of the people who exited from it . A 71-year-old woman from Mesa, Arizona, was pronounced dead at the scene." If you exit a vehicle, and are on foot, you are a pedestrian. I wouldn't expect FSD's object recognition system to treat a human who has just exited a car differently than…

The description has me wondering if this was definitely a case where FSD was being used. There have been other cases in the past where drivers had an accident and claimed they were using autopilot when they actually were not. I don't know for sure, but I would think that the car could detect a collision. I also don't know for sure, but I would think that FSD would stop once a collision has been detected.

Did the article say the Tesla didn't stop after the collision?

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

#266

Post by gambiting »

blagie wrote: post #252
jeremyjh wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this is the answer: the company takes on full liability. If a Tesla is Fully Self Driving then Tesla is driving it. The insurance market will ensure that dodgy software/hardware developers exit the industry.

This is very much what I would like to see. The price of insurance is baked into the price of a car. If the car is as safe as I am, I pay the same price in the end. If it's safer, I pay less. From my perspective: 1) I would *much* rather have Honda kill someone than myself. If I killed someone, the psychological impact on myself would be horrible. In the city I live in, I dread ageing; as my reflexes get slower, I'm…

>> I would much rather have Honda kill someone than myself. If I killed someone, the psychological impact on myself would be horrible.

Except that we know that it doesn't work like that. Train drivers are ridden with extreme guilt every time "their" train runs over someone, even though they know that logically there was absolutely nothing they could have done to prevent it. Don't see why it would be any different here.

>>If we want safer cars, we can simply raise insurance payouts, and vice-versa

In what way? In the EU the minimum covered amount for any car insurance is 5 million euro, it has had no impact on the safety of cars. And of course the recent increase in payouts(due to the general increase in labour and parts cost) has led to a dramatic increase in insurance premiums which in turn has lead to a drastic increase in the number of people driving without insurance. So now that needs increased policing and enforcement, which we pay for through taxes. So no, market doesn't "work everything out".

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

#267

Post by akira2501 »

frabjoused wrote: post #262
bastawhiz wrote: post #257

Lots of people are asking how good the self driving has to be before we tolerate it. I got a one month free trial of FSD and turned it off after two weeks. Quite simply: it's dangerous. - It failed with a cryptic system error while driving - It started making a left turn far too early that would have scraped the left side of the car on a sign. I had to manually intervene. - In my opinion, the default setting accelera…

The thing that doesn't make sense is the numbers. If it is dangerous in your anecdotes, why don't the reported numbers show more accidents when FSD is on? When I did the trial on my Tesla, I also noted these kinds of things and felt like I had to take control. But at the end of the day, only the numbers matter.

You can measure risks without having to witness disaster.

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

#268

Post by bastawhiz »

varenc wrote: post #246
neom wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is the correct use of pedestrian as a noun.

By a stricter definition, a pedestrian is one who travels by foot. Of course, they are walking, but they’re traveling via their car, so by some interpretations you wouldn’t call them a pedestrian. You could call them a “motorist” or a “stranded vehicle occupant”. For understanding the accident it does seem meaningful that they were motorists that got out of their car on a highway and not pedestrians at a street cross…

Cars and drivers ideally shouldn't hit people who exited their vehicles after an accident on a highway. Identifying and avoiding hazards is part of driving.

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

#269

Post by ForHackernews »

frabjoused wrote: post #262
bastawhiz wrote: post #257

Lots of people are asking how good the self driving has to be before we tolerate it. I got a one month free trial of FSD and turned it off after two weeks. Quite simply: it's dangerous. - It failed with a cryptic system error while driving - It started making a left turn far too early that would have scraped the left side of the car on a sign. I had to manually intervene. - In my opinion, the default setting accelera…

The thing that doesn't make sense is the numbers. If it is dangerous in your anecdotes, why don't the reported numbers show more accidents when FSD is on? When I did the trial on my Tesla, I also noted these kinds of things and felt like I had to take control. But at the end of the day, only the numbers matter.

Maybe other human drivers are reacting quickly and avoiding potential accidents from dangerous computer driving? That would be ironic, but I'm sure it's possible in some situations.
Post reply on HN