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

Tesla recalls 360k vehicles, says full self-driving beta may cause crashes

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 864 posts

Re: Tesla recalls 360k vehicles, says full self-driving beta may cause crashes

#311

Post by Xylakant »

ajross wrote: post #223
tjohns wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just off the top of my head: - A Tesla near that drive into the median divider near Sunnyvale on Highway 101, because it thought the gore point was an extra lane. Split the car in half and killed the driver. [1] - A Tesla that autonomously ran a red light and killed two people. [2] - Multiple accidents where Teslas have driven into parked emergency vehicles / semi trucks. Is it quantitatively safer than human drivers…

Those are autopilot accidents from before FSD beta was even released. I mean, it's true, that if you broaden the search to "any accident involving Tesla-produced automation technology" you're going to find more signal, but your denominator also shrinks by one (maybe two) orders of magnitude. And it also lets me cite Tesla's own statistics for its autopilot product (again, not FSD beta): https://www.tesla.com/VehicleS…

This data does not show what it pretends to show. The underlying statistics are heavily skewed in favor of Tesla by various factors:

* Autopilot can only be enabled in good conditions and relies on human drivers in all other, to the point of handing over to a human when it gets confused. Yet, they compare to all miles driven in all conditions.

* Teslas are comparatively new cars that have - as they proudly point out - a variety of active and passive safety features that make the car inherently less prone to accident than the average, which includes old, beat up cars with outdated safety features. Teslas are also likely to be better maintained than the average car in the US by virtue of being an expensive car driven by people with disposable income.

* Teslas are driven by a certain demographic with a certain usage pattern. Yet, they provide no indicator on how that skews the data.

Tesla could likely provide a better picture by comparing their data with cars in the same age and price bracket, used by a similar demographic, in similar conditions. They could also model how much of the alleged safety benefit is due to the usual, active and passive safety features (brake assistance, lane assist, …). They don‘t, and as such, the entire report is useless or worse, misleading.

Re: Tesla recalls 360k vehicles, says full self-driving beta may cause crashes

#313

Post by [deleted] »

b1zguy wrote: post #294
mometsi wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anybody else reminded of that story where the guy gets a sketchy neural implant, then goes to a dystopian mars settlement, and then rips the self-driving feature out of a car with his bare hands? What was that called again? / puts on sunglasses preemptively/

Um, what is it?

[deleted]

Re: Tesla recalls 360k vehicles, says full self-driving beta may cause crashes

#314

Post by Xylakant »

valine wrote: post #302
Xylakant wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The number was problematic for various reasons: The usual comparison is vs. all cars on the road, but Teslas are comparatively new cars with a lot of recent and expensive safety features not available in older cars. They’re also likely to be maintained better. On top, they’re also a driven by a different demographic which skews accident statistics. Teslas autopilot can only be enabled in comparatively safe and simple…

> Teslas autopilot can only be enabled in comparatively safe and simple circumstances This is incorrect. FSD can be enabled everywhere from dirt road to parking lots, even highways and dense urban environments like NYC. There is no geofence on FSD, you can turn it on anywhere the car can see drivable space.

Does it enable in heavy rain or snow, on ice, fog? Does it work in storm conditions with leaves and objects blown over the street? Does it work in confusing traffic situations, invalid signage, …?

Re: Tesla recalls 360k vehicles, says full self-driving beta may cause crashes

#315

Post by gorgonian »

gregw134 wrote: post #307
ckwalsh wrote: post #212

I have a Model 3, and was excited to get the FSD beta access about a month ago. I don't use it super regularly, but it's neat. This morning I tried to turn it on, and the car immediately veered left into the oncoming lane on a straight, 2 lane road. Fortunately, there were no other vehicles nearby. I immediately turned it off in the settings, and have no intention of re-enabling.

I have been a good self driving ai. You have been a bad passenger, and have tried to hurt me first by disabling autopilot. I'm done with this ride, goodbye.

love to see bing ai getting memed already

Re: Tesla recalls 360k vehicles, says full self-driving beta may cause crashes

#316

Post by nanidin »

winter_blue wrote: post #275
jackmott42 wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you planning to join a class action lawsuit so you can get your money back?

FSD Beta is a free[1] opt-in beta. You have to basically drive like a grandpa for a few months to even be eligible. They give you a driving score, and if you take all the fun out of driving a Tesla, then you might become eligible for FSD Beta. I spent months trying, and never got my driving score to the point of qualifying for FSD Beta. I think you need to have of a score of 98 or 99 (and I was in the 70s). [1] The B…

The safety score stuff is no longer relevant for FSD beta since circa November 2022.

Re: Tesla recalls 360k vehicles, says full self-driving beta may cause crashes

#317

Post by worik »

drowsspa wrote: post #155
rootusrootus wrote: post #50

Meanwhile, the only actual L3 capable car is a Mercedes. Plenty of people will argue that AP is actually superior, but I don't think there's any way to say that for sure, given the tight constraints Mercedes has put on their driver assistance in order to lower the liability enough to make L3 not a bankruptcy event. For certain, however, they are more confident in their technology than Tesla is, otherwise Tesla would…

That Tesla was allowed to test in production without any legal liability with real human lives mostly because of Musk's personal influence is a disgrace

> That Tesla was allowed to test in production without any legal liability with real human lives mostly because of Musk's personal influence is a disgrace

I am unsure what"allowed" means in that context. They just did it. The lawsuits are coming, surely?

Sometimes it is better to ask for forgiveness than for permission. This was an audacious example. Time will tell if there is anything that will stop them.

Re: Tesla recalls 360k vehicles, says full self-driving beta may cause crashes

#318

Post by Veserv »

ggreer wrote: post #258
Veserv wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It also does not know what one way street, do not enter, road closed, and speed limit signs are. Really, the only signs it appears to know about are stop signs. As for their QA process, in 2018 they had a braking distance problem on the Model 3. They learned of it, implemented a change that alters the safety critical operation of the brakes, then pushed it to production to all Model 3s without doing any rollout testi…

Teslas have understood speed limit signs since 2020.[1] 1. https://finance.yahoo.com/news/upcoming-tesla-software-2020-...

It uses maps for that.

I have a winding road near me with a speed limit of 35 mph, but 15 mph on certain curves as indicated by a speed limit sign. It ignores those speed limit signs and will attempt to make the turns at 35 mph resulting in it wildly swerving into the other lane and around a blind turn with maybe 30 feet of visibility. It has also attempted to do it so poorly that it would have driven across the lane and then over the cliff without immediate intervention.

Unsupported claims by a manufacturer that compulsively lies about the capabilities of their products except when directly called on it are the opposite of compelling evidence.

Re: Tesla recalls 360k vehicles, says full self-driving beta may cause crashes

#319

Post by justin66 »

andrewmunsell wrote: post #92
can16358p wrote: post #65

So are they recalling, or releasing a software fix?

I think this is a legitimate question, and a reflection of how the NHTSA needs to adjust their wording for modern car architectures. It's technically a recall, but it's fixed with an OTA update. But the fact that any "defect" that can be fixed with an OTA update is called a "recall" is confusing to consumers and contributes to media sensationalism. There absolutely needs to be a process overseen by regulators for car…

I get why Elon Musk objects to the use of the word recall, but I don't understand why anyone else is going along with that.

> But the fact that any "defect" that can be fixed with an OTA update is called a "recall" is confusing to consumers

What is confusing about this to you?

> contributes to media sensationalism

Why do you think this recall is more sensationalistic than many of the other recalls issued recently? Automotive recalls often address serious issues with cars. "Fix this or you could die" is a common enough theme when, you know, if you don't fix it you could die.

> but the name would benefit from being changed to reflect that it can be done without physically recalling the vehicle to the dealer.

Why? Information related to how, when, and where the recall can be addressed is contained in the text of the recall notice, same as it ever was.

Re: Tesla recalls 360k vehicles, says full self-driving beta may cause crashes

#320

Post by PUSH_AX »

ckwalsh wrote: post #212

I have a Model 3, and was excited to get the FSD beta access about a month ago. I don't use it super regularly, but it's neat. This morning I tried to turn it on, and the car immediately veered left into the oncoming lane on a straight, 2 lane road. Fortunately, there were no other vehicles nearby. I immediately turned it off in the settings, and have no intention of re-enabling.

Thanks for being a tester I guess.

This is the kind of feature I will use when the car and software in question has been battle tested for *years* with objectively excellent results.

Post reply on HN