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

Video of Tesla FSD almost hitting pedestrian receives DMCA takedown

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 455 posts

Re: Video of Tesla FSD almost hitting pedestrian receives DMCA takedown

#321

Post by kaba0 »

silisili wrote: post #209
AlotOfReading wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you can set a guaranteed maximum on the delays (regardless of what those limits are), you're hard real-time by definition. The horror is that they weren't building a system that could support those guarantees.

I see, thanks. What if say, a system is written against an indeterminate timed GC like say, Azul or Go's, but code is written in a way that proves GC times never exceed X, whether by theory or stress testing. Is this still seen as 'unguaranteed'?

I think that would at most be soft-real time.

Re: Video of Tesla FSD almost hitting pedestrian receives DMCA takedown

#322

Post by sleepybrett »

simion314 wrote: post #236
Draiken wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Genuinely curious: how would you even go about advancing autonomous driving without testing it in the streets? I'm absolutely certain that they've attempted to simulate millions of hours of driving, yet this odd behavior happened in real life, which now can be studied and fixed. If we never had the software on the wild, how would you ever really test it?

>Genuinely curious: how would you even go about advancing autonomous driving without testing it in the streets? Genuine response: 1 don't let customers do the testing, especially if you don't train them (I mean real training about failures not PR videos and tweets and some small letter manual with disclaimers) 2 use employees, train drivers to test, have some cameras to check the driver to make sure he pays attention…

IMO there is so much 'machine learning' in the tesla self driving system is there any way to know a bug is 'fixed' other than just running it through a probably totally boring set of tests that doesn't even approach covering all scenarios?

Re: Video of Tesla FSD almost hitting pedestrian receives DMCA takedown

#324

Post by flavius29663 »

angelzen wrote: post #271
margalabargala wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

99% perfect is not good enough, it's horrifyingly bad for a car on public roads. When I drive, I don't spend 1 minute plowing into pedestrians for every 1 hour and 39 minutes I spend driving normally. If a FSD Tesla spends just 99% of its time doing boring, non-click-worthy things, that is itself interesting in how dangerous it is. To your point, I'm definitely interested in knowing how many minutes of boring driving…

99% is a an very rough colloquial estimate meaning 'the vast majority of the time' to drive the point. Could well be 99.999999%. What really matters is how it compares with human performance, I don't have data to do that comparison. The only ones that can make the comparison are Tesla, modulo believing data from a megacorp in the wake of the VW scandal.

FYI, that 99.999999 number you quoted is still bad. It means around 30 minutes of the machine actively trying to kill you or others while driving on public roads. I assumed a person driving 2 hours a day for a year.

FSD should not be allowed on the road, or if it is it should be labeled as what it really is: lane assist.

Re: Video of Tesla FSD almost hitting pedestrian receives DMCA takedown

#325

Post by josephcsible »

majormajor wrote: post #316
Draiken wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course it's not fine in that sense. What I mean is that you don't see a headline on news outlets or twitter hashtags trending for every drunk driver fatality or crash that happens. Which for me tells that collectively, we are fine with it. We accept it as ordinary, as crazy as it may be.

I regularly see "traffic collision kills [person or people]" stories in my local newspaper. I don't know if it's every one, it might be restricted to the extremely stupid (wrong-way on the highway, drunk, or excessively-high-speed) but "someone got killed" is certainly a common story in the news here. I've certainly seen many more local "person dies in car accident" non-brand-related stories than "person dies in Tesl…

The point is those stories remain local news, but whenever a Tesla is involved, it becomes national news.

Re: Video of Tesla FSD almost hitting pedestrian receives DMCA takedown

#326

Post by ChicagoBoy11 »

_moof wrote: post #297
ChicagoBoy11 wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've made this argument here a few times and am always shot down, but I think its important to highlight that the airline industry has an extremely robust history of automation and HCI in critical transportation scenarios and it seems to me that all the lessons that we have learned have been chucked out the window with self-driving cars. Being able to effectively reason about what the automation is doing is such an i…

Hi, aerospace software engineer and flight instructor here. I think you get shot down because the problems just aren't comparable. While I agree that there may be some philosophical transfer from aircraft automation, the environments are so radically different that it's difficult to imagine any substantial technological transfer. Aircraft operate in an extremely controlled environment that is almost embarrassingly si…

I'm actually in complete agreement! What sticks out to me is your assessment that the flight environment is "embarrassingly simple from an automation perspective", which I agree as well (as compared to cars). And yet despite that simplicity and decades at it, we still run it with an incredible robust infrastructure to have a human oversee the tech. We have super robust procedures for checking and cross-checking the automation, defined minimus and tolerances for when the automation needs to cease to operate the aircraft, training solely focused on operating the automation etc. But with cars, we somehow are super comfortable with cars severely altering behavior in a split-second, super poor driver insight or feedback on the automation, no training at all, with a human behind the wheel who in every marketing material known to man has been encouraged to trust the system far more than the tech (or law), would ever have you prudently do.

I'm with you that they are super different, and that the auto case is likely much, much harder. But I see that and can't help but think that the path we should be following here is one with a much greater and healthy skepticism (and far greater human agency) in this automation journey than we are currently thinking is needed.

Re: Video of Tesla FSD almost hitting pedestrian receives DMCA takedown

#327

Post by kaba0 »

kempbellt wrote: post #240
aaroninsf wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Something I do not understand: there are keys difference between automation in e.g. aircraft, and what Tesla at al are failing at, e.g., how constrained the environment is; and what the exposure is to anomalous conditions is; and what the opportunity window usually is to turn control back over to a human. The thing I don't understand is, we have a much more comparable environment in ground travel: federal highways. I…

Even lower-level automation for highway driving would be super useful. I would appreciate a simple "keep-distance-wrt-speed" function for bumper-to-bumper situations. Where worst case scenario, you rear-end a car at relatively low speeds. I'd happily keep control over steering in this situation and just keep my foot over the brake, though lane-keep assist would probably be handy here as well. A couple radar sensors/c…

Also, what could possibly save the most lives: simply ML the hell out of people’s faces to notice when they are getting sleepy. That’s almost trivial and should be mandatory in a few years.

A more advanced problem would be safely stopping in case the driver falls asleep/looses consciousness, eg. on a highway. that short amount of self-driving is less error-prone than the alternative.

Re: Video of Tesla FSD almost hitting pedestrian receives DMCA takedown

#328

Post by kaba0 »

liber8 wrote: post #239
ChuckNorris89 wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>On my first Tesla, autopilot would regularly try to kill you by running you into a gore point or median (literally once per trip on my usual commute) And people paid money for this privilege?

To be fair, it still felt like magic. My car would drive me 20 miles without me really having to do anything, other than make sure it didn't kill me at an interchange. And I'm now trying to remember, but I think autopilot was initially free (or at least was included with every car I looked at, so it didn't seem like an extra fee). Auotpilot is now standard on all Teslas, but FSD is an extra $10k, which IMO is a joke.

Humans are ridiculously bad at overseeing something that mostly works. That’s why it is insanely more dangerous.

Also, the problem is “easy” for the general case, but the edge cases are almost singularity-requiring. The former is robot vacuum level, the latter is out of our reach for now.

Re: Video of Tesla FSD almost hitting pedestrian receives DMCA takedown

#329

Post by ChicagoBoy11 »

ReidZB wrote: post #227
ChicagoBoy11 wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've made this argument here a few times and am always shot down, but I think its important to highlight that the airline industry has an extremely robust history of automation and HCI in critical transportation scenarios and it seems to me that all the lessons that we have learned have been chucked out the window with self-driving cars. Being able to effectively reason about what the automation is doing is such an i…

> Being able to effectively reason about what the automation is doing is such an important part of why these technologies have been so successful in flight, and examples like this illustrate how far off we are to something like that in cars. Is that actually the case, though? I would hope, although perhaps I'm mistaken, that the developers of the actual self-driving systems would be able to effectively reason about w…

They certainly are trying very hard, as far as I can tell. Tesla's efforts on data collection and simulation of their algorithm are incredibly impressive. But part of why it is so necessary is that there is an opaqueness to the ML decision-making that I don't think anyone has quite effectively cracked. I do wonder, for instance, if the decision to go solely with the cameras and no LIDAR will prove to ultimately be a failure. The camera-only solution requires the ML model to accurately account for all obstacles, for example. As crude, and certainly non-human as it is, a LIDAR with super crude rules for "dont hit an actual object" would have even at this point prevented some of their more widely publicized fatal accidents which relied on the algorithm alone.

Re: Video of Tesla FSD almost hitting pedestrian receives DMCA takedown

#330

Post by dotancohen »

ChicagoBoy11 wrote: post #142
ChrisKnott wrote: post #63

Maximise the video and watch the left hand HUD pane from 0:10 to 0:11. The dotted black line coming from the front of the car (which I am assuming is the intended route) quickly snaps from straight ahead, to a hair pin right, to a normal right turn. Ignoring the fact that the right turn happened to be into a pedestrian crossing with people on it - what was the car even trying to do? The sat-nav shows it should have j…

I've made this argument here a few times and am always shot down, but I think its important to highlight that the airline industry has an extremely robust history of automation and HCI in critical transportation scenarios and it seems to me that all the lessons that we have learned have been chucked out the window with self-driving cars. Being able to effectively reason about what the automation is doing is such an i…

Why didn't you post this as a top-level comment? What does this have to do with the post you are replying to?
Post reply on HN