381–390 of 410 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In America, you fail the second you apologize or take accountability. Ignoring criticism and deflecting all the time gets you further, as it is part of the game. Unfortunately, this is just an accepted social science-y thing at this point. It is a very much cultural thing of the past couple of decades.
Do you have sources?
I use Tesla FSD 99% of the time. I recently drove from Austin to Florida and back. The only time I had to take over was for road debris on the highway. Off the highway it’s very good about avoiding it. My guess is Tesla has not been focusing on this issue as it's not needed for robotaxi for phase one.
Your experience supports the other data, it’s not full self driving.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, I have to admit that your friend has a point. Humans are bad at reacting quickly and correctly to unexpected situations, and some debris large enough to damage your car showing up from out of nowhere after several hours of boring driving along a largely straight highway with little traffic is definitely one of these situations. But a self-driving system worth its salt should always be alert, scanning the road a…
The humans in the vehicle spotted it fine, and we should not tolerate self-driving systems that are only as good as the worst of us.
Sad to see HN to give up to mob mentality.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Indeed... You can see the driver reaching for the wheel, presumably he saw it coming, and would have hit the breaks. He left the car to do its thing thinking it knows better than him... maybe.
> presumably he saw it coming Not presumably, we know for sure since they are talking about it for a long time before impact. The point of the experiment was to let the car drive so they let it drive and crash, but we know the humans saw it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Humans routinely drive from LA to NYC without wrecking their cars. In fact, that's the normal outcome.
I've been driving on local and highway roads for 30 years now and I have never come across a piece of debris so large that driving over it would damage my car. Seeing that video, I don't have high confidence that I would have dodged that hazard - maybe 70% sure? The thing is, usually there is plenty of traffic ahead that acts very obviously different in situations like this that helps as well. All that to say that I…
Really? The people in the video clearly identify a large stationary object in the road a good 7 seconds before hitting it. You don't exactly need lightning quick reflexes to avoid hitting something in that scenario. Maybe more importantly, the Tesla did not seem to see the object at all at any distance. Even if you don't think you could have avoided it, do you think you would have entirely failed to see it and driven right into it at full speed? Because that's what the Tesla did.
Such an event might not be super common, but that doesn't make it an unfair criticism of Telsa's self-driving. Even if they've never seen a large object in the road before or react the wrong way, humans are generally capable of recognizing it when it happens and at least considering it's something they should take action on. The fact that Tesla can't do the same makes this an area where FSD is categorically worse than humans, and "avoiding stuff in the road" feels like an area where that's not a good deficit even if there generally isn't stuff in the road.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes. Humans would. Which is why the car should be able to handle the impact. My honda civic has had worse without issue. The suspension should be beefy enough to absorb the impact with, at worst, a blown tire. That the car has broken suspension says to me that teslas are still too fragile, biuld more like performance cars than everyday drivers.
With millions of Teslas on the road one would think if that was true we would have heard something by now. My absolute worst car quality wise ever was a Honda Accord. And I owned shitty cars including a Fiat. My most reliable car was a Honda Civic before I “upgraded” to a brand new Accord. I abuse my Tesla and so far no issues driving in one of the worst roads in the country. I must hit 100 potholes per month and ble…
A company actively covering up things that egregious can only be assumed to be doing things even worse regularly.
[1] https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/tesla-mu...
Anecdotal: I am surprised how the basic Tesla autopilot often cannot even read the speed limit signs correctly. In perfect lighting conditions. It just misses a lot of them. And it does not understand the traffic rules enough to know when the speed limit ends. I know that the basic autopilot is a completely different system than the so-called FSD. But equipped with that experience from the basic autopilot, it does no…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you don't disagree on the characterization of the technical details, then you must realize how very fair it is for us to criticize the system for failing in the exact way it's predicted to fail. We don't need 1000 more trials to know that the system is technically flawed.
What if there is no debris the other 999 times, and the system works fine? The video does not give me that information as a prospective Tesla customer. This looks like a fluke to me.
Now you can certainly argue that "objects in the road" is a category of failure mode you don't expect to happen often enough to care about, but it's still a technical flaw in the FSD system. I'd also argue it points to a broader problem with FSD because it doesn't seem like it should have been all that hard for the Tesla to see and avoid the object since the humans saw it in plenty of time. The fact that it didn't raises questions for me about how well the system works in general.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's almost entirely a product/economic gamble. Basically: "How do we get self-driving into millions of regular consumer cars without doubling the price by adding expensive sensors and redesigning the vehicle around huge chunky sensors" Waymo is focused on Taxis for a reason because it's likely going to be unaffordable, except to people driving Lambos. But that also may be fine for a big chunk of the public who don't…
Is LIDAR full of unobtainium? Is there some fundamental first-principles reason that the cost of LIDAR can't go down by orders of magnitude? Isn't that kind of reasoning from first principles what Elon's genius was supposed to be about, like with cost of accessing space? But apparently he thinks a spinning laser is always going to cost six figures?
Back then Comma AI did the same thing choosing cheap cameras, Geohot the founder is similar to Elon being someone who prefers bucking trends and taking risks. He made a good public argument around that time for using Cameras and betting on more data = better output. And I guess Elon thought so too. It also happened to involve less hardware engineering and let them focus on software. Which is an easier decision as a business.
If it doesn’t work out I’m sure it will die a quick death and LIDAR will take over. State regulators won’t tolerate it long.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Humans routinely drive from LA to NYC without wrecking their cars. In fact, that's the normal outcome.
I'd imagine the highway doesn't normally have a debris that's nearly the same color of the surface of a highway.