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

411–420 of 1001 posts

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

#411

Post by ben_w »

eric_cc wrote: post #382
jvanderbot wrote: post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have yet to see a difference. I let it highway drive for an hour and it cut off a semi, coming within 9 to 12 inches of the bumper for no reason. I heard about that one believe me. It got stuck in a side street trying to get to a target parking lot, shaking the wheel back and forth. It's no better so far and this is the first day.

Is it possible you have a lemon? Genuine question. I’ve had nothing but positive experiences with FSD for the last several months and many thousands of miles.

I've had nothing but positive experiences with ChatGPT-4o, that doesn't make people wrong to criticise either as modelling their training data too much and generalising too little when they need to use it for something where the inference domain is too far outside the training domain.

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

#412

Post by JumpinJack_Cash »

HaZeust wrote: post #405
JumpinJack_Cash wrote: post #343

Unpopular take: Even with perfect FSD which is much better than the average human driver (say having the robotic equivalent of a Lewis Hamilton in every car) the productivity and health gains won't be as great as people anticipate. Sure way less traffic deaths but the spike in depression especially among males would be something very big. Life events are much outside of our control, having a 5000lbs thing that can ge…

As a sports car owner, I see where you're coming from -- but MANY do not. We are the 10%, the other 90% see their vehicle as an A-B tool, and you can clearly see that displayed with the average, utilitarian car models that the vast majority of the public buy. There will be no "spike" in depression; simply put, there's not enough people that care about their car, how it gets from point A to point B, or what contributi…

Maybe they don't care about their car to be a sports car but they surely enjoy some pleasure out of the control of being at the helm of something powerful like a car (even though it's not a sports car)

Also even people in small cars they think a lot while driving already, and they also communicate, how much more productive they could be with FSD?

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

#413

Post by Uzza »

throwaway562if1 wrote: post #390
frabjoused wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

AIUI the numbers are for accidents where FSD is in control. Which means if it does a turn into oncoming traffic and the driver yanks the wheel or slams the brakes 500ms before collision, it's not considered a crash during FSD.

That is not correct. Tesla counts any accident within 5 seconds of Autopilot/FSD turning off as the system being involved. Regulators extend that period to 30 seconds, and Tesla must comply with that when reporting to them.

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

#414

Post by dchichkov »

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…

> I'm grateful to be getting a car from another manufacturer this year.

I'm curious, what is the alternative that you are considering? I've been delaying an upgrade to electric for some time. And now, a car manufacturer that is contributing to the making of another Jan 6th, 2021 is not an option, in my opinion.

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

#415

Post by Uzza »

bastawhiz wrote: post #274
frabjoused wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Is Tesla required to report system failures or the vehicle damaging itself? How do we know they're not optimizing for the benchmark (what they're legally required to report)?

All manufacturers have for some time been required by regulators to report any accident where an autonomous or partially autonomous system was active within 30 seconds of an accident.

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

#416

Post by Retric »

concordDance wrote: post #407
TheCleric wrote: post #374

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Lots of people are asking how good the self driving has to be before we tolerate it. There’s a simple answer to this. As soon as it’s good enough for Tesla to accept liability for accidents. Until then if Tesla doesn’t trust it, why should I?

Whats the current total liability cost for all Tesla drivers? The average for all USA cars seems to be around $2000/year, so even if FSD was half as dangerous Tesla would still be paying $1000/year equivalent (not sure how big insurance margins are, assuming nominal) per car. Now, if legally the driver could avoid paying insurance for the few times they want/need to drive themselves (e.g. snow? Dunno what FSD support…

Liability alone isn’t nearly that high.

Car insurance payments include people stealing your car, uninsured motorists, rental cars, and other issues not the drivers fault. Further insurance payments also include profits for the insurance company, advertising, billing, and other overhead from running a business.

Also, if Tesla was taking on these risks you’d expect your insurance costs to drop.

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

#417

Post by pbasista »

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…

> I'm grateful to be getting a car from another manufacturer this year.

I have no illusions about Tesla's ability to deliver an unsupervised self-driving car any time soon. However, as far as I understand, their autosteer system, in spite of all its flaws, is still the best out there.

Do you have any reason to believe that there actually is something better?

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

#418

Post by Retric »

rKarpinski wrote: post #402
Retric wrote: post #389

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People walking on freeways may be rare from the perspective of an individual driver but not a self driving system operating on millions of vehicles.

What does that have to do with the original article's misleading title?

I don’t think it’s misleading. It’s a tile not some hundred word description of what exactly happened.

Calling them motorists would definitely be misleading by comparison. Using the simple “fatal crash” of the linked title implies the other people might in be responsible which is misleading.

Using accident but saying Tesla was at fault could open them up to liability and therefore isn’t an option.

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

#419

Post by concordDance »

throwaway562if1 wrote: post #390
frabjoused wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

AIUI the numbers are for accidents where FSD is in control. Which means if it does a turn into oncoming traffic and the driver yanks the wheel or slams the brakes 500ms before collision, it's not considered a crash during FSD.

Several people in this thread have been saying this or similar. It's incorrect, from Tesla:

"To ensure our statistics are conservative, we count any crash in which Autopilot was deactivated within 5 seconds before impact"

https://www.tesla.com/en_gb/VehicleSafetyReport

Situations which inevitably cause a crash more than 5 seconds later seem like they would be extremely rare.

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

#420

Post by Laaas »

jeffbee wrote: post #393
modeless wrote: post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tesla jumped the gun on the FSD free trial earlier this year. It was nowhere near good enough at the time. Most people who tried it for the first time probably share your opinion. That said, there is a night and day difference between FSD 12.3 that you experienced earlier this year and the latest version 12.6. It will still make mistakes from time to time but the improvement is massive and obvious. More importantly,…

If I had a dime for every hackernews who commented that FSD version X was like a revelation compared to FSD version X-ε I'd have like thirty bucks. I will grant you that every release has surprisingly different behaviors. Here's an unintentionally hilarious meta-post on the subject https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29531915

Doesn’t this just mean it’s improving rapidly which is a good thing?
Post reply on HN