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

California passes law banning Tesla from calling software FSD

teslarati.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

441–450 of 672 posts

Re: California passes law banning Tesla from calling software FSD

#441

Post by yucky »

sangnoir wrote: post #429
yucky wrote: post #358

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Should have happened sooner. Which tells you everything you need to know about California's government.

What, that they are #1 in understanding the self-driving technological landscape? They remain more responsive than the other 49 states.

Their timing tells you what you need to know. This isn't new information, their decision is motivated by something other than a new set of facts on self driving vehicles.

So they were wrong, and they stayed wrong (for money) long after they knew they were wrong. And now that it's convenient they've reversed course. Sounds like the other 49 states was right to be cautious.

Re: California passes law banning Tesla from calling software FSD

#442

Post by janalsncm »

rzimmerman wrote: post #323
dreamcompiler wrote: post #307

Should have happened sooner. I love my Model Y. It's the most fun car I've ever owned. It's also the most comfortable on long road trips and I can sleep in it in climate-controlled comfort without generating a gas that could kill me. I leave the house every morning with a full tank and never have to stop at a gas station. And my cost per mile is 1/4 what it was with an ICE car. I just wish Tesla would focus on this s…

I also love my Model Y. It’s by far the best car I’ve ever owned or driven. But the software has stagnated in favor of “FSD” beta releases. Autopilot on freeways is great. I use it all the time and it works. I wish Tesla would focus on getting that to a level 3-type system - something where I can take my hands off the wheel and just be ready to take over after 10-15 seconds. It feels close enough that it could be don…

> Elon’s claim of “humans drive with eyes so a car can drive with cameras” is naive.

Humans drive with our eyes and we’re pretty bad at driving. We should want systems with redundancy and using multiple modalities so that a car crash isn’t an accident, it’s a choice.

Re: California passes law banning Tesla from calling software FSD

#443

Post by burnished »

logifail wrote: post #424
rzimmerman wrote: post #323

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I also love my Model Y. It’s by far the best car I’ve ever owned or driven. But the software has stagnated in favor of “FSD” beta releases. Autopilot on freeways is great. I use it all the time and it works. I wish Tesla would focus on getting that to a level 3-type system - something where I can take my hands off the wheel and just be ready to take over after 10-15 seconds. It feels close enough that it could be don…

> But the software has stagnated [..] I've only owned ICE vehicles (lifetime total: 3, 2 of which are parked outside right now), and have only ever rented ICE vehicles (lifetime total: several hundred, the latest of which is in the long-stay at London Heathrow right now...) I'm unable to get my head around talk of a vehicle's software "stagnating"? AFAIK none of the vehicles I've ever driven had OTA updates, and from…

That isn’t ICE vs EV that’s new vs old

Re: California passes law banning Tesla from calling software FSD

#444

Post by dagmx »

rzimmerman wrote: post #323
dreamcompiler wrote: post #307

Should have happened sooner. I love my Model Y. It's the most fun car I've ever owned. It's also the most comfortable on long road trips and I can sleep in it in climate-controlled comfort without generating a gas that could kill me. I leave the house every morning with a full tank and never have to stop at a gas station. And my cost per mile is 1/4 what it was with an ICE car. I just wish Tesla would focus on this s…

I also love my Model Y. It’s by far the best car I’ve ever owned or driven. But the software has stagnated in favor of “FSD” beta releases. Autopilot on freeways is great. I use it all the time and it works. I wish Tesla would focus on getting that to a level 3-type system - something where I can take my hands off the wheel and just be ready to take over after 10-15 seconds. It feels close enough that it could be don…

To add to one of your points, The Tesla auto park is legitimately awful. https://youtu.be/nsb2XBAIWyA

Every time we try it for a spot to reverse into, the linear regression it must be doing is so apparent. It violently tries to turn left and right rapidly trying to straighten itself.

It works better for parallel spots but often gives up half way because it made a bad angle choice.

We’ve tried it in various models in addition to our own Model Y. They’re just embarrassingly bad at it.

Re: California passes law banning Tesla from calling software FSD

#445

Post by bruce511 »

endisneigh wrote: post #16

Mainstream full self driving would just create massive traffic and gridlock - pointless in the end. The induced demand would outweigh the benefits. States are better off acknowledging that sprawling car dependent cities are not sustainable. High frequency busses in the interim with rail transit is the real solution. Current self driving technology plus some key infrastructure changes with dedicated bus lanes and prio…

>>High frequency busses in the interim with rail transit is the real solution.

Mass transit systems only really work in high density areas.

This is because the time taken to stop (pasengers on and off) then go is high. So the distance matters less than the number of stops.

To be appealing your nearest stop should be within a half mile or so of your house. If a bus can carry 60 people, and only one or two people get in and off at a time, then it takes say 30 stops to fill up, or empty. That makes overall travel speed really slow.

Contrast with a dense city - here big groups get on and off at every stop. So a bus needs fewer stops in a route, while being useful to lots of people.

Cars work in low-density areas because they typically "stop" only twice, once to load, once to unload.

So absolutely yes, we need better public transport, but that ideally means living and working in high density areas. (which for most(?) US people is undesirable.

Re: California passes law banning Tesla from calling software FSD

#446

Post by nradov »

okwubodu wrote: post #416
rootusrootus wrote: post #387

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like Uber? Real FSD would just give us the same result as ride sharing, but on a far grander scale. In other words, gridlock.

Isn’t most traffic caused by cascading human error? I assumed true FSD would be a mesh net where every car broadcasts its next move to its neighbors.

The NHTSA has been working on vehicle-to-vehicle communication for some time but we're still many years away from having it widely implemented.

https://www.nhtsa.gov/technology-innovation/vehicle-vehicle-...

Re: California passes law banning Tesla from calling software FSD

#447

Post by dagmx »

yucky wrote: post #441
sangnoir wrote: post #429

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What, that they are #1 in understanding the self-driving technological landscape? They remain more responsive than the other 49 states.

Their timing tells you what you need to know. This isn't new information, their decision is motivated by something other than a new set of facts on self driving vehicles. So they were wrong, and they stayed wrong (for money) long after they knew they were wrong. And now that it's convenient they've reversed course. Sounds like the other 49 states was right to be cautious.

This is illogical. You can’t simultaneously criticize California for taking so long to do this, while praising other states for being more cautious by not doing it.

You’re also ascribing some laterite motive that you fail to provide a description of.

Post reply on HN