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

441–450 of 1001 posts

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

#441

Post by geoka9 »

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…

> It didn't merge left to make room for vehicles merging onto the highway. The vehicles then tried to cut in. The system should have avoided an unsafe situation like this in the first place.

I've been on the receiving end of this with the offender being a Tesla so many times that I figured it must be FSD.

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

#442

Post by Aloisius »

gambiting wrote: post #251
AlchemistCamp wrote: post #226

The interesting question is how good self-driving has to be before people tolerate it. It's clear that having half the casualty rate per distance traveled of the median human driver isn't acceptable. How about a quarter? Or a tenth? Accidents caused by human drivers are one of the largest causes of injury and death, but they're not newsworthy the way an accident involving automated driving is. It's all too easy to se…

>>. How about a quarter? Or a tenth? The answer is zero. An airplane autopilot has increased the overall safety of airplanes by several orders of magnitude compared to human pilots, but literally no errors in its operation are tolerated, whether they are deadly or not. The exact same standard has to apply to cars or any automated machine for that matter. If there is any issue discovered in any car with this tech then…

Autopilots aren't held to a zero error standard let alone a zero accident standard.

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

#443

Post by peterdsharpe »

gambiting wrote: post #251
AlchemistCamp wrote: post #226

The interesting question is how good self-driving has to be before people tolerate it. It's clear that having half the casualty rate per distance traveled of the median human driver isn't acceptable. How about a quarter? Or a tenth? Accidents caused by human drivers are one of the largest causes of injury and death, but they're not newsworthy the way an accident involving automated driving is. It's all too easy to se…

>>. How about a quarter? Or a tenth? The answer is zero. An airplane autopilot has increased the overall safety of airplanes by several orders of magnitude compared to human pilots, but literally no errors in its operation are tolerated, whether they are deadly or not. The exact same standard has to apply to cars or any automated machine for that matter. If there is any issue discovered in any car with this tech then…

> literally no errors in its operation are tolerated

Aircraft designer here, this is not true. We typically certify to <1 catastrophic failure per 1e9 flight hours. Not zero.

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

#444

Post by gamblor956 »

valval wrote: post #188
gamblor956 wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every year Musk personally flies enough in his private jet to undo the emissions savings of over 100,000 EVs... Remember that every time you get in your Tesla that you're just a carbon offset for a spoiled billionaire.

As opposed to all the other execs whose companies aren’t a force to combat climate change and still fly their private jets. But don’t get me wrong, anyone and everyone can fly their private jets if they can afford such things. They will already have generated enough taxes at that point that they’re offsetting thousands or millions of Prius drivers.

As opposed to all the other execs

Yes, actually.

Other execs fly as needed because they recognize that in this wondrous age of the internet that teleconferencing can replace most in-person meetings. Somehow, only a supposed technology genius like Elon Musk thinks that in-person meetings required for everything.

Other execs also don't claim to be trying to save the planet while doing everything in their power to exploit its resources or destroy natural habitats.

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

#445

Post by UltraSane »

valval wrote: post #338
UltraSane wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"It makes no difference if a person is in the seat." It does when Musk is claiming that Tesla is going to sell a car with no steering wheel! The current Tesla FSD fails so often that a human HAS to be in the driver seat ready to take over at any moment. You really don't understand the enormous difference between the current crappy level 2 Tesla FSD and Waymo's level 4 system?

The difference is that Tesla has a general algorithm, while Waymo is hard coding scenarios. I never really got why people bring Waymo up every time Tesla’s FSD is mentioned. Waymo isn’t competing with Tesla’s vision.

The difference is that Waymo has a very well engineered system using vision, LIDAR, and millimeter wave RADAR that works well enough in limited areas to provide tens of thousands of actual driver-less rides. Tesla has a vision only system that sucks so bad a human has to be ready to take over for it at any time like a parent monitoring a toddler near stairs.

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

#446

Post by UltraSane »

porphyra wrote: post #392
gitaarik wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just like AGI and the year of the Linux desktop ;P

Honestly LLMs were a big step towards AGI, and gaming on Linux is practically flawless now. Just played through Black Myth Wukong with no issues out of the box.

LLMs are to AGI

as

A ladder is to getting to orbit.

I can seem LLMs serving as a kind of memory for an AGI but something fundamentally different will be needed for true reasoning and continues self-improvement.

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

#447

Post by davidcalloway »

dekhn wrote: post #400
sangnoir wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't have a right of way over a slow moving vehicle that merged ahead of you. Most ramps are not long enough to allow merging traffic to accelerate to highway speeds before merging, so many drivers free up the right-most lane for this purpose (by merging left)

Since a number of people are giving pushback, can you point to any (California-oriented) driving instructions consistent with this? I'm not seeing any. I see people saying "it's curteous", but when I'm driving I'm managing hundreds of variables and changing lanes is often risky, given motorcycles lanesplitting at high speed (quite common).

Definitely not California but literally the first part of traffic law in Germany says that caution and consideration are required from all partaking in traffic.

Germans are not known for poor driving.

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

#448

Post by dietsche »

amenhotep wrote: post #201
Kirby64 wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Road obstacles are static and can be seen by not “out driving your headlights”. Animals flinging themselves into the road cannot, in many instances.

You are responding in a thread about a person saying they were driving at 60 when the deer only became visible "due to terrain" at 100 feet away, and therefore hitting it is no reflection on their skill or choices as a driver. I suppose we're meant to interpret charitably here, but it really seems to me like there is a big difference between the scenario described and the one you're talking about, where the deer real…

op here. you nailed it on the head. also, the car started breaking before i could!

incidentally, i’ve also had the tesla dodge a deer successfully!

autopilot has improved in BIG ways over the past 2 years. went 700 miles in one day on autopilot thru the mountains. no issues at all.

that said expecting perfection from a machine or a human is a fools errand.

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

#449

Post by dekhn »

davidcalloway wrote: post #447
dekhn wrote: post #400

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since a number of people are giving pushback, can you point to any (California-oriented) driving instructions consistent with this? I'm not seeing any. I see people saying "it's curteous", but when I'm driving I'm managing hundreds of variables and changing lanes is often risky, given motorcycles lanesplitting at high speed (quite common).

Definitely not California but literally the first part of traffic law in Germany says that caution and consideration are required from all partaking in traffic. Germans are not known for poor driving.

Right- but the "consideration" here is the person merging onto the highway actually paying attention and adjusting, rather than pointedly not even looking (this is a very common merging behavior where I life). Changing lanes isn't without risk even on a clear day with good visibility. Seems like my suggestion of slowing down or speeding up makes perfect sense because it's less risky overall, and is still being considerate.

Note that I personally do change lanes at times when it's safe, convenient, I am experienced with the intersection, and the merging driver is being especially unaware.

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

#450

Post by UltraSane »

jjmarr wrote: post #353
UltraSane wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It "works" if you mean often does incredibly stupid and dangerous things and requires a person to be ready to take over for it at any moment to prevent a crash. So far no Tesla car has ever legally driven even a single mile without a person in the driver's seat.

And? How does that make Elon Musk a con artist? It's possible to physically get in a Tesla and have it drive you from point A to point B. That's a self-driving car. You're saying it's unreliable, makes mistakes, and can be used illegally. That doesn't mean the car can't drive itself, just that it doesn't do a very good job at "self-driving"

"How does that make Elon Musk a con artist?"

Because since 2014 he has made wildly unrealistic claims that he is smart enough to know were BS.

December 2015: “We’re going to end up with complete autonomy, and I think we will have complete autonomy in approximately two years.”

January 2016 In ~2 years, summon should work anywhere connected by land & not blocked by borders, eg you're in LA and the car is in NY

June 2016: “I really consider autonomous driving a solved problem, I think we are less than two years away from complete autonomy, safer than humans.”

October 2016 By the end of next year, said Musk, Tesla would demonstrate a fully autonomous drive from, say, a home in L.A., to Times Square ... without the need for a single touch, including the charging.

"A 2016 video that Tesla used to promote its self-driving technology was staged to show capabilities like stopping at a red light and accelerating at a green light that the system did not have, according to testimony by a senior engineer."

January 2017 The sensor hardware and compute power required for at least level 4 to level 5 autonomy has been in every Tesla produced since October of last year.

March 2017: “I think that [you will be able to fall asleep in a Tesla] in about two years.”

May 2017 Update on the coast to coast autopilot demo? - Still on for end of year. Just software limited. Any Tesla car with HW2 (all cars built since Oct last year) will be able to do this.

March 2018 I think probably by end of next year [end of 2019] self-driving will encompass essentially all modes of driving and be at least 100% to 200% safer than a person.

February 2019 We will be feature complete full self driving this year. The car will be able to find you in a parking lot, pick you up, take you all the way to your destination without an intervention this year. I'm certain of that. That is not a question mark. It will be essentially safe to fall asleep and wake up at their destination towards the end of next year

April 2019 We expect to be feature complete in self driving this year, and we expect to be confident enough from our standpoint to say that we think people do not need to touch the wheel and can look out the window sometime probably around the second quarter of next year.

May 2019 We could have gamed an LA/NY Autopilot journey last year, but when we do it this year, everyone with Tesla Full Self-Driving will be able to do it too

December 2020 I'm extremely confident that Tesla will have level five next year, extremely confident, 100%

January 2021 FSD will be capable of Level 5 autonomy by the end of 2021

Post reply on HN