Video of Tesla FSD almost hitting pedestrian receives DMCA takedown • Hacker News Board

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

#451

Post by maybeOneDay » Mon, Sep 20, 2021, 6:02 PM UTC

kbenson wrote: post #42

maybeOneDay wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Entered the crosswalk section" is a rather euphemistic way of describing "drove directly through where the people were going to be"

That's not what I saw. I saw the car abort it's turn that would have taken it through the crosswalk in front of the people and not impeding them. Still illegal, but a far cry from almost hitting them. The car aborted (or was aborted by the driver) and stopped before finishing it's turn on the road from what I saw, leaving it at about a 45 degree angle instead of the 90 degrees it would eventually reach if it continue…

I think it's the devil in the details here. "Was aborted by the driver" is the key thing, nobody is arguing this error was so bad it could have killed civilians even if the driver was responsible.

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

#452

Post by kbenson » Mon, Sep 20, 2021, 6:35 PM UTC

maybeOneDay wrote: post #451

kbenson wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not what I saw. I saw the car abort it's turn that would have taken it through the crosswalk in front of the people and not impeding them. Still illegal, but a far cry from almost hitting them. The car aborted (or was aborted by the driver) and stopped before finishing it's turn on the road from what I saw, leaving it at about a 45 degree angle instead of the 90 degrees it would eventually reach if it continue…

I think it's the devil in the details here. "Was aborted by the driver" is the key thing, nobody is arguing this error was so bad it could have killed civilians even if the driver was responsible.

> "Was aborted by the driver" is the key thing

Was it though? Look closely, and maybe replay it a few times (I just did, another response to a different comment of mine had made this point so I looked). The car seems to have recovered itself, and the driver grabbed it a second later after it was already correcting.

That it decided it needed to turn all of a sudden us perplexing, and something that should be looked into, but it also went back to a straight path a moment later, either because of pedestrians too close or because of some other reason.

> nobody is arguing this error was so bad it could have killed civilians even if the driver was responsible.

"drove directly through where the people were going to be" most definitely implies that to my eyes. People die for exactly that reason all the time. Maybe I'm confused as to what you're trying to communicate.

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

#453

Post by joshribakoff » Mon, Sep 20, 2021, 9:15 PM UTC

LeoPanthera wrote: post #346

joshribakoff wrote: post #70

I have FSD but not the beta. When cars cut across my lane autopilot will not react for a solid second or so, then proceeds to slam on the brakes after the car is clear. It does not instill confidence to say the least. From my POV it feels like someone put a debounce on the reaction to prevent phantom breaking, to the point the car doesn’t brake when it needs to.

I also have FSD but not the beta and I just wanted to add that my car (a 2020 model X) does not do this. Actually I've always been very impressed with how it smoothly slows to avoid merging cars. Is it possible you have older autopilot hardware that runs different/older software?

I have the latest hardware and software. Note I was not talking about merging cars. I’m talking about someone cutting across my lane from a perpendicular street, so they can enter a lane adjacent to mine.

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

#454

Post by maybeOneDay » Tue, Sep 21, 2021, 9:49 AM UTC

kbenson wrote: post #452

maybeOneDay wrote: post #451

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's the devil in the details here. "Was aborted by the driver" is the key thing, nobody is arguing this error was so bad it could have killed civilians even if the driver was responsible.

> "Was aborted by the driver" is the key thing Was it though? Look closely, and maybe replay it a few times (I just did, another response to a different comment of mine had made this point so I looked). The car seems to have recovered itself, and the driver grabbed it a second later after it was already correcting. That it decided it needed to turn all of a sudden us perplexing, and something that should be looked in…

If you substitute those quoted words into the sentence I was responding to my meaning becomes less dramatic:

> The driver took over way before the car entered the crosswalk section.

+

> "Entered the crosswalk section" is a rather euphemistic way of describing "drove directly through where the people were going to be" reply

=

"The driver took over way before the car drove directly through where the people were going to be."

If you are right that the car stopped itself then it's certainly not as large an error as I had assumed. I think what I was mainly trying to communicate was simply a disagreement with the person I was responding to who implied there was little wrong with this behaviour at all.

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

#455

Post by darkmarmot » Fri, Sep 24, 2021, 11:06 PM UTC

xxs wrote: post #204

darkmarmot wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I recently avoided a startup prospect because they were looking to build a car OS that wasn't hard real-time. The very idea that they're trying to develop such things that might intermittently pause to do some garbage collection is freaking terrifying.

What has hard real time have to do with garbage collection? You can have concurrent GCs (with [sub]millisecond pauses, or no Stop-the-world at all) but you also need 'hard real time' OS to begin with. Heck, even opening files is far from real-time. Then you need: not-blocking data strcutures, not just lock-free - that are much easier to develop. Pretty much you need forward guarantees on any data structure you'd use.

This was an OS that did not support hard real-time GC.