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

Tesla recalls 360k vehicles, says full self-driving beta may cause crashes

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

481–490 of 864 posts

Re: Tesla recalls 360k vehicles, says full self-driving beta may cause crashes

#481

Post by clnq »

diebeforei485 wrote: post #190
buildbot wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? It involves a safety system! That needs to be tracked publicly and updated! Nothing more than an OTA - does not mean much when everything is fly by wire and a bug could mean your car does not stop accelerating or something.

Recall implies something being returned. This should be called a mandatory software patch, or something like that. The problem is Tesla owners repeatedly see "recall" to mean "software update", so this might lead to a lot of confusion if a physical recall is actually required in the future.

It seems to me that calling it a "recall" emphasises the severity of the problem, which might make it easier to argue that a lot is being done for customer safety to the interested authorities. But I don't think Tesla wants this to be seen more than an OTA update from the perspective of their customers (at least those who ignore Tesla news).

I had a VW car that was "recalled" shortly following the emissions scandal. The dealership asked me to come in for a free software update related to emissions. So you can say it's a "recall" to the lawmakers but call it a "free software update" to the user.

Re: Tesla recalls 360k vehicles, says full self-driving beta may cause crashes

#482

Post by JoshCole »

freejazz wrote: post #473
JoshCole wrote: post #462

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree that people who don't cite the evidence are ignoring the evidence? Are you trying to say I'm doing that by pointing to relevant datasets which track the number of accidents and the probability of injury? If so, why are there accidents tracked in the datasets such that the rate can be calculated? This kind of contradicts the claim that I'm asking to ignore, but I definitely agree that other people are ignoring…

No, your argument is just ridiculous. The standard isn't and shouldn't be how much they get right. It should be what they get wrong and how they do that. I completely disagree with your point, and phrasing it obtusely just makes you obnoxious from a conversational standpoint.

My position is that we ought to include assertions backed by the evidence. Your views probably do have evidence that supports them. I want to see the evidence you are using, because I think that is important.

I'm not sorry that annoys you, because it shouldn't.

Re: Tesla recalls 360k vehicles, says full self-driving beta may cause crashes

#483

Post by enslavedrobot »

pxx wrote: post #152
enslavedrobot wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have the same experience. I think if there was more transparency in the data around FSD related accidents the conversation would be different. The last evidence we have is Tesla stating that there have been no fatalities in 60 million miles of driving under FSD. Pretty good so far.

Regardless of whether or not that's true, that's also not the impressive number you think it is. Human-driven cars have a fatality rate of about 1 per 100 million miles travelled, and that's including drunk drivers, inattentive drivers, and all environments, not just the ones people are comfortable turning on these features in.

Yes. The data collection continues. But this initial report indicates that FSD is probably not massively worse that a human.

Re: Tesla recalls 360k vehicles, says full self-driving beta may cause crashes

#484

Post by kibwen »

starbase wrote: post #384
Tostino wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are plenty of other places you could go travel to where you get to see some amazing wonders right before your guaranteed death. Right here on earth too. Why no go for some of those? You can likely do it for cheaper too.

There are plenty of people who would give their lives to advance civilization for the sake of future generations. The brief pleasure of seeing some amazing wonders is, in comparison, irrelevant. Death is guaranteed either way.

There is no "advancement" to be gained by merely sending tourists to die uselessly on a tomb world.

Re: Tesla recalls 360k vehicles, says full self-driving beta may cause crashes

#485

Post by [deleted] »

diebeforei485 wrote: post #363
pclmulqdq wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My Honda had 2 recalls on it recently: one was a software update and the other was over the fact that a few of the cables on the audio system were slightly too short. This sounds like the same thing other than the fact that I had to pop over to the dealership to do them. Even with the cable replacement, in and out in an hour with a nice lounge to sit in.

If the software update has to be done physically at a dealer location, that's a recall. The scenario in this article is an over-the-air update.

[deleted]

Re: Tesla recalls 360k vehicles, says full self-driving beta may cause crashes

#486

Post by bischofs »

JoshCole wrote: post #411
panick21_ wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have actual knowlage of Tesla internal QA processes, any kind of source at all? Based on there presentation, they for sure have a whole load of tests, many built directly from real world situation that the car has to handle. They simulate sensor input based on the simulation and check the car does the right thing. They very likely have some internal test drivers and before the software goes public it goes to t…

I strongly feel people ought to have these discussions while consistently citing actual data sources relevant to the discussion. For example, did you predict, based on the speculation of Tesla being incompetent with regard to safety, that they have the lowest probability of injury scores of any car manufacturer? Because they do. Did you predict, based on speculation about Elon Musk's incompetence in predicting that s…

A system that protects 400 people but kills 1 is not a system that I want on public roads because I don't want to be in the 1 - Elon and the children of Elon are basically making the assumption that everyone is okay with this.

The probability of an accident for any driver assistance system will ALWAYS be lower than a human driver - but that doesn't mean the system is safe for use with the general public!

People like me are not advocating for "killing people" because we aren't looking at data - it's that no company has the right to make these tradeoffs without the permission and consent of the public.

Also if this was about safety and not just a bunch of dudes who think they are cool because their Tesla can kinda drive itself, why does "FSD" cost $16,000?

Re: Tesla recalls 360k vehicles, says full self-driving beta may cause crashes

#487

Post by InCityDreams »

kbos87 wrote: post #430

The amount of hyperbole and completely uninformed takes around FSD is eye opening. I’ll completely agree that “Full self driving” is a misleading name, and they should be forced to change it, full stop. That being said, it’s exceptionally clear that all the responsibility is on you, the driver, while you are using it. The messaging in the vehicle is concise and constant (not just the wall of text you read when opting…

>....“Full self driving” is a misleading name, and they should be forced to change it, full stop.

Problem and solution.

Nothing more need be said.

Re: Tesla recalls 360k vehicles, says full self-driving beta may cause crashes

#488

Post by [deleted] »

dtheodor wrote: post #292
varjag wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Practical neural networks operate in enormous parameter spaces that are impossible to meaningfully test for all possible adversarial inputs and degraded outputs. Your FSD could well recognize stop signs in your battery of tests but not when someone drew a squirrel on it with green sharpie.

Your run of the mill computer program also "operates in enormous parameter spaces that are impossible to meaningfully test for all possible adversarial inputs and degraded outputs".

[deleted]

Re: Tesla recalls 360k vehicles, says full self-driving beta may cause crashes

#489

Post by yread »

jlv2 wrote: post #154

There really needs to be a distinction between an actual recall (my Model S had one to change the latch on the frunk) and this type of "recall" that is nothing more than an OTA software update.

It's funny that it's a bit like "autopilot". The word fits exactly here but laic public doesn't usually understand it to mean this.

Re: Tesla recalls 360k vehicles, says full self-driving beta may cause crashes

#490

Post by acover »

alberth wrote: post #305
acover wrote: post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People drive motorcycles, which seems much more dangerous. I don't think the risk of self driving is that high but it does seem stressful.

I'm creating a new bullet proof vest. Would you like to participate in the beta program, to test stoping bullets being shot at you?

That feels like a very different scenario. A successful test would still leave me winded and bruised. The odds of failure are much higher than 1 in 100,000 per year. I also have no need for a bullet proof vest so why would I be interested in testing it - what's the benefit to me?
Post reply on HN