US probes Tesla's Full Self-Driving software after fatal crash • Hacker News Board

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

#491

Post by bastawhiz » Sun, Oct 20, 2024, 1:01 AM UTC

geoka9 wrote: post #441

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.

Probably autopilot, honestly.

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

#492

Post by hilsdev » Sun, Oct 20, 2024, 1:02 AM UTC

dmix wrote: post #468

TheCleric wrote: post #440

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good. If you write software that people rely on with their lives, and it fails, you should be held liable for that criminally.

Drug companies and the FDA (circa 1906) play a very dangerous and delicate dance all the time releasing new drugs to the public. But for over a century now we've managed to figure it out without holding pharma companies criminally liable for every death. > If you write software that people rely on with their lives, and it fails, you should be held liable for that criminally. Easy to type those words on the internet t…

We should hold Pharma companies liable for every death. They make money off the success cases. Not doing so is another example of privatized profits and socialized risks/costs. Something like a program with reduced costs for those willing to sign away liability to help balance social good vs risk analysis

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

#493

Post by moralestapia » Sun, Oct 20, 2024, 1:02 AM UTC

jalapenos wrote: post #481

TheCleric wrote: post #440

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good. If you write software that people rely on with their lives, and it fails, you should be held liable for that criminally.

What a laugh, would you take that deal? Upside: you get paid a 200k salary, if all your code works perfectly. Downside: if it doesn't, you go to prison. The users aren't compelled to use it. They can choose not to. They get to choose their own risks. The internet is a gold mine of creatively moronic opinions.

Read the site rules.

And also, of course some people would take that deal, and of course some others wouldn't. Your argument is moot.

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

#494

Post by bastawhiz » Sun, Oct 20, 2024, 1:06 AM UTC

pbasista wrote: post #417

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?

Autopilot has not been good. I have a cabin four hours from my home and I've used autopilot for long stretches on the highway. Some of the problems:

- Certain exits are not detected as such and the car violently veers right before returning to the lane. I simply can't believe they don't have telemetry to remedy this.

- Sometimes the GPS becomes miscalibrated. This makes the car think I'm taking an exit when I'm not, causing the car to abruptly reduce its speed to the speed of the ramp. It does not readjust.

- It frequently slows for "emergency lights" that don't exist.

- If traffic comes to a complete stop, the car accelerates way too hard and brakes hard when the car in front moves any substantial amount.

At this point, I'd rather have something less good than something which is an active danger. For all intents and purposes, my Tesla doesn't have reliable cruise control, period.

Beyond that, though, I simply don't have trust in Tesla software. I've encountered so many problems at this point that I can't possibly expect them to deliver a product that works reliably at any point in the future. What reason do I have to believe things will magically improve?

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

#495

Post by ryandrake » Sun, Oct 20, 2024, 1:08 AM UTC

misiti3780 wrote: post #401

ethbr1 wrote: post #372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Curiousity about why they're against it and enunciating your why you think it will work would be more helpful.

It's evident to Tesla drivers using Full Self-Driving (FSD) that the technology is rapidly improving and will likely succeed. The key reason for this anticipated success is data: any reasonably intelligent observer recognizes that training exceptional deep neural networks requires vast amounts of data, and Tesla has accumulated more relevant data than any of its competitors. Tesla recently held a robotaxi event, expl…

Then why have we been just a year or two away from actual working self-driving, for the last 10 years? If I told my boss that my project would be done in a year, and then the following year said the same thing, and continued that for years, that’s not what “achieving results” means.

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

#496

Post by bastawhiz » Sun, Oct 20, 2024, 1:08 AM UTC

concordDance wrote: post #409

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…

This would be more helpful with a date. Was this in 2020 or 2024? I've been told FSD had a complete rearchitecting.

It was a few months ago

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

#497

Post by bastawhiz » Sun, Oct 20, 2024, 1:09 AM UTC

dekhn wrote: post #399

bastawhiz wrote: post #362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just because you have the right of way doesn't mean the correct thing to do is to remain in the lane. If remaining in your lane is likely to make someone else do something reckless, you should have been proactive. Not legally, for the sake of being a good driver.

Can you point to some online documentation that recommends changing lanes in preference to speeding up when a person is merging at too slow a speed? What I'm doing is following CHP guidance in this post: https://www.facebook.com/chpmarin/posts/lets-talk-about-merg... """Finally, if you are the vehicle already traveling in the slow lane, show some common courtesy and do what you can to create a space for the person by…

> recommends changing lanes in preference to speeding up when a person is merging at too slow a speed

It doesn't matter, Tesla does neither. It always does the worst possible non-malicious behavior.

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

#498

Post by bastawhiz » Sun, Oct 20, 2024, 1:12 AM UTC

eric_cc wrote: post #379

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…

That sucks that you had that negative experience. I’ve driven thousands of miles in FSD and love it. Could not imagine going back. I rarely need to intervene and when I do it’s not because the car did something dangerous. There are just times I’d rather take over due to cyclists, road construction, etc.

I'm glad for you, I guess.

I'll say the autopark was kind of neat, but parking has never been something I have struggled with.

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

#499

Post by bastawhiz » Sun, Oct 20, 2024, 1:13 AM UTC

paulcole wrote: post #368

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…

> Until I ride in one and feel safe, I can't have any faith that this is a reasonable system This is probably the worst way to evaluate self-driving for society though, right?

Why would I be supportive of a system that has actively scared me for objectively scary reasons? Even if it's the worst reason, it's not a bad reason.

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

#500

Post by absoflutely » Sun, Oct 20, 2024, 1:34 AM UTC

bastawhiz wrote: post #494

pbasista wrote: post #417

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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?

Autopilot has not been good. I have a cabin four hours from my home and I've used autopilot for long stretches on the highway. Some of the problems: - Certain exits are not detected as such and the car violently veers right before returning to the lane. I simply can't believe they don't have telemetry to remedy this. - Sometimes the GPS becomes miscalibrated. This makes the car think I'm taking an exit when I'm not,…

I'll add that it randomly brakes hard on the interstate because it thinks the speed limit drops to 45. There aren't speed limit signs anywhere nearby on different roads that it could be mistakenly reading either.