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

501–510 of 864 posts

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

#501

Post by dmix »

clnq wrote: post #481
diebeforei485 wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 industry needs to come up with a new related term like "Software Recall"

Recalling the hardware is a drastically more difficult request to impose on customers and financially/logistically for the car maker.

That's a disporportate response just to highlight importance of an OTA update.

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

#502

Post by freejazz »

JoshCole wrote: post #482
freejazz wrote: post #473

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

>Oh. So you don't like the data, because it disagrees with you. So you are trying to pretend I'm ignoring data, even though I'm linking to summary statistics which by their nature summarize the statistics rather than ignoring the statistics.

Oh the data is great. I like the data. I'd take the data out to dinner. It's completely besides my point, and you continuing to be obtuse and rephrasing things this way, is not only a strawman, but it's rude.

> Your views probably do have evidence that supports them. I want to see the evidence you are using, because I think that is important.

Not every policy decision is driven by data. Some are driven by reasoning and sensibility, as well as deference to previous practices. So your whole data-driven shtick is just that... a shtick.

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

#503

Post by thepasswordis »

bena wrote: post #195
thepasswordis wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah it's not that I'm scared of my own driving, I mean that if other people had it it would be safer. Things which have happened in the last 3 days of moderate driving around a city: 1) A car gets impatient at some traffic turning right on a green light in a construction zone, and comes into my lane meaning into oncoming traffic . We have to swerve out of the way and slam on the brakes to avoid them. 2) A guy gets i…

Your Tesla tells you you're a safe driver. Well, geez, I'm convinced that the $55,000 (maybe+?) you spent tells you things you like to hear. I mean, one of the criteria is "Late Night Driving". Why not driving between the hours of 4pm and 6pm? When there are a lot more cars on the road, which is just statistically less safe. https://www.tesla.com/support/safety-score#version-1.2 And looking at the rest of the criteri…

The Tesla doesn't just tell me I'm a safe driver, it also gives me a cheaper insurance rate due to the safe driving. The safety score is related to my monthly insurance premium.

So maybe it's to stroke my ego? But they're also putting their proverbial money where their mouth is.

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

#504

Post by ertian »

TaylorAlexander wrote: post #160
apnew wrote: post #64

> The FSD Beta system may cause crashes by allowing the affected vehicles to: “act unsafe around intersections, such as traveling straight through an intersection while in a turn-only lane, entering a stop sign-controlled intersection without coming to a complete stop, or proceeding into an intersection during a steady yellow traffic signal without due caution,” according to the notice on the website of the National…

Andrej Karpathy was the AI lead for most of the project and he has talked about the general system design. They have a set of regression tests they run on new code updates either by feeding in real world data and ensuring the code outputs the expected result, or running the code in simulation. It does seem worrying that they would miss things like this. Here’s a talk from Karpathy explaining the system in 2021: https…

It's not even a bit surprising they'd miss things like this, IMHO. They do tests with a few (maybe even a lot of) intersections, but there are thousands upon thousands of intersections out there, including some where bushes are obscuring a stop sign, or the sign is at a funny angle, or sunlight is reflecting off the traffic lights, or heavy rain obscuring them, or plain old ambiguous signage...there's _bound_ to be mistakes. Human drivers make similar mistakes all the time.

I used to think that fact was going to delay self-driving cars by a decade or more, because of the potential bad press involved in AI-caused accidents, but then along comes Tesla and enables the damn thing as a beta. I mean...good for them, but I've always wondered if it was going to last.

I've been using it pretty consistently for a few months now (albeit with my foot near the brake at all times). I haven't experienced any of the above. Worst thing I've seen is the car slamming on the breaks on the freeway for...some reason? There was a pile-up in a tunnel caused by exactly that a month or so ago, so I've been careful not to use FSD when I'm being tailgated, or in dense traffic.

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

#505

Post by baby »

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.

Oh damn, that title is definitely a lie then

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

#506

Post by 2muchcoffeeman »

_visgean wrote: post #426
John23832 wrote: post #405

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it does raise serious questions as to is the models used for autonomous cars could also "hallucinate" and do something stupid "on purpose"... It doesn't because Tesla's FSD model is just a rules engine with an RGB camera. There's not "purpose" to any hallucination. It would just be a misread of sensors and input. Tesla's FSD just doesn't work. The model is not sentient. It's not even a Transformer (in both the mach…

> rules engine with an RGB camera I dont think its true? They use convolutional networks for image recognition and those things can certainly halucinate - e.g. detecting things that are not there.

We need to stop anthropomorphising machines. Sensor errors and bugs aren’t chemicals messing with brain chemistry even if it may seem analogous.

Or maybe when I get a bug report today I’m going to tell them the software is just hallucinating.

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

#507

Post by now__what »

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.

In auto recalls, "recall" more generally implies something being repaired than returned, IME

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

#508

Post by rco8786 »

buildbot wrote: post #176
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.

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.

Because nothing is being "recalled".

It should absolutely be tracked and publicized. But it's fundamentally different than "this car is fundamentally broken and you have to take it back to the manufacturer"

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

#509

Post by thepasswordis »

halfmatthalfcat wrote: post #497
linsomniac wrote: post #433

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How would the FSD beta program kill me? I realize that not everybody is in agreement, but I personally use the FSD beta while remaining fully in control of the vehicle. I steer with it, I watch the road conditions, I check my blind spots when it is changing lanes, I hit the accelerator if it is slowing unexpectedly, I hit the brakes if it is not... You know, basically behaving exactly as the terms you have to agree t…

Sure, you are in control of your Tesla but you are obviously not in control of other Teslas. Someone else who isn't as diligent as you or who doesn't care about it's limitations will happily crash head-on into you, blissfully unaware of their own ignorance.

I'm not in control of any other cars on the road. Many of those cars are driven by drunk, distracted people who cause thousands of deadly accidents every single year.
Post reply on HN