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

521–530 of 864 posts

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

#521

Post by JoshCole »

freejazz wrote: post #502
JoshCole wrote: post #482

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 o…

You claim that I said that we should ignore evidence, but I didn't. I claimed that we should look at it.

You claim that I said that we should focus on the good, but I didn't. I claimed that we should look at the data.

Now I feel as if you are trying to argue that looking at data is wrong because not all decisions should be made on the basis of the data. This seems inconsistent to me with your previous assertion that my ignoring data was bad, because now you argue against your own previous position.

That said, uh, datasets related to bayesian priors support your assertions about deference in decision making. So you could, if you cared to, support that claim with data. It would contradict your broader point that I should not want to have data, but you could support it with data and I would agree with you, because contrary to your assertion I was making an argument for evidence informed statements. Your inference about whether I think the evidence leans should not be taken as an argument that I believe my positions would always be what was reached by looking at the evidence, because I don't think that is true. I'm obviously going to be wrong often. Everyone is.

Unfortunately, I think you lie too much and shift your goalposts too much. So I'm not going to talk to you anymore.

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

#522

Post by dmix »

georgeburdell wrote: post #214
dshpala wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You'd be surprised how many people want a one-way ticket to Mars. I think Elon can make good money from that alone.

Isn’t Antarctica just Mars-lite? Do you think a mere treaty is hampering settlement there? That’s where my mind goes when people talk about colonizing another planet.

Flying to another planet on a rocket is obviously very different, the goal is way more interesting than the challenge of living in a hostile environment. Even if it's ultimately a useless exercise for humanity.

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

#523

Post by mrguyorama »

georgeburdell wrote: post #214
dshpala wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You'd be surprised how many people want a one-way ticket to Mars. I think Elon can make good money from that alone.

Isn’t Antarctica just Mars-lite? Do you think a mere treaty is hampering settlement there? That’s where my mind goes when people talk about colonizing another planet.

These people are incredibly stupid. They somehow think colonizing mars is easier than regulating the environment here on earth, somehow think elon as dictator is better than any earth government, are interested in putting undertested and sketchy implants into their brain even without a proposed use case, and seem to think that the only reason we don't regularly visit mars is because we don't have a big enough rocket, as if easy access to tons of powdered rust is economically useful.

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

#524

Post by bigtex88 »

saudade97 wrote: post #494

The amount of Tesla apologism in HN is nasueasting. Per the NHTSA, a safety recall is issued if either the manufacturer or the NHTSA determines that a vehicle or its equipment pose a safety risk or do not meet motor vehicle safety standards. On its face, Tesla's situation clearly calls out for classification as a recall.

We live in a strange world. No one should worship that sad narcissistic piece of crap but yet the sycophants continue to multiply.

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

#525

Post by TheCoelacanth »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #169
rootusrootus wrote: post #50

Meanwhile, the only actual L3 capable car is a Mercedes. Plenty of people will argue that AP is actually superior, but I don't think there's any way to say that for sure, given the tight constraints Mercedes has put on their driver assistance in order to lower the liability enough to make L3 not a bankruptcy event. For certain, however, they are more confident in their technology than Tesla is, otherwise Tesla would…

This is limited to certain pre mapped roads, under 40 mph and requires a car in front to follow. This in no way compares to Tesla's Autopilot system. Edit (because HN throttling replies): > Mercedes is being responsible about their rollout You can always succeed if you define success. If rolling out something that doesn't do much of anything is success, success? Oh well. Less than 20 people have died related to Autop…

It is in no way comparable to Tesla's Autopilot system. Mercedes has an actual feature while Tesla recklessly gambles with other peoples' lives to juice their stock price.

If Tesla believes that their feature is safe, then let them take legal liability for it.

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

#527

Post by sentientslug »

asdff wrote: post #386
sentientslug wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is most likely a legislative issue with NHTSA, I don't think they have a mechanism by which they can enforce a software update since the concept didn't exist when recalls were first implemented.

Why not? At the end of the day its a binary check box on the paper that you had the fix. Whether that fix was a software update or a new piece of hardware should be irrelevant.

I agree with you, I'm just responding to another commenter who questioned the use of the word "recall" in relation to software updates.

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

#528

Post by londons_explore »

dylan604 wrote: post #460
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.

Was the recall a voluntary recall by the company or something the company was told to do by a regulator? To me, recall means much more than just having to have the company replace something. It means they have to do it at their expense. So in this case, it's not as bad for Tesla's bottom line if it is just an OTA update. A recall is something that the car industry is used to doing whenever they have to fix a mistake.…

Nearly all recalls are voluntary. But the NHTSA advises the company that if they don't do a voluntary recall, the NHTSA will do a compulsory recall.

A voluntary recall is easier and cheaper for all involved.

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

#529

Post by heleninboodler »

whamlastxmas wrote: post #394
alberth wrote: post #305

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

Virtually everyone will take the vest that needs improvement over none at all

Virtually everyone will opt out of the test, because the choice is not, "I'm going to shoot a gun at you as a test. Do you want the experimental bullet proof vest or no bullet proof vest?"

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

#530

Post by p_j_w »

SomaticPirate wrote: post #498
orthecreedence wrote: post #444

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If we're actually serious about this, we should get rid of roads altogether and replace them with rail tracks. That solves 95% of the automation problem anyway.

US passenger rail is unsafe. We have no way near the level of sophistication of European passenger rail transport. We have a significantly higher number of derailments. Even the worst European rail is more safe than US rail.

>US passenger rail is unsafe.

US passenger automobiles are more unsafe.

Post reply on HN