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

When Tesla's FSD works well, it gets credit. When it doesn't, you get blamed

electrek.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 149 posts

Re: When Tesla's FSD works well, it gets credit. When it doesn't, you get blamed

#61

Post by redserk »

don_neufeld wrote: post #17
Animats wrote: post #10

As time goes on, Tesla's fiasco becomes more and more embarrassing. Waymos are all over the place in the cities they serve, doing pretty much what they're supposed to do. Nuro has some fully autonomous vehicles running around. Baidu's Apollo Go is deployed in 16 cities in China, although they use remote driving as a backup. Tesla, though, is still hyping a technology that seems to have maxed out years ago.

Not sure if it’s evident in broader statistics yet, but I think that because Tesla got the early adopter market (tech savvy people), they are now losing that same market first. I had a party at my house a couple months ago, mostly SF tech people. I found the Tesla owners chatting together, and the topic was how much FSD sucks and they don’t trust it. I asked and no-one said they would buy a Tesla again. Distrust beca…

I partially agree. FSD seems fine to me but I wouldn’t buy a second Tesla. Tesla seems to have stopped caring about being a car company that caters to nerds/tech enthusiasts.

Mine has been an extremely well done vehicle and I was (and kind of am) bullish on FSD as a driver assistance technology, but a car is a 6-7 year investment for me and I have big doubts about their direction. They seem to have abandoned the idea of being a car company, instead chasing this robotaxi idea.

Up until 2023/2024 was fine for my 6-7 year car lifecycle. Tesla was really cool when they let you do all sorts of backwards-compatible upgrades, but they seemed to have abandoned that.

I’ve found it incredibly disappointing seeing their flailing direction now.

Rivian seems to still have a lot of the magic that Tesla had. They’re definitely a strong contender for my next vehicle in a year or two.

Re: When Tesla's FSD works well, it gets credit. When it doesn't, you get blamed

#62

Post by irjustin »

tippytippytango wrote: post #57

Ultimately, anecdotes and testimonials of a product like this are irrelevant. But the public discourse hasn't caught up with it. People talk about it like it's a new game console or app, giving their positive or negative testimonials, as if this is the correct way to validate the product. Only rigorous, continual, third party validation that the system is effective and safe would be relevant. It should be evaluated m…

> Only rigorous, continual, third party validation that the system is effective and safe would be relevant. It should be evaluated more like a medical treatment.

100% agreed, and I'll take it one step further - level 3 should be outright banned/illegal.

The reason is it allows blame shifting exactly as what is happening right now. Drivers mentally expected level 4 and legally the company will position the fault, in as much as it can get away with, to be on the driver, effectively level 2.

Re: When Tesla's FSD works well, it gets credit. When it doesn't, you get blamed

#63

Post by energy123 »

terminalshort wrote: post #60
energy123 wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It was genuinely good. You lack data to draw this conclusion. The most important factor is deaths per mile, which is sparse, so it requires aggregating data from many drivers before you have enough statistical power.

[flagged]

Data is needed to know if it's safe. For self-driving software, safety is the #1 criteria for whether it's a good product.

Re: When Tesla's FSD works well, it gets credit. When it doesn't, you get blamed

#64

Post by georgemcbay »

bastawhiz wrote: post #37
don_neufeld wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure if it’s evident in broader statistics yet, but I think that because Tesla got the early adopter market (tech savvy people), they are now losing that same market first. I had a party at my house a couple months ago, mostly SF tech people. I found the Tesla owners chatting together, and the topic was how much FSD sucks and they don’t trust it. I asked and no-one said they would buy a Tesla again. Distrust beca…

I own six EVs (three cars, one of which is a Tesla, and three motorcycles). My first EV was my Tesla. We're on the cusp of trading the Tesla in for a Rivian most likely. I should be Tesla's target customer, but instead I'm exactly who you described: - I don't like the brand. I don't like Elon. I don't like the reputation that the car attaches to me. - I don't trust the technology. I've gotten two FSD trials, both sca…

> They should be panicking.

I'm sure they would be if the stock price had ever showed any signs of being based in reality.

But for now Elon can keep having SpaceX and xAI buy up all the unsold Teslas to make number go up.

If that ever stops working, just spin up a new company with a hyper-inflated valuation and have it acquire Tesla at some made up number. Worked for him once, why not try it again.

And at this point he can get even fraudier, with the worst possible realistic outcome being that he might get forced to pay a relatively small bribe and publicly humiliate himself for Trump a bit.

But there's really no more consequences to any sort of business fraud (for now) as long as you can afford the tribute.

#WorldLibertyFinancial

Re: When Tesla's FSD works well, it gets credit. When it doesn't, you get blamed

#65

Post by terminalshort »

buran77 wrote: post #55
vessenes wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

have you tried fsd 13/14 yet? I just upgraded to 13 from 12 and it's a massssive improvement. Not sure what 14 s like. It's definitely added a 9 in the last year.

> have you tried I've heard this so many times it's starting to be a meme. The system was claimed to be very capable from the beginning, then every version was a massive improvement, and yet we're always still in very dangerous, and honestly underwhelming territory. Teslas keep racking up straight line highway miles where every intervention probably counts at most as 1 mile deducted from the total in the stats. Have…

It was very capable, and each version has been a big improvement. The first time I rode in a Tesla with FSD back in 2017 I was shocked by how good it was. Self driving tech has advanced so fast that we forget it was considered next to impossible even 15 years ago. You are judging past tech by 2025 standards.

Re: When Tesla's FSD works well, it gets credit. When it doesn't, you get blamed

#66

Post by ares623 »

adocomplete wrote: post #30
coliveira wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This scam is true for all AI technologies. It only "works" as far as we interpret it as working. LLMs generate text. If it answers our question, we say that the LLM works. If it doesn't, we say that it is "hallucinating".

How is that any different from Googling something and believing any of the highly-SEO optimized results that pollute the front page?

Search engines didn't need $500B and growing in CAPEX.

Re: When Tesla's FSD works well, it gets credit. When it doesn't, you get blamed

#67

Post by don_neufeld »

bastawhiz wrote: post #37
don_neufeld wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure if it’s evident in broader statistics yet, but I think that because Tesla got the early adopter market (tech savvy people), they are now losing that same market first. I had a party at my house a couple months ago, mostly SF tech people. I found the Tesla owners chatting together, and the topic was how much FSD sucks and they don’t trust it. I asked and no-one said they would buy a Tesla again. Distrust beca…

I own six EVs (three cars, one of which is a Tesla, and three motorcycles). My first EV was my Tesla. We're on the cusp of trading the Tesla in for a Rivian most likely. I should be Tesla's target customer, but instead I'm exactly who you described: - I don't like the brand. I don't like Elon. I don't like the reputation that the car attaches to me. - I don't trust the technology. I've gotten two FSD trials, both sca…

The execution on the roadster baffles me.

IIRC the deposit was 250K, and I know people who signed up on the first day. Can you imagine a more dedicated fan?

How do you not deliver to that group? How big an own-goal is that?

Re: When Tesla's FSD works well, it gets credit. When it doesn't, you get blamed

#68

Post by ckocagil »

twostorytower wrote: post #5
neilv wrote: post #3

> However, at this week’s shareholder meeting, Musk stated that Tesla may allow “texting and driving” within “a month or two.” The family of the first person killed by that will know who to sue for a punitive trillion dollars.

Would at least like to use it for stop and go traffic, which is about the only thing I trust FSD for.

That's also the most tiresome part of driving and has the least risk due to low speeds. Easy win for FSD. But for all other cases it becomes a complicated ethical question.

Re: When Tesla's FSD works well, it gets credit. When it doesn't, you get blamed

#69

Post by madamelic »

buran77 wrote: post #40
paulryanrogers wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ancedotes are nice. Miles per disengagement stats would be better.

That's not an anecdote, it sounds like an exaggeration bordering flat out lying. A 2000 miles trip "without touching anything" to drive the car is statistically impossible for any reasonable drive (e.g. not endless straight lines on an Australian highway), especially for a Tesla famously known for needing interventions often. Even more advanced autonomous driving systems are far too limited to take arbitrary 2000 mil…

13 is quite good. 14 is even better.

2,000 may be stretching it but it is possible if the driver is trusting enough. Personally many of my disengagements isn't because it is being dangerous, but just sub-optimal such as not driving as aggressive as I want to, not getting into off-ramp lane as early as I like, or just picking weird navigational choices.

Trying to recall but I haven't had a safety involved disengagement in probably a few months across late 13 and 14. I am just one data point and the main criticism I've seen from 14 is: 1) getting rid of fine speed controls in favor of driving style profiles 2) its car and obstacle avoidance being overtuned so it will tap the brakes if, for instance, an upcoming perpendicular car suddenly appears and starts to roll its stop sign.

Personally, I prefer it to be overly protective albeit turn it down slightly and fix issues where it hilariously thinks large clouds of leaves blowing across are obstacles to brake for.

Re: When Tesla's FSD works well, it gets credit. When it doesn't, you get blamed

#70

Post by johnnyApplePRNG »

romaaeterna wrote: post #53

> So, for example, when a Florida driver on Autopilot drops his phone and blows through a stop sign, hitting a car which then hits two pedestrians, killing one, Tesla will claim “this driver was solely at fault.” In that case, a judge agreed that the driver was mostly at fault, but still assigned 33% of blame to Tesla, resulting in a $243 million judgment against the company. His foot was on the gas though Looking at…

A couple of facts on the Florida case: it was a jury verdict, not a judge. The jury found Tesla 33% at fault for a 2019 Key Largo crash. Damages were $129M compensatory (Tesla responsible for 33% of that) plus $200M punitive, for $243M total.

The driver admitted he looked down after dropping his phone and blew a stop sign; Tesla argues his foot was on the accelerator, but the jury still assigned partial fault because Autopilot was allowed to operate off limited-access highways and the company didn’t do enough to prevent foreseeable misuse. The driver had already settled separately.

Post reply on HN