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

661–670 of 864 posts

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

#661

Post by caf »

adamjcook wrote: post #296
slg wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The whole point of over-the-air updates is that the owner doesn't need to do anything. For example, both Tesla and Toyota have had bugs in their ABS software that required recalls. The owners of the Toyotas had to physically bring their cars in to get the software update which slows down the adoption drastically. The Teslas received the update automatically and asked for the best time to install the update the next t…

> The OTA updates do provide an avenue to make cars much safer by reducing the friction for these type of safety fixes. True, but let us also acknowledge the immense systems safety downsides of OTA updates given the lack of effective automotive regulation in the US (and to varying degrees globally). OTA updates can also be utilized to hide safety-critical system defects that did exist on a fleet for a time. Also, the…

It'd probably be just as effective to require that every version of the car software that is made available to the fleet must also be provided to the NHTSA. There's no sweeping shoddy versions under the carpet then.

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

#662

Post by Kiro »

Tostino wrote: post #248
Kiro wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you hate the idea of going to Mars so much? https://idlewords.com/2023/1/why_not_mars.htm I would love to go there, even if it meant I died the second I step foot on it. Getting back would be the last thing on my mind.

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.

Why would I do that? It's not like I want to die and nothing on earth is worth dying for but going to another planet is.

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

#663

Post by thomaskcr »

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.

I like that we're arguing over the word "recall" being an issue when the system it applies to is called "full self driving". I think calling a level 2 driver assistance system "full self driving" is a much bigger inaccuracy.

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

#664

Post by eternityforest »

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.

The software isn't returned but it is destroyed and replaced. In a world where the behavior of the things we own is driven by software, it's pretty much just the same as if you recalled and replaced faulty gas tanks.

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

#665

Post by [deleted] »

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…

[deleted]

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

#666

Post by sidibe »

Xylakant wrote: post #311
ajross wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those are autopilot accidents from before FSD beta was even released. I mean, it's true, that if you broaden the search to "any accident involving Tesla-produced automation technology" you're going to find more signal, but your denominator also shrinks by one (maybe two) orders of magnitude. And it also lets me cite Tesla's own statistics for its autopilot product (again, not FSD beta): https://www.tesla.com/VehicleS…

This data does not show what it pretends to show. The underlying statistics are heavily skewed in favor of Tesla by various factors: * Autopilot can only be enabled in good conditions and relies on human drivers in all other, to the point of handing over to a human when it gets confused. Yet, they compare to all miles driven in all conditions. * Teslas are comparatively new cars that have - as they proudly point out…

All very true, by far the biggest factor is the first bullet. Autopilot is enabled exactly when the driver thinks it is very safe and easy driving. If we are comparing miles without an accident it shouldn't be compared to all miles, it's much more like all miles with cruise control activated, data which Tesla doesn't have and probably can't get, but I don't think they'd want to trumpet it either.

It should be blindingly obvious that FSD is not safer than a human right now from using it or watching it be used. It's weird that people are trying to point to some very misleading statistics when you can go to YouTube and see serious problems in almost every video about FSD, even those by owners clearly wanting to paint it as great. Of course getting data-based answers is great but when you see problems every couple miles and the data is saying is saying it's way safer than a human, you are doing something wrong with or using irrelevant data.

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

#667

Post by JoshCole »

justapassenger wrote: post #463
JoshCole wrote: post #411

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Unaudited (internal Tesla data), cherry-picked (comparing with average cars in USA, which are 12 years old beaters, to their very young fleet of expensive cars) data, that doesn't correct for any bias (highway driving vs non-highway driving being one of the many issues) is not exactly the magic bullet you think it is. Also, none of that is self driving. This data talks about AP, not FSD. FSD is also not self driving…

I didn't say it was a magic bullet. So you are hallucinating thoughts about me, not responding to what I said. Being critical of the data like you are being is good thinking in my opinion. I just don't like how often people don't have beliefs that are anywhere close to the data.

For example, elsewhere in this comment thread, someone threw out a random statistic of 400:1 as part of their argument, but this seems to me to be something like six orders of magnitude diverged from a data informed estimate.

To try and contextualize how big an error that is - it is like thinking that a house in the Bay Area has the same cost as a soft drink.

I think if we have to cite our data we are less likely to do that sort of error and more likely to catch it when it is done.

I definitely don't think FSD is magically safe. So if you think that is what I'm trying to say, please update your beliefs according to my correction that I do not believe this. I think anyone driving in FSD should remain vigilant, because it can make worse decisions than a human would.

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

#668

Post by caf »

lolinder wrote: post #15

Note that this recall just means that there's a regulator-mandated patch, not that FSD is being removed.

Yes, the description of the remedy in the recall says:

The remedy OTA software update will improve how FSD Beta negotiates certain driving maneuvers during the conditions described above, whereas a software release without the remedy does not contain the improvements.

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

#669

Post by epolanski »

orthecreedence wrote: post #444
panick21_ wrote: post #410

I wish all the ink spilled on controversy over Tesla would instead be spilled on doing basic safety improvement to the road system that are cheap and proven to save many lives. Lets be real here, automated driving or not, having actually save roads helps prevent death and harm in many cases. The hyper focus on high tech software by all the agencies engaged in 'automotive security' is totally wrongly focused. What the…

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.

Trains and trams should be overall the present, past and future of affordable, green, cheap transport.

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

#670

Post by eternityforest »

panick21_ wrote: post #569
2h wrote: post #434

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree. If someone is a bad driver, and causing crashes, we don't say "we need to improve the road system". We suspend the drivers license until they can prove they are capable of being a safe driver. We should hold this software to the same standard. Until it can demonstrate safety at or above human level, it should be outlawed. Road systems should always be worked on, but when a crash happens its usually the dr…

> I disagree. If someone is a bad driver, and causing crashes, we don't say "we need to improve the road system". Well yes, and that is literally exactly the problem. That is exactly why its so unsafe in the US. Because instead of building a safe system everything is blamed on people. In countries that take road safety seriously, every crash is analyzed and often the road system is changed to make sure it does not ha…

America hates any solution to a problem that doesn't involve training individuals to act differently. I constantly hear people who want warning labels gone and periodic PSAs against mixing bleach and ammonia removed, people who don't want mandatory baby left in a hot car detectors, people who hate OSHA, etc.

We think the solution should always be human. That the way to solve climate change is homesteads, the solution to poverty is individuals working harder, etc.

When anything we don't want happens, we think "I'll try harder next time" not "We will eliminate this as a possibility".

People treat life as a sport rather than an engineering challenge, they want to "win fairly", not make it impossible to lose, they want everything they do to say something about their own ability rather than say something about a clever process that makes individual skill irrelevant.

I really don't exactly like that aspect of humanity, constantly making everything into a sport.

Post reply on HN