This will go away once Trump wins
[deleted]
US probes Tesla's Full Self-Driving software after fatal crash
711–720 of 1001 posts
Re: US probes Tesla's Full Self-Driving software after fatal crash
#712Lots 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…
[deleted]
Re: US probes Tesla's Full Self-Driving software after fatal crash
#713Lots 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…
Arguably the problem with Tesla self-driving is that it's stuck in an uncanny valley of performance where it's worse than better performing systems but also worse from a user experience perspective than even less capable systems.
Less capable driver assistance type systems might help the driver out (e.g. adaptive cruise control), but leave no doubt that the human is still driving. Tesla though goes far enough that it takes over driving from the human but it isn't reliable enough that the human can stop paying attention and be ready to take over at a moment's notice. This seems like the worst of all possible worlds since you are both disengaged by having to maintain alertness.
Autopilots in airplanes are much the same way, pilots can't just turn it on and take a nap. But the difference is that nothing an autopilot is going to do will instantly crash the plane, while Tesla screwing up will require split second reactions from the driver to correct for.
I feel like the real answer to your question is that having reasonable confidence in self-driving cars beyond "driver assistance" type features will ultimately require a car that will literally get from A to B reliably even if you're taking a nap. Anything close to that but not quite there is in my mind almost worse than something more basic.
Re: US probes Tesla's Full Self-Driving software after fatal crash
#714Earlier quoted context omitted.
But some little boy down the line will pay for it. Look for Eschede ICE accident.
There are many examples. The Koch brothers, famous "anti-regulatory state" warriors, have fought oversight so hard that their gas pipelines were allowed to be barely intact. Two teens get into a truck, turn the ignition key - and the air explodes: https://www.southcoasttoday.com/story/news/nation-world/1996... Does anyone go to jail? F*K NO.
To be fair, the teens knew about the gas leak and started the truck in an attempt to get away. Gas leaks like that shouldn't happen easily, but people near pipelines like that should also be made aware of the risks of gas leaks, as some leaks are inevitable.
Re: US probes Tesla's Full Self-Driving software after fatal crash
#715Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
He’s not doing anything activists haven’t done for years to get out the vote. In college famous rock and hip hop groups would come on campus to play shows that had voter registration tables upon entry and lots of messaging about who to vote for and then being endlessly recruited to volunteer/phone bank/canvas for some group that was supporting the event. Activism cuts both ways.
That may be but were they required to sign a PAC's pledge to enter such concert? I think this might be over the line but a court has the decide this.
Re: US probes Tesla's Full Self-Driving software after fatal crash
#716Earlier quoted context omitted.
Tesla jumped the gun on the FSD free trial earlier this year. It was nowhere near good enough at the time. Most people who tried it for the first time probably share your opinion. That said, there is a night and day difference between FSD 12.3 that you experienced earlier this year and the latest version 12.6. It will still make mistakes from time to time but the improvement is massive and obvious. More importantly,…
So just a few more years of death and injury until they reach a finished product?
If this is what society has to pay to improve Tesla's product, then perhaps they should have to share the software with other car manufacturers too.
Otherwise every car brand will have to kill a whole heap of people too until they manage to make a FSD system.
Re: US probes Tesla's Full Self-Driving software after fatal crash
#717Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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. This is what bugs me about ordinary autopilot. Autopilot doesn't switch lanes, but I like to slow down or speed up as needed to allow merging cars to enter my lane. Autopilot never does that, and I've had some close calls with ir…
While I certainly wouldn't object to how you handle merging cars (it's a nice, helpful thing to do!), I was always taught that if you want to merge into a lane, you are the sole person responsible for making that possible and making that safe. You need to get your speed and position right, and if you can't do that, you don't merge. (That's for merging onto a highway from an entrance ramp, at least. If you're talking…
> You need to get your speed and position right, and if you can't do that, you don't merge.
I agree, but my observation has been that the majority of drivers are absolutely trash at doing that and I'd rather they not crash into me, even if would be their fault.
Honestly I think Tesla's self-driving technology is long on marketing and short on performance, but it really helps their case that a lot of the competition is human drivers who are completely terrible at the job.
Re: US probes Tesla's Full Self-Driving software after fatal crash
#718Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think it is a matter of perceived risk. Realistically speaking, nuclear power is pretty safe. In the history of nuclear power, there were two major incidents. Considering the number of nuclear power plants around the planet, that is pretty good. However, as those two accidents demonstrated, the potential fallout of those incidents is pretty severe and widespread. I think this massively contributes to the perceived…
During power outages, having natural gas in your home is a huge benefit. Many in my area just experienced it with Helene. You can still cook. You can still get hot water. If you have gas logs you still have a heat source in the winter too. These trade offs are far more important to a lot of people.
Granted, that is a valid concern if power outages are more frequent in your area. I have never experienced a power outage personally, so that is nothing I ever thought of. However, I feel like with solar power and battery storage systems becoming increasingly widespread, this won't be a major concern for much longer
Re: US probes Tesla's Full Self-Driving software after fatal crash
#719Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think it is a matter of perceived risk. Realistically speaking, nuclear power is pretty safe. In the history of nuclear power, there were two major incidents. Considering the number of nuclear power plants around the planet, that is pretty good. However, as those two accidents demonstrated, the potential fallout of those incidents is pretty severe and widespread. I think this massively contributes to the perceived…
> However, the effects of those danger seem much more abstract and delayed, leading people to not be as worried about it. Climate change is very visible in the present day to me. People are protesting about it frequently enough that it's hard to claim they are not worried.
Climate change is certainly visible, although the extend to which areas are affected varies wildly. However, there are still shockingly many people who have a hard time attributing ever increasing natural disasters and more extreme weather patterns to climate change.
Re: US probes Tesla's Full Self-Driving software after fatal crash
#720Earlier quoted context omitted.
Imagine that in 2031, FSD cars could exactly halve all aspects of auto crashes (minor, major, single car, multi car, vs pedestrian, fatal/non, etc.) Would you want FSD software to be developed or not? If you do, do you think holding devs or companies criminally liable for half of all crashes is the best way to ensure that progress happens?
From a utilitarian perspective sure, you might be right but how do you exempt those companies from civil liability and make it impossible for victims/their families to sue the manufacturer? Might be legally tricky (driver/owner can explicitly/implicitly agree with the EULA or other agreements, imposing that on third parties wouldn’t be right).
> how do you exempt those companies from civil liability and make it impossible for victims/their families to sue the manufacturer?
I don't think anyone in this thread has talked about an exemption from civil liability (sue for money), just criminal liability (go to jail).
Civil liability is the far less controversial issue because it's transferred all the time: governments even mandate that drivers carry insurance for this purpose.
With civil liability transfer, imperfect FSD can still make economic sense. Just as an insurance company needs to collect enough premium to pay claims, the FSD manufacturer would need to reserve enough revenue to pay its expected claims. In this case, FSD doesn't even need to be better than humans to make economic sense, in the same way that bad drivers can still buy (expensive) insurance.