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

US probes Tesla's Full Self-Driving software after fatal crash

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

781–790 of 1001 posts

Re: US probes Tesla's Full Self-Driving software after fatal crash

#781

Post by masto »

I have such a love-hate relationship with this thing. I don't think Tesla's approach will ever be truly autonomous, and they do a lot of things to push it into unsafe territory (thanks to you know who at the helm). I am a tech enthusiast and part of the reason I bought this car (before you know who revealed himself to be you know what) is that they were the furthest ahead and I wanted to experience it. If they had continued on the path I'd hoped, they'd have put in more sensors, not taken them out for cost-cutting and then tried to gaslight people about it. And all this hype about turning your car into a robotaxi while you're not using it is just stupid.

On the other hand, I'd hate for the result of all this to be to throw the ADAS out with the bathwater. The first thing I noticed even with the early "autopilot" is that it made long road trips much more bearable. I would arrive at my destination without feeling exhausted, and I attribute a lot of that to not having to spend hours actively making micro adjustments to speed and steering. I know everyone thinks they're a better driver than they are, and it's those other people who can't be trusted, but I do feel that when I have autopilot/FSD engaged, I am paying attention, less fatigued, and actually have more cognitive capacity freed up to watch for dangerous situations.

I had to pick someone up at LaGuardia Airport yesterday, a long annoying drive in heavy NYC-area traffic. I engaged autosteer for most of the trip both ways (and disengaged it when I didn't feel it was appropriate), and it made it much more bearable.

I'm neither fanboying nor apologizing for Tesla's despicable behavior. But I would be sad if, in the process of regulating this tech, it got pushed back too far.

Re: US probes Tesla's Full Self-Driving software after fatal crash

#782

Post by trompetenaccoun »

Rebuff5007 wrote: post #298

Tesla testing and developing FSD with normal consumer drivers frankly seems criminal. Test drivers for AV companies get advanced driver training, need to filed detailed reports about the cars response to various driving scenarios, and generally are paid to be as attentive as possible. The fact that any old tech-bro or un-assuming old lady can buy this thing and be on their phone when the car could potentially turn in…

>Test drivers for AV companies get advanced driver training, need to filed detailed reports about the cars response to various driving scenarios, and generally are paid to be as attentive as possible.

Like this one, who ran over and killed a woman?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Elaine_Herzberg

While not fully being the driver's fault, during the investigation they were found to have watched TV on their smartphone at the time of the accident and the driver-facing camera clearly showed them not even looking at the road! Such attentiveness.

Re: US probes Tesla's Full Self-Driving software after fatal crash

#783

Post by FireBeyond »

kgermino wrote: post #733
f1shy wrote: post #647

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What?! So if there is a failure and the car goes full throttle (no autonomous car) it is my responsibility?! You are pretty wrong!!!

You are responsible (Legally, contractually, morally) for supervising FSD today. If the car decided to stomp on the throttle you are expected to be ready to hit the brakes. The whole point is that is somewhat of an unreasonable expectation but it’s what Tesla expects you to do today

> If the car decided to stomp on the throttle you are expected to be ready to hit the brakes.

Didn't Tesla have an issue a couple of years ago where pressing the brake did not disengage any throttle? i.e. if the car has a bug and puts throttle to 100% and you stand on the brake, the car should say "cut throttle to 0", but instead, you just had 100% throttle, 100% brake?

Re: US probes Tesla's Full Self-Driving software after fatal crash

#784

Post by tverbeure »

rootusrootus wrote: post #518

I'm on my second free FSD trial, just started for me today. Gave it another shot, and it seems largely similar to the last free trial they gave. Fun party trick, surprisingly good, right up until it's not. A hallmark of AI everywhere, is how great it is and just how abruptly and catastrophically it fails occasionally. Please, if you're going to try it, keep both hands on the wheel and your foot ready for the brake. W…

I just gave it another try after my last failed attempt. (https://tomverbeure.github.io/2024/05/20/Tesla-FSD-First-and...)

I still find it shockingly bad, especially in the way it reacts, or doesn’t, to the way things change around the car (think a car on the left in front of you who switches on indicators to merge in front of you) or the way it makes the most random lane changing decisions and changes it’s mind in the middle of that maneuver.

Those don’t count as disengagements, but they’re jarring and drivers around you will rightfully question your behavior.

And that’s all over just a few miles of driving in an easy environment if interstate or highway.

I totally agree that it’s an impressive party trick, but it has no business being on the road.

My experience with Waymo in SF couldn’t have been more different.

Re: US probes Tesla's Full Self-Driving software after fatal crash

#785

Post by jeffbee »

Animats wrote: post #638
misiti3780 wrote: post #401

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's evident to Tesla drivers using Full Self-Driving (FSD) that the technology is rapidly improving and will likely succeed. The key reason for this anticipated success is data: any reasonably intelligent observer recognizes that training exceptional deep neural networks requires vast amounts of data, and Tesla has accumulated more relevant data than any of its competitors. Tesla recently held a robotaxi event, expl…

> and Tesla has accumulated more relevant data than any of its competitors. Has it really? How much data is each car sending to Tesla HQ? Anybody actually know? That's a lot of cell phone bandwidth to pay for, and a lot of data to digest. Vast amounts of data about routine driving is not all that useful, anyway. A "highlights reel" of interesting situations is probably more valuable for training. Waymo has shown some…

Anyone who believes Tesla beats Google because they are better at collecting and handling data can be safely ignored.

Re: US probes Tesla's Full Self-Driving software after fatal crash

#787

Post by deergomoo »

This is an opinion almost certainly based more in emotion than logic, but I don't think I could trust any sort of fully autonomous driving system that didn't involve communication with transmitters along the road itself (like a glideslope and localiser for aircraft approaches) and with other cars on the road.

Motorway driving sure, there it's closer to fancy cruise control. But around town, no thank you. I regularly drive through some really crappily designed bits of road, like unlabelled approaches to multi-lane roundabouts where the lane you need to be in for a particular exit sorta just depends on what the people in front and to the side of you happen to have chosen. If it's difficult as a human to work out what the intent is, I don't trust a largely computer vision-based system to work it out.

The roads here are also in a terrible state, and the lines on them even moreso. There's one particular patch of road where the lane keep assist in my car regularly tries to steer me into the central reservation, because repair work has left what looks a bit like lane markings diagonally across the lane.

Re: US probes Tesla's Full Self-Driving software after fatal crash

#788

Post by mannykannot »

andrewaylett wrote: post #635
ndsipa_pomu wrote: post #592

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> As soon as it’s good enough for Tesla to accept liability for accidents. That makes a lot of sense and not just from a selfish point of view. When a person drives a vehicle, then the person is held responsible for how the vehicle behaves on the roads, so it's logical that when a machine drives a vehicle that the machine's manufacturer/designer is held responsible. It's a complete con that Tesla is promoting their a…

The responsibility doesn't shift, it always lies with the human. One problem is that humans are notoriously poor at maintaining attention when supervising automation Until the car is ready to take over as legal driver, it's foolish to set the human driver up for failure in the way that Tesla (and the humans driving Tesla cars) do.

> The responsibility doesn't shift, it always lies with the human.

Indeed, and that goes for the person or persons who say that the products they sell are safe when used in a certain way.

Re: US probes Tesla's Full Self-Driving software after fatal crash

#789

Post by drowsspa »

Fomite wrote: post #737

"Driver is mostly disengaged, but then must intervene in a sudden fail state" is also one of the most dangerous types of automation due to how long it takes the driver to reach full control as well.

Yeah, I don't drive but I would think it would be worse than actually paying attention all the time

Re: US probes Tesla's Full Self-Driving software after fatal crash

#790

Post by tmtvl »

Terr_ wrote: post #410
stormfather wrote: post #361

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That would be good because it would incentivize all FSD cars communicating with each other. Imagine how safe driving would be if they are all broadcasting their speed and position to each other. And each vehicle sending/receiving gets cheaper insurance.

It goes kinda dsytopic if access to the network becomes a monopolistic barrier.

Not to mention the possibility of requiring pedestrians and cyclists to also be connected to the same network. Anyone with access to the automotive network could track any pedestrian who passes by the vicinity of a road.
Post reply on HN