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

851–860 of 864 posts

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

#851

Post by panick21_ »

int_19h wrote: post #706
panick21_ wrote: post #632

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Would smart roads be expensive? RFID responders seem super cheap compared to how much actual asphalt costs. Authorities are currently unable to remotely control flows, speeds and safety which is completely bonkers. Yeah its not actually that easy. Go and look into train signaling. And cars are not even able to do coupling. Making a train system operate like a super-railway with cars is crazy difficult and has never…

But is it more crazy difficult than making a car that knows how to safely drive on roads designed specifically for humans? That said, I think even just basic machine-readable road metadata like signs, speed limits, lanes etc would improve matters.

> That said, I think even just basic machine-readable road metadata like signs, speed limits, lanes etc would improve matters.

That assumes that sign reading is the primary issue with AI cars and it isn't.

If you are willing to go to that expense and infrastructure investment, why not just build thing like trains (trams, subways, S-Bahn) and things like Trolley buses and so on.

They are far more space efficient, you get much higher threwput then your untested fancy road infrastructure.

Another issue with your solution is that there are 1 billion cars out there that do not have any of these things so after decades of working on it, you will still have decades where most cars don't use any of this stuff.

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

#852

Post by panick21_ »

root_axis wrote: post #766
panick21_ wrote: post #573

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The question is not if FSD makes mistakes, its if FSD+a human driver monitoring is worse then a human driver.

All the available scientific evidence suggests these systems diminish driver focus and attention which definitely makes them less safe since these systems can't be operated safely without an attentive driver.

I have seen some evidence bases on some limited lane keeping systems that suggest this. But not on systems that are as advanced as FSD Beta for inner-city with the same amount of forcing the drives attention systems.

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

#853

Post by panick21_ »

diggernet wrote: post #381
panick21_ wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not a former Tesla engineer. This is competitor who wants to discredit Tesla and sell its own solution. The guy behind this is known to be untrustworthy, and many of the videos don't actually do what he claims. Notably he refused to release the videos that would prove his claims right. The reality is that Tesla scores high on all the automated breaking test done by government. The driver however can override…

So they scored high on whatever version of software was on the specific car tested by government at some point in time. Has any government done any testing at all on the version of software actually in use today?

The automated breaking is standard part of the software on every Tesla and is the software that was tested by multiple governments. This gives you certification. If Tesla would change or remove that software, it would be highly illegal. Tesla is actually notable that they are one of the only company that has implemented the highest standard of this safety feature on every car. These features are something Tesla is proud of have talked about quite a bit. They also mention that they have achieved the highest scores these evaluations.

The test done above has been replicated and the car does break in automated driving. And it gives loud warning to the driver even under normal driving operation and does emergency breaking.

Tesla assumes that if the driver hits the accelerator after the warning, the drive wants to accelerate based on the drivers judgment.

This is what this video shows, notably the person that made this video has refused to release prove that the car actually was in Autopilot, refused to provide evidence that the driver didn't hit the accelerator and refused to provide audio from inside the car so it can be verified that there was no warning sound.

In addition to that, the same person also claims things like 'millions of people will die if Autopilot isn't stopped' and that even under absurd assumptions is a legit insane thing to say.

So what is more likely, that Tesla did something incredibly illegal removing and incredibly important safety critical software that is standard in every Tesla OR that a competitor is doing a PR campaign where they deliberately set up a situation to film a video where they can create maximum damage to Tesla and then advocate for their own solution.

https://www.tesla.com/blog/model-y-earns-5-star-safety-ratin...

So the question is who do you believe, Euro NCAP or a competitor who made a sensationalist viral video.

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

#854

Post by int_19h »

panick21_ wrote: post #851
int_19h wrote: post #706

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But is it more crazy difficult than making a car that knows how to safely drive on roads designed specifically for humans? That said, I think even just basic machine-readable road metadata like signs, speed limits, lanes etc would improve matters.

> That said, I think even just basic machine-readable road metadata like signs, speed limits, lanes etc would improve matters. That assumes that sign reading is the primary issue with AI cars and it isn't. If you are willing to go to that expense and infrastructure investment, why not just build thing like trains (trams, subways, S-Bahn) and things like Trolley buses and so on. They are far more space efficient, you…

I'm not saying that it is a primary issue, but all of these issues come up with Teslas occasionally - just read some of the comments here.

More importantly, even if this kind of stuff doesn't enable full self-driving, it can still be used to make basic driving assistance much better - think of even the most basic cars having lane assist on most road, for example.

I don't think it's a significant expense, either. I'm not talking about ripping up roads and replacing all signs in one fell swoop. But e.g. when they redid the highway near me recently, it got little reflectors to mark the lanes. What if, say, every Nth of those had some kind of RFID thing in it? Or when they replace signs, why not put up a new one that broadcasts what it is? None of this is particularly expensive.

As to why not trains and buses - because they do not actually offer the same features as cars, and many people want those features. If you want to argue against cars on principle, it's a different conversation entirely. I do think that more quality public transport is desperately needed, but, speaking as someone who used it nearly exclusively for the first 25 years of my life (and in places that are designed around it, unlike US), it does not replace a car.

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

#855

Post by clouddrover »

ajross wrote: post #845
clouddrover wrote: post #836

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't matter how you rationalise it to yourself or how irresponsible you are in using it. Your car does not do full self-driving. It is stranded on Hardware 3. It will not get Hardware 4 unless a lawsuit enforces it: https://electrek.co/2023/02/15/tesla-self-driving-hw4-comput... Tesla has lied about full self-driving for years: https://www.tesla.com/blog/all-tesla-cars-being-produced-now... Tesla has admitted t…

> Your car does not do full self-driving. It literally drives itself. You're hiding behind a semantic argument about what "full" means, and how autonomy is deployed. It's the "Money Printer Go Brrr...." meme. You don't seem to be able to understand that the product as deployed has value to its purchasers, and that's leading you to some really emotionally dark places. I mean, it shouldn't be this upsetting to you that…

> You're hiding behind a semantic argument about what "full" means

No, I'm "hiding" behind the truth. I'm "hiding" behind the benchmark Tesla very publically sets for itself. Every year. Year after year:

https://jalopnik.com/elon-musk-promises-full-self-driving-ne...

> that's leading you to some really emotionally dark places

Okay, this is just sad now. It's like a kind of Stockholm syndrome. Cult members go one of two ways when confronted with realities which contradict their beliefs: they either finally recognise the silliness of their beliefs or they become even more ardent believers.

It's better to try to find a way to be objective. You shouldn't let people con you and you certainly shouldn't propagate the lie.

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

#856

Post by eternityforest »

monissiddiqui wrote: post #685
eternityforest wrote: post #670

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Positive sum games >>> zero sum games. The solipsistic individualistic mindset stems from the zero-sum game system IMO and that's a larger social and biological issue.

It's bigger than zero sum. The people I'm talking about have amazing amounts of altruism and community ethics.

They truly seem to want the whole world to succeed together, just... excluding the people who want to put you in jail for sneaking lead fuel in your truck, and anyone who doesn't lift weights and eat lots of meat, or anyone who complains about them going out while having a cough spreading germs.

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

#857

Post by brokenmachine »

Sparyjerry wrote: post #761
brokenmachine wrote: post #741

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why the hell does your washing machine need internet access?

Don't really need it but it sends notifications when the wash is done, lol.

#internetofshit solving problems you never had, one insecure device at a time.

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

#858

Post by dzhiurgis »

panick21_ wrote: post #851
int_19h wrote: post #706

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But is it more crazy difficult than making a car that knows how to safely drive on roads designed specifically for humans? That said, I think even just basic machine-readable road metadata like signs, speed limits, lanes etc would improve matters.

> That said, I think even just basic machine-readable road metadata like signs, speed limits, lanes etc would improve matters. That assumes that sign reading is the primary issue with AI cars and it isn't. If you are willing to go to that expense and infrastructure investment, why not just build thing like trains (trams, subways, S-Bahn) and things like Trolley buses and so on. They are far more space efficient, you…

You seem to contradict yourself - train signalling is hard, but lets build trains..?

My point the road metadata isn't for collision avoidance, but for better lane and speed assist.

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

#859

Post by bena »

thepasswordis wrote: post #834
bena wrote: post #796

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're both from Tesla. There's no real proof that they're representative of safe driving. And you kind of want it to flow both ways: "the safety score represents good driving, so I get cheaper insurance" and "I get cheaper insurance so the safety score must represent good driving". You're trying to use each of these things to validate the other so you can then claim it's something entirely else. I think it's tellin…

Man I think you're really confused about what the "safety score is". Here it is stated a simpler way: Tesla tracks driving style and gives you an insurance rate based on those driving habits. My insurance rate is about $90, which is the lowest the rate goes, because the things it tracks (following distance, for one) corresponds to a lower liability risk for the insurance underwriter, which in this case, is tesla. The…

I'm not confused.

Tesla is the insurer. Tesla is also the manufacturer of the insured item.

You are using as proof of the claim, the fact that the group making the claim says they're right. This is big "We've investigated ourselves and found nothing wrong" energy.

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

#860

Post by orthecreedence »

Zanneth wrote: post #848
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.

Replacing roads with railways means nearly complete reliance on a central authority for all transportation needs. This authority decides who gets to leave town and who doesn’t, which companies have priority when delivering goods, how or if the parallel railways should scale to meet more transportation demand, etc. Transportation safety is important but it shouldn’t be considered in isolation when there are potentiall…

Why can't personal vehicles use rail tracks without permission from a central authority?
Post reply on HN