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

901–910 of 1001 posts

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

#901

Post by iknowstuff »

stormfather wrote: post #361
jeremyjh wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this is the answer: the company takes on full liability. If a Tesla is Fully Self Driving then Tesla is driving it. The insurance market will ensure that dodgy software/hardware developers exit the industry.

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.

no need.

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

#902

Post by kjkjadksj »

crazygringo wrote: post #878
kjkjadksj wrote: post #867

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m not looking directly at the sun I am looking at the road. Either way it makes a big difference and you don’t get much black ice here in sunny southern california.

But the scenario we're talking about is when the sun is just a few degrees away from the road. It's still entering your eyeball directly. It's still literally blinding, so I just... don't understand how you can do that? Like, I certainly can't. Sunglasses -- polarized or otherwise -- don't make the slightest difference. It's why sun visors exist. Also, I'm assuming you get rain in SoCal at least sometimes, that then…

When we get rain in socal its a deluge. The first couple months of 2024 we had more rain than seattle. That being said there is a big difference wearing sunglasses and not. Actually I was in a parking garage today and thought of this very thread, because the sun was shining on the cement ground through the side and was literally blinding. To my naked eye it was like a blown out photograph, just pure light on the ground. I put the sunglasses on that were around my neck and what do you know. Not only did the glare go down it went down to the point I could now make out the little half rainbow streaks the cement pavers added to the floor. Same thing happens on our cement highways or when you get bad glare off of someones relatively freshly waxed car. I had a period of two weeks where I lost my polarized glasses and it was like I was disabled going outside in the day; I had to squint to even stand it because of how many white painted or cement surfaces we have here in socal. I grew up in the midwest where I did not really own sunglasses at all fwiw. Here it is mandatory for the amount of unclouded sunlight coupled with the usually white or light grey surface treatment on a lot of things.

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

#903

Post by xattt »

throw4950sh06 wrote: post #897
sokoloff wrote: post #854

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That seems odd to the point of uselessness, and does not match the required training I received in Germany from my work colleagues at Daimler prior to being able to sign out company cars. https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/stvo_2013/__9.html seems to be the relevant law in Germany, which Google translates to "(1) Anyone wishing to turn must announce this clearly and in good time; direction indicators must be used."

Maybe the guy was talking about the reality, not the theory. From my autobahn travels it seems like the Germans don't know how to turn on the blinkers.

> … the Germans don’t know how turn on the blinkers.

[Insert nationality/regional area here] don’t know how to turn on the blinkers.

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

#904

Post by UltraSane »

fallingknife wrote: post #866
UltraSane wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"It makes no difference if a person is in the seat." It does when Musk is claiming that Tesla is going to sell a car with no steering wheel! The current Tesla FSD fails so often that a human HAS to be in the driver seat ready to take over at any moment. You really don't understand the enormous difference between the current crappy level 2 Tesla FSD and Waymo's level 4 system?

Who said anything about Waymo? Waymo is building a very high cost commercial grade system intended for use on revenue generating vehicles. Tesla is building a low cost system intended for personal vehicles where Waymo's system would be cost prohibitive. Obviously Waymo's system is massively more capable. But that is about as surprising as the fact that a Ferrari is faster than a Ford Ranger. But this is all irrelevan…

[dead]

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

#905

Post by twoWhlsGud »

dham wrote: post #881
dreamcompiler wrote: post #366

Earlier 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…

Autopilot is just adaptive cruise control with lane keep. Literally every car has this now. I don't see people on Toyota, Honda, or Ford forums complaining that a table-stakes feature of a car doesn't adjust speed or change lanes as a car is merging in. Do you know how insane that sounds. I'm assuming you're in software since you're on Hacker news.

My Audi doesn't advertise its predictive cruise control as Full Self Driving. So expectations are more controlled...

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

#906

Post by Der_Einzige »

itsoktocry wrote: post #427
eric_cc wrote: post #379

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That sucks that you had that negative experience. I’ve driven thousands of miles in FSD and love it. Could not imagine going back. I rarely need to intervene and when I do it’s not because the car did something dangerous. There are just times I’d rather take over due to cyclists, road construction, etc.

These "works for me!" comments are exhausting. Nobody believes you "rarely intervene", otherwise Tesla themselves would be promoting the heck out of the technology. Bring on the videos of you in the passenger seat on FSD for any amount of time.

Thank god someone else said it.

I want some of these tesla bulls to PROVE that they are actually "not intervening". I think the one's who claim they aren't doing things for hours are liars.

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

#907

Post by mvdtnz »

AlchemistCamp wrote: post #226

The interesting question is how good self-driving has to be before people tolerate it. It's clear that having half the casualty rate per distance traveled of the median human driver isn't acceptable. How about a quarter? Or a tenth? Accidents caused by human drivers are one of the largest causes of injury and death, but they're not newsworthy the way an accident involving automated driving is. It's all too easy to se…

How about fewer accidents per distance of equivalent driving?

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

#908

Post by hilux »

lowbloodsugar wrote: post #840
hilux wrote: post #350

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Considering HN is mostly technologists, the extent of Tesla-hate in here surprises me. My best guess is that it is sublimated Elon-hate. (Not a fan of my former neighbor myself, but let's separate the man from his creations.) People seem to be comparing Tesla FSD to perfection, when the more fair and relevant comparison is to real-world American drivers. Who are, on average, pretty bad. Sure, I wouldn't trust data co…

That seems an odd take. This is a technologist website, and a good number of technologists believe in building robust systems that don’t fail in production. We don’t stand for demos, and we have to fight off consultants peddling crapware that demos well but dies in production. I own a Tesla, despite my dislike of Musk, because it is an insanely fun car. I will never enable FSD, did not even do so when it was free. I…

> ... systems that don’t fail in production.

I'll say it again: "compared to what?"

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

#909

Post by tverbeure »

sokoloff wrote: post #807
tverbeure wrote: post #784

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> (think a car on the left in front of you who switches on indicators to merge in front of you) That car is signaling an intention to merge into your lane once it is safe for them to do so . What does the Tesla do (or not do) in this case that's bad?

What I expect it to do is to be a courteous driver, and back off a little bit to signal to the car in front that I got the message and that it's safe to merge.

FSD is already defensive to a fault, with frequent stop-and-go indecisions of when to merge onto a highway, but that's a whole other story.

A major part of safe driving is about being predictable. You either commit and claim your right of way, or you don't. In this situation, both can be signaled easily to the other party by being a bit of a jerk (e.g. accelerating to close the gap and prevent somebody else from merging) or the opposite. Both are better than not doing anything at all and keeping the other dangling in a state of uncertainty.

FSD is in an almost permanent state of being indecisive and unpredictable. It behaves like a scared teenager with a learner's permit. Again, totally different than my experience in Waymo in the urban jungle of San Francisco, who's a defensive but confident driver.

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

#910

Post by ethbr1 »

jeffbee wrote: post #785
Animats wrote: post #638

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

The argument wouldn't be "better at" but simply "more".

Sensor platforms deployed at scale, that you have the right to take data from, are difficult to replicate.

Post reply on HN