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

921–930 of 1001 posts

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

#921

Post by avar »

tverbeure wrote: post #784
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…

[flagged]

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

#922

Post by HeadsUpHigh »

shepherdjerred wrote: post #429
HeadsUpHigh wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ive had similar experience with a Hyundai with steering assist. It would get confused by messed road lining all the time. Meanwhile it had no problem climbing a road curb that was unmarked. And it would try to constantly nudge the steering wheel meaning I had to put force into holding it in place all the time since it which was extra fatigue. Oh and it was on by default, meaning I had to disable it every time I turne…

What model year? I'm guessing it's an older one? My Hyundai is a 2021 and I have to turn on the steering assist every time which I find annoying. My guess is that you had an earlier model where the steering assist was more liability than asset. It's understandable that earlier versions of this kind of thing wouldn't function as well, but it is very strange that they would have it on by default.

>What model year? I'm guessing it's an older one?

Not 100% sure which year since it wasn't mine I think around 2018 +-2y. It was good at following bright painted white lines and nothing else. I didn't mind the beeping and the vibration when I stepped on a line but it wanted to actively steer the wheel which was infuriating. I wouldn't mind it if it was just a suggestion.

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

#923

Post by throw4950sh06 »

xattt wrote: post #903
throw4950sh06 wrote: post #897

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I wouldn't say so. It's a very marked difference with a sharp change the moment I drive through the border.

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

#924

Post by nkrisc »

dham wrote: post #888
nkrisc wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I dunno, knowing the exact relative velocity of the car in front of you seems like it could be useful and is something humans can’t do very well. I’ve always wanted a car that shows my speed and the relative speed (+/-) of the car in front of me. My car’s cruise control can maintain a set distance so obviously it’s capable of it but it doesn’t show it.

If your car is maintaining speed of the car in front then the car in front is going speed that is showing on your speedometer.

Yes, that’s true, but I don’t see how that relates to my comment at all.

I said the relative speed. If the car is going the same speed as me then the relative speed is 0mph. I want to see that when I’m not using cruise control.

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

#925

Post by valval »

kelnos wrote: post #573
valval wrote: post #344

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

No, that's absolutely not how this works. Confounding factors are things that make your data not tell you what you are actually trying to understand. You can't just hand-wave that away, sorry. Consider: what I expect is actually true based on the data is that Tesla FSD is as safe or safer than the average human driver, but only if the driver is paying attention and is ready to take over in case FSD does something uns…

Like I said, the time for studies is in the future. FSD is a product in development and they know which stats they need to track in order to track progress.

You’re arguing for something that: 1. Isn’t under contention and 2. Isn’t rooted in the real world.

You’re right FSD isn’t an autonomous driving system. It’s not meant to be, right now.

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

#926

Post by LadyCailin »

Majromax wrote: post #725
LadyCailin wrote: post #626

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But people driving manually kill people all the time too. The bar for self driving isn’t «does it never kill anyone», it’s «does it kill people less than manual driving». We’re not there yet, and Tesla’s «FSD» is marketing bullshit, but we certainly will be there one day, and at that point, we need to understand what we as a society will do when a self driving car kills someone. It’s not obvious what the best solutio…

> The bar for self driving isn’t «does it never kill anyone», it’s «does it kill people less than manual driving». Socially, that's not quite the standard. As a society, we're at ease with auto fatalities because there's often Someone To Blame. "Alcohol was involved in the incident," a report might say, and we're more comfortable even though nobody's been brought back to life. Alternatively, "he was asking for it, wa…

That may be true, but I think I personally would find it extremely hard to argue against when the numbers are clearly showing that it’s safer. I think once the numbers are unambiguously showing that autopilots are safer, it will be super hard for people to argue against it. Of course there is a huge intermediate state where the numbers aren’t clear (or at least not clear to the average person), and during that stage, emotions may rule the debate. But if the underlying data is there, I’m certain car companies can change the narrative - just look at how much American hates public transit and jaywalkers.

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

#927

Post by davkan »

sashank_1509 wrote: post #820
TheCleric wrote: post #440

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good. If you write software that people rely on with their lives, and it fails, you should be held liable for that criminally.

Do we send Boeing engineers to jail when their plane crashes? Intention matters when passing crime judgement. If a mother causes the death of her baby due to some poor decision (say feed her something contaminated), no one proposes or tries to jail the mother, because they know the intention was the opposite.

This is why we have criminal negligence. Did the mother open a sealed package from the grocery store or did she find an open one on the ground?

Harder to apply to software but maybe there should be a some legal liability involved when a sysadmin uses admin/admin and health information is leaked.

Some employees should be absolutely in jail from boeing regarding the MCAS system and the hundreds of people who died as a result. But the actions there go beyond negligence anyway.

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

#928

Post by [deleted] »

avar wrote: post #921
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…

[flagged]

[deleted]

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

#929

Post by suggeststrongid »

bastawhiz wrote: post #257

Lots 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…

> I'd call myself a fairly aggressive driver

This is puzzling. It’s as if it was said without apology. How about not endangering others on the road with manual driving before trying out self driving?

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

#930

Post by rcxdude »

valval wrote: post #912
hotspot_one wrote: post #851

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That car is signaling an intention to merge into your lane once it is safe for them to do so. Only under the assumption that the driver was trained in the US, to follow US traffic law, and is following that training. For example, in the EU, you switch on the indicators when you start the merge; the indicator shows that you ARE moving.

For anyone confused, this person’s statement about the EU is total bs.

It's what I was taught: you switch on your indicators when you have checked that you are clear to merge and you have effectively committed. I always assume that someone who has put their indicators in is going to move according to them, whether it's clear or not.
Post reply on HN