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

941–950 of 1001 posts

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

#941

Post by whoitwas »

vkou wrote: post #935
avar wrote: post #921

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

There's degrees to being a shitty human being. Using your platform and millions of followers to publicly shit some random person who pissed you off is a degree of it. Being a colossal hypocrite with your 'free speech' platform, or lying to your customers is something else. Full mask-off throwing millions of dollars towards electing a convicted conman who is unabashedly corrupt, vindictive, nepotistic, already has a f…

I'm a bit more cynical and see his turn as a business move. He has considerate market captured, so he went full wackjob to capture that market.

Apparently, this doesn't reflect reality and he actually went crazy because one of his kids is trans. I have no idea because I don't know him.

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

#942

Post by johnisgood »

sokoloff wrote: post #854
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.

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."

I think the moral of the story is that cars may or may not turn their blinkers on. If they do, the self-driving should catch that just as easily and expect the car to switch lanes (with extreme caution).

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

#943

Post by johnisgood »

rcxdude wrote: post #930
valval wrote: post #912

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

It is what I see in practice in Eastern Europe. They signal as they are shifting lanes. Even if they turn the blinker on and then start moving 1 second later, it could be considered the same thing as 1 second is negligible.

Thus "the indicator shows that you ARE moving." is correct, at least in practice.

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

#944

Post by johnisgood »

Zanfa wrote: post #869
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 example, in the EU, you switch on the indicators when you start the merge; the indicator shows that you ARE moving. In my EU country it's theoretically at least 3 seconds before initiating the move.

As I mentioned in my other comment, 1 second is negligible, I would even dare to say that 3 seconds, is, too. For a computer it should not be, however.

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

#945

Post by johnisgood »

sandworm101 wrote: post #767
eschneider wrote: post #761

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"You slowly build a relationship with it and understand where it will fail." I spent over a decade working on production computer vision products. You think you can do this, and for some percentage of failures you can. The thing is, there will ALWAYS be some percentage of failure cases where you really can't perceive anything different from a success case. If you want to trust your life to that, fine, but I certainly…

Or until a software update quietly resets the relationship and introduces novel failure modes. There is little more dangerous on the road than false confidence.

Exactly. You may learn its patterns, but a software update could fuck it all up in a zillion different ways.

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

#946

Post by espadrine »

nh2 wrote: post #862
rvnx wrote: post #762

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ironically, Robotaxis from Waymo are actually working really well. It's a true unsupervised system, very safe, used in production, where the manufacturer takes the full responsibility. So the gradual rollout strategy is actually great. Tesla wants to do "all or nothing", and ends up with nothing for now (example with Europe, where FSD is sold since 2016 but it is "pending regulatory approval", when actually, the prob…

> So the gradual rollout strategy is actually great. I think you misunderstood, or it's a terminology problem. Waymo's point in the video is that in contrast to Tesla, they are _not_ doing gradual rollout of seemingly-working-still-often-catastropically-failing tech. See e.g. minute 5:33 -> 6:06. They are stating that they are targeting directly the shown upper curve of safety, and that they are not aiming for the "g…

Terminology.

Since they targeted very low risk, they did a geographically-segmented rollout, starting with Phoenix, which is one of the easiest places to drive: a lot of photons for visibility, very little rain, wide roads.

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

#947

Post by friendzis »

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…

> 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.

I have said it before, I will say it again. It seems that this software does not posses permanence, neither object nor decision.

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

#948

Post by mcintyre1994 »

Something I find weird about riding in a Tesla is that they have a mode that a bunch of Uber drivers seem to use where it shows a sort of diagram on the screen of what the car perceives to be its surroundings. This seems to be mostly bad - cars jump in and out, things appear from nowhere right next to the car, things randomly disappear. If that's produced using the same inputs the car uses for self driving then I'm not surprised it has all these issues.

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

#949

Post by xattt »

throw4950sh06 wrote: post #923
xattt wrote: post #903

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> … 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.

I’m only saying this from my experience in Canada where every region thinks its drivers are the worst.

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

#950

Post by jdblair »

mcintyre1994 wrote: post #948

Something I find weird about riding in a Tesla is that they have a mode that a bunch of Uber drivers seem to use where it shows a sort of diagram on the screen of what the car perceives to be its surroundings. This seems to be mostly bad - cars jump in and out, things appear from nowhere right next to the car, things randomly disappear. If that's produced using the same inputs the car uses for self driving then I'm n…

Here in Amsterdam, this view is constantly bicycles approaching from the sides, flickering and disappearing, but most of the time the bicycles are parked, completely stationary, without riders.
Post reply on HN