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

961–970 of 1001 posts

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

#961

Post by thunky »

7sidedmarble wrote: post #843
jalapenos wrote: post #530

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Arguing for the sake of it; you wouldn't take that risk reward. Most code has bugs from time to time even when highly skilled developers are being careful. None of them would drive if the fault rate was similar and the outcome was death.

I don't think anyone's seriously suggesting people be held accountable for bugs which are ultimately accidents. But if you knowingly sign off on, oversea, or are otherwise directly responsible for the construction of software that you know has a good chance of killing people, then yes, there should be consequences for that.

Exactly. Just like most car accidents don't result in prison or death. But negligence or recklessness can do it.

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

#962

Post by Lanolderen »

johnisgood wrote: post #943
rcxdude wrote: post #930

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

It's the difference between actually purposefully blinking and blinking to avoid a fine. In the latter you just tap the blinker stalk as you're turning the wheel. If someone's trying to do a dangerousish turn (waiting for a line of cars to do an illegal U turn for example) they'll be blinking to signal intention most of the time.

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

#963

Post by Toorkit »

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.

I got my license in 2014, in Germany, and was taught to turn on the turn signal > check mirrors > turn your head to look over your shoulder and only then, when you're clear, do you merge.

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

#964

Post by dham »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #920
dham wrote: post #881

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

It sounds zero insane. Adaptive cruise control taking into account merging would be great. And it's valid to complain about automations that make your car worse at cooperating.

This entire thread is people complaining about automation and FSD. Then you want an advanced feature, that requires a large amount of AI to do, as a toss-in feature to basic adaptive cruise control. Do you realize how far ahead Tesla is to everyone else?

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

#965

Post by InsomniacL »

iknowstuff wrote: post #899
InsomniacL wrote: post #677

As I come over the top of a crest, there was suddenly a lot of sun glare and the my Model Y violently swerved to the left, fortunately I had just overtaken a car on a two lane, dual carriageway and hadn't moved back to the left hand lane yet. The driver I had just overtaken, although he wasn't very close anymore slowed right down to get away from me and I didn't blame him. That manoeuvre in another car likely would h…

what do you mean you can only use fsd on motorways? Just by phrasing I assume you’re referring to the old FSD which is just beefed up autopilot based on heuristics - europe is stuck on a gimped 5 year old autopilot stack due to overzealous regulation. American FSD is a completely different beast, usable on every road and street, so your anecdote is actually not relevant to the thread

> Just by phrasing I assume you’re referring to the old FSD

I find it very confusing with the multiple versions of FSD, Auto-pilot, enhanced Auto-Pilot, supervised etc, but yeah I'm in Europe.

I got the car new from Tesla last year.

I understood there are vastly more features in the American locale but I assumed the 'keep lane' ability to be on-par and given the hardware is the same, sun-glare performance.

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

#966

Post by ra7 »

lopkeny12ko wrote: post #831
ra7 wrote: post #821

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The perfect setup. By the time an incident in the “current” software is investigated, it will be outdated. All Tesla has to do is a rev a software version and ignore all incidents that occurred prior to it.

You are welcome to conjure whatever conspiracy theories you like but the reality is FSD 12.5 is exponentially better than previous versions. Don't just take it from me, this is what all Tesla owners are saying too.

I’m pointing out the absurdity in your comment. There can’t be real time investigations when software is designed to be updated over time.

As far FSD 12.5’s supposed exponential improvement, its disengagement rate is still in the low double digits:

https://arstechnica.com/cars/2024/09/tesla-full-self-driving...

https://teslafsdtracker.com/

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

#967

Post by tirant »

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.

In general, the requirement is the following:

a) Check for the possibility of the maneuver; b) signal the maneuver; c) perform the maneuver.

However the signaling needs to be done in a way that it helps other road users to read and act according to your maneuver, so 3 seconds seems to be a good amount of time for that.

There are, on the other hand, situations where signaling the maneuver is also desirable even though the maneuver might not be possible yet: merging into a full lane, so vehicles might free up some space to let you merge.

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

#968

Post by eric_cc »

Der_Einzige wrote: post #906
itsoktocry wrote: post #427

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> tesla bulls

I’m not a Tesla financial speculator.

Consider the effort it would take a normal individual to prove how well their cars FSD works for them. Now consider how somebody with no investment in the technology stands to benefit from that level of effort. That’s ridiculous. If you’re curious about the technology, go spend time with it. That’s a better way to gather data. And then you don’t have to troll forums calling people liars.

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

#969

Post by friendzis »

nh2 wrote: post #744
jvolkman wrote: post #726

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is what Waymo realized a decade ago and what helped define their rollout strategy: https://youtu.be/tiwVMrTLUWg?t=247&si=Twi_fQJC7whg3Oey

This video is great. It looks like Wayno really understood the problem. It explains concisely why it's a bad idea to roll our incremental progress, how difficult the problem really is, and why you should really throw all sensors you can at it. I also appreciate the "we don't know when it's going to be ready" attitude. It shows they have a better understanding of what their task actually is than anybody who claims "ne…

> It looks like Wayno really understood the problem.

All they needed was one systems safety engineering student

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

#970

Post by Der_Einzige »

eric_cc wrote: post #968
Der_Einzige wrote: post #906

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> tesla bulls I’m not a Tesla financial speculator. Consider the effort it would take a normal individual to prove how well their cars FSD works for them. Now consider how somebody with no investment in the technology stands to benefit from that level of effort. That’s ridiculous. If you’re curious about the technology, go spend time with it. That’s a better way to gather data. And then you don’t have to troll forums…

I did! I own a comma! I’ve put in hundreds of hours into using teslas FSD. I know more about it than most in this thread and I repeat, folks who claim it’s as good as they say it is are liars. Yes, even with the 12.6 firmware. Yes, even with the 13.0 firmware that’s about to come out.
Post reply on HN