Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

$10K to whoever can show a Fortune 500 product is less reliable than Tesla's FSD

dawnproject.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

1–10 of 27 posts

Re: $10K to whoever can show a Fortune 500 product is less reliable than Tesla's FSD

#2

Post by guardiangod »

Dumb stunt-

has a critical safety malfunction on average every 8 minutes;

has been on the market for at least 6 months;

has never been recalled.

Have they tried Ford's self driving system on the Mach-E, and see how it auto-disengages when a highway curved more than what the system can handle? Would that count as a critical safety malfunction?

I'd never use FSD in its current state, but FSD had plenty of recalls by way of version rollbacks.

Re: $10K to whoever can show a Fortune 500 product is less reliable than Tesla's FSD

#3

Post by waffle_maniac »

guardiangod wrote: post #2

Dumb stunt- has a critical safety malfunction on average every 8 minutes; has been on the market for at least 6 months; has never been recalled. Have they tried Ford's self driving system on the Mach-E, and see how it auto-disengages when a highway curved more than what the system can handle? Would that count as a critical safety malfunction? I'd never use FSD in its current state, but FSD had plenty of recalls by wa…

FSD needs a permanent recall. I don't consent to alpha software being used on roads.

Re: $10K to whoever can show a Fortune 500 product is less reliable than Tesla's FSD

#5

Post by maxharris »

This is a stunt by Green Hills Software, a maker of embedded operating systems and programming tools. You might be interested to know that they initiated a public relations campaign decrying the use of Linux as insecure:

https://lwn.net/Articles/83242/

Here's an article by the very same Dan O’Dowd: "Linux: unfit for national security?" https://web.archive.org/web/20040912190752/http://www.ghs.co... https://web.archive.org/web/20040916074333/https://www.ghs.c...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Hills_Software

Re: $10K to whoever can show a Fortune 500 product is less reliable than Tesla's FSD

#6

Post by natch »

These people's reading comprehension is atrocious.

Tesla's FSD does not exist yet. A beta product is not the same as a product. Yes one can pre-pay for the product and get some features now, but actual FSD is simply not here yet. By "actual FSD" I mean something that is non-beta and actually does full self driving, in case that needs to be spelled out. Boy.

Re: $10K to whoever can show a Fortune 500 product is less reliable than Tesla's FSD

#7

Post by spiderice »

waffle_maniac wrote: post #3
guardiangod wrote: post #2

Dumb stunt- has a critical safety malfunction on average every 8 minutes; has been on the market for at least 6 months; has never been recalled. Have they tried Ford's self driving system on the Mach-E, and see how it auto-disengages when a highway curved more than what the system can handle? Would that count as a critical safety malfunction? I'd never use FSD in its current state, but FSD had plenty of recalls by wa…

FSD needs a permanent recall. I don't consent to alpha software being used on roads.

Why do you think your consent is necessary or relevant? You do consent, by driving on the roads with them.

"I don't consent to sharing the road with large SUVs"

Did I just make large SUVs illegal?

Re: $10K to whoever can show a Fortune 500 product is less reliable than Tesla's FSD

#9

Post by ben_w »

waffle_maniac wrote: post #3
guardiangod wrote: post #2

Dumb stunt- has a critical safety malfunction on average every 8 minutes; has been on the market for at least 6 months; has never been recalled. Have they tried Ford's self driving system on the Mach-E, and see how it auto-disengages when a highway curved more than what the system can handle? Would that count as a critical safety malfunction? I'd never use FSD in its current state, but FSD had plenty of recalls by wa…

FSD needs a permanent recall. I don't consent to alpha software being used on roads.

I appreciate the sentiment, especially given the types of failure mode, but the stats (such as they are) indicate the cars are safer with it switched on than without it.

To the extent that it’s possible to know anything, it looks like it makes cars less unsafe.

Post reply on HN