Most active commenters
  • UltraSane(7)
  • valval(3)

←back to thread

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

(www.reuters.com)
410 points jjulius | 12 comments | 18 Oct 24 16:01 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source | bottom
Show context
UltraSane ◴[19 Oct 24 03:23 UTC] No.41885410[source]▶
I'm astonished at how long Musk has been able to keep his autonomous driving con going. He has been lying about it to inflate Tesla shares for 10 years now.
replies(4): >>41885430 #>>41885475 #>>41885487 #>>41894628 #
porphyra ◴[19 Oct 24 03:42 UTC] No.41885487[source]▶
Just because it has taken 10 years longer than promised doesn't mean that it will never happen. FSD has made huge improvements this year and is on track to keep up the current pace so it actually does seem closer than ever.
replies(2): >>41885527 #>>41888830 #
1. UltraSane ◴[19 Oct 24 03:52 UTC] No.41885527[source]▶
The current vision-only system is a clear technological dead-end that can't go much more than 10 miles between "disengagements". To be clear, "disengagements" would be crashes if a human wasn't ready to take over. And not needing a human driver is THE ENTIRE POINT! I will admit Musk isn't a liar when Tesla has FSD at least as good as Waymo's system and Tesla accepts legal liability for any crashes.
replies(1): >>41886198 #
2. valval ◴[19 Oct 24 07:11 UTC] No.41886198[source]▶
You’re wrong. Nothing about this is clear, and you’d be silly to claim otherwise.

You should explore your bias and where it’s coming from.

replies(1): >>41887902 #
3. UltraSane ◴[19 Oct 24 14:19 UTC] No.41887902[source]▶
No Tesla vehicle has legally driven even a single mile with no driver in the driver's seat. They aren't even trying to play Waymo's game. The latest FSD software's failure rate is at least 100 times higher than it needs to be.
replies(1): >>41888135 #
4. fallingknife ◴[19 Oct 24 14:57 UTC] No.41888135{3}[source]▶
That's a stupid point. I've been in a Tesla that's driven a mile by itself. It makes no difference if a person is in the seat.
replies(1): >>41888440 #
5. UltraSane ◴[19 Oct 24 15:43 UTC] No.41888440{4}[source]▶
"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?

replies(2): >>41889921 #>>41897998 #
6. valval ◴[19 Oct 24 19:12 UTC] No.41889921{5}[source]▶
The difference is that Tesla has a general algorithm, while Waymo is hard coding scenarios.

I never really got why people bring Waymo up every time Tesla’s FSD is mentioned. Waymo isn’t competing with Tesla’s vision.

replies(2): >>41890584 #>>41891302 #
7. porphyra ◴[19 Oct 24 20:35 UTC] No.41890584{6}[source]▶
Waymo uses a learned planner and is far from "hardcoded". In any case, imo both of these can be true:

* Tesla FSD works surprisingly well and improving capabilities to hands free actual autonomy isn't as far fetched as one might think.

* Waymo beat them to robotaxi deployment and scaling up to multiple cities may not be as hard as people say.

It seems that self driving car fans are way too tribal and seem to be convinced that the "other side" sucks and is guaranteed to fail. In reality, it is very unclear as both strategies have their merits and only time will tell in the long run.

replies(1): >>41891319 #
8. UltraSane ◴[19 Oct 24 22:32 UTC] No.41891302{6}[source]▶
The difference is that Waymo has a very well engineered system using vision, LIDAR, and millimeter wave RADAR that works well enough in limited areas to provide tens of thousands of actual driver-less rides. Tesla has a vision only system that sucks so bad a human has to be ready to take over for it at any time like a parent monitoring a toddler near stairs.
replies(1): >>41901655 #
9. UltraSane ◴[19 Oct 24 22:35 UTC] No.41891319{7}[source]▶
" Tesla FSD works surprisingly well and improving capabilities to hands free actual autonomy isn't as far fetched as one might think"

Except FSD doesn't work surprisingly well and there is no way it will get as good as Waymo using vision-only.

"It seems that self driving car fans are way too tribal and seem to be convinced that the "other side" sucks and is guaranteed to fail."

I'm not being tribal, I'm being realistic based on the very public performance of both systems.

If Musk was serious about his Robotaxi claims then Tesla would be operating very differently. Instead it is pretty obvious it all a con to inflate Tesla shares beyond all reason.

10. fallingknife ◴[20 Oct 24 19:48 UTC] No.41897998{5}[source]▶
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 irrelevant to my point. You said a Tesla is not capable of driving itself for a mile. I have personally seen one do it. Whether a person is sitting in the driver's seat, or the regulators will allow it, has nothing to do with the fact that the vehicle does, in fact, have that capability.

replies(1): >>41899819 #
11. valval ◴[21 Oct 24 07:40 UTC] No.41901655{7}[source]▶
Wait until you hear Waymo has people ready to step in with remote controls at all times.
replies(1): >>41906016 #
12. UltraSane ◴[21 Oct 24 16:53 UTC] No.41906016{8}[source]▶
NO. Waymo cars are never remote-controlled. Remote controlling cars in traffic is too dangerous do to latency severely limited. What Waymo does is have operators provide hints. At no time is the autonomous system ever disabled. Just another example of how much better engineered Waymo is than Tesla's FSD scam.