/top/
/new/
/best/
/ask/
/show/
/job/
^
slacker news
login
about
←back to thread
US probes Tesla's Full Self-Driving software after fatal crash
(www.reuters.com)
410 points
jjulius
| 3 comments |
18 Oct 24 16:01 UTC
|
HN request time: 0.381s
|
source
Show context
UltraSane
◴[
19 Oct 24 03:23 UTC
]
No.
41885410
[source]
▶
>>41880649 (OP)
#
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
#
jjmarr
[dead post]
◴[
19 Oct 24 03:38 UTC
]
No.
41885475
[source]
▶
>>41885410
#
[flagged]
two_handfuls
◴[
19 Oct 24 04:19 UTC
]
No.
41885608
[source]
▶
>>41885475
#
I tried it. It drives worse than a teenager.
There is absolutely no way this can safely drive a car without supervision.
replies(1):
>>41886215
#
valval
◴[
19 Oct 24 07:15 UTC
]
No.
41886215
[source]
▶
>>41885608
#
It’s been safer than a human driver for years. It’s also not meant to be unsupervised.
replies(3):
>>41888839
#
>>41889379
#
>>41891531
#
gitaarik
◴[
19 Oct 24 16:40 UTC
]
No.
41888839
[source]
▶
>>41886215
#
Something about these two statements seem to be in conflict with each other, but maybe that is just kinda Tesla PR talk.
replies(2):
>>41889902
#
>>41891387
#
1.
valval
◴[
19 Oct 24 19:09 UTC
]
No.
41889902
[source]
▶
>>41888839
#
It’s quite easy to be safer than a human driver, since humans are just human. Supervision is required because the system can face edge cases.
replies(2):
>>41889941
#
>>41891391
#
ID:
GO
2.
gitaarik
◴[
19 Oct 24 19:14 UTC
]
No.
41889941
[source]
▶
>>41889902 (TP)
#
Ah ok so if humans would be supervised for their edge cases then humans would actually be safer!
3.
UltraSane
◴[
19 Oct 24 22:49 UTC
]
No.
41891391
[source]
▶
>>41889902 (TP)
#
Edge cases like intersections?
↑