←back to thread

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

(www.reuters.com)
410 points jjulius | 1 comments | 18 Oct 24 16:01 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
bastawhiz ◴[19 Oct 24 17:33 UTC] No.41889192[source]▶
Lots of people are asking how good the self driving has to be before we tolerate it. I got a one month free trial of FSD and turned it off after two weeks. Quite simply: it's dangerous.

- It failed with a cryptic system error while driving

- It started making a left turn far too early that would have scraped the left side of the car on a sign. I had to manually intervene.

- In my opinion, the default setting accelerates way too aggressively. I'd call myself a fairly aggressive driver and it is too aggressive for my taste.

- It tried to make way too many right turns on red when it wasn't safe to. It would creep into the road, almost into the path of oncoming vehicles.

- It didn't merge left to make room for vehicles merging onto the highway. The vehicles then tried to cut in. The system should have avoided an unsafe situation like this in the first place.

- It would switch lanes to go faster on the highway, but then missed an exit on at least one occasion because it couldn't make it back into the right lane in time. Stupid.

After the system error, I lost all trust in FSD from Tesla. Until I ride in one and feel safe, I can't have any faith that this is a reasonable system. Hell, even autopilot does dumb shit on a regular basis. I'm grateful to be getting a car from another manufacturer this year.

replies(24): >>41889213 #>>41889323 #>>41889348 #>>41889518 #>>41889642 #>>41890213 #>>41890238 #>>41890342 #>>41890380 #>>41890407 #>>41890729 #>>41890785 #>>41890801 #>>41891175 #>>41892569 #>>41894279 #>>41894644 #>>41894722 #>>41894770 #>>41894964 #>>41895150 #>>41895291 #>>41895301 #>>41902130 #
eric_cc ◴[19 Oct 24 20:11 UTC] No.41890407[source]▶
That sucks that you had that negative experience. I’ve driven thousands of miles in FSD and love it. Could not imagine going back. I rarely need to intervene and when I do it’s not because the car did something dangerous. There are just times I’d rather take over due to cyclists, road construction, etc.
replies(4): >>41890549 #>>41890902 #>>41892106 #>>41897127 #
itsoktocry ◴[19 Oct 24 21:26 UTC] No.41890902[source]▶
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.

replies(3): >>41891792 #>>41893276 #>>41900222 #
eric_cc ◴[19 Oct 24 23:58 UTC] No.41891792[source]▶
It’s the counter-point to the “it doesn’t work for me” posts. Are you okay with those ones?
replies(1): >>41894208 #
1. kelnos ◴[20 Oct 24 09:36 UTC] No.41894208[source]▶
I think the problem with the "it works for me" type posts is that most people reading them think the person writing it is trying to refute what the person with the problem is saying. As in, "it works for me, so the problem must be with you, not the car".

I will refrain from commenting on whether or not that's a fair assumption to make, but I think that's where the frustration comes from.

I think when people make "WFM" posts, it would go a long way to acknowledge that the person who had a problem really did have a problem, even if implicitly.

"That's a bummer; I've driven thousands of miles using FSD, and I've felt safe and have never had to intervene. I wonder what's different about our travel that's given us such different experiences."

That kind of thing would be a lot more palatable, I think, even if you might think it's silly/tiring/whatever to have to do that every time.