←back to thread

410 points jjulius | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
rootusrootus ◴[] No.41892630[source]
I'm on my second free FSD trial, just started for me today. Gave it another shot, and it seems largely similar to the last free trial they gave. Fun party trick, surprisingly good, right up until it's not. A hallmark of AI everywhere, is how great it is and just how abruptly and catastrophically it fails occasionally.

Please, if you're going to try it, keep both hands on the wheel and your foot ready for the brake. When it goes off the rails, it usually does so in surprising ways with little warning and little time to correct. And since it's so good much of the time, you can get lulled into complacence.

I never really understand the comments from people who think it's the greatest thing ever and makes their drive less stressful. Does the opposite for me. Entertaining but exhausting to supervise.

replies(5): >>41894715 #>>41896317 #>>41896773 #>>41898129 #>>41898671 #
darknavi ◴[] No.41894715[source]
You slowly build a relationship with it and understand where it will fail.

I drive my 20-30 minute commutes largely with FSD, as well as our 8-10 hour road trips. It works great, but 100% needs to be supervised and is basically just nicer cruise control.

replies(4): >>41895075 #>>41895464 #>>41895891 #>>41895943 #
coffeefirst ◴[] No.41895075[source]
This feels like the most dangerous possible combination (not for you, just to have on the road in large numbers).

Good enough that the average user will stop paying attention, but not actually good enough to be left alone.

And when the machine goes to do something lethally dumb, you have 5 seconds to notice and intervene.

replies(2): >>41895427 #>>41895956 #
jvolkman ◴[] No.41895427[source]
This is what Waymo realized a decade ago and what helped define their rollout strategy: https://youtu.be/tiwVMrTLUWg?t=247&si=Twi_fQJC7whg3Oey
replies(1): >>41895700 #
nh2 ◴[] No.41895700[source]
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 "next year" every year.

replies(3): >>41895788 #>>41896208 #>>41904273 #
trompetenaccoun ◴[] No.41896208[source]
All their sensors didn't prevent them from crashing into stationary object. You'd think that would be the absolute easiest to avoid, especially with both radar and lidar on board. Accidents like that show the training data and software will be much more important than number of sensors.

https://techcrunch.com/2024/06/12/waymo-second-robotaxi-reca...

replies(1): >>41896467 #
rvnx ◴[] No.41896467{3}[source]
The issue was fixed, now handling 100'000 trips per week, and all seems to go well in the last 4 months, this is 1.5 million trips.
replies(2): >>41896970 #>>41896990 #
1. trompetenaccoun ◴[] No.41896970{4}[source]
So they had "better understanding" of the problem as the other user put it, but their software was still flawed and needed fixing. That's my point. This happened two weeks ago btw: https://www.msn.com/en-in/autos/news/waymo-self-driving-car-...

I don't mean Waymo is bad or unsafe, it's pretty cool. My point is about true automation needing data and intelligence. A lot more data than we currently have, because the problem is in the "edge" cases, the kind of situation the software has never encountered. Waymo is in the lead for now but they have fewer cars on the road, which means less data.