←back to thread

Tesla said it didn't have key data in a fatal crash, then a hacker found it

(www.washingtonpost.com)
650 points clcaev | 2 comments | 29 Aug 25 11:15 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
voidUpdate ◴[29 Aug 25 12:11 UTC] No.45063021[source]▶
I'm still convinced that it being called "full self driving" is misleading marketing and really needs to stop, since it isn't according to Tesla
replies(7): >>45063088 #>>45063277 #>>45063334 #>>45063570 #>>45063571 #>>45063584 #>>45066589 #
orlp ◴[29 Aug 25 12:36 UTC] No.45063277[source]▶
The marketing doesn't even matter. It either needs to be full self driving, or nothing at all. The "semi self-driving but you're still responsible when shit hits the fan" just doesn't work.

Humans are simply incapable of paying attention to a task for long periods if it doesn't involve some kind of interactive feedback. You can't ask someone to watch paint dry while simultaneously expect them to have < 0.5sec reaction time to a sudden impulse three hours into the drying process.

replies(2): >>45063485 #>>45064308 #
sneak ◴[29 Aug 25 14:05 UTC] No.45064308[source]▶
I used to think this, but then I got a Model 3. I believe that FSD is presently better than most humans driving today even when they are theoretically “fully engaged in manual driving”.

FSD doesn’t lull humans into a false sense of security, humans do. FSD doesn’t let you use your phone while it’s on. This alone is an upgrade over most human beings, who think occasional quick phone usage while driving is fine (at least for themselves).

I believe that if you replaced all human drivers in the US with FSD as it exists today, fatalities would go down immediately.

Humans are not a gold standard, and the current median human driver is easy to outperform on safety.

replies(1): >>45066865 #
1. binoct ◴[29 Aug 25 17:20 UTC] No.45066865[source]▶
So this is a really good example of small sample size intuition being a big challenge. Fatalities happen on the order of billion miles driven - obviously people don’t come to that. Take a few thousand miles of positive experience sets a statistical floor on accident rates, but that is orders of magnitude away from how safe (or unsafe, depending on how you look at it) human drivers are on average. FSD and other, less capable L2 systems are amazing at paying attention in situations where humans fail, but also tend to have major limitations in places humans will largely do great most of the time. Your experience, as positive as it has been, doesn’t support the assertion that fatalities would decrease.
replies(1): >>45070245 #
2. sneak ◴[29 Aug 25 22:43 UTC] No.45070245[source]▶
I see median human drivers all of the time, and I see median FSD all of the time. I don’t need to drive a billion miles to have a valid opinion that one is better than the other.

I’m sure things are very different out around the edges, as you note, but the majority of the time humans in cars kill people it isn’t because they were in an edge case - quite the opposite. They were just driving home from the bar like they do every night.