20 ms·

People are reporting collisions with Tesla’s Smart Summon feature

159 points by Alupis 7y ago

samstave 7y ago
Brilliant So we can send a fleet of Tesla to a bank robbery as gay away cars and have them block. Our getaway?
- LiamPa 7y ago
  Did you write this whilst ‘driving’ yours?
SrslyJosh 7y ago
Nobody who has an inkling how hacky self-driving is would try this.
- rantwasp 7y ago
  and still you have a team of really gifted engineers that worked on this, an executive or a bunch of executives that pushed for this and a bunch of tesla owners that will give it a try.
- GaryNumanVevo 7y ago
  I cringe whenever my friend tell me his Tesla M3 will be full self driving and he'll be able to earn passive income in the future.
fyfy18 7y ago
Most of these look like user stupidity rather than anything wrong with the car. Especially the video of the guy who trys to summon his car across a road. I imagine summon is pretty dumb, but all Tesla's talk of autopilot and self-driving cars has made people believe it is a lot smarter than it actually is.
- rsynnott 7y ago
  Let’s say you make an amazing new consumer gas central heating boiler, and shout about it on Twitter to your adoring followers. And if someone switches it on without opening the water valves, it explodes and kills them. You say “oh, the manual says not to do that”. How do you think that would fly? Consumer products have to be designed to be safe against consumers, to a large extent. You can’t just add a feature, add a disclaimer that says, in effect, “don’t use this”, and blame the user if they use the feature.
  - donatj 7y ago
    I don’t understand if this argument is sarcasm or not? I don’t have a boiler but I have a water heater and know if I don’t manually start the pilot light after having shut off the gas I could die. Technology has always required basic understanding to avoid harm.
- arkitaip 7y ago
  How is it 'user stupidity' when customers are using a feature as it is advertised, especially since the distances traveled are absolutely trivial?
  - gambiting 7y ago
    The car only moves forward as long as you hold a button on your phone - as soon as you let go it stops. You are supposed to observe the car moving at all times. So logically, if you see that the car is about to collide with something, you let go of the button and the car stops. What else is it if not user error then?
    - barrkel 7y ago
      Most parking involves one or the other end of the vehicle being close to something else. How do you stop in time if it starts out going the wrong way? That sounds like the issue with the chap who tried it in his driveway. (My feeling is that if the feature isn't more reliable than a 95th percentile human for the subset of functionality, it probably shouldn't be released.)
ztjio 7y ago
The feature is in beta, and it is enabled on cars lacking the latest hardware. I think it would be reasonable to expect issues especially for those cars. I know it's very popular to cherry pick incidents and attack Tesla these days, but, nobody else is pushing the envelope. And nothing about this feature is putting anyone at significant risk. These are inconveniences that have occurred, and nothing else. In the meantime, the pursuit of self driving cars is pushed forward greatly through the collection of this data. In the end, this will benefit everyone. For now, we can sit back and enjoy the cringey videos this will produce.
- duaoebg 7y ago
  It's bad enough to share the road with bad drivers now I have to share the road with poorly written software.
  - celticninja 7y ago
    You think cars were running perfect software before Tesla?
    - elcomet 7y ago
      No, but they didn't drive alone.
- Tomte 7y ago
  > nobody else is pushing the envelope Many other companies do. They just stop short of releasing obviously substandard and dangerous technologies into the wild. That's what test tracks were built for, not public streets.
  - missosoup 7y ago
    To add to this, there are a number of production cars today with level 2 automation equivalent to or better than Tesla's. None of them made a big fuss about it. The only envelope Tesla is pushing with 'autopilot' is in misleading marketing that has been directly linked to drivers misunderstanding the capabilities/limitations of the technology.
molmalo 7y ago
Honest question, Can somebody explain me the use case for this feature? I don't get it. I mean, if the summoned car came to me in a totally autonomous way, it would be useful in very large parking lots, like an airport, campus, etc... Or I could call it while still leaving my apartment/office, and the car would be there by the time I get to the door. But if I need to have the car in my line of sight, just standing still while watching it and holding the button, with me being aware and responsible of the car not bumping into any obstacle, then it means I'm pretty close to the vehicle, so why not just walk the very short distance to it?
- m3kw9 7y ago
  Ever more want for Convenience.
- dannyw 7y ago
  Most people won't use it everyday. However, maybe it's raining outside and you don't have an umbrella. Or you got a shopping trolley full of stuff. Or the spot is so tight, it's easier to get into your car after it pulls out.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- x38iq84n 7y ago
  It's to show your friends and colleagues, it has no practical purpose given the conditions and requirements for the use of the feature.
  - wnorris 7y ago
    This is a critical part of the overall full self driving equation. Any vendor working on this problem will be spending inordinate amounts of resources on this as parking lots are one of the more challenging environments. In certain locations (especially in winter) this will be a very nice feature. This is especially true to anyone with disabilities or extreme laziness. ;-).
  - MobileVet 7y ago
danielovichdk 7y ago
AI taking over and teasing owners. Or just a bad idea for fat and lazy people.
- dhdjdkd 7y ago
  Pretty much - ppl are too lazy to walk to their bloody cats and drive their own cars because they want to keep starting at the car video they’re watching
RaceWon 7y ago
And so if a person accidentally drops their phone the car eventually stops when it meets an unmovable object? Is this correct?
- reitzensteinm 7y ago
  No, if you release the button it'll stop (barring some kind of fault). It will also stop before hitting anything (again, barring some kind of fault). It's not ready, though. The Tesla might not technically have been at fault in this clip, but driving is full of situations where one party makes a mistake, and another takes corrective action to prevent an accident. A self driving system that is never "at fault" but crashes regularly into drivers that are at fault is not good enough. It needs to drive defensively. The timing of this release is suspiciously close to the end of Q3. It concerns me that this was rushed out the door early to recognize some revenue. https://twitter.com/DavidFe83802184/status/1177761173271392256 https://twitter.com/DavidFe83802184/status/11777611732713922...
  - RaceWon 7y ago
    > No, if you release the button it'll stop OIC, thanks for the info that I was too lazy to DuckDuck
- icebraining 7y ago
  Seems like you have to keep pushing a button, so it should stop as soon as the phone is let go.
Havoc 7y ago
Taking move fast and break things to the next level
- PhantomGremlin 7y ago
  Yup. The following is from a previous HN Tesla discussion: Tesla Will Have Full Autonomy in 2020, Musk Says Tesla has an advantage here in that they don't feel the need for their autonomy to be particularly safe. These problems and accidents are a direct result of Tesla's laissez-faire attitude toward autonomous driving. They do whatever the fuck they think they can get away with, consequences be damned. So far, they've been allowed to get away with quite a lot.
  - blub 7y ago
    SV will be SV, the real question is what is the NHTSA doing. The US wants to deregulate itself into chaos apparently.
  - donatj 7y ago
    For the sake of argument let’s say they’re not perfect but better than human drivers, is that good enough? Technology is inherently dangerous, but if everything that could kill someone had been held back we’d still be workshopping fire.
    - oldgradstudent 7y ago
      > For the sake of argument let’s say they’re not perfect but better than human drivers, is that good enough? When we'll get there we can discuss it. We're not even close.
      - donatj 7y ago
        > We're not even close. What makes you say that? I've certainly known quite a few people who've gotten into fender benders in parking lots.
  - 7y ago
sunstone 7y ago
I like the Tesla cars and definitely thinking of getting one but the self driving stuff, I'll let that age for a decade or two.
- Shivetya 7y ago
  Own a TM3, unless Tesla can make "smart" summon work the idea they will ever have full autonomous driving down is just a pipe dream. What the car can do on a long drive is nothing short of amazing compared to any other brand but treat it like your kid with their new driving license, you watch over it like a hawk. At most I use it to slide out of a space where someone got too close, usually on purpose, or as a party trick. Let it drive out of my sight, oh, hell no.
  - throwaway66920 7y ago
    Isn’t that the intended use case? You’re not supposed to let it drive out of your sight.
antpls 7y ago
The feature being a worldwide premier, with no past experience, I honestly expected that Tesla had added more sounds and visual warnings when the Summon feature is running, such as flashing the car's headlights and emitting regular "bip" (like when a big truck is doing a reverse manœuvre), to catch the attention of other drivers, or even warn blind people when the Tesla is near. Then, once the feature is polished with more real world data, they can always remove the warnings later. The video with the white car coming through especially is scary. From all the sensors and marketing materials I know from Tesla, I would expect the Tesla to have detected that white car way sooner and stopped automatically. There was really no ambiguity to what decision to take here.
- BoorishBears 7y ago
  Does the Model 3 have a concept of stop signs (not just recognizing them, but understanding arrival order and how long to wait) and right of way? Or are they expecting to get away with just avoiding cars and pedestrians while breaking driving rules because it's a parking lot and blaming owners when it inevitably falls short. Tesla's track record leads me to believe the latter, but I'd love to find out something to the contrary. - Actually it looks like this is still controlled by holding a button? So yeah, guessing it has no concept of those andalmost-crash in video #2 would be expected behavior. Marvelous.
  - mysterydip 7y ago
    If four teslas arrive at an intersection at the same time, do they all crash? :)
    - mannykannot 7y ago
      You say this as a joke, but I suspect they have been programmed to drive fairly aggressively, though probably to come to a halt before any collision that it can predict. If so, we might soon see two or more Teslas deadlocked, their fenders inches apart.
    - we_are_teslas 7y ago
moltar 7y ago
Ok, so, from the article: 1. Lexus backed into Tesla 2. Nearly collided, on a busy lot, both cars stopped in time. I’m really not seeing a problem yet. Just an alarmist, fake news article.
- BoorishBears 7y ago
  Are you joking? In the first case the Lexus was in the wrong, but a human would have intervened with that loud auditory device affixed to the steering wheel, or moved further out of the way. The Tesla freezes deer in headlights after it turns into the path of the car backing up. I wonder if it even signaled before turning. The fact the owner is worried that the other driver thinks they were driving leads to be believe it probably did something a human driver should have, not signaling makes sense - In the second case it ignored right of way and almost caused a serious crash! In another it ran into a wall! If anything tuis article is being incredible charitable by trying to focus on the cases where it doesn't fail...
  - pound 7y ago
    >> In the second case it ignored right of way This is exactly the thing that people should !not expect! from it in the very beginning. It's an owner's responsibility to _monitor surroundings_ and make car move when it's safe to do so. Car will navigate, but it's not a full self driving obeying all the rules of city traffic.
    - BoorishBears 7y ago
      The real world is not a train line. A car that moves on a track while you hold a button, then stops when you let go is not safe. Even when it is safe to move from your point of view, it doesn't exclude you from having to signal to other drivers. It doesn't exclude you from situations that were safe but are no longer and require the car to move out of the way in a maneuver more complex than a few feet forward or backwards. - Not to mention all the scenarios Tesla touts in the launch are also perfect completely contradictory to monitoring surroundings. You wouldn't drive with a hand full of groceries, or your baby crying in your lap, because you'd be driving distracted. Why is Tesla bragging you can control the car while dealing with these distractions when they haven't taken the steps to make it safe to do so?
samstave 7y ago
It was a freaking typo guys, Jesus Christ. iPads suck to type from some times.
brainless 7y ago
"You are still responsible for your car and must monitor it and its surroundings at times within your line of sight because it may not detect all obstacles. Be especially careful around quick moving people, bicycles, and cars." Is this a joke? I have huge respect for Tesla and SpaceX, but how do they expect to release a feature that will self-drive a car (even tiny distance) and someone will oversee a moving car? The software engineer in me just died.
- m3kw9 7y ago
  If you think harder about not, no one really turns on autopilot except on main roads or highways, hence almost no training data. Parking lots is like a big rectangular area with stuff moving all over. So with more training data, they should have it down, but these incidents gonna lower their rates of getting training data. Is a chicken and egg problem.
  - occamrazor 7y ago
    And if the pharma companies didn’t have to abide by ethical guidelines for clinical trials they could collect more data. There are good reasons to forbid that.
  - petters 7y ago
    I thought Tesla collected training data everywhere all the time?
    - froh 7y ago
      And they shadow test while hooman is driving.
- loceng 7y ago
  It's not unreasonable to assume someone will have a line of sight for where a vehicle is being summoned from, just like when in the vehicle itself and you drive forward you're paying attention to its surroundings as well. I have seen some videos released with summons that just a quick horn honk would have likely prevented another driver backing up their vehicle from bumping into, with enough force to do some front bumper damage, a Tesla being summoned in a parking lot; it moves slowly too, and that could also be a factor in surrounding drivers not gauging or having the same kinds of reactions.
perspective1 7y ago
Tesla. I'm disappointed. You say your cars are the safest on the road. That your self-driving AI is safer than humans. You spar with regulating bodies along those lines-- arguing that you're protecting consumers. And then you roll out a fluff feature that causes accidents.
- rohit2412 7y ago
  Then you shouldn't be trusting Tesla's marketing. Did you think Elon musk had personally made break throughs that ML scientists at Google are struggling over?
  - JJCoh 7y ago
    As much as google likes to brand themselves as an AI company it is pretty much all marketing fluff. What google has actually deployed is all super simply modeling because of the scale they have to run at. They can’t deploy expensive models because they have to run across a billion+ users. They have made some contributions on the NLP side but mostly they just have the best consumer packaging of ai.
- rantwasp 7y ago
  maybe, if road means freeway. There is no way the "self-driving" AI is safer than humans in the context of busy city streets, construction areas, parking lots, you name it.
thrower123 7y ago
I can't believe that this is a real thing. Are we so lazy that we can't walk to our cars now?
- sixothree 7y ago
  We waste vast amounts of space on parking spots. We destroy perfectly good land just in case someone might want to park there. This could change the shape of shopping and make the world a better place.
  - thrower123 7y ago
    And? This doesn't do anything about that if you still need to be line-of-sight.
    - sixothree 7y ago
      That won't always be the case.
cj 7y ago
As a motorcyclist, these videos are sickening. Especially the guy purposely using smart summon to cross LIVE traffic (not in a parking lot). These kind of low speed collisions are not a big deal to car drivers. But for someone on a motorcycle, having a Tesla with no driver obliviously pulling out into live traffic in front of a motorcycle (even at low speeds) can cause significant injury. Please, people... don't be stupid.
- dhdjdkd 7y ago
  when I ride to work I take a completely different route that is significantly longer just to avoid two intersections and a couple of blind high speed crests. The long route also a long twisty section, so that helps too :D
- woofyman 7y ago
  >Please, people... don't be stupid It’s more than stupidity, it’s a sense of entitlement.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- gruez 7y ago
  >But for someone on a motorcycle, having a Tesla with no driver obliviously pulling out into live traffic in front of a motorcycle I don't get it. Do motorcyclists use whether someone's in the driver's seat to determine whether the car is moving or not? Shouldn't they be looking at the brake/head lights?
  - cj 7y ago
    The point is not to needlessly increase the risk for other people using the road for the sake of showing off your car’s cool party trick. But to directly answer your question: in fact, most people on a motorcycle will try to look at the driver, when possible, to check if the driver is looking at them to gauge whether the driver sees them or not. In the case of a Tesla, it’s impossible to know if the car’s sensors know you’re approaching... Also, I don’t know any human beings that share a similar driving pattern as the Tesla while it’s being summoned. It seems to start and stop unpredictably and does so in a very jerky nature (and most humans do not drive as slow as in the videos, and yes sometimes driving slowly is more dangerous than driving regular speeds, and most humans also won’t drive on the wrong side of a lane, which the Tesla often does in videos I’ve watched... it’s just very unpredictable
dkarl 7y ago
If you're incredulous that Tesla would let people oversee a moving car at 15mph in a parking lot, wait until you hear what happens next after the car gets to them! I think driving is a special case for safety, because we have put humans in charge of controlling 2000+lb cars at high speed in close proximity with other humans doing the same thing, and we've either designed or retrofitted this activity into almost every dense human habitation on the planet. Obviously we would never make such a decision now, but it gives a special context to today's safety decisions. It is a major ongoing source of death and injury as well as a major source of pollution, and bringing that era to a close is a special priority. In the United States roughly 100 people per day die in car accidents, and many more are seriously injured, so you could say that every day we can accelerate the end of human driving saves a hundred lives.
- natch 7y ago
  Small clarification: it’s 5 mph for now, not 15.
- elihu 7y ago
  I agree that having humans drive cars is inherently unsafe and that self-driving cars will eventually be safer when the technology matures. However, that doesn't justify Tesla releasing features before they're ready. That doesn't move us towards a self-driving future; in fact, it sets us back.
- CPLX 7y ago
  I think you’ve sort of articulated the problem yourself. Cars are inherently incredibly dangerous, and also ubiquitous. Therefore, even a subtle change to how cars work has the potential to cause literal carnage. And this isn’t a subtle change.
  - gpm 7y ago
    It also has the potential to prevent literal carnage. The risk might be high, but so is the reward.
- jakeogh 7y ago
tjoff 7y ago
It is bold to imply that what tesla does is anything but directly harmful towards the goal of ending human driving. Tesla and uber do a terrific job of pushing the acceptance of self driving and risking postponing that with their recklessness.
- dkarl 7y ago
  Maybe; it's hard to say. I think the reputation of human driving is so low that it's hard to go lower, but opinion on that is pretty polarized. As a bike commuter in a quickly growing city, I'm aware that there are a lot of people who think driving is a fundamentally safe activity that is only made dangerous by unwelcome novelties such as cyclists, pedestrians, etc. But there's also a lot of awareness that it's really a shit show: humans are terrible drivers who kill people by the thousands every year. It's such an outlier that I don't think normal safety standards apply. I think the only standard that self-driving cars should need to meet is being comparable to human drivers. If self-driving cars replaced humans the day they became safer than human drivers, they would become our second most deadly consumer technology next to guns. Crazy to think about, isn't it? As safety improves, self-driving cars can save thousands of lives per year and still be our second most deadly consumer technology. We should get used to that idea and look forward to cranking the death rate lower and lower as technology improves. Humans behind the wheel will always be a menace.
  - tjoff 7y ago
    Well they are nowhere near human drivers. And yes, human drivers are terrible. Thing is that human drivers vary a lot. So we have excellent drivers and we have awful drivers. And also we have tired drivers, bored drivers, angry drivers and we have sporadically inattentive drivers. If we were to aim for "at least the same number of accidents as a human per mile" that would be a pretty disastrous AI. Because the AI would be much more uniform in its performance. A human driver will send text messages and won't even slow down before hitting a stand-still truck right in front of them. A human driver will mix up the brake pedal and speed straight through an intersection. An AI that does comparable damage (obviously wouldn't make the same mistakes) would be pretty darn scary to sit inside or be near. There is also the very important factor that a self-driving car needs to behave as a human to not cause accidents just with it's presence. The PR disasters that await, when people die because a self-driving car did something that a conscious human would never do people won't react rationally. Tesla are just begging for a, well deserved, ban on self-driving cars and attach a stigma to them. All while killing some people. There is no silver lining to it.
gpm 7y ago
So, the author managed to find 3 concrete examples. One where someone else backed into the Tesla. One where no collision occured. One where the tesla ran into a garage. Only the last seems at all worrisome... I vote for changing the headline to singular collision.
- davedx 7y ago
  But this is HN, so the comment stating “It's insane people are putting these death machines on public roads.” is voted above yours.
- ajross 7y ago
  Right, the first was an at fault incident by the non-Tesla driver for sure. In the second, the vehicle was allowed to drive across a traffic lane. And in fact it attempted to do so, but stopped at the threshold when it saw a vehicle approaching (which also hit the brakes). I fail so see how this isn't exactly the behavior claimed and desired.
  - rohit2412 7y ago
    Hmm, Tesla definitely crossed into the road in that video. If driving into live traffic and stopping in middle of it is acceptable, then okay, self driving cars are here!
    - ajross 7y ago
      Are we looking at the same video? https://twitter.com/eiddor/status/1177749574976462848 https://twitter.com/eiddor/status/1177749574976462848 It pulls out as if it were going to continue across the traffic lane and very clearly stops right at the threshold. At no point is it in the traffic lane, nor in the path of the gray vehicle that stops. It's true that it "looked like" a human driver who was going to continue straight out, so the other driver (correctly) hit the brakes. But spinning this like the Tesla "stopped in the middle of traffic" is just plain wrong.
      - 7y ago
Jasper_ 7y ago
All evidence so far suggests that self-driving cars are more dangerous than human drivers when similar conditions are taken into account. The comparison numbers that Tesla parrots are between Teslas with modern safety features and in good weather conditions, and the entire rest of road fatalities, including motorcycles. Comparing similarly bodied cars in similar weather conditions, Tesla's self driving has more reported collisions per miles driven.
- lol768 7y ago
  >The comparison numbers that Tesla parrots are between Teslas with modern safety features and in good weather conditions, and the entire rest of road fatalities, including motorcycles. Comparing similarly bodied cars in similar weather conditions, Tesla's self driving has more reported collisions per miles driven. I'm interested in learning more about this, because I'd originally taken Tesla's figures at face value. Are there any sources you'd recommend?
  - Jasper_ 7y ago
    The best data source I'm aware of is NHTSA's Traffic Safety Facts tables, but the data is a bit hard to filter by. https://cdan.nhtsa.gov/tsftables/tsfar.htm https://cdan.nhtsa.gov/tsftables/tsfar.htm The raw data is available in some other form available by one of the linked sites, but I cannot find it in the rat's nest of hyperlinks right now.
  - gnicholas 7y ago
    I co-wrote an article [1] that covers some of the flaws in Tesla’s comparisons a few years back. Not sure if their stats have gotten any better in recent years, but the errors back then were pretty basic. 1: https://www.thedailybeast.com/how-tesla-and-elon-musk-exaggeraged-safety-claims-about-autopilot-and-cars?ref=author https://www.thedailybeast.com/how-tesla-and-elon-musk-exagge...
    - natch 7y ago
      One of the issues raised in the article was insufficient data. I guess there’s a lot more data now!
mindfulplay 7y ago
The carelessness and dangerous way this entire thing has been "rolled out" is alarming. People are touting this as some sort of "amazing" feature, I think this guy Elon Musk is a crazy whackjob who puts people's lives at risk. All the videos I saw from Tesla were " ideal well-lit" situations; well of course! University graduate students have Legos and basic robotics that do that crap. Getting it to work in "normal" (read "edge-cases) is the most difficult part. And they conveniently just ignored that part. It's insane people are putting these death machines on public roads. Before people claim "this is just a parking lot", imagine how many parents use their stroll-cartd with babies in them or how many kids run around in parking lots.
- GhostVII 7y ago
  I think "death machines" is a bit hyperbolic, the speed is capped at 5mph, and I imagine that Tesla is better at avoiding hitting humans in parking lots than a normal driver since it has sensors all around it. Avoiding hitting people isn't the hard part, navigating in a predictable way and following the unwritten expectations of driving in a parking lot is, and that is something Tesla doesn't seem to do a great job of yet.
  - rantwasp 7y ago
    yes. you have a couple thousands pounds of "self-driving" technology that does not do well in parking lots (that's like 95% of where I usually park my car). It's definitely not going to hit or kill anyone. Also, it's the responsibility of pedestrians 100% to look for cars. Give me a break. You can either handle what your feature advertises or you cannot. This is in the cannot bucket - the same way autopilot is in the cannot bucket. The sad story with Tesla is that they should probably focus on the one thing that works beautifully on the car and that is the fact that it's electric. Focus on making a beautiful, insanely fast electric car. People love it already - just stop w/ the gimmicks.
    - GhostVII 7y ago
      There is a big different between not doing well in parking lots, and being dangerous in parking lots. From the videos I have seen, it doesn't do well in parking lots because it is too cautious - it is safe, but not very functional. Now of course we have to wait longer before determining if it is safe or not, but I would imagine that it is not hard for Tesla to avoid hitting people, and if it does hit someone it is only going at walking speed anyways.
benj111 7y ago
Apparently the car doesn't try to read road markings, I stand by my comment I made 2 days ago in response to that. "Isnt that below minimum viable product for something expected to be used with other people around?" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21089373 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21089373
tpmx 7y ago
Related - if you like spending time on reddit: please consider visiting r/realtesla. Sometimes it's a bit too negative, but mostly I find it a nice counterbalance to that creepy "everything is always awesome" subreddit.
chvid 7y ago
It looks it is running the same software as my vacuum robot.
imglorp 7y ago
This seems like a huge opportunity for insurance fraud like you see often in Asia. Someone arranges to be struck by a car (ie flings themself in front of it), then splits the medical payout with a crooked doctor.
new_realist 7y ago
This feature was pushed out way before it was ready, all so Tesla can recognize some deferred FSD revenue in Q3, which ends on Monday.
grizzles 7y ago
I love Musk but this is a bad feature because he hasn't looked at the actuarial case for not having this. TONS of car accidents happen in parking lots.
GaryNumanVevo 7y ago
Honestly what's interesting here: People are rushing to try out the v1.0 software of a feature from a car company, potentially risking their expensive vehicle because FOMO of all the other Tesla owners posting about summon before them.

159 points by Alupis 7y ago

samstave 7y ago

Brilliant So we can send a fleet of Tesla to a bank robbery as gay away cars and have them block. Our getaway?

LiamPa 7y ago
Did you write this whilst ‘driving’ yours?

SrslyJosh 7y ago

Nobody who has an inkling how hacky self-driving is would try this.

rantwasp 7y ago
and still you have a team of really gifted engineers that worked on this, an executive or a bunch of executives that pushed for this and a bunch of tesla owners that will give it a try.
GaryNumanVevo 7y ago
I cringe whenever my friend tell me his Tesla M3 will be full self driving and he'll be able to earn passive income in the future.

fyfy18 7y ago

Most of these look like user stupidity rather than anything wrong with the car. Especially the video of the guy who trys to summon his car across a road. I imagine summon is pretty dumb, but all Tesla's talk of autopilot and self-driving cars has made people believe it is a lot smarter than it actually is.

rsynnott 7y ago
Let’s say you make an amazing new consumer gas central heating boiler, and shout about it on Twitter to your adoring followers. And if someone switches it on without opening the water valves, it explodes and kills them. You say “oh, the manual says not to do that”. How do you think that would fly? Consumer products have to be designed to be safe against consumers, to a large extent. You can’t just add a feature, add a disclaimer that says, in effect, “don’t use this”, and blame the user if they use the feature.
- donatj 7y ago
  I don’t understand if this argument is sarcasm or not? I don’t have a boiler but I have a water heater and know if I don’t manually start the pilot light after having shut off the gas I could die. Technology has always required basic understanding to avoid harm.
arkitaip 7y ago
How is it 'user stupidity' when customers are using a feature as it is advertised, especially since the distances traveled are absolutely trivial?
- gambiting 7y ago
  The car only moves forward as long as you hold a button on your phone - as soon as you let go it stops. You are supposed to observe the car moving at all times. So logically, if you see that the car is about to collide with something, you let go of the button and the car stops. What else is it if not user error then?
  - barrkel 7y ago
    Most parking involves one or the other end of the vehicle being close to something else. How do you stop in time if it starts out going the wrong way? That sounds like the issue with the chap who tried it in his driveway. (My feeling is that if the feature isn't more reliable than a 95th percentile human for the subset of functionality, it probably shouldn't be released.)

ztjio 7y ago

The feature is in beta, and it is enabled on cars lacking the latest hardware. I think it would be reasonable to expect issues especially for those cars. I know it's very popular to cherry pick incidents and attack Tesla these days, but, nobody else is pushing the envelope. And nothing about this feature is putting anyone at significant risk. These are inconveniences that have occurred, and nothing else. In the meantime, the pursuit of self driving cars is pushed forward greatly through the collection of this data. In the end, this will benefit everyone. For now, we can sit back and enjoy the cringey videos this will produce.

duaoebg 7y ago
It's bad enough to share the road with bad drivers now I have to share the road with poorly written software.
- celticninja 7y ago
  You think cars were running perfect software before Tesla?
  - elcomet 7y ago
    No, but they didn't drive alone.
Tomte 7y ago
> nobody else is pushing the envelope Many other companies do. They just stop short of releasing obviously substandard and dangerous technologies into the wild. That's what test tracks were built for, not public streets.
- missosoup 7y ago
  To add to this, there are a number of production cars today with level 2 automation equivalent to or better than Tesla's. None of them made a big fuss about it. The only envelope Tesla is pushing with 'autopilot' is in misleading marketing that has been directly linked to drivers misunderstanding the capabilities/limitations of the technology.

molmalo 7y ago

Honest question, Can somebody explain me the use case for this feature? I don't get it. I mean, if the summoned car came to me in a totally autonomous way, it would be useful in very large parking lots, like an airport, campus, etc... Or I could call it while still leaving my apartment/office, and the car would be there by the time I get to the door. But if I need to have the car in my line of sight, just standing still while watching it and holding the button, with me being aware and responsible of the car not bumping into any obstacle, then it means I'm pretty close to the vehicle, so why not just walk the very short distance to it?

m3kw9 7y ago
Ever more want for Convenience.
dannyw 7y ago
Most people won't use it everyday. However, maybe it's raining outside and you don't have an umbrella. Or you got a shopping trolley full of stuff. Or the spot is so tight, it's easier to get into your car after it pulls out.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
x38iq84n 7y ago
It's to show your friends and colleagues, it has no practical purpose given the conditions and requirements for the use of the feature.
- wnorris 7y ago
  This is a critical part of the overall full self driving equation. Any vendor working on this problem will be spending inordinate amounts of resources on this as parking lots are one of the more challenging environments. In certain locations (especially in winter) this will be a very nice feature. This is especially true to anyone with disabilities or extreme laziness. ;-).
- MobileVet 7y ago

danielovichdk 7y ago

AI taking over and teasing owners. Or just a bad idea for fat and lazy people.

dhdjdkd 7y ago
Pretty much - ppl are too lazy to walk to their bloody cats and drive their own cars because they want to keep starting at the car video they’re watching

RaceWon 7y ago

And so if a person accidentally drops their phone the car eventually stops when it meets an unmovable object? Is this correct?

reitzensteinm 7y ago
No, if you release the button it'll stop (barring some kind of fault). It will also stop before hitting anything (again, barring some kind of fault). It's not ready, though. The Tesla might not technically have been at fault in this clip, but driving is full of situations where one party makes a mistake, and another takes corrective action to prevent an accident. A self driving system that is never "at fault" but crashes regularly into drivers that are at fault is not good enough. It needs to drive defensively. The timing of this release is suspiciously close to the end of Q3. It concerns me that this was rushed out the door early to recognize some revenue. https://twitter.com/DavidFe83802184/status/1177761173271392256 https://twitter.com/DavidFe83802184/status/11777611732713922...
- RaceWon 7y ago
  > No, if you release the button it'll stop OIC, thanks for the info that I was too lazy to DuckDuck
icebraining 7y ago
Seems like you have to keep pushing a button, so it should stop as soon as the phone is let go.

Havoc 7y ago

Taking move fast and break things to the next level

PhantomGremlin 7y ago
Yup. The following is from a previous HN Tesla discussion: Tesla Will Have Full Autonomy in 2020, Musk Says Tesla has an advantage here in that they don't feel the need for their autonomy to be particularly safe. These problems and accidents are a direct result of Tesla's laissez-faire attitude toward autonomous driving. They do whatever the fuck they think they can get away with, consequences be damned. So far, they've been allowed to get away with quite a lot.
- blub 7y ago
  SV will be SV, the real question is what is the NHTSA doing. The US wants to deregulate itself into chaos apparently.
- donatj 7y ago
  For the sake of argument let’s say they’re not perfect but better than human drivers, is that good enough? Technology is inherently dangerous, but if everything that could kill someone had been held back we’d still be workshopping fire.
  - oldgradstudent 7y ago
    > For the sake of argument let’s say they’re not perfect but better than human drivers, is that good enough? When we'll get there we can discuss it. We're not even close.
    - donatj 7y ago
      > We're not even close. What makes you say that? I've certainly known quite a few people who've gotten into fender benders in parking lots.
- 7y ago

sunstone 7y ago

I like the Tesla cars and definitely thinking of getting one but the self driving stuff, I'll let that age for a decade or two.

Shivetya 7y ago
Own a TM3, unless Tesla can make "smart" summon work the idea they will ever have full autonomous driving down is just a pipe dream. What the car can do on a long drive is nothing short of amazing compared to any other brand but treat it like your kid with their new driving license, you watch over it like a hawk. At most I use it to slide out of a space where someone got too close, usually on purpose, or as a party trick. Let it drive out of my sight, oh, hell no.
- throwaway66920 7y ago
  Isn’t that the intended use case? You’re not supposed to let it drive out of your sight.

antpls 7y ago

The feature being a worldwide premier, with no past experience, I honestly expected that Tesla had added more sounds and visual warnings when the Summon feature is running, such as flashing the car's headlights and emitting regular "bip" (like when a big truck is doing a reverse manœuvre), to catch the attention of other drivers, or even warn blind people when the Tesla is near. Then, once the feature is polished with more real world data, they can always remove the warnings later. The video with the white car coming through especially is scary. From all the sensors and marketing materials I know from Tesla, I would expect the Tesla to have detected that white car way sooner and stopped automatically. There was really no ambiguity to what decision to take here.

BoorishBears 7y ago
Does the Model 3 have a concept of stop signs (not just recognizing them, but understanding arrival order and how long to wait) and right of way? Or are they expecting to get away with just avoiding cars and pedestrians while breaking driving rules because it's a parking lot and blaming owners when it inevitably falls short. Tesla's track record leads me to believe the latter, but I'd love to find out something to the contrary. - Actually it looks like this is still controlled by holding a button? So yeah, guessing it has no concept of those andalmost-crash in video #2 would be expected behavior. Marvelous.
- mysterydip 7y ago
  If four teslas arrive at an intersection at the same time, do they all crash? :)
  - mannykannot 7y ago
    You say this as a joke, but I suspect they have been programmed to drive fairly aggressively, though probably to come to a halt before any collision that it can predict. If so, we might soon see two or more Teslas deadlocked, their fenders inches apart.
  - we_are_teslas 7y ago

moltar 7y ago

Ok, so, from the article: 1. Lexus backed into Tesla 2. Nearly collided, on a busy lot, both cars stopped in time. I’m really not seeing a problem yet. Just an alarmist, fake news article.

BoorishBears 7y ago
Are you joking? In the first case the Lexus was in the wrong, but a human would have intervened with that loud auditory device affixed to the steering wheel, or moved further out of the way. The Tesla freezes deer in headlights after it turns into the path of the car backing up. I wonder if it even signaled before turning. The fact the owner is worried that the other driver thinks they were driving leads to be believe it probably did something a human driver should have, not signaling makes sense - In the second case it ignored right of way and almost caused a serious crash! In another it ran into a wall! If anything tuis article is being incredible charitable by trying to focus on the cases where it doesn't fail...
- pound 7y ago
  >> In the second case it ignored right of way This is exactly the thing that people should !not expect! from it in the very beginning. It's an owner's responsibility to _monitor surroundings_ and make car move when it's safe to do so. Car will navigate, but it's not a full self driving obeying all the rules of city traffic.
  - BoorishBears 7y ago
    The real world is not a train line. A car that moves on a track while you hold a button, then stops when you let go is not safe. Even when it is safe to move from your point of view, it doesn't exclude you from having to signal to other drivers. It doesn't exclude you from situations that were safe but are no longer and require the car to move out of the way in a maneuver more complex than a few feet forward or backwards. - Not to mention all the scenarios Tesla touts in the launch are also perfect completely contradictory to monitoring surroundings. You wouldn't drive with a hand full of groceries, or your baby crying in your lap, because you'd be driving distracted. Why is Tesla bragging you can control the car while dealing with these distractions when they haven't taken the steps to make it safe to do so?

samstave 7y ago

It was a freaking typo guys, Jesus Christ. iPads suck to type from some times.

brainless 7y ago

"You are still responsible for your car and must monitor it and its surroundings at times within your line of sight because it may not detect all obstacles. Be especially careful around quick moving people, bicycles, and cars." Is this a joke? I have huge respect for Tesla and SpaceX, but how do they expect to release a feature that will self-drive a car (even tiny distance) and someone will oversee a moving car? The software engineer in me just died.

m3kw9 7y ago
If you think harder about not, no one really turns on autopilot except on main roads or highways, hence almost no training data. Parking lots is like a big rectangular area with stuff moving all over. So with more training data, they should have it down, but these incidents gonna lower their rates of getting training data. Is a chicken and egg problem.
- occamrazor 7y ago
  And if the pharma companies didn’t have to abide by ethical guidelines for clinical trials they could collect more data. There are good reasons to forbid that.
- petters 7y ago
  I thought Tesla collected training data everywhere all the time?
  - froh 7y ago
    And they shadow test while hooman is driving.
loceng 7y ago
It's not unreasonable to assume someone will have a line of sight for where a vehicle is being summoned from, just like when in the vehicle itself and you drive forward you're paying attention to its surroundings as well. I have seen some videos released with summons that just a quick horn honk would have likely prevented another driver backing up their vehicle from bumping into, with enough force to do some front bumper damage, a Tesla being summoned in a parking lot; it moves slowly too, and that could also be a factor in surrounding drivers not gauging or having the same kinds of reactions.

perspective1 7y ago

Tesla. I'm disappointed. You say your cars are the safest on the road. That your self-driving AI is safer than humans. You spar with regulating bodies along those lines-- arguing that you're protecting consumers. And then you roll out a fluff feature that causes accidents.

rohit2412 7y ago
Then you shouldn't be trusting Tesla's marketing. Did you think Elon musk had personally made break throughs that ML scientists at Google are struggling over?
- JJCoh 7y ago
  As much as google likes to brand themselves as an AI company it is pretty much all marketing fluff. What google has actually deployed is all super simply modeling because of the scale they have to run at. They can’t deploy expensive models because they have to run across a billion+ users. They have made some contributions on the NLP side but mostly they just have the best consumer packaging of ai.
rantwasp 7y ago
maybe, if road means freeway. There is no way the "self-driving" AI is safer than humans in the context of busy city streets, construction areas, parking lots, you name it.

thrower123 7y ago

I can't believe that this is a real thing. Are we so lazy that we can't walk to our cars now?

sixothree 7y ago
We waste vast amounts of space on parking spots. We destroy perfectly good land just in case someone might want to park there. This could change the shape of shopping and make the world a better place.
- thrower123 7y ago
  And? This doesn't do anything about that if you still need to be line-of-sight.
  - sixothree 7y ago
    That won't always be the case.

cj 7y ago

As a motorcyclist, these videos are sickening. Especially the guy purposely using smart summon to cross LIVE traffic (not in a parking lot). These kind of low speed collisions are not a big deal to car drivers. But for someone on a motorcycle, having a Tesla with no driver obliviously pulling out into live traffic in front of a motorcycle (even at low speeds) can cause significant injury. Please, people... don't be stupid.

dhdjdkd 7y ago
when I ride to work I take a completely different route that is significantly longer just to avoid two intersections and a couple of blind high speed crests. The long route also a long twisty section, so that helps too :D
woofyman 7y ago
>Please, people... don't be stupid It’s more than stupidity, it’s a sense of entitlement.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
gruez 7y ago
>But for someone on a motorcycle, having a Tesla with no driver obliviously pulling out into live traffic in front of a motorcycle I don't get it. Do motorcyclists use whether someone's in the driver's seat to determine whether the car is moving or not? Shouldn't they be looking at the brake/head lights?
- cj 7y ago
  The point is not to needlessly increase the risk for other people using the road for the sake of showing off your car’s cool party trick. But to directly answer your question: in fact, most people on a motorcycle will try to look at the driver, when possible, to check if the driver is looking at them to gauge whether the driver sees them or not. In the case of a Tesla, it’s impossible to know if the car’s sensors know you’re approaching... Also, I don’t know any human beings that share a similar driving pattern as the Tesla while it’s being summoned. It seems to start and stop unpredictably and does so in a very jerky nature (and most humans do not drive as slow as in the videos, and yes sometimes driving slowly is more dangerous than driving regular speeds, and most humans also won’t drive on the wrong side of a lane, which the Tesla often does in videos I’ve watched... it’s just very unpredictable

dkarl 7y ago

If you're incredulous that Tesla would let people oversee a moving car at 15mph in a parking lot, wait until you hear what happens next after the car gets to them! I think driving is a special case for safety, because we have put humans in charge of controlling 2000+lb cars at high speed in close proximity with other humans doing the same thing, and we've either designed or retrofitted this activity into almost every dense human habitation on the planet. Obviously we would never make such a decision now, but it gives a special context to today's safety decisions. It is a major ongoing source of death and injury as well as a major source of pollution, and bringing that era to a close is a special priority. In the United States roughly 100 people per day die in car accidents, and many more are seriously injured, so you could say that every day we can accelerate the end of human driving saves a hundred lives.

natch 7y ago
Small clarification: it’s 5 mph for now, not 15.
elihu 7y ago
I agree that having humans drive cars is inherently unsafe and that self-driving cars will eventually be safer when the technology matures. However, that doesn't justify Tesla releasing features before they're ready. That doesn't move us towards a self-driving future; in fact, it sets us back.
CPLX 7y ago
I think you’ve sort of articulated the problem yourself. Cars are inherently incredibly dangerous, and also ubiquitous. Therefore, even a subtle change to how cars work has the potential to cause literal carnage. And this isn’t a subtle change.
- gpm 7y ago
  It also has the potential to prevent literal carnage. The risk might be high, but so is the reward.
jakeogh 7y ago

tjoff 7y ago

It is bold to imply that what tesla does is anything but directly harmful towards the goal of ending human driving. Tesla and uber do a terrific job of pushing the acceptance of self driving and risking postponing that with their recklessness.

dkarl 7y ago
Maybe; it's hard to say. I think the reputation of human driving is so low that it's hard to go lower, but opinion on that is pretty polarized. As a bike commuter in a quickly growing city, I'm aware that there are a lot of people who think driving is a fundamentally safe activity that is only made dangerous by unwelcome novelties such as cyclists, pedestrians, etc. But there's also a lot of awareness that it's really a shit show: humans are terrible drivers who kill people by the thousands every year. It's such an outlier that I don't think normal safety standards apply. I think the only standard that self-driving cars should need to meet is being comparable to human drivers. If self-driving cars replaced humans the day they became safer than human drivers, they would become our second most deadly consumer technology next to guns. Crazy to think about, isn't it? As safety improves, self-driving cars can save thousands of lives per year and still be our second most deadly consumer technology. We should get used to that idea and look forward to cranking the death rate lower and lower as technology improves. Humans behind the wheel will always be a menace.
- tjoff 7y ago
  Well they are nowhere near human drivers. And yes, human drivers are terrible. Thing is that human drivers vary a lot. So we have excellent drivers and we have awful drivers. And also we have tired drivers, bored drivers, angry drivers and we have sporadically inattentive drivers. If we were to aim for "at least the same number of accidents as a human per mile" that would be a pretty disastrous AI. Because the AI would be much more uniform in its performance. A human driver will send text messages and won't even slow down before hitting a stand-still truck right in front of them. A human driver will mix up the brake pedal and speed straight through an intersection. An AI that does comparable damage (obviously wouldn't make the same mistakes) would be pretty darn scary to sit inside or be near. There is also the very important factor that a self-driving car needs to behave as a human to not cause accidents just with it's presence. The PR disasters that await, when people die because a self-driving car did something that a conscious human would never do people won't react rationally. Tesla are just begging for a, well deserved, ban on self-driving cars and attach a stigma to them. All while killing some people. There is no silver lining to it.

gpm 7y ago

So, the author managed to find 3 concrete examples. One where someone else backed into the Tesla. One where no collision occured. One where the tesla ran into a garage. Only the last seems at all worrisome... I vote for changing the headline to singular collision.

davedx 7y ago
But this is HN, so the comment stating “It's insane people are putting these death machines on public roads.” is voted above yours.
ajross 7y ago
Right, the first was an at fault incident by the non-Tesla driver for sure. In the second, the vehicle was allowed to drive across a traffic lane. And in fact it attempted to do so, but stopped at the threshold when it saw a vehicle approaching (which also hit the brakes). I fail so see how this isn't exactly the behavior claimed and desired.
- rohit2412 7y ago
  Hmm, Tesla definitely crossed into the road in that video. If driving into live traffic and stopping in middle of it is acceptable, then okay, self driving cars are here!
  - ajross 7y ago
    Are we looking at the same video? https://twitter.com/eiddor/status/1177749574976462848 https://twitter.com/eiddor/status/1177749574976462848 It pulls out as if it were going to continue across the traffic lane and very clearly stops right at the threshold. At no point is it in the traffic lane, nor in the path of the gray vehicle that stops. It's true that it "looked like" a human driver who was going to continue straight out, so the other driver (correctly) hit the brakes. But spinning this like the Tesla "stopped in the middle of traffic" is just plain wrong.
    - 7y ago

Jasper_ 7y ago

All evidence so far suggests that self-driving cars are more dangerous than human drivers when similar conditions are taken into account. The comparison numbers that Tesla parrots are between Teslas with modern safety features and in good weather conditions, and the entire rest of road fatalities, including motorcycles. Comparing similarly bodied cars in similar weather conditions, Tesla's self driving has more reported collisions per miles driven.

lol768 7y ago
>The comparison numbers that Tesla parrots are between Teslas with modern safety features and in good weather conditions, and the entire rest of road fatalities, including motorcycles. Comparing similarly bodied cars in similar weather conditions, Tesla's self driving has more reported collisions per miles driven. I'm interested in learning more about this, because I'd originally taken Tesla's figures at face value. Are there any sources you'd recommend?
- Jasper_ 7y ago
  The best data source I'm aware of is NHTSA's Traffic Safety Facts tables, but the data is a bit hard to filter by. https://cdan.nhtsa.gov/tsftables/tsfar.htm https://cdan.nhtsa.gov/tsftables/tsfar.htm The raw data is available in some other form available by one of the linked sites, but I cannot find it in the rat's nest of hyperlinks right now.
- gnicholas 7y ago
  I co-wrote an article [1] that covers some of the flaws in Tesla’s comparisons a few years back. Not sure if their stats have gotten any better in recent years, but the errors back then were pretty basic. 1: https://www.thedailybeast.com/how-tesla-and-elon-musk-exaggeraged-safety-claims-about-autopilot-and-cars?ref=author https://www.thedailybeast.com/how-tesla-and-elon-musk-exagge...
  - natch 7y ago
    One of the issues raised in the article was insufficient data. I guess there’s a lot more data now!

mindfulplay 7y ago

The carelessness and dangerous way this entire thing has been "rolled out" is alarming. People are touting this as some sort of "amazing" feature, I think this guy Elon Musk is a crazy whackjob who puts people's lives at risk. All the videos I saw from Tesla were " ideal well-lit" situations; well of course! University graduate students have Legos and basic robotics that do that crap. Getting it to work in "normal" (read "edge-cases) is the most difficult part. And they conveniently just ignored that part. It's insane people are putting these death machines on public roads. Before people claim "this is just a parking lot", imagine how many parents use their stroll-cartd with babies in them or how many kids run around in parking lots.

GhostVII 7y ago
I think "death machines" is a bit hyperbolic, the speed is capped at 5mph, and I imagine that Tesla is better at avoiding hitting humans in parking lots than a normal driver since it has sensors all around it. Avoiding hitting people isn't the hard part, navigating in a predictable way and following the unwritten expectations of driving in a parking lot is, and that is something Tesla doesn't seem to do a great job of yet.
- rantwasp 7y ago
  yes. you have a couple thousands pounds of "self-driving" technology that does not do well in parking lots (that's like 95% of where I usually park my car). It's definitely not going to hit or kill anyone. Also, it's the responsibility of pedestrians 100% to look for cars. Give me a break. You can either handle what your feature advertises or you cannot. This is in the cannot bucket - the same way autopilot is in the cannot bucket. The sad story with Tesla is that they should probably focus on the one thing that works beautifully on the car and that is the fact that it's electric. Focus on making a beautiful, insanely fast electric car. People love it already - just stop w/ the gimmicks.
  - GhostVII 7y ago
    There is a big different between not doing well in parking lots, and being dangerous in parking lots. From the videos I have seen, it doesn't do well in parking lots because it is too cautious - it is safe, but not very functional. Now of course we have to wait longer before determining if it is safe or not, but I would imagine that it is not hard for Tesla to avoid hitting people, and if it does hit someone it is only going at walking speed anyways.

benj111 7y ago

Apparently the car doesn't try to read road markings, I stand by my comment I made 2 days ago in response to that. "Isnt that below minimum viable product for something expected to be used with other people around?" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21089373 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21089373

tpmx 7y ago

Related - if you like spending time on reddit: please consider visiting r/realtesla. Sometimes it's a bit too negative, but mostly I find it a nice counterbalance to that creepy "everything is always awesome" subreddit.

chvid 7y ago

It looks it is running the same software as my vacuum robot.

imglorp 7y ago

This seems like a huge opportunity for insurance fraud like you see often in Asia. Someone arranges to be struck by a car (ie flings themself in front of it), then splits the medical payout with a crooked doctor.

new_realist 7y ago

This feature was pushed out way before it was ready, all so Tesla can recognize some deferred FSD revenue in Q3, which ends on Monday.

grizzles 7y ago

I love Musk but this is a bad feature because he hasn't looked at the actuarial case for not having this. TONS of car accidents happen in parking lots.

GaryNumanVevo 7y ago

Honestly what's interesting here: People are rushing to try out the v1.0 software of a feature from a car company, potentially risking their expensive vehicle because FOMO of all the other Tesla owners posting about summon before them.