4 ms·

Why is the US allowing this beta testing of a feature that impacts safety to continue? There have to be at least dozens of documented cases of this being unsafe

Why is the US allowing this beta testing of a feature that impacts safety to continue? There have to be at least dozens of documented cases of this being unsafe. Have regulators just given up or are they that incompetent?

chrisseaton 4y ago
> There have to be at least dozens of documented cases of this being unsafe. The human in the loop seems to catch the mistake just fine? Doesn't seem to be even remotely close to an accident?
- skywhopper 4y ago
  Did you miss the ones where the self-driving Teslas plowed into fire trucks on the side of the road?
- kadoban 4y ago
  Any system based on a human doing nothing for long periods and then being expected to act swiftly and accurately is _deeply_ flawed. Human attention doesn't work like that. This is russian roulette with the general public forced to play.
  - mwint 4y ago
    So FSD beta testing has been around for what, a couple years? To continue the tortured analogy: We’ve been playing this Russian roulette for millions of miles. How many times to people have to be “almost” shot, but not actually shot, before we concede that maybe the gun has no bullets?
    - kadoban 4y ago
      > How many times to people have to be “almost” shot, but not actually shot, before we concede that maybe the gun has no bullets? You say that like we have anything like good data. We have pretty much what Tesla's marketing team put together on their website, and _maybe_ what some cities or states have cobbled together. And before we assume that Telsa wouldn't lie, let's remember that they call this "Full Self-Driving".
      - mwint 4y ago
        We all know that a real accident would be all over YouTube, and front page of HN for about a week straight. That we have so many “almost” videos, and a couple “it hit a cone”, but no real collisions seems telling.
        kadoban 4y ago
        There's all kinds of Tesla crash news. Here's one of hundreds of results. https://www.cnn.com/2022/05/19/cars/nhtsa-tesla-crash-california/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2022/05/19/cars/nhtsa-tesla-crash-califo... Which ones are in which terribly-named driving mode? Who knows, Tesla doesn't seem to be saying.
- justin66 4y ago
  OP was referring to the safety of the feature, you're referring to the safety of the driver who was experimenting with it.
  - chrisseaton 4y ago
    > you're referring to the safety of the driver who was experimenting with I Isn't the safety of running the beta (the issue being discussed) a function of the safety of the driver?
- salawat 4y ago
  This totally worked for 737 MAX. This one doesn't even have a well defined algorithm so it's behavior can be predicted ahead of time.
  - chrisseaton 4y ago
    > This totally worked for 737 MAX. But this is how all aircraft autopilot systems work - they expect a pilot to be able to step in. The pilots don't leave the controls.
martindbp 4y ago
Because it hasn't impacted safety, there have been no known accidents so far with over 100k users. It's also the driver's responsibility to disengage at first sign of trouble, just like as it is on a freeway with cruise control on any other car. The problem is many of these Youtubers try to push the system to test its limits, and wait until the last second to disengage, or let it do the wrong thing (for clicks? look at the "oh" face in the video thumbnail). Now there is a good argument that as FSD gets better it actually gets less safe, because drivers stop paying attention if it rarely makes a mistake. I think you can battle this kind of attention fatigue by making simple driving L4, but require attention for unprotected lefts and other more risky moments. Of course they'd need to have that approved, but having millions of vehicles on the road they should quickly be able to prove which kinds of driving FSD can do well enough for L4. To be clear: at of right now there is no kind of driving it can do to that safety level.
- vardump 4y ago
  Exactly. There definitely are some scary Youtube videos, but how do you ban something that's apparently safer [0] than the average road user? As far as I'm aware, there have been zero fatal FSD beta crashes. I hope it'll stay that way. What would be your arguments as the governing body for a ban? I think you'd need some hard statistical evidence, random Youtube videos might not count. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_fatality_rate_in_U.S._by_year https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_fatality_rate_in...
- enragedcacti 4y ago
  There are numerous FSD Beta crashes according to NHTSA complaints, including ones that occurred prior to Elon tweeting that none had occurred. https://twitter.com/TaylorOgan/status/1539607989937741825 https://twitter.com/TaylorOgan/status/1539607989937741825
  - vardump 4y ago
    Taylor Ogan is very biased against Tesla, and has a strong financial interest for Tesla to fail (TSLAQ). He's purportedly long BYD. Not saying these incidents aren't real, but I'd really really want confirm these from a reliable source.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
kadoban 4y ago
Part of it is that government regulation of new things is slow. Part of it is that Congress is barely functional, at best. Part of it is that Republicans are anti- the government doing anything useful. California has been making some noises about cracking down on this, there was a story on HN a few weeks back. My sense is that some people will need to die in a sensational way, that happens to go viral, before anything really goes anywhere.
- shagie 4y ago
  (politicsish) The crafting of regulations (not laws) and their implementation is the domain of the agencies under the executive branch. This is where the scientists and researchers are hired - neither the legislative nor judicial branches routinely employ them. The funding of these agencies has been consistently cut back over the past decades resulting in a slower moving body and one that is not as able to employ experts in the various domains who understand that technology and issues as part of a career. Additionally, the recent Supreme Court decision against the EPA further makes it difficult for the agencies to make and enforce those regulations. NPR Marketplace : Today’s Supreme Court decision is about more than the EPA- https://www.marketplace.org/shows/marketplace/todays-supreme-court-decision-is-about-more-than-the-epa/ https://www.marketplace.org/shows/marketplace/todays-supreme... gets into the SCOTUS ruling and how it attacking what is called the administrative state. https://www.npr.org/2022/01/30/1076844670/supreme-court-justice-stephen-breyers-legacy-in-administrative-law https://www.npr.org/2022/01/30/1076844670/supreme-court-just... also goes into the rolling back of the administrative ability of the executive branch.
  - salawat 4y ago
    Administrative law is a farce and clear violation of the intent expressed in the Constitution. When more laws are entering the books through the executive and judiciary than through the legislature, you've got a problem. Congress sets executive agency scope. Not executive branch employees or judges out of force of habit. If they want increased scope, best ask the People if that's alright, and get the People leaning on their legislators. Bottom up. Not top down.
skywhopper 4y ago
From my perspective in the US, the NHTSA which investigates crashes, regulates automobile safety, and handles recalls, etc, seems highly competent regarding general auto safety and investigating issues. But politicians and the press by and large were drinking the self-driving Kool-Aid for the last 10 years, and so there’s some level of political risk for the NHTSA to clamp down hard on something politicians have bought into without some level of popular outrage to back them up. So I think not exactly “given up” but more “afraid to poke the hornets’ nest”. Although as self-driving proves more and more to be a dud/fraud, I hope that changes. I’ve been surprised they didn’t take a stronger stance on it after the spate of crashes into emergency vehicles on shoulder, but they may have been (perhaps rightly) afraid blowback from Trump would gut their powers entirely.
greenthrow 4y ago
Coz Tesla has a lot of money and the government agencies that should be intervening are hobbled due to decades of under funding and being de-fanged by other parts of the government.

chrisseaton 4y ago

> There have to be at least dozens of documented cases of this being unsafe. The human in the loop seems to catch the mistake just fine? Doesn't seem to be even remotely close to an accident?

skywhopper 4y ago
Did you miss the ones where the self-driving Teslas plowed into fire trucks on the side of the road?
kadoban 4y ago
Any system based on a human doing nothing for long periods and then being expected to act swiftly and accurately is _deeply_ flawed. Human attention doesn't work like that. This is russian roulette with the general public forced to play.
- mwint 4y ago
  So FSD beta testing has been around for what, a couple years? To continue the tortured analogy: We’ve been playing this Russian roulette for millions of miles. How many times to people have to be “almost” shot, but not actually shot, before we concede that maybe the gun has no bullets?
  - kadoban 4y ago
    > How many times to people have to be “almost” shot, but not actually shot, before we concede that maybe the gun has no bullets? You say that like we have anything like good data. We have pretty much what Tesla's marketing team put together on their website, and _maybe_ what some cities or states have cobbled together. And before we assume that Telsa wouldn't lie, let's remember that they call this "Full Self-Driving".
    - mwint 4y ago
      We all know that a real accident would be all over YouTube, and front page of HN for about a week straight. That we have so many “almost” videos, and a couple “it hit a cone”, but no real collisions seems telling.
      - kadoban 4y ago
        There's all kinds of Tesla crash news. Here's one of hundreds of results. https://www.cnn.com/2022/05/19/cars/nhtsa-tesla-crash-california/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2022/05/19/cars/nhtsa-tesla-crash-califo... Which ones are in which terribly-named driving mode? Who knows, Tesla doesn't seem to be saying.
justin66 4y ago
OP was referring to the safety of the feature, you're referring to the safety of the driver who was experimenting with it.
- chrisseaton 4y ago
  > you're referring to the safety of the driver who was experimenting with I Isn't the safety of running the beta (the issue being discussed) a function of the safety of the driver?
salawat 4y ago
This totally worked for 737 MAX. This one doesn't even have a well defined algorithm so it's behavior can be predicted ahead of time.
- chrisseaton 4y ago
  > This totally worked for 737 MAX. But this is how all aircraft autopilot systems work - they expect a pilot to be able to step in. The pilots don't leave the controls.

martindbp 4y ago

Because it hasn't impacted safety, there have been no known accidents so far with over 100k users. It's also the driver's responsibility to disengage at first sign of trouble, just like as it is on a freeway with cruise control on any other car. The problem is many of these Youtubers try to push the system to test its limits, and wait until the last second to disengage, or let it do the wrong thing (for clicks? look at the "oh" face in the video thumbnail). Now there is a good argument that as FSD gets better it actually gets less safe, because drivers stop paying attention if it rarely makes a mistake. I think you can battle this kind of attention fatigue by making simple driving L4, but require attention for unprotected lefts and other more risky moments. Of course they'd need to have that approved, but having millions of vehicles on the road they should quickly be able to prove which kinds of driving FSD can do well enough for L4. To be clear: at of right now there is no kind of driving it can do to that safety level.

vardump 4y ago
Exactly. There definitely are some scary Youtube videos, but how do you ban something that's apparently safer [0] than the average road user? As far as I'm aware, there have been zero fatal FSD beta crashes. I hope it'll stay that way. What would be your arguments as the governing body for a ban? I think you'd need some hard statistical evidence, random Youtube videos might not count. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_fatality_rate_in_U.S._by_year https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_fatality_rate_in...
enragedcacti 4y ago
There are numerous FSD Beta crashes according to NHTSA complaints, including ones that occurred prior to Elon tweeting that none had occurred. https://twitter.com/TaylorOgan/status/1539607989937741825 https://twitter.com/TaylorOgan/status/1539607989937741825
- vardump 4y ago
  Taylor Ogan is very biased against Tesla, and has a strong financial interest for Tesla to fail (TSLAQ). He's purportedly long BYD. Not saying these incidents aren't real, but I'd really really want confirm these from a reliable source.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

kadoban 4y ago

Part of it is that government regulation of new things is slow. Part of it is that Congress is barely functional, at best. Part of it is that Republicans are anti- the government doing anything useful. California has been making some noises about cracking down on this, there was a story on HN a few weeks back. My sense is that some people will need to die in a sensational way, that happens to go viral, before anything really goes anywhere.

shagie 4y ago
(politicsish) The crafting of regulations (not laws) and their implementation is the domain of the agencies under the executive branch. This is where the scientists and researchers are hired - neither the legislative nor judicial branches routinely employ them. The funding of these agencies has been consistently cut back over the past decades resulting in a slower moving body and one that is not as able to employ experts in the various domains who understand that technology and issues as part of a career. Additionally, the recent Supreme Court decision against the EPA further makes it difficult for the agencies to make and enforce those regulations. NPR Marketplace : Today’s Supreme Court decision is about more than the EPA- https://www.marketplace.org/shows/marketplace/todays-supreme-court-decision-is-about-more-than-the-epa/ https://www.marketplace.org/shows/marketplace/todays-supreme... gets into the SCOTUS ruling and how it attacking what is called the administrative state. https://www.npr.org/2022/01/30/1076844670/supreme-court-justice-stephen-breyers-legacy-in-administrative-law https://www.npr.org/2022/01/30/1076844670/supreme-court-just... also goes into the rolling back of the administrative ability of the executive branch.
- salawat 4y ago
  Administrative law is a farce and clear violation of the intent expressed in the Constitution. When more laws are entering the books through the executive and judiciary than through the legislature, you've got a problem. Congress sets executive agency scope. Not executive branch employees or judges out of force of habit. If they want increased scope, best ask the People if that's alright, and get the People leaning on their legislators. Bottom up. Not top down.

skywhopper 4y ago

From my perspective in the US, the NHTSA which investigates crashes, regulates automobile safety, and handles recalls, etc, seems highly competent regarding general auto safety and investigating issues. But politicians and the press by and large were drinking the self-driving Kool-Aid for the last 10 years, and so there’s some level of political risk for the NHTSA to clamp down hard on something politicians have bought into without some level of popular outrage to back them up. So I think not exactly “given up” but more “afraid to poke the hornets’ nest”. Although as self-driving proves more and more to be a dud/fraud, I hope that changes. I’ve been surprised they didn’t take a stronger stance on it after the spate of crashes into emergency vehicles on shoulder, but they may have been (perhaps rightly) afraid blowback from Trump would gut their powers entirely.

greenthrow 4y ago

Coz Tesla has a lot of money and the government agencies that should be intervening are hobbled due to decades of under funding and being de-fanged by other parts of the government.