7 ms·
Tesla Full Self-Driving Beta is now available to anyone in North America
- sidibe 4y agoWow incredible work by the team that decides who can access the FSD they paid for, very impressive. Now let's see if the engineering team can match that with a product that works.
- l-albertovich 4y agoWell, it runs (insert dramatic pause) over people.
- returnInfinity 4y agoWhat is Full Self-Driving?
- hprotagonist 4y agoan ad campaign, currently under investigation by several states and at least one other nation.
- steadyready 4y agofunny yet sadly true
- Rygian 4y agoAssuming you're asking honestly. It's a commercial name for a Level 3 autonomous function on Tesla cars ("the car’s systems perform the entire dynamic driving task (DDT) within the area that it is designed to do so. The human driver is only expected to be responsible for the DDT-fallback when the car essentially “asks” the driver to take over if something goes wrong or the car is about to leave the zone where it is able to operate." [1]), considering that the "area" is not strictly defined, and could be any road with sufficient visual cues for the car to assume where a viable lane could be. In terms of sensors, it relies exclusively on optical cameras, as opposed to other autonomy projects that use LiDAR and/or radar and/or ultrasounds as well as cameras. People have been paying thousands of dollars to subscribe to FSD for many years now, even when the only autonomous interventions in the car were strict Level 2 autonomy. Contributing factors for this seemingly irrational investment could be that the Level 2 features worked great (except for phantom braking and other arguably dangerous mistakes), and the backhanded marketing that would place FSD as a Level 5 autonomy feature. [1] https://level5auto.com/what-is-level-3-autonomous-driving/ https://level5auto.com/what-is-level-3-autonomous-driving/
- jonnrb 4y agofsd is still l2 btw...
- tialaramex 4y agoAs I understand it this is Tesla's hypothetical Level 4 automation. Except Tesla doesn't really offer that, so this "beta" is really Level 2 but sold like it's a bigger deal. SAE automation level 2 means the machine can do some of the boring parts of driving, but you as driver are actually always responsible, you are required to overrule the machine whenever it does something which was a bad idea and that's somehow not Tesla's fault. If you somehow fall asleep while a level 2 car is "driving" you're possibly never going to wake up, and if you do chances are any collision or other damage is your fault. At level 4, the machine will either do its job or safely give up. So it's OK to be asleep, although it's possible when you wake up you're like "God damn it car, I wanted to be in Boston by now, and you've just sat here moaning about a little bit of snow just outside Plattsburgh all night"... (At level 5 the machine should drive in any reasonable conditions, this probably gets very elastic about what constitutes a "reasonable" condition for driving - is this car level 5 despite the fact it won't drive in a blizzard? Maybe not driving in a blizzard isn't cowardice but common sense? A dirt track seems fine in a 4WD with AI, but how about this boulder-strewn mountain path?)
- sethd 4y agoA lot of folks get hung up on the “self” part, thinking it refers to the car when it actually refers to you the driver.
- themihai 4y agoDoes this beta has any roadmap to become "stable"? The issue with FSD is the corner cases and I doubt we will see real FSD anytime soon. I would say the beta FSD is the equivalent of an intoxicated driver.
- Rygian 4y agoMy personal guess: if Gmail stayed in beta for 5 years after it was opened to the general public, and it was "just" an email service where the only unknowns are how people and servers will abuse the SMTP protocol... then Tesla's FSD will probably stay in beta forever :-)
- iknowstuff 4y agoGmail had no pressure to go out of beta. FSD safer than human drivers unlocks untold amounts of money.
- Rygian 4y agoWhile I agree with you, FSD is already safer than human drivers in some cases. Safer is not yet a quantifiable metric. My guess is that FSD will be in Beta until such metric is defined, measured, and indeed FSD comes ahead of humans.
- PedroBatista 4y agoDon't known about timeframes but maybe there's a threshold of deaths they hope not to hit until they release a Service Pack upgrade.
- themihai 4y agoBut there should be no death as the beta is not supposed to be used "in production" (i.e without keeping your hands on the wheel)
- xiphias2 4y agoOf course it will, just not as soon as it was advertised. The problem is not that FSD won't be successful, but that many people were led to believe that it will be done in 1-2 years if they just buy the software package.
- matthewmorgan 4y agoAs a pedestrian, how do I opt out of this beta test programme?
- discordance 4y agoThe same way you opt out of the drunk driver beta
- leereeves 4y agoMake it illegal?
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- melling 4y agoWe already have several thousand pedestrian and cyclists every year. 130,000 Cyclists are injured. https://www.iihs.org/topics/fatality-statistics/detail/pedestrians https://www.iihs.org/topics/fatality-statistics/detail/pedes... https://www.cdc.gov/transportationsafety/bicycle/index.html https://www.cdc.gov/transportationsafety/bicycle/index.html We shouldn’t be accepting any deaths, or accidents, and take steps to reduce (eliminate) them. However, people seem to really get worried when we want technology to assist us. About 18 pedestrian and 2-3 cyclists will die today in the US alone. What should we do?
- sethd 4y agoSo we should just accept more due to this “beta”?
- melling 4y agoNo one said that. The humans are careless, often taking their eyes off the road. I see people looking at devices in their hands while driving. People bike near me on curvy roads and people drive fast. Hear about these horrible accidents where cars collide with cyclists. I think humans could use a little more assistance. We haven’t even discussed the 38,000 traffic deaths in the US alone every year. Is this acceptable?
- bearmode 4y agoHave they fixed the issue of Teslas ploughing through pedestrians yet?
- iknowstuff 4y agoThere hasn't been a single such accident. It's very careful around VRUs. The dude behind the mannequin video sells lidar systems and was caught doctoring the first video he released.
- bearmode 4y agoIf you're going to claim that first video was 'doctored', how about the second, the follow-up in a school zone, on a crosswalk, with the child dummy wearing a reflective safety vest, showing FSD enabled, and the accelerator not being depressed, with everything in view at all times? https://twitter.com/RealDanODowd/status/1559245760054575112?s=20&t=l-h9QGOd2BeWRL5vP5tIbA https://twitter.com/RealDanODowd/status/1559245760054575112?... What about the one from China where a Tesla accelerated on its own, the driver was unable to brake, and it ended up mowing down two pedestrians? https://electrek.co/2022/11/13/tesla-china-responds-to-dramatic-crash-that-kills-two-video/ https://electrek.co/2022/11/13/tesla-china-responds-to-drama...
- iknowstuff 4y ago1) not fsd, just a test of automated emergency braking 2) lidar guy. You'll see a ton of responses to his antics on HN and YouTube. 3) not fsd, driver confused pedals
- ramraj07 4y ago> driver confused pedals Says Tesla who had every intention to lie. The driver wasn’t drunk and I can’t believe a human can plough accudentally for that long.
- iknowstuff 4y ago
- steadyready 4y agoThe only time I’m actually glad I don’t live in the U.S. and that we (Europe) get access much later (or never) to the cool new tech
- quintussss 4y agoThe only time?
- steadyready 4y agoNot sure if the only one, but not getting ploughed by a Tesla with a guy shooting YouTube videos from the backseat certainly takes first place.
- akmarinov 4y agoYeah, we have those things called safety regulations that protect people and don't allow anyone to just deploy whatever software they call "full self driving" that doesn't really full self drive the car.
- Dah00n 4y agoExcept regulations have nothing to do with this as Tesla doesn't follow those. Tesla update their cars with software changes in areas that by law requires the cars to be re-certified. For example if I go out now and do something that add 50 hp to my car or change the way its braking system functions (even if it makes it better) it is instantly illegal to drive the car until it has been approved (like an MOT test in the UK). Tesla don't give a donkeys arse about those rules and no government so far have dared do anything about it (Sweden almost did, then didn't). All updated Teslas are illegal in the EU as far as I can tell and that isn't even considering the whole GDPR can of worms that is their cameras.
- eastendguy 4y agoWhy? FSD even in its current state will save lives. Think of it as driver-assist on steroids.
- MarcoZavala 4y ago
- redox99 4y agoAs someone who has been following Tesla FSD progress through the years through some YouTubers[1], the progress has been very very impressive. 2 years ago, FSD was pretty awful. Back then, my opinion was that Tesla FSD was doomed: Self driving without LIDAR was not going to be feasible for at least a decade. Now, I've changed my mind. Current version of course has a long way to go, but the current state and the rate of progress makes me believe now that, in 2 or 3 years, with a new hardware update, Tesla FSD will be very successful. I recommend checking out some videos of the latest version (10.69.3.1) to get an idea of how good (or bad) it currently is. [1] https://www.youtube.com/@ChuckCook https://www.youtube.com/@ChuckCook https://www.youtube.com/@AIDRIVR https://www.youtube.com/@AIDRIVR
- dncornholio 4y agoWell.. "impressive" is not good enough for public road. "Impeccable" should be the bare minimum.
- Denvercoder9 4y agoI don't understand this attitude. Shouldn't the requirement be that it's better than the alternative, i.e. human drivers? Human drivers certainly aren't impeccable.
- MarcoZavala 4y ago
- perlgeek 4y ago> in 2 or 3 years, with a new hardware update, Tesla FSD will be very successful. Do you think that folks who bought FSD will get a hardware update, without extra cost?
- redox99 4y agoIt probably depends on how well current hardware performs. If it's good enough they might not (however if you have a newer car with newer HWU FSD will perform better of course). Camera placement (A-pillar camera), better cameras, and faster processing would be an almost immediate improvement to current FSD without having to improve software.
- NotACop182 4y agoI take issue with the term “full Self-Driving”. It is no where near such and only stating this fact in the fine print is dangerous.
- tejohnso 4y agoThis is why I immediately came to the comments. My only question was whether this is actually full self driving or if it's just Tesla's usual fraudulent and dangerous (imo) use of the term. I guess it's the latter, thanks.
- NotACop182 4y agoIt’s the latter
- PedroBatista 4y ago"Full Self-Driving" BETA .. Yikes.. works something like 100%, 60% of the time? I think I'll wait for the "Full Self-Driving Pro MAX" version when it comes out. ( If I don't get runover by a Beta version in the mean time.. )
- soco 4y agoCan we get any fuller "full self-driving" before it overflows?
- AlexandrB 4y agoI would trust Tesla FSD if Tesla accepted liability[1] for accidents that happen while using it. "Put your money where your mouth is" and all that. [1] https://www.motor1.com/news/575167/mercedes-accepts-liability-autonomous-crash/ https://www.motor1.com/news/575167/mercedes-accepts-liabilit...
- rkagerer 4y agoHow can they possibly do this without exposure to liability? At some point a vehicle is going to do something atrocious, and the owner will have the means (or find a sympathetic litigator) to sue the crap out of the company.
- Someone1234 4y ago> At some point a vehicle is going to do something atrocious Multiple people have already died[0] [0] https://fortune.com/2022/10/19/tesla-cars-involved-in-10-of-the-11-new-crash-deaths-linked-to-automated-tech-vehicles/ https://fortune.com/2022/10/19/tesla-cars-involved-in-10-of-...
- bryanlarsen 4y agoNo indication of whether those are autopilot or FSD, or whether the Tesla was at fault. Musk used to state no FSD deaths during quarterly conference calls, I think he's stopped so there probably has been some. I don't expect FSD to be 100% perfect, but I want it to be about 10X safer than humans. Any less safe leaves too many unknowns. Any more safe means we waited too long to enable it for unnecessary deaths. -- Tesla owner without FSD.
- orev 4y ago> How can they possibly do this without exposure to liability? They can’t, just like human drivers can’t drive without liability, which is why insurance is required for all drivers. Auto insurance companies determine rates based on risk that’s assessed based on many factors related to the driver. They could do the same by assessing the risk associated with using the software. At least then it would have some kind of independent review.
- mduggles 4y agoI don't understand why this is legal. First how is it not false advertisement that a feature called "Full Self-Driving" isn't that? This isn't a marketing mistake, it is lying to users about what this technology does. Second why doesn't Tesla have to submit to some sort of third-party independent verification that this software works? Why does Elon, who has demonstrated over the last month his absolute contempt for his fellow humans, get to decide that I am now an unwilling member of their beta testing as someone who shares the road with Teslas? How dangerous is the software, how often does it make mistakes, what has been done to correct known errors and limitations of relying exclusively on cameras, all of this should be in the public record and independently verified. What's the logic here? Elon and Tesla, whose entire stock price and financial fortunes are based on this technology working as advertised, are going to pull the plug if the results aren't up to an acceptable level of safety? Why would we think either party would ever do that?
- Dah00n 4y ago>Second why doesn't Tesla have to submit to some sort of third-party independent verification that this software works That is the law in the EU but all currently driven Teslas that have been updated in areas that change steering, braking, power, safety features, etc. have the same problem. They haven't been re-approved either and are by definition illegal to drive but rules and laws are there to be ignored after all. I couldn't make changes to my car or motorcycles in those areas if I wanted them to pass a test (like a MOT test) but I'm not a US owned company that you need hundreds of lawyers to even dare look at. You don't even need to activate FSD to make the car illegal to drive. Just add a few extra HP or upgrade the brakes (hardware or software) and that's it it.
- loppt 4y ago> I don't understand why this is legal. Our current elites do not want lesser humans to make autonomous decisions, hence the push for the technology and the absence of regulations. We are supposed to be passive, sit in a car while tweeting and be surveilled and tracked 24/7. (In the case of Tesla, having excellent connections to subsidies, DARPA, as well as providing Starlink Internet to crisis regions with plausible deniability could help, too.)
- 4y ago
- rubyfan 4y ago60% of the time, it works every time
- JonChesterfield 4y agoThis will kill and injure people in persuit of at least one of Tesla's profits or technological progress. It's interesting to see the USA still on the side of reckless with human life in favour of progress. I don't believe Europe would take the same stance, which I suppose is a balance between short and long term thinking.
- iknowstuff 4y agoOr this will save hundreds of thousands of people. No deaths yet despite millions of miles on FSD.
- kart23 4y agothis isn’t true. ap has killed multiple motorcyclists. https://insideevs.com/news/603364/tesla-probe-motorcyclist-crash-autopilot-higwhway-night/amp/ https://insideevs.com/news/603364/tesla-probe-motorcyclist-c...
- ashwagary 4y agoAttentive subset of good drivers doing millions of miles vs general public is a big difference. Is FSD's reputation being saved by the small pool of good drivers rather the reverse? If so, worst case scenario will be pretty grim.
- sethd 4y agoLike clockwork this is now buried. We wouldn’t want to upset a potential source of funding, would we?
- danjc 4y agoCurrently at rank #348 (page 12), seems odd given its points, freshness and number of comments. Curiously on page 12, most posts have 1 or no comments. Only one other post has more comments - "The Twitter Advertiser Exodus" [1] clocks in with 315 although it is already a day old. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33713142 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33713142
- sethd 4y agoThis isn’t the first time I’ve seen this happen. Also look at how some YC leaders have recently praised Musk’s management approach RE Twitter.
- redox99 4y agoThis was at the front page, and then just vanished. I would like to know why.
- saalweachter 4y ago#comments > #upvotes triggers the flamewar logic and downranks a thread.
- nunez 4y agoEveryone that is hyper critical of FSD needs to try it before they dunk it. It might surprise you. It is not perfect, but it is extremely capable IMO.