3 ms·

Tesla is damaging the idea of self-driving cars in spite of the media, not because of it. Self driving cars were billed as the cool new thing. Then Tesla start

Tesla is damaging the idea of self-driving cars in spite of the media, not because of it. Self driving cars were billed as the cool new thing. Then Tesla started charging people for "Full Self Driving" with a system that regresses from basic LKA that was shipping in the mid 2000s in terms of safety by using public roads for beta testing an intentionally hamstrung* L2-billed-as-L5 driving stack. It's frustrating to watch as someone working in the AV space, and it's silly to act like this one case was isolated enough that the fact it was wrong changes any of that reality. We know Tesla's stack has killed people: it became normalized once the first few times it happened they were able to get away with victim blaming. By 2021 it was already accepted, this incident was already business as usual. *humans just need eyes so self driving cars just need cameras

kmeisthax 4y ago
The thing is, I would have thought that Tesla's stance on repairability alone would have made their brand radioactive to the average Hacker News commenter, way before the Pedo Guy accusations or Elon Musk burning a bunch of money to make Twitter worse. Tesla is everything we claim to hate about Apple.
- a4isms 4y ago
  If Apple owned Tesla, there wouldn't be enough room in this comment to list all the reasons HN would hate it: 1. What do you mean, the OS and all its software is proprietary? Why can't I sideload my own fart app? 2. Highest margins in the industry? No we won't praise their business genius, we'll complain that they're charging a Tesla Fanboi Tax. 3. Like you said, RIGHT TO REPAIR, this is John Deere stuff, only it's a car and not a tractor. 4. Shit build quality would have us raving about butterfly keyboards 2.0. And so on, and so forth. Steve Jobs had a "reality distortion field." So does Elon Musk, and it's aimed squarely at a certain very obvious demographic.
  - bjelkeman-again 4y ago
    From a business perspective, a demographic bigger than the HN readership.
ajross 4y ago
> a system that regresses from basic LKA that was shipping in the mid 2000s in terms of safety Cite? Everyone likes to throw around the word "safety" as a qualitative thing, but the only data we have points to the system being extremely safe.
- BoorishBears 4y ago
  Mid 2000s LKA was passive systems in the US market: they were backups that vibrated the seat or steering wheel, or provided mild outputs. That meant they couldn't actively put the driver into danger, making them inherently safer than a system that will gladly drive onto a sidewalk Now what about active systems from back then? Almost 20 years ago Lexus had learned the lessons that Tesla kicked and resisted until about 2 years ago on. You need to watch the driver to ensure they're full attentive: https://lexusenthusiast.com/2007/09/08/a-look-at-the-lexus-ls-600hls-driver-monitoring-system/ https://lexusenthusiast.com/2007/09/08/a-look-at-the-lexus-l... In markets with LKA, that same module was used to ensure that drivers were actively watching the road while it was activated. In other words a 2007 Lexus did a better job on the one thing that Tesla is still getting dinged on (https://www.consumerreports.org/car-safety/tesla-driver-monitoring-fails-to-keep-driver-focus-on-road-a3964813328/ https://www.consumerreports.org/car-safety/tesla-driver-moni...) Tesla blamed a man for playing Candy Crush when his Tesla drove into a barrier and killed him. Lexus had solved the problem that killed this man over a decade prior. A 2007 Lexus would have used its Driver Awareness Module to recognize the man was not paying attention and stopped lane centering. The solution was not complex, not expensive, iirc Tesla even had interior facing cameras by then but was still resisting turning them on until much more recently. Tesla put their not-marketing ahead of human life, because if they had enabled more aggressive awareness monitoring than capacitance sensing or silly steering wheel jiggles, Elon wouldn't get to tweet about how "you're just there for regulatory reasons" - Also slightly off topic, but I think my biggest internet pet peeve is when people ask for a citation on a complex problem that requires critical thinking. I can't chew and pour the conclusion for you, but you're free to research before making low effort commentary like "Cite"
  - dsfyu404ed 4y ago
    >Now what about active systems from back then? Almost 20 years ago Lexus had learned the lessons that Tesla kicked and resisted until about 2 years ago on Lexus/Toyota doesn't "learn lessons". The are simply ultra-conservative about adopting anything so when anything is a dud or the V1 version sucks they wind up looking smart.

kmeisthax 4y ago

The thing is, I would have thought that Tesla's stance on repairability alone would have made their brand radioactive to the average Hacker News commenter, way before the Pedo Guy accusations or Elon Musk burning a bunch of money to make Twitter worse. Tesla is everything we claim to hate about Apple.

a4isms 4y ago
If Apple owned Tesla, there wouldn't be enough room in this comment to list all the reasons HN would hate it: 1. What do you mean, the OS and all its software is proprietary? Why can't I sideload my own fart app? 2. Highest margins in the industry? No we won't praise their business genius, we'll complain that they're charging a Tesla Fanboi Tax. 3. Like you said, RIGHT TO REPAIR, this is John Deere stuff, only it's a car and not a tractor. 4. Shit build quality would have us raving about butterfly keyboards 2.0. And so on, and so forth. Steve Jobs had a "reality distortion field." So does Elon Musk, and it's aimed squarely at a certain very obvious demographic.
- bjelkeman-again 4y ago
  From a business perspective, a demographic bigger than the HN readership.

ajross 4y ago

> a system that regresses from basic LKA that was shipping in the mid 2000s in terms of safety Cite? Everyone likes to throw around the word "safety" as a qualitative thing, but the only data we have points to the system being extremely safe.

BoorishBears 4y ago
Mid 2000s LKA was passive systems in the US market: they were backups that vibrated the seat or steering wheel, or provided mild outputs. That meant they couldn't actively put the driver into danger, making them inherently safer than a system that will gladly drive onto a sidewalk Now what about active systems from back then? Almost 20 years ago Lexus had learned the lessons that Tesla kicked and resisted until about 2 years ago on. You need to watch the driver to ensure they're full attentive: https://lexusenthusiast.com/2007/09/08/a-look-at-the-lexus-ls-600hls-driver-monitoring-system/ https://lexusenthusiast.com/2007/09/08/a-look-at-the-lexus-l... In markets with LKA, that same module was used to ensure that drivers were actively watching the road while it was activated. In other words a 2007 Lexus did a better job on the one thing that Tesla is still getting dinged on (https://www.consumerreports.org/car-safety/tesla-driver-monitoring-fails-to-keep-driver-focus-on-road-a3964813328/ https://www.consumerreports.org/car-safety/tesla-driver-moni...) Tesla blamed a man for playing Candy Crush when his Tesla drove into a barrier and killed him. Lexus had solved the problem that killed this man over a decade prior. A 2007 Lexus would have used its Driver Awareness Module to recognize the man was not paying attention and stopped lane centering. The solution was not complex, not expensive, iirc Tesla even had interior facing cameras by then but was still resisting turning them on until much more recently. Tesla put their not-marketing ahead of human life, because if they had enabled more aggressive awareness monitoring than capacitance sensing or silly steering wheel jiggles, Elon wouldn't get to tweet about how "you're just there for regulatory reasons" - Also slightly off topic, but I think my biggest internet pet peeve is when people ask for a citation on a complex problem that requires critical thinking. I can't chew and pour the conclusion for you, but you're free to research before making low effort commentary like "Cite"
- dsfyu404ed 4y ago
  >Now what about active systems from back then? Almost 20 years ago Lexus had learned the lessons that Tesla kicked and resisted until about 2 years ago on Lexus/Toyota doesn't "learn lessons". The are simply ultra-conservative about adopting anything so when anything is a dud or the V1 version sucks they wind up looking smart.