44 ms·

Tesla recalls 360k vehicles, says full self-driving beta may cause crashes

727 points by jeffpalmer 4y ago

armatav 4y ago
It’s a software update
- armatav 4y ago
  Hahah - look at those downvotes. Just to reiterate; it’s a software update. You can FUD as much as you want.
stainablesteel 4y ago
i've never understood why people were excited for self-driving to begin with, i would never feel safe even if it was fullproof
jonny_eh 4y ago
Does a recall like this actually mean owners return their car to Tesla for modification? Or would it be an over-the-air update to remove FSD?
- KaiserPro 4y ago
  That was my first thought. Also what percentage of people who paid for "FSD" needed their car recalling?
  - acchow 4y ago
    This is 100%. It's a required software update on all the FSD vehicles.
- kube-system 4y ago
  > The auto safety regulator said the Tesla software allows a vehicle to "exceed speed limits or travel through intersections in an unlawful or unpredictable manner increases the risk of a crash." Tesla will release an over-the-air (OTA) software update, free of charge. https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/tesla-recalls-362000-us-vehicles-over-full-self-driving-software-2023-02-16/ https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/tesla-... Sounds like it's just a patch release with regulators involved.
  - andrewmunsell 4y ago
    I'm not sure how to reconcile that statement with how FSD beta works. Fine, the speed limit thing is easy to fix-- just cap the max speed to the speed limit. But the "[traveling] through intersections in an unlawful or unpredictable manner" is inherent to the FSD beta. Most of the time it does "fine", but there's some intersections where it will inexplicably swerve into different lanes and then correct itself. And this can change beta-to-beta (one in particular used to be bad, it got fixed at some point, then went back to the old swerving behavior).
    - shoelessone 4y ago
      This is what I'm most interested in. I'm hopeful about Tesla FSD, and don't think it necessarily needs to be perfect, just significantly better than humans. So I'm rooting for Tesla FSD/Autopilot overall. I just don't see how given the findings there is a solution without removing removing the entire FSD feature.
    - vilhelm_s 4y ago
      If they accepted a software update, I would assume it would be about things that are deliberately programmed in, rather than just fundamental limitations? But I agree it's a bit odd. The longer description says > The FSD Beta system may allow the vehicle to act unsafe around intersections, such as traveling straight through an intersection while in a turn-only lane, entering a stop sign-controlled intersection without coming to a complete stop, or proceeding into an intersection during a steady yellow traffic signal without due caution. In addition, the system may respond insufficiently to changes in posted speed limits or not adequately account for the driver's adjustment of the vehicle's speed to exceed posted speed limit. [https://www.nhtsa.gov/vehicle/2020/TESLA/MODEL%252520Y/SUV/AWD#recalls https://www.nhtsa.gov/vehicle/2020/TESLA/MODEL%252520Y/SUV/A...] "entering a stop sign-controlled intersection without coming to a complete stop" sounds a lot like the thing they already issued a recall over in Janary 2020 (further down the same web page), so it seems a bit odd that it would still be an issue. And "due caution" to yellow lights seems like it could just be tuning some parameter. On the other hand, failing to recognize turn-only lanes sounds more like a failure of the computer vision system...
- lattalayta 4y ago
  Seems like they should come up with a new phrase to distinguish between making modifications to the car at a dealer or service provider vs. a downloadable update, right?
  - panick21_ 4y ago
    Yes, this is just a historical term that nobody bothered to change. We have to remember that Tesla was the first company to really do this and even today almost no other company does it. Most can update some parts of their system, but almost non have anywhere close to the integration Tesla has. So for 99% of recalls, it is a physical recall, its just Tesla where most of the time it isn't.
- autonomousErwin 4y ago
  I had the same question. I think this is the original report: https://static.nhtsa.gov/odi/rcl/2023/RCLRPT-23V085-3451.PDF https://static.nhtsa.gov/odi/rcl/2023/RCLRPT-23V085-3451.PDF On Page 4 it mentions the "Description of Remedy" as an OTA update. Gives a new meaning to a recall! https://howtune.com/recalls/ford/ford/1980/ https://howtune.com/recalls/ford/ford/1980/ Software > Stickers
- tensor 4y ago
  Almost all of these "recalls" that make the news are just software patches. The only difference between these and a normal patch is that customers get an email about it. I can understand why people might think that all these recalls require going back to the shop, that's how most legacy makers work to this day.
  - gowld 4y ago
    It's also the word "recall", as opposed to "urgent patch", that makes people think that the car is going back to manufacturer. Non-Tesla automakers are not "legacy".
  - idop 4y ago
    The solution being (supposedly) easy doesn't discount the severity of the issue. Owners must be informed and aware.
- diebeforei485 4y ago
  Why does the media not make this clear in the headline?
  - natch 4y ago
    Because Tesla does not pay for advertising in media outlets. So many media outlets tend to have it in for Tesla.
  - ChickenNugger 4y ago
    They hate Musk ever since he took twitter away from them.
  - panick21_ 4y ago
    Because it gets more clicks. Reading about how Tesla will lose lots of money because they have to recall 350k vehicles is juicy story, specially if its about removing a major feature, a slight software update to that feature is boring.
causi 4y ago
I'm astonished consumers are still paying fifteen thousand dollars to be guinea pigs for this bullshit. No car that currently has tires on the road is going to let you fall asleep in your driveway and wake up at work.
- adampk 4y ago
  When someone can drive from Palm Springs to SF with no intervention does that not make it bullshit anymore?
  - vore 4y ago
    Sure, but they can't.
  - onlyrealcuzzo 4y ago
    If you have a 99% chance of death - 1% of people are still going to make it. You obviously don't have a 99% chance of death - but just by virtue of it being possible does not also mean it is not BS. You can drive drunk from PS to SF also. What's your point?
    - RajT88 4y ago
      I know a Tesla owner. The chance of death (well, a crash anyways) is more like 1%, according to him. Those odds are good enough for the occasional trip home from a cocktail party, but hardly cost-competitive with Rideshares/Taxis. How many 9's do we need before we can say it's reliable enough to trust it? A few more, for sure.
      - rootusrootus 4y ago
        > How many 9's do we need before we can say it's reliable enough to trust it? A few more, for sure. Yeah, 1% is definitely not going to cut it. What are the odds of dying when a human is at the wheel? Something like 0.000025% if my napkin math is right and my assumptions in the right ballpark.
  - 4y ago
lolinder 4y ago
Note that this recall just means that there's a regulator-mandated patch, not that FSD is being removed.
- mdeeks 4y ago
  Both of my cars patched last night with “Bug fixes” as the changelog. I don’t think I’ve seen an update that only said that before. I suspect that was this “recall”. If that’s the case, then the recall (patch) is probably mostly done by now.
  - ryantgtg 4y ago
    I had that update message, too, though I thought I was just installing that “adjustments to the steering wheel warmer” update. I don’t have FSD.
    - Groxx 4y ago
      Crash -> fire -> steering wheel is warmed. Could still be related.
      - ryantgtg 4y ago
        For sure. Just another genius move in Elon’s 4D chess game.
  - linsomniac 4y ago
    I've had 4-6 "misc bug fixes" patches since 2016, just FYI.
    - mrguyorama 4y ago
      If the changelog to my car's safety critical system was limited to "misc bug fixes", I would never touch it again. Either have extreme transparency into the system, or don't have the system. I leverage this complaint against my own car. The AEB radar just stopped passing start up self tests for a while, and I had no idea why, and could not find out without going to the dealership. While waiting to be able to do that, it started working again. I don't consider it a backup, or a helper or anything. It's an independent roll of the dice for an upcoming crash that I already failed to prevent. If it does anything in that case then that's probably an improvement, but I don't exactly trust it to save my bacon.
thepasswordis 4y ago
It seems like there is a huge disconnect between people who know about FSD from using it and people who know about FSD from things they read on the internet. I have FSD, I use it every single day. I love it. If every car on the road had this the road would be a substantially safer place.
- helf 4y ago
  Until your car decides to randomly slam on its brakes and cause a pile up.
  - dpkirchner 4y ago
    I'm reminded of a thread on HN where someone did a cross country trip and their car only phantom-braked a couple of times, and called that a huge success.
    - rootusrootus 4y ago
      Ha, my new Model 3 phantom braked the first time on the trip home from the service center, which was only 10 miles. I doubt it had even gone over 10 miles on the odometer at that moment.
      - DarmokJalad1701 4y ago
        How were you able to put it into autopilot? Typically, the autopilot is calibrating itself the first 60 or so miles of driving, and it does not let you engage it.
        rootusrootus 4y ago
        Good question! It didn't argue one bit, literally drove it off the lot at the service center and hit the freeway and turned AP on (it's my second Model 3, so I already have such habits). It's entirely possible it had more miles than 5 on the odometer when I picked it up. Officially the paperwork says 15, the associate who gave me the car said it was actually less, and the odometer isn't very prominent so I never even looked. Maybe it had 50 miles and was a reject ;). I should go check TeslaFi, since I reenabled that the day I bought the car. I confess that the only way I ever know how many miles my car has is when I see it on TeslaFi.
slt2021 4y ago
Knowing how software engineers write code - I would never ever trust my life to the BS that is FSD. It is not so much software, as well as <other people on the road> problem.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
bhauer 4y ago
As posted on the Tesla subreddit [1]: > Remedy: Tesla will release an over-the-air (OTA) software update, free of charge. Owner notification letters are expected to be mailed by April 15, 2023. Owners may contact Tesla customer service at 1-877-798-3752. Tesla's number for this recall is SB-23-00-001. [1] https://www.reddit.com/r/teslamotors/comments/113wltl/comment/j8snxes/ https://www.reddit.com/r/teslamotors/comments/113wltl/commen...
- moremetadata 4y ago
  Why even bother with a letter? Surely the letter could be displayed on screen like most other tech displays some text of sorts before an update occurs. Are these letters designed to satisfy the legalese types, or is paper still required to make sure tech companies dont make post update changes to the letter contents?
  - diebeforei485 4y ago
    A lot of car owners don't have reliable internet at home and live outside of cell tower coverage (mountainous areas, especially). Statistically these are not likely to be Tesla owners, but it's about making sure people know about the issue and how to fix it.
    - bhauer 4y ago
      When GP says "the update could be displayed on-screen," they are referring to the car's user interface, and not a secondary device like a computer or cell phone. Incidentally, when you point out the issue of missing a theoretical electronic version of the notice because of spotty Internet connectivity, in such a scenario, they wouldn't be able to receive the OTA update either.
      - diebeforei485 4y ago
        When they get the letter in the mail, they'll know to take their car to the nearest library or Starbucks or wherever with wi-fi to install the update.
adoxyz 4y ago
I still can't believe FSD Beta was allowed on public roads. I've had it since day 1, and oh my god. It behaves worse than a drunk teenager. All the updates since, have made it barely better. This needs to be pulled entirely and rethought.
- pirate787 4y ago
  [flagged]
  - ghqst 4y ago
    Yeah so now the driver error can be automated. Great.
  - capableweb 4y ago
    The tech might promise to save millions of lives, but if "behaves worse than a drunk teenager" is to be believed, don't you think it's best to wait a bit, if you want to save as many lives as possible?
  - elil17 4y ago
    The "self driving" tech that works (e.g. auto braking) is deployed and has saved lives. (Self driving in quotes because it is not really the full promise of self driving.) This Tesla AI does not work well enough in many conditions and is clearly sometimes more dangerous than humans. Just watch videos of people using it - it's obvious that is making unforgivable errors.
    - ajross 4y ago
      Do you have evidence for "clearly more dangerous"? Because what numbers exist say the opposite. They are now pushing a million (!) of these vehicles on US roads and to my knowledge the bay bridge accident[1] is the only example of a significant at fault accident involving the technology. It's very easy to make pronouncements like "one accident is too many", but we all know that's not correct in context. Right? If FSD beta is safer than a human driver it should be encouraged even if not perfect. So... where's the evidence that it's actually less safe? Because no one has it. [1] Which I continue to insist looks a lot more like "confused driver disengaged and stopped" (a routine accident) than "FSD made a wild lane change" (that's not its behavior). Just wait. It took a year before that "autopilot out of control" accident was shown (last week) to be a false report. This will probably be similar.
rootusrootus 4y ago
Meanwhile, the only actual L3 capable car is a Mercedes. Plenty of people will argue that AP is actually superior, but I don't think there's any way to say that for sure, given the tight constraints Mercedes has put on their driver assistance in order to lower the liability enough to make L3 not a bankruptcy event. For certain, however, they are more confident in their technology than Tesla is, otherwise Tesla would release an L3 capable car too. To be fair, though, Tesla has no sensors other than cameras, and I believe the Mercedes has a half dozen or so, several radars and even a lidar.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- naillo 4y ago
  Makes me think karpathys "bet" on vision being the only sensor was maybe misguided
  - sockaddr 4y ago
    Yup. You need an AGI behind that vision for that premise to work. Even a fruit-fly class AGI would do it.
    - justapassenger 4y ago
      Flies hit windows and cars. Even much more complex animals cannot manage effectively moving in a complex environment without hitting each other (like flocks of sheep). There's no data that would support that anything than human level AGI is required to drive cars with how current infrastructure looks like.
      - worik 4y ago
        > Even much more complex animals cannot manage effectively moving in a complex environment without hitting each other (like flocks of sheep). No. You have to force flocking animals into extreme circumstances to have them start crashing,. Sounds like the Tesla cannot manage that. Not even "bird brained".
clouddrover 4y ago
It's irrelevant anyway. None of those cars will be retrofit with Hardware 4: https://electrek.co/2023/02/15/tesla-self-driving-hw4-computer-leaks-teardown/ https://electrek.co/2023/02/15/tesla-self-driving-hw4-comput... So much for the "full self-driving" fantasy all those people paid for but will not get.
swyx 4y ago
is this the largest car recall in history? holy crap edit: looks like no.. the largest was 578607 cars... also by Tesla lol
- ceejayoz 4y ago
  That's definitely not the largest. Toyota, 2.9M: https://www.consumerreports.org/car-recalls-defects/toyota-recall-faulty-airbag-sensor-avalon-corolla-matrix/ https://www.consumerreports.org/car-recalls-defects/toyota-r... Ford, 21M: https://247wallst.com/autos/2021/07/24/this-is-the-largest-car-recall-in-history/ https://247wallst.com/autos/2021/07/24/this-is-the-largest-c... Takata airbags, possibly 100M+: https://www.carvertical.com/blog/top-10-worst-car-recalls-in-the-automotive-industry https://www.carvertical.com/blog/top-10-worst-car-recalls-in... > Yet even after the company declared bankruptcy in 2017, the Takata recall kept on giving. 65-70 million vehicles with faulty Takata airbags were recalled by the end of 2019, with approx. 42 million still to be recalled.
- mdeeks 4y ago
  The word recall is misleading. It’s a software update. My cars both updated last night. I’m guessing it was this patch. If that’s the case then the “recall” is probably largely already done.
  - swyx 4y ago
    well yeah if thats the case its not really a recall, agreed
- sixQuarks 4y ago
  Where do you anti-Tesla folks get your information? Just wow
  - rootusrootus 4y ago
    Be nice. You fanboys aren't exactly batting a thousand with your points in this discussion either.
apnew 4y ago
> The FSD Beta system may cause crashes by allowing the affected vehicles to: “act unsafe around intersections, such as traveling straight through an intersection while in a turn-only lane, entering a stop sign-controlled intersection without coming to a complete stop, or proceeding into an intersection during a steady yellow traffic signal without due caution,” according to the notice on the website of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Does anyone have insights on what QA looks like at Tesla for FSD work? Because all of these seem table-stakes before even thinking about releasing the BETA FSD.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- rvnx 4y ago
  There are many of such tests in the open. There is even a former Tesla AI engineer that throws objects in front of the car on YouTube, as a demonstration. The results are not glorious at all :| (trying to find the channel back if someone knows). And random public tests too: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3mnG_Gbxf_w https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3mnG_Gbxf_w This is a basic safety auto-braking. Just feels very wrong to even accept it goes into release.
  - panick21_ 4y ago
    This is not a former Tesla engineer. This is competitor who wants to discredit Tesla and sell its own solution. The guy behind this is known to be untrustworthy, and many of the videos don't actually do what he claims. Notably he refused to release the videos that would prove his claims right. The reality is that Tesla scores high on all the automated breaking test done by government. The driver however can override this, and that is exactly what is being done in this video.
    - diggernet 4y ago
      So they scored high on whatever version of software was on the specific car tested by government at some point in time. Has any government done any testing at all on the version of software actually in use today?
can16358p 4y ago
So are they recalling, or releasing a software fix?
- andrewmunsell 4y ago
  I think this is a legitimate question, and a reflection of how the NHTSA needs to adjust their wording for modern car architectures. It's technically a recall, but it's fixed with an OTA update. But the fact that any "defect" that can be fixed with an OTA update is called a "recall" is confusing to consumers and contributes to media sensationalism. There absolutely needs to be a process overseen by regulators for car manufacturers to address software-based defects, but the name would benefit from being changed to reflect that it can be done without physically recalling the vehicle to the dealer.
  - panick21_ 4y ago
    The problem is that almost no other car company is yet seriously fixing things with OTA. And 99% of cars on the road don't have OTA. So fixing the naming will likely happen but it will take a while. Its crazy that Tesla has been doing OTA for 10+ years and today many cars are released that are not capable of being upgraded. And even those few cars that do support OTA only support it for a very limited amount of system. Often they still need to go to the shops because lots of software lives on chips and sub-components that can't be upgraded.
    - deckard1 4y ago
      What is made easy will become inevitable. OTA updates carry a perverse set of incentives. Look at the gaming industry. They went from putting out rock solid games because of necessity (the reality of publishing physical cartridges and CD-ROMs without network updates) to the absolute dogshit of No Man's Sky and Cyberpunk 2077. Gamers have effectively become an extension of QA to the point that some game devs simply stop doing QA at all. Which we are seeing clearly with the "beta" version of self-driving software. To make matters worse, firmware devs are on the lower totem pole of the developer hierarchy. They live more on the cost center side than the profit center side (think airbag control vs. the guy that did the whoopee cushion sounds). The quality of firmware is already incredibly poor across the range of consumer devices. OTA incentivizes corporations to release software earlier than they currently do knowing that they can always fix it later if necessary.
moralestapia 4y ago
That's 4-5B USD worth of fraud. This thing could actually be quite dangerous for TSLA. One class-action lawsuit around this and they're bankrupt. Edit: Dang, you're all right, they could eat this and still be alive. My whole sentiment comes from FSD being their big shot (and everything that comes with that, like the robotaxis and whatnot). Without FSD, they're "just another car company" and the market is already thriving with good alternatives (Audi's EVs are jaw dropping, at least for me). Excited to see what they announce on March 1st, though.
- oneoff786 4y ago
  That’s not how the law works.
- gowld 4y ago
  You think $5B would bankrupt Tesla?
  - rvnx 4y ago
    Couldn't they issue new shares under their own name and sell them in the open market to get dozens of billions ?
    - sebzim4500 4y ago
      Probably but it's more likely they would just pay it out of their $20B in liquid assets.
- recursive 4y ago
  What would happen to the other ~15B they have in the bank?
  - kcb 4y ago
    There's many people that still have the perception that Tesla is a small fish waiting to get gobbled up by legacy automakers. But every year that becomes further from the truth. A company with $80 billion revenue and 100,000+ employees is not dying from a single lawsuit.
sergiotapia 4y ago
I thought emperically, statistically, the number of crashes from FSD was drastically lower than human drivers. Was this number hogwash or is this just lawboys saying the number must be 0 before it's allowed on the road? If so, that's pretty crazy and people will die because of this decision.
- Xylakant 4y ago
  The number was problematic for various reasons: The usual comparison is vs. all cars on the road, but Teslas are comparatively new cars with a lot of recent and expensive safety features not available in older cars. They’re also likely to be maintained better. On top, they’re also a driven by a different demographic which skews accident statistics. Teslas autopilot can only be enabled in comparatively safe and simple circumstances, yet the comparison is made against all driver in all situations. When autopilot detects a situation it can’t handle, it turns off and hands over to the human who gets a few seconds warning. Human drivers can’t just punt the issue and then crash. Tesla FSD may be safer than Human drivers for the limited set of environments where you can use it, but last time I checked, the numbers that Tesla published are useless to demonstrate that.
  - valine 4y ago
    > Teslas autopilot can only be enabled in comparatively safe and simple circumstances This is incorrect. FSD can be enabled everywhere from dirt road to parking lots, even highways and dense urban environments like NYC. There is no geofence on FSD, you can turn it on anywhere the car can see drivable space.
    - Xylakant 4y ago
      Does it enable in heavy rain or snow, on ice, fog? Does it work in storm conditions with leaves and objects blown over the street? Does it work in confusing traffic situations, invalid signage, …?
      - valine 4y ago
coding123 4y ago
Lets all guess on the countdown to the laser approach being announced.
peoplearepeople 4y ago
So at what point is a refund required?
supernova87a 4y ago
I wonder what severity / frequency of incidents or regulator awareness required them to actually come out and say that they're issuing a recall, rather than just quietly putting it into an upcoming release like they probably would otherwise do?
- pilsetnieks 4y ago
  > A new car built by my company leaves somewhere traveling at 60 mph. The rear differential locks up. The car crashes and burns with everyone trapped inside. Now, should we initiate a recall? Take the number of vehicles in the field, A, multiply by the probable rate of failure, B, multiply by the average out-of-court settlement, C. A times B times C equals X. If X is less than the cost of a recall, we don't do one.
- panick21_ 4y ago
  As far as I know pretty much all update to critical system will always be told to the government and cause a 'recall'. But I'm not 100% on what the actual regulatory requirement are.
idlewords 4y ago
I love that this is the same guy who wants to send people to Mars one-way and then figure out the return trip later.
- james_pm 4y ago
  No need to worry about the return trip if it's unlikely that anyone would survive the trip there, right?
  - pavlov 4y ago
    ”Six days after the radiation-wrecked colonists emerged from the battered Starship, the Emperor of Mars condemned them all to death by suffocation for ‘insufficiently engaging with his tweets’. Historians debate the meaning of this expression found carved in a rock outside the base.”
    - SketchySeaBeast 4y ago
      The settlement communication log will be just a series of "I need people to be even more hardcore" declarations coupled with lists of people thrown out of airlocks.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    - rsynnott 4y ago
      I've read two separate sci-fi novels recently which make some passing reference to the remains of a failed Musk settlement on Mars. Definite shades of this.
- LoveMortuus 4y ago
  Under promise, over deliver
  - jskrablin 4y ago
    Over promise, never deliver.
jlv2 4y ago
There really needs to be a distinction between an actual recall (my Model S had one to change the latch on the frunk) and this type of "recall" that is nothing more than an OTA software update.
- buildbot 4y ago
  Why? It involves a safety system! That needs to be tracked publicly and updated! Nothing more than an OTA - does not mean much when everything is fly by wire and a bug could mean your car does not stop accelerating or something.
  - diebeforei485 4y ago
    Recall implies something being returned. This should be called a mandatory software patch, or something like that. The problem is Tesla owners repeatedly see "recall" to mean "software update", so this might lead to a lot of confusion if a physical recall is actually required in the future.
    - sixQuarks 4y ago
      I agree. It’s like crying wolf, eventually you start ignoring it
      - connicpu 4y ago
        Laypeople have an incorrect perception of what a recall actually means, especially when it comes to vehicles. The most important effect that comes along with an official vehicle recall is that the manufacturer has to fix the issue for you for free, or otherwise compensate you in some way for reduced functionality you may have paid for.
        mcguire 4y ago
        Well, that and the manufacturer has to notify owners of the recall, which is (or should be) tracked by the vehicle's VIN. https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls
woeirua 4y ago
Remains to be seen what the OTA patch will actually do. If they could make FSD work correctly they would have _already_ done it. So, my guess is more smoke and mirrors to mislead the NHTSA, and then NHTSA will come down with the ban hammer on FSD and require them to disable it entirely.
totalhack 4y ago
Thanks to the Tesla owners on the front lines risking their lives for the greater good (of Tesla)! Jokes aside, it's gotta be damn tough to QA a system like this in any sort of way that resembles full coverage. Can't even really define what full test coverage means.
- foepys 4y ago
  If it just were only Tesla owners. A autonomous Tesla driving into a group of people or swerving into oncoming traffic is potentially killing other people.
ckwalsh 4y ago
I have a Model 3, and was excited to get the FSD beta access about a month ago. I don't use it super regularly, but it's neat. This morning I tried to turn it on, and the car immediately veered left into the oncoming lane on a straight, 2 lane road. Fortunately, there were no other vehicles nearby. I immediately turned it off in the settings, and have no intention of re-enabling.
- jackmott42 4y ago
  Are you planning to join a class action lawsuit so you can get your money back?
  - LanceJones 4y ago
    I would suggest reading all the disclaimers and screens one has to review (or skip, at their own peril) in order to actually get access to FSD Beta. You would likely not believe a Class Action lawsuit is a cakewalk if you read those screens...
    - arkitaip 4y ago
      How would you know, are you a lawyer?
    - system16 4y ago
      With Tesla's army of lawyers it'll never be a cakewalk, but I can't imagine even miles of T&C can remove a company's responsibility for your car throwing you directly into oncoming traffic, not to mention the potential victim's in the other vehicles.
      - jacquesm 4y ago
        That alone is why I would love it if Tesla would stop shipping this crap. You get to opt-in as the Tesla owner, but I don't and I'm at least as much at risk.
    - VyseofArcadia 4y ago
yawz 4y ago
"Tesla will deliver an over-the-air software update to cars to address the issues, the recall notice said" A bit of a sensational title compared to what this really is.
- t0mas88 4y ago
  That's the same for other manufacturers. It's called a recall in legal terms, in the sense that the original product as used is not safe and needs to be changed. The changing can luckily be done OTA instead of driving to a service center to plug it in first.
- mrguyorama 4y ago
  No it isn't. Recall means "The manufacturer sold you something they should not have, and are legally required to remedy that problem". It has NOTHING to do with the action needing to be taken. It has NOTHING to do with the product category. Lots of recalls, ie for food or child toys, basically say "throw it out". The people who keep making this "Recall means go back to the dealer" claim is simply down to them never paying attention to all the recalls in the world that don't make it to their mailbox like car recalls do.
alberth 4y ago
Dumb question: why would anyone sign-up for a beta program, that could kill you if gone wrong? (maybe people just don't think through ramifications)
- sebzim4500 4y ago
  I guess they think that not being in the beta program also has a non-zero chance of killing you. Either that or they are willing to exchange lower safety for greater pleasure/convenience (which everyone is willing to do sometimes, otherwise they would stay inside 100% of the time). I wouldn't use it myself, however.
- acover 4y ago
  People drive motorcycles, which seems much more dangerous. I don't think the risk of self driving is that high but it does seem stressful.
  - alberth 4y ago
    I'm creating a new bullet proof vest. Would you like to participate in the beta program, to test stoping bullets being shot at you?
    - whamlastxmas 4y ago
      Virtually everyone will take the vest that needs improvement over none at all
      - heleninboodler 4y ago
        Virtually everyone will opt out of the test, because the choice is not, "I'm going to shoot a gun at you as a test. Do you want the experimental bullet proof vest or no bullet proof vest?"
      - bigtex88 4y ago
        Not if the vest suddenly decides to malfunction and explode or otherwise do something that kills you. Good lord there is some poor logic happening in this thread.
maxdo 4y ago
FSD beta is a super weird beast. I managed to go in New York with 0 interventions to my friend 3-4 miles away one day, yet another day it can act stupid, and barely handle a trivial intersection.
cfr2023 4y ago
Head and shoulders above even QC problems at DeLorean Motor Company. Impressive, really.
auggierose 4y ago
You must be really stupid to use any kind of self-driving feature. I wish you would die in your bed before you can try it on the road.
alluro2 4y ago
I generally root for Tesla as a former underdog who lit the fire under the asses of stagnating manufacturers, but, seeing videos of FSD in action, I'm fully on the side of people who think that calling it FSD should be considered fraud. Given how much time and data they had so far, and the state it's in, it really makes news like Zoox getting a testing permit for public roads, without any manual controls in the vehicle, seem crazy irresponsible and dangerous. Is it possible that they are just that much better at cracking autonomous driving?
- esalman 4y ago
  Unlike Tesla, Mercedes will take responsibility if level-3 autonomous system is malfunctioning. If I ever get an autonomous vehicle this will be the main deciding factor.
  - theluketaylor 4y ago
    Taking legal liability ought to be the truly defining difference between L2 and higher systems. Anything L2 (including Tesla's horribly named FSD) needs to be clearly labelled as a driver assistance feature. Until the manufacturer takes legal responsibility features should be stuck as assistance and agencies like the FTC should be enforcing the terminology much more carefully.
- 00F_ 4y ago
  what videos are you talking about? when i watch recent FSD videos (there have been regressions recently) on youtube the car generally drives itself. if you showed those videos to someone in the 90s they would without hesitation remark "that car drives itself!" there is zero ambiguity about this. nobody said that a self driving car could never make mistakes. the 90s person would definitely notice those mistakes but would come to the conclusion that we had pretty much done it and that we are going to have fully reliable self driving cars shortly. fsd is the largest experiment of its kind, its one of the coolest software projects of all time. how hackernews users are blind to that is beyond me. there are hundreds of videos that directly contradict your comment. the funny thing is that on reddit and on hackernews as well as all mainstream news outlets, i have never, not even once, seen one of these videos posted or even linked to or even referred to. its like they dont exist despite the fact that there are hundreds of them just a click away. you can say that we shouldnt be experimenting on the roads. thats a matter of opinion. but to say that fsd isnt the most advanced and capable system available, to say that its a fraud, to say that its failed is all objectively false. just look at where they started and look at one of the latest videos. and in what may be a world first, i will link to a video here on hackernews. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mHadhx3c840&ab_channel=AIDRIVR https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mHadhx3c840&ab_channel=AIDRI... the same guy, who drives FSD every day, is deeply involved in reporting bugs and publishes videos about FSD. by any metric that matters, his opinion is worth more than yours or anyone else on hackernews or reddit. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nvvhmc837Tw&ab_channel=AIDRIVR https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nvvhmc837Tw&ab_channel=AIDRI...
joewadcan 4y ago
Recall = Over the Air Update. Not nothing, but not as big as CNBC is making it out to be.
robomartin 4y ago
If Tesla are not careful with this, drivers of other vehicles will have serious reservations being anywhere around a Tesla. I have to say, I already do. I will not stay behind or next to a Tesla if I can avoid it. I'll avoid being in front of one if the distance is such that I cannot react if the thing decides to suddenly accelerate or, while stopping, not break enough or at all. In other words, I have no interest in risking my life and that of my family based on decisions made by both Tesla drivers (engaging drive-assist while not paying attention, sleeping, etc.) or Tesla engineering. Will this sentiment change? Over time. Sure. If we do the right things. My gut feeling is program similar to crash testing safety will need to be instituted at some point. A qualified government agency needs to come-up with a serious "torture" test for self-driving cars. Cars must pass a range of required scenario response requirements. Cars will need to be graded based on the result of running the test suite. And, of course, the test suite needs to include an evaluation of scenario response under various failure modes (sensor damage, impairment, disablement and computing system issues). I am not for greatly expanded government regulation over everything in our lives. However, something like this would, in my opinion, more than justify it. This isn't much different from aircraft and aircraft system certification or medical device testing and licensing.
- skullone 4y ago
  I was driving behind a Tesla which I can only assume was on FSD mode down a narrow side street coming up to a turn to a busy intersection. The car/driver almost drove straight into cross traffic, ended up blocking a lane without moving for like 15 seconds before it turned right (while signalling left) and almost crashed again into the oncoming traffic coming the other way. Seriously unsafe
ubermonkey 4y ago
Both predictable AND overdue.
pellucide 4y ago
Folks with Tesla FSD, please find an empty parking lot and drive all you want. It helps Tesla's mission. Please don't test it on real roads. At least not on busy roads
w0mbat 4y ago
An automatic software update is not a recall.
- asdff 4y ago
  Why is it not? a recall just means there is something wrong that needs to be fixed in all models. Whether the fix is a software update or a new screw is irrelevant.
- freejazz 4y ago
  Apparently, it is!
- therealcamino 4y ago
  IANAL! But maybe it's a recall when 49 CFR 573 says it is. Defects or noncompliance with motor vehicle safety standards are what make it a recall. It's not defined as whether you have to take it to the dealer or not.
- rootusrootus 4y ago
  So say the Tesla fans, because they don't like the optics. But in the real world, there are legal definitions, and recall is exactly the right term for what is happening.
jeffbee 4y ago
The word "assertive" does not appear in the comments but this recall is about the "Assertive" FSD profile, which speeds and runs stop signs. It is not a defect it is a design flaw.
- t0mas88 4y ago
  It's a defect in Tesla's engineering teams to release that kind of thing. Their self driving is a fraud, it does not work. Their CEO has claimed "it will be ready next year" for literally 8 years now. How much more bullshit is he going to sell?
  - jeffbee 4y ago
    Yeah. I'm just saying it's not a mistake, they did this on purpose. Whatever PEs were involved in shipping this need to have their licenses reviewed.
  - TheCoelacanth 4y ago
    It's a defect in the US legal system that Musk didn't see the inside of a jail cell five minutes after that feature was inflicted upon public roads.
bdastous 4y ago
They should rename it KSD.
jdelman 4y ago
The confusion from multiple HN posters here confirms that the "recall" language is inadequate to capture what is happening here. Obviously attention should be drawn to the fact that there is a critical safety update being pushed OTA, but "recall" is too overloaded a term if it means both "we're taking this back and destroying it because it's fundamentally flawed" vs. "a software update is being pushed to your vehicle (which may or may not be fundamentally flawed...)" I do think something beyond "software update" is necessary, though - these aren't your typical "bug fixes and improvements" type release notes that accompany many app software releases these days. I don't think it would be too difficult to come up with appropriate language. "Critical Safety Update"?
- 2h 4y ago
  I think recall is just fine. Recall offers no ambiguity in my mind. It means the manufacturer fucked something up, big time. Everything else is just details. In the current world of forced updates (looking at you Android), the word "update" itself is kind of toxic, and doesn't (and I would argue cant) represent what has happened here, even if its technically more correct.
- redundantly 4y ago
  In this scenario 'recall' is a legal/compliance term. It's appropriately used.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- tsgagnon 4y ago
  Obviously attention should be drawn to the fact that there is a critical safety update being pushed OTA, but "recall" is too overloaded a term if it means both "we're taking this back and destroying it because it's fundamentally flawed" vs. "a software update is being pushed to your vehicle (which may or may not be fundamentally flawed...)" How many times in history has a vehicle recall meant the cars were returned and destroyed? What makes this situation any more confusing than all the previous times vehicles were recalled?
panick21_ 4y ago
I wish all the ink spilled on controversy over Tesla would instead be spilled on doing basic safety improvement to the road system that are cheap and proven to save many lives. Lets be real here, automated driving or not, having actually save roads helps prevent death and harm in many cases. The hyper focus on high tech software by all the agencies engaged in 'automotive security' is totally wrongly focused. What they should actually do is point out how insanely unsafe and broken the infrastructure is, specially for people outside of cars. See: "Confessions of a Recovering Engineer: Transportation for a Strong Town"
- 2h 4y ago
  I disagree. If someone is a bad driver, and causing crashes, we don't say "we need to improve the road system". We suspend the drivers license until they can prove they are capable of being a safe driver. We should hold this software to the same standard. Until it can demonstrate safety at or above human level, it should be outlawed. Road systems should always be worked on, but when a crash happens its usually the drivers fault, except in a minority of cases where bad road engineering is to blame. this self driving is fucking up enough that it cannot be blamed on the roads anymore, if it ever could.
  - jjcon 4y ago
    Tesla publishes their safety data quarterly no need for your many assumptions and speculations - Teslas are already much safer than the average driver, especially when autopilot is on https://www.tesla.com/VehicleSafetyReport https://www.tesla.com/VehicleSafetyReport
    - dmix 4y ago
      One interesting bit from a different 3rd party study: > Cambridge Mobile Telematics also found that people driving Teslas were 21% less likely to engage in distracted driving with their phone in their Tesla compared to when they drove their other car. Maybe the software integration helps avoid this? Lots of other cars have much more complicated interfaces to hook up calls and reading texts. My mom struggled to figure out her car even supported Android Auto. It might just be it's a higher end car, but they didn't see it for an EV Porsche > These findings include an analysis of Tesla drivers who also operate another vehicle. These drivers are nearly 50% less likely to crash while driving their Tesla than any other vehicle they operate. We conducted the same analysis on individuals who operate a Porsche and another vehicle. In this case, we observed the opposite effect. Porsche drivers are 55% more likely to crash while driving their Porsche compared to their other vehicle. The reduction in speed is likely influenced by automated driving, especially considering how fast a Tesla car can accelerate vs normal cars: > They were 9% less likely to drive above the speed limit. https://electrek.co/2022/05/27/tesla-owners-less-likely-crash-than-their-other-cars/ https://electrek.co/2022/05/27/tesla-owners-less-likely-cras...
kbos87 4y ago
The amount of hyperbole and completely uninformed takes around FSD is eye opening. I’ll completely agree that “Full self driving” is a misleading name, and they should be forced to change it, full stop. That being said, it’s exceptionally clear that all the responsibility is on you, the driver, while you are using it. The messaging in the vehicle is concise and constant (not just the wall of text you read when opting in.) Eye tracking makes sure you are actually engaged and looking at the road, otherwise the car will disengage and you’ll eventually lose the ability to use FSD. Why is there never a mention of this in any coverage? Because it’s more salacious to believe people are asleep at the wheel. Is it perfect? No, though it’s a lot better than many people seem to want the world to believe. It’s so easy to overlook the fact that human drivers are also very, very far from perfect.
- InCityDreams 4y ago
  >....“Full self driving” is a misleading name, and they should be forced to change it, full stop. Problem and solution. Nothing more need be said.
  - culi 4y ago
    This one issue is one of the primary reasons Google ended up deciding not to acquire Tesla really early on. Google's been way ahead of them for a long time and their engineers were extremely aware of how reckless this type of marketing from Musk was But the marketing worked. They sold the dream to people and only got sued a couple times and still got the most subsidization of any automaker
- Barrin92 4y ago
  >That being said, it’s exceptionally clear that all the responsibility is on you, the driver Virtually every study ever done on human-machine interaction shows that users will inevitably lose reaction time and attention when they are engaged with half automated systems given that constant context switching creates extreme issues. Waymo did studies on this in the earlier days and very quickly came to the conclusion that it's full autonomy or nothing. Comparisons to human performance are nonsensical because machines don't operate like human beings. If factory floor robots had the error rate of a human being you'd find a lot of limbs on the floor. When we interact with autonomous systems that a human can never predict precision needs to far exceed that of a human being for the cooperation to work. A two ton blackbox moving at speeds that kill people is not something any user can responsibly engage with at all.
1970-01-01 4y ago
I found an interesting phrase in the official report. NHTSA formally says that not respecting 'local driving customs' is a defect: ...the feature could potentially infringe upon local traffic *laws or customs* while executing certain driving maneuvers... Do they want Tesla to create a DB with 'allowed' and 'locally faux pas' driving maneuvers? It sure reads like they do.
- idop 4y ago
  Yes, and good that they do.
saudade97 4y ago
The amount of Tesla apologism in HN is nasueasting. Per the NHTSA, a safety recall is issued if either the manufacturer or the NHTSA determines that a vehicle or its equipment pose a safety risk or do not meet motor vehicle safety standards. On its face, Tesla's situation clearly calls out for classification as a recall.
- Kranar 4y ago
  Meh, the term recall conjures images of vehicles having to be taken back to the dealership to get repaired, replaced, or refunded. The recall announced here is just an over the air software update. It's worth pointing this out.
  - notyourwork 4y ago
    It’s really not a differentiator. Is it? Issue is still an issue and must be addressed. OTA doesn’t change that.
    - literalAardvark 4y ago
      It certainly is different. Recalls are expensive and annoying for the user, involving drives and waiting times. This is an OTA update.
  - billiallards 4y ago
    In the same way that the term "full self driving" or "autopilot" conjures images of vehicles driving themselves? Not sure that Tesla should be opening the "what do words mean" can of worms right now.
    - Domenic_S 4y ago
      > In the same way that the term "full self driving" or "autopilot" conjures images of vehicles driving themselves? I disagree with your point here, but whether correct or not you should be consistent: if words conjuring things is important, then the previous commenter's point is valid.
nmca 4y ago
Because this is a mandatory OTA patch and does not involve stock being physically returned or taken for repair (as is typically implied by "recall") this headline is clearly very misleading.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
londons_explore 4y ago
This just a few days before the much anticipated 'v11' software release... V11 supposedly uses neural nets for deciding the driving path and speed (rather than hand coded C++ rules).
- londons_explore 4y ago
  I would imagine v11 will be cancelled or at least massively delayed to deal with this recall...
tevon 4y ago
These articles really need to add a denominator to their numbers.
oblib 4y ago
Splitting hairs on the definition of "recall" of a potential deadly flaw in 362,758 automobiles is silly. But is is the correct word for that industry when there is one. I worked at a Oldsmobile dealer in the 80s and fixed all kinds of issues on cars that were "recalled" and that is what we called it way back then and long before it. Some were trivial and others were serious safety issues. https://www.kbb.com/car-advice/what-do-i-need-to-know-about-recalls/ https://www.kbb.com/car-advice/what-do-i-need-to-know-about-...
- 1970-01-01 4y ago
  The news headlines coming out are also interesting. 'Tesla Recalls' vs 'Tesla Voluntary Recalls' are technically both true, however the former is a much more popular headline while being less precise.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

727 points by jeffpalmer 4y ago

armatav 4y ago

It’s a software update

armatav 4y ago
Hahah - look at those downvotes. Just to reiterate; it’s a software update. You can FUD as much as you want.

stainablesteel 4y ago

i've never understood why people were excited for self-driving to begin with, i would never feel safe even if it was fullproof

jonny_eh 4y ago

Does a recall like this actually mean owners return their car to Tesla for modification? Or would it be an over-the-air update to remove FSD?

KaiserPro 4y ago
That was my first thought. Also what percentage of people who paid for "FSD" needed their car recalling?
- acchow 4y ago
  This is 100%. It's a required software update on all the FSD vehicles.
kube-system 4y ago
> The auto safety regulator said the Tesla software allows a vehicle to "exceed speed limits or travel through intersections in an unlawful or unpredictable manner increases the risk of a crash." Tesla will release an over-the-air (OTA) software update, free of charge. https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/tesla-recalls-362000-us-vehicles-over-full-self-driving-software-2023-02-16/ https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/tesla-... Sounds like it's just a patch release with regulators involved.
- andrewmunsell 4y ago
  I'm not sure how to reconcile that statement with how FSD beta works. Fine, the speed limit thing is easy to fix-- just cap the max speed to the speed limit. But the "[traveling] through intersections in an unlawful or unpredictable manner" is inherent to the FSD beta. Most of the time it does "fine", but there's some intersections where it will inexplicably swerve into different lanes and then correct itself. And this can change beta-to-beta (one in particular used to be bad, it got fixed at some point, then went back to the old swerving behavior).
  - shoelessone 4y ago
    This is what I'm most interested in. I'm hopeful about Tesla FSD, and don't think it necessarily needs to be perfect, just significantly better than humans. So I'm rooting for Tesla FSD/Autopilot overall. I just don't see how given the findings there is a solution without removing removing the entire FSD feature.
  - vilhelm_s 4y ago
    If they accepted a software update, I would assume it would be about things that are deliberately programmed in, rather than just fundamental limitations? But I agree it's a bit odd. The longer description says > The FSD Beta system may allow the vehicle to act unsafe around intersections, such as traveling straight through an intersection while in a turn-only lane, entering a stop sign-controlled intersection without coming to a complete stop, or proceeding into an intersection during a steady yellow traffic signal without due caution. In addition, the system may respond insufficiently to changes in posted speed limits or not adequately account for the driver's adjustment of the vehicle's speed to exceed posted speed limit. [https://www.nhtsa.gov/vehicle/2020/TESLA/MODEL%252520Y/SUV/AWD#recalls https://www.nhtsa.gov/vehicle/2020/TESLA/MODEL%252520Y/SUV/A...] "entering a stop sign-controlled intersection without coming to a complete stop" sounds a lot like the thing they already issued a recall over in Janary 2020 (further down the same web page), so it seems a bit odd that it would still be an issue. And "due caution" to yellow lights seems like it could just be tuning some parameter. On the other hand, failing to recognize turn-only lanes sounds more like a failure of the computer vision system...
lattalayta 4y ago
Seems like they should come up with a new phrase to distinguish between making modifications to the car at a dealer or service provider vs. a downloadable update, right?
- panick21_ 4y ago
  Yes, this is just a historical term that nobody bothered to change. We have to remember that Tesla was the first company to really do this and even today almost no other company does it. Most can update some parts of their system, but almost non have anywhere close to the integration Tesla has. So for 99% of recalls, it is a physical recall, its just Tesla where most of the time it isn't.
autonomousErwin 4y ago
I had the same question. I think this is the original report: https://static.nhtsa.gov/odi/rcl/2023/RCLRPT-23V085-3451.PDF https://static.nhtsa.gov/odi/rcl/2023/RCLRPT-23V085-3451.PDF On Page 4 it mentions the "Description of Remedy" as an OTA update. Gives a new meaning to a recall! https://howtune.com/recalls/ford/ford/1980/ https://howtune.com/recalls/ford/ford/1980/ Software > Stickers
tensor 4y ago
Almost all of these "recalls" that make the news are just software patches. The only difference between these and a normal patch is that customers get an email about it. I can understand why people might think that all these recalls require going back to the shop, that's how most legacy makers work to this day.
- gowld 4y ago
  It's also the word "recall", as opposed to "urgent patch", that makes people think that the car is going back to manufacturer. Non-Tesla automakers are not "legacy".
- idop 4y ago
  The solution being (supposedly) easy doesn't discount the severity of the issue. Owners must be informed and aware.
diebeforei485 4y ago
Why does the media not make this clear in the headline?
- natch 4y ago
  Because Tesla does not pay for advertising in media outlets. So many media outlets tend to have it in for Tesla.
- ChickenNugger 4y ago
  They hate Musk ever since he took twitter away from them.
- panick21_ 4y ago
  Because it gets more clicks. Reading about how Tesla will lose lots of money because they have to recall 350k vehicles is juicy story, specially if its about removing a major feature, a slight software update to that feature is boring.

causi 4y ago

I'm astonished consumers are still paying fifteen thousand dollars to be guinea pigs for this bullshit. No car that currently has tires on the road is going to let you fall asleep in your driveway and wake up at work.

adampk 4y ago
When someone can drive from Palm Springs to SF with no intervention does that not make it bullshit anymore?
- vore 4y ago
  Sure, but they can't.
- onlyrealcuzzo 4y ago
  If you have a 99% chance of death - 1% of people are still going to make it. You obviously don't have a 99% chance of death - but just by virtue of it being possible does not also mean it is not BS. You can drive drunk from PS to SF also. What's your point?
  - RajT88 4y ago
    I know a Tesla owner. The chance of death (well, a crash anyways) is more like 1%, according to him. Those odds are good enough for the occasional trip home from a cocktail party, but hardly cost-competitive with Rideshares/Taxis. How many 9's do we need before we can say it's reliable enough to trust it? A few more, for sure.
    - rootusrootus 4y ago
      > How many 9's do we need before we can say it's reliable enough to trust it? A few more, for sure. Yeah, 1% is definitely not going to cut it. What are the odds of dying when a human is at the wheel? Something like 0.000025% if my napkin math is right and my assumptions in the right ballpark.
- 4y ago

lolinder 4y ago

Note that this recall just means that there's a regulator-mandated patch, not that FSD is being removed.

mdeeks 4y ago
Both of my cars patched last night with “Bug fixes” as the changelog. I don’t think I’ve seen an update that only said that before. I suspect that was this “recall”. If that’s the case, then the recall (patch) is probably mostly done by now.
- ryantgtg 4y ago
  I had that update message, too, though I thought I was just installing that “adjustments to the steering wheel warmer” update. I don’t have FSD.
  - Groxx 4y ago
    Crash -> fire -> steering wheel is warmed. Could still be related.
    - ryantgtg 4y ago
      For sure. Just another genius move in Elon’s 4D chess game.
- linsomniac 4y ago
  I've had 4-6 "misc bug fixes" patches since 2016, just FYI.
  - mrguyorama 4y ago
    If the changelog to my car's safety critical system was limited to "misc bug fixes", I would never touch it again. Either have extreme transparency into the system, or don't have the system. I leverage this complaint against my own car. The AEB radar just stopped passing start up self tests for a while, and I had no idea why, and could not find out without going to the dealership. While waiting to be able to do that, it started working again. I don't consider it a backup, or a helper or anything. It's an independent roll of the dice for an upcoming crash that I already failed to prevent. If it does anything in that case then that's probably an improvement, but I don't exactly trust it to save my bacon.

thepasswordis 4y ago

It seems like there is a huge disconnect between people who know about FSD from using it and people who know about FSD from things they read on the internet. I have FSD, I use it every single day. I love it. If every car on the road had this the road would be a substantially safer place.

helf 4y ago
Until your car decides to randomly slam on its brakes and cause a pile up.
- dpkirchner 4y ago
  I'm reminded of a thread on HN where someone did a cross country trip and their car only phantom-braked a couple of times, and called that a huge success.
  - rootusrootus 4y ago
    Ha, my new Model 3 phantom braked the first time on the trip home from the service center, which was only 10 miles. I doubt it had even gone over 10 miles on the odometer at that moment.
    - DarmokJalad1701 4y ago
      How were you able to put it into autopilot? Typically, the autopilot is calibrating itself the first 60 or so miles of driving, and it does not let you engage it.
      - rootusrootus 4y ago
        Good question! It didn't argue one bit, literally drove it off the lot at the service center and hit the freeway and turned AP on (it's my second Model 3, so I already have such habits). It's entirely possible it had more miles than 5 on the odometer when I picked it up. Officially the paperwork says 15, the associate who gave me the car said it was actually less, and the odometer isn't very prominent so I never even looked. Maybe it had 50 miles and was a reject ;). I should go check TeslaFi, since I reenabled that the day I bought the car. I confess that the only way I ever know how many miles my car has is when I see it on TeslaFi.

slt2021 4y ago

Knowing how software engineers write code - I would never ever trust my life to the BS that is FSD. It is not so much software, as well as <other people on the road> problem.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

bhauer 4y ago

As posted on the Tesla subreddit [1]: > Remedy: Tesla will release an over-the-air (OTA) software update, free of charge. Owner notification letters are expected to be mailed by April 15, 2023. Owners may contact Tesla customer service at 1-877-798-3752. Tesla's number for this recall is SB-23-00-001. [1] https://www.reddit.com/r/teslamotors/comments/113wltl/comment/j8snxes/ https://www.reddit.com/r/teslamotors/comments/113wltl/commen...

moremetadata 4y ago
Why even bother with a letter? Surely the letter could be displayed on screen like most other tech displays some text of sorts before an update occurs. Are these letters designed to satisfy the legalese types, or is paper still required to make sure tech companies dont make post update changes to the letter contents?
- diebeforei485 4y ago
  A lot of car owners don't have reliable internet at home and live outside of cell tower coverage (mountainous areas, especially). Statistically these are not likely to be Tesla owners, but it's about making sure people know about the issue and how to fix it.
  - bhauer 4y ago
    When GP says "the update could be displayed on-screen," they are referring to the car's user interface, and not a secondary device like a computer or cell phone. Incidentally, when you point out the issue of missing a theoretical electronic version of the notice because of spotty Internet connectivity, in such a scenario, they wouldn't be able to receive the OTA update either.
    - diebeforei485 4y ago
      When they get the letter in the mail, they'll know to take their car to the nearest library or Starbucks or wherever with wi-fi to install the update.

adoxyz 4y ago

I still can't believe FSD Beta was allowed on public roads. I've had it since day 1, and oh my god. It behaves worse than a drunk teenager. All the updates since, have made it barely better. This needs to be pulled entirely and rethought.

pirate787 4y ago
[flagged]
- ghqst 4y ago
  Yeah so now the driver error can be automated. Great.
- capableweb 4y ago
  The tech might promise to save millions of lives, but if "behaves worse than a drunk teenager" is to be believed, don't you think it's best to wait a bit, if you want to save as many lives as possible?
- elil17 4y ago
  The "self driving" tech that works (e.g. auto braking) is deployed and has saved lives. (Self driving in quotes because it is not really the full promise of self driving.) This Tesla AI does not work well enough in many conditions and is clearly sometimes more dangerous than humans. Just watch videos of people using it - it's obvious that is making unforgivable errors.
  - ajross 4y ago
    Do you have evidence for "clearly more dangerous"? Because what numbers exist say the opposite. They are now pushing a million (!) of these vehicles on US roads and to my knowledge the bay bridge accident[1] is the only example of a significant at fault accident involving the technology. It's very easy to make pronouncements like "one accident is too many", but we all know that's not correct in context. Right? If FSD beta is safer than a human driver it should be encouraged even if not perfect. So... where's the evidence that it's actually less safe? Because no one has it. [1] Which I continue to insist looks a lot more like "confused driver disengaged and stopped" (a routine accident) than "FSD made a wild lane change" (that's not its behavior). Just wait. It took a year before that "autopilot out of control" accident was shown (last week) to be a false report. This will probably be similar.

rootusrootus 4y ago

Meanwhile, the only actual L3 capable car is a Mercedes. Plenty of people will argue that AP is actually superior, but I don't think there's any way to say that for sure, given the tight constraints Mercedes has put on their driver assistance in order to lower the liability enough to make L3 not a bankruptcy event. For certain, however, they are more confident in their technology than Tesla is, otherwise Tesla would release an L3 capable car too. To be fair, though, Tesla has no sensors other than cameras, and I believe the Mercedes has a half dozen or so, several radars and even a lidar.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
naillo 4y ago
Makes me think karpathys "bet" on vision being the only sensor was maybe misguided
- sockaddr 4y ago
  Yup. You need an AGI behind that vision for that premise to work. Even a fruit-fly class AGI would do it.
  - justapassenger 4y ago
    Flies hit windows and cars. Even much more complex animals cannot manage effectively moving in a complex environment without hitting each other (like flocks of sheep). There's no data that would support that anything than human level AGI is required to drive cars with how current infrastructure looks like.
    - worik 4y ago
      > Even much more complex animals cannot manage effectively moving in a complex environment without hitting each other (like flocks of sheep). No. You have to force flocking animals into extreme circumstances to have them start crashing,. Sounds like the Tesla cannot manage that. Not even "bird brained".

clouddrover 4y ago

It's irrelevant anyway. None of those cars will be retrofit with Hardware 4: https://electrek.co/2023/02/15/tesla-self-driving-hw4-computer-leaks-teardown/ https://electrek.co/2023/02/15/tesla-self-driving-hw4-comput... So much for the "full self-driving" fantasy all those people paid for but will not get.

swyx 4y ago

is this the largest car recall in history? holy crap edit: looks like no.. the largest was 578607 cars... also by Tesla lol

ceejayoz 4y ago
That's definitely not the largest. Toyota, 2.9M: https://www.consumerreports.org/car-recalls-defects/toyota-recall-faulty-airbag-sensor-avalon-corolla-matrix/ https://www.consumerreports.org/car-recalls-defects/toyota-r... Ford, 21M: https://247wallst.com/autos/2021/07/24/this-is-the-largest-car-recall-in-history/ https://247wallst.com/autos/2021/07/24/this-is-the-largest-c... Takata airbags, possibly 100M+: https://www.carvertical.com/blog/top-10-worst-car-recalls-in-the-automotive-industry https://www.carvertical.com/blog/top-10-worst-car-recalls-in... > Yet even after the company declared bankruptcy in 2017, the Takata recall kept on giving. 65-70 million vehicles with faulty Takata airbags were recalled by the end of 2019, with approx. 42 million still to be recalled.
mdeeks 4y ago
The word recall is misleading. It’s a software update. My cars both updated last night. I’m guessing it was this patch. If that’s the case then the “recall” is probably largely already done.
- swyx 4y ago
  well yeah if thats the case its not really a recall, agreed
sixQuarks 4y ago
Where do you anti-Tesla folks get your information? Just wow
- rootusrootus 4y ago
  Be nice. You fanboys aren't exactly batting a thousand with your points in this discussion either.

apnew 4y ago

> The FSD Beta system may cause crashes by allowing the affected vehicles to: “act unsafe around intersections, such as traveling straight through an intersection while in a turn-only lane, entering a stop sign-controlled intersection without coming to a complete stop, or proceeding into an intersection during a steady yellow traffic signal without due caution,” according to the notice on the website of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Does anyone have insights on what QA looks like at Tesla for FSD work? Because all of these seem table-stakes before even thinking about releasing the BETA FSD.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
rvnx 4y ago
There are many of such tests in the open. There is even a former Tesla AI engineer that throws objects in front of the car on YouTube, as a demonstration. The results are not glorious at all :| (trying to find the channel back if someone knows). And random public tests too: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3mnG_Gbxf_w https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3mnG_Gbxf_w This is a basic safety auto-braking. Just feels very wrong to even accept it goes into release.
- panick21_ 4y ago
  This is not a former Tesla engineer. This is competitor who wants to discredit Tesla and sell its own solution. The guy behind this is known to be untrustworthy, and many of the videos don't actually do what he claims. Notably he refused to release the videos that would prove his claims right. The reality is that Tesla scores high on all the automated breaking test done by government. The driver however can override this, and that is exactly what is being done in this video.
  - diggernet 4y ago
    So they scored high on whatever version of software was on the specific car tested by government at some point in time. Has any government done any testing at all on the version of software actually in use today?

can16358p 4y ago

So are they recalling, or releasing a software fix?

andrewmunsell 4y ago
I think this is a legitimate question, and a reflection of how the NHTSA needs to adjust their wording for modern car architectures. It's technically a recall, but it's fixed with an OTA update. But the fact that any "defect" that can be fixed with an OTA update is called a "recall" is confusing to consumers and contributes to media sensationalism. There absolutely needs to be a process overseen by regulators for car manufacturers to address software-based defects, but the name would benefit from being changed to reflect that it can be done without physically recalling the vehicle to the dealer.
- panick21_ 4y ago
  The problem is that almost no other car company is yet seriously fixing things with OTA. And 99% of cars on the road don't have OTA. So fixing the naming will likely happen but it will take a while. Its crazy that Tesla has been doing OTA for 10+ years and today many cars are released that are not capable of being upgraded. And even those few cars that do support OTA only support it for a very limited amount of system. Often they still need to go to the shops because lots of software lives on chips and sub-components that can't be upgraded.
  - deckard1 4y ago
    What is made easy will become inevitable. OTA updates carry a perverse set of incentives. Look at the gaming industry. They went from putting out rock solid games because of necessity (the reality of publishing physical cartridges and CD-ROMs without network updates) to the absolute dogshit of No Man's Sky and Cyberpunk 2077. Gamers have effectively become an extension of QA to the point that some game devs simply stop doing QA at all. Which we are seeing clearly with the "beta" version of self-driving software. To make matters worse, firmware devs are on the lower totem pole of the developer hierarchy. They live more on the cost center side than the profit center side (think airbag control vs. the guy that did the whoopee cushion sounds). The quality of firmware is already incredibly poor across the range of consumer devices. OTA incentivizes corporations to release software earlier than they currently do knowing that they can always fix it later if necessary.

moralestapia 4y ago

That's 4-5B USD worth of fraud. This thing could actually be quite dangerous for TSLA. One class-action lawsuit around this and they're bankrupt. Edit: Dang, you're all right, they could eat this and still be alive. My whole sentiment comes from FSD being their big shot (and everything that comes with that, like the robotaxis and whatnot). Without FSD, they're "just another car company" and the market is already thriving with good alternatives (Audi's EVs are jaw dropping, at least for me). Excited to see what they announce on March 1st, though.

oneoff786 4y ago
That’s not how the law works.
gowld 4y ago
You think $5B would bankrupt Tesla?
- rvnx 4y ago
  Couldn't they issue new shares under their own name and sell them in the open market to get dozens of billions ?
  - sebzim4500 4y ago
    Probably but it's more likely they would just pay it out of their $20B in liquid assets.
recursive 4y ago
What would happen to the other ~15B they have in the bank?
- kcb 4y ago
  There's many people that still have the perception that Tesla is a small fish waiting to get gobbled up by legacy automakers. But every year that becomes further from the truth. A company with $80 billion revenue and 100,000+ employees is not dying from a single lawsuit.

sergiotapia 4y ago

I thought emperically, statistically, the number of crashes from FSD was drastically lower than human drivers. Was this number hogwash or is this just lawboys saying the number must be 0 before it's allowed on the road? If so, that's pretty crazy and people will die because of this decision.

Xylakant 4y ago
The number was problematic for various reasons: The usual comparison is vs. all cars on the road, but Teslas are comparatively new cars with a lot of recent and expensive safety features not available in older cars. They’re also likely to be maintained better. On top, they’re also a driven by a different demographic which skews accident statistics. Teslas autopilot can only be enabled in comparatively safe and simple circumstances, yet the comparison is made against all driver in all situations. When autopilot detects a situation it can’t handle, it turns off and hands over to the human who gets a few seconds warning. Human drivers can’t just punt the issue and then crash. Tesla FSD may be safer than Human drivers for the limited set of environments where you can use it, but last time I checked, the numbers that Tesla published are useless to demonstrate that.
- valine 4y ago
  > Teslas autopilot can only be enabled in comparatively safe and simple circumstances This is incorrect. FSD can be enabled everywhere from dirt road to parking lots, even highways and dense urban environments like NYC. There is no geofence on FSD, you can turn it on anywhere the car can see drivable space.
  - Xylakant 4y ago
    Does it enable in heavy rain or snow, on ice, fog? Does it work in storm conditions with leaves and objects blown over the street? Does it work in confusing traffic situations, invalid signage, …?
    - valine 4y ago

coding123 4y ago

Lets all guess on the countdown to the laser approach being announced.

peoplearepeople 4y ago

So at what point is a refund required?

supernova87a 4y ago

I wonder what severity / frequency of incidents or regulator awareness required them to actually come out and say that they're issuing a recall, rather than just quietly putting it into an upcoming release like they probably would otherwise do?

pilsetnieks 4y ago
> A new car built by my company leaves somewhere traveling at 60 mph. The rear differential locks up. The car crashes and burns with everyone trapped inside. Now, should we initiate a recall? Take the number of vehicles in the field, A, multiply by the probable rate of failure, B, multiply by the average out-of-court settlement, C. A times B times C equals X. If X is less than the cost of a recall, we don't do one.
panick21_ 4y ago
As far as I know pretty much all update to critical system will always be told to the government and cause a 'recall'. But I'm not 100% on what the actual regulatory requirement are.

idlewords 4y ago

I love that this is the same guy who wants to send people to Mars one-way and then figure out the return trip later.

james_pm 4y ago
No need to worry about the return trip if it's unlikely that anyone would survive the trip there, right?
- pavlov 4y ago
  ”Six days after the radiation-wrecked colonists emerged from the battered Starship, the Emperor of Mars condemned them all to death by suffocation for ‘insufficiently engaging with his tweets’. Historians debate the meaning of this expression found carved in a rock outside the base.”
  - SketchySeaBeast 4y ago
    The settlement communication log will be just a series of "I need people to be even more hardcore" declarations coupled with lists of people thrown out of airlocks.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - rsynnott 4y ago
    I've read two separate sci-fi novels recently which make some passing reference to the remains of a failed Musk settlement on Mars. Definite shades of this.
LoveMortuus 4y ago
Under promise, over deliver
- jskrablin 4y ago
  Over promise, never deliver.

jlv2 4y ago

There really needs to be a distinction between an actual recall (my Model S had one to change the latch on the frunk) and this type of "recall" that is nothing more than an OTA software update.

buildbot 4y ago
Why? It involves a safety system! That needs to be tracked publicly and updated! Nothing more than an OTA - does not mean much when everything is fly by wire and a bug could mean your car does not stop accelerating or something.
- diebeforei485 4y ago
  Recall implies something being returned. This should be called a mandatory software patch, or something like that. The problem is Tesla owners repeatedly see "recall" to mean "software update", so this might lead to a lot of confusion if a physical recall is actually required in the future.
  - sixQuarks 4y ago
    I agree. It’s like crying wolf, eventually you start ignoring it
    - connicpu 4y ago
      Laypeople have an incorrect perception of what a recall actually means, especially when it comes to vehicles. The most important effect that comes along with an official vehicle recall is that the manufacturer has to fix the issue for you for free, or otherwise compensate you in some way for reduced functionality you may have paid for.
      - mcguire 4y ago
        Well, that and the manufacturer has to notify owners of the recall, which is (or should be) tracked by the vehicle's VIN. https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls

woeirua 4y ago

Remains to be seen what the OTA patch will actually do. If they could make FSD work correctly they would have _already_ done it. So, my guess is more smoke and mirrors to mislead the NHTSA, and then NHTSA will come down with the ban hammer on FSD and require them to disable it entirely.

totalhack 4y ago

Thanks to the Tesla owners on the front lines risking their lives for the greater good (of Tesla)! Jokes aside, it's gotta be damn tough to QA a system like this in any sort of way that resembles full coverage. Can't even really define what full test coverage means.

foepys 4y ago
If it just were only Tesla owners. A autonomous Tesla driving into a group of people or swerving into oncoming traffic is potentially killing other people.

ckwalsh 4y ago

I have a Model 3, and was excited to get the FSD beta access about a month ago. I don't use it super regularly, but it's neat. This morning I tried to turn it on, and the car immediately veered left into the oncoming lane on a straight, 2 lane road. Fortunately, there were no other vehicles nearby. I immediately turned it off in the settings, and have no intention of re-enabling.

jackmott42 4y ago
Are you planning to join a class action lawsuit so you can get your money back?
- LanceJones 4y ago
  I would suggest reading all the disclaimers and screens one has to review (or skip, at their own peril) in order to actually get access to FSD Beta. You would likely not believe a Class Action lawsuit is a cakewalk if you read those screens...
  - arkitaip 4y ago
    How would you know, are you a lawyer?
  - system16 4y ago
    With Tesla's army of lawyers it'll never be a cakewalk, but I can't imagine even miles of T&C can remove a company's responsibility for your car throwing you directly into oncoming traffic, not to mention the potential victim's in the other vehicles.
    - jacquesm 4y ago
      That alone is why I would love it if Tesla would stop shipping this crap. You get to opt-in as the Tesla owner, but I don't and I'm at least as much at risk.
  - VyseofArcadia 4y ago

yawz 4y ago

"Tesla will deliver an over-the-air software update to cars to address the issues, the recall notice said" A bit of a sensational title compared to what this really is.

t0mas88 4y ago
That's the same for other manufacturers. It's called a recall in legal terms, in the sense that the original product as used is not safe and needs to be changed. The changing can luckily be done OTA instead of driving to a service center to plug it in first.
mrguyorama 4y ago
No it isn't. Recall means "The manufacturer sold you something they should not have, and are legally required to remedy that problem". It has NOTHING to do with the action needing to be taken. It has NOTHING to do with the product category. Lots of recalls, ie for food or child toys, basically say "throw it out". The people who keep making this "Recall means go back to the dealer" claim is simply down to them never paying attention to all the recalls in the world that don't make it to their mailbox like car recalls do.

alberth 4y ago

Dumb question: why would anyone sign-up for a beta program, that could kill you if gone wrong? (maybe people just don't think through ramifications)

sebzim4500 4y ago
I guess they think that not being in the beta program also has a non-zero chance of killing you. Either that or they are willing to exchange lower safety for greater pleasure/convenience (which everyone is willing to do sometimes, otherwise they would stay inside 100% of the time). I wouldn't use it myself, however.
acover 4y ago
People drive motorcycles, which seems much more dangerous. I don't think the risk of self driving is that high but it does seem stressful.
- alberth 4y ago
  I'm creating a new bullet proof vest. Would you like to participate in the beta program, to test stoping bullets being shot at you?
  - whamlastxmas 4y ago
    Virtually everyone will take the vest that needs improvement over none at all
    - heleninboodler 4y ago
      Virtually everyone will opt out of the test, because the choice is not, "I'm going to shoot a gun at you as a test. Do you want the experimental bullet proof vest or no bullet proof vest?"
    - bigtex88 4y ago
      Not if the vest suddenly decides to malfunction and explode or otherwise do something that kills you. Good lord there is some poor logic happening in this thread.

maxdo 4y ago

FSD beta is a super weird beast. I managed to go in New York with 0 interventions to my friend 3-4 miles away one day, yet another day it can act stupid, and barely handle a trivial intersection.

cfr2023 4y ago

Head and shoulders above even QC problems at DeLorean Motor Company. Impressive, really.

auggierose 4y ago

You must be really stupid to use any kind of self-driving feature. I wish you would die in your bed before you can try it on the road.

alluro2 4y ago

I generally root for Tesla as a former underdog who lit the fire under the asses of stagnating manufacturers, but, seeing videos of FSD in action, I'm fully on the side of people who think that calling it FSD should be considered fraud. Given how much time and data they had so far, and the state it's in, it really makes news like Zoox getting a testing permit for public roads, without any manual controls in the vehicle, seem crazy irresponsible and dangerous. Is it possible that they are just that much better at cracking autonomous driving?

esalman 4y ago
Unlike Tesla, Mercedes will take responsibility if level-3 autonomous system is malfunctioning. If I ever get an autonomous vehicle this will be the main deciding factor.
- theluketaylor 4y ago
  Taking legal liability ought to be the truly defining difference between L2 and higher systems. Anything L2 (including Tesla's horribly named FSD) needs to be clearly labelled as a driver assistance feature. Until the manufacturer takes legal responsibility features should be stuck as assistance and agencies like the FTC should be enforcing the terminology much more carefully.
00F_ 4y ago
what videos are you talking about? when i watch recent FSD videos (there have been regressions recently) on youtube the car generally drives itself. if you showed those videos to someone in the 90s they would without hesitation remark "that car drives itself!" there is zero ambiguity about this. nobody said that a self driving car could never make mistakes. the 90s person would definitely notice those mistakes but would come to the conclusion that we had pretty much done it and that we are going to have fully reliable self driving cars shortly. fsd is the largest experiment of its kind, its one of the coolest software projects of all time. how hackernews users are blind to that is beyond me. there are hundreds of videos that directly contradict your comment. the funny thing is that on reddit and on hackernews as well as all mainstream news outlets, i have never, not even once, seen one of these videos posted or even linked to or even referred to. its like they dont exist despite the fact that there are hundreds of them just a click away. you can say that we shouldnt be experimenting on the roads. thats a matter of opinion. but to say that fsd isnt the most advanced and capable system available, to say that its a fraud, to say that its failed is all objectively false. just look at where they started and look at one of the latest videos. and in what may be a world first, i will link to a video here on hackernews. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mHadhx3c840&ab_channel=AIDRIVR https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mHadhx3c840&ab_channel=AIDRI... the same guy, who drives FSD every day, is deeply involved in reporting bugs and publishes videos about FSD. by any metric that matters, his opinion is worth more than yours or anyone else on hackernews or reddit. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nvvhmc837Tw&ab_channel=AIDRIVR https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nvvhmc837Tw&ab_channel=AIDRI...

joewadcan 4y ago

Recall = Over the Air Update. Not nothing, but not as big as CNBC is making it out to be.

robomartin 4y ago

If Tesla are not careful with this, drivers of other vehicles will have serious reservations being anywhere around a Tesla. I have to say, I already do. I will not stay behind or next to a Tesla if I can avoid it. I'll avoid being in front of one if the distance is such that I cannot react if the thing decides to suddenly accelerate or, while stopping, not break enough or at all. In other words, I have no interest in risking my life and that of my family based on decisions made by both Tesla drivers (engaging drive-assist while not paying attention, sleeping, etc.) or Tesla engineering. Will this sentiment change? Over time. Sure. If we do the right things. My gut feeling is program similar to crash testing safety will need to be instituted at some point. A qualified government agency needs to come-up with a serious "torture" test for self-driving cars. Cars must pass a range of required scenario response requirements. Cars will need to be graded based on the result of running the test suite. And, of course, the test suite needs to include an evaluation of scenario response under various failure modes (sensor damage, impairment, disablement and computing system issues). I am not for greatly expanded government regulation over everything in our lives. However, something like this would, in my opinion, more than justify it. This isn't much different from aircraft and aircraft system certification or medical device testing and licensing.

skullone 4y ago
I was driving behind a Tesla which I can only assume was on FSD mode down a narrow side street coming up to a turn to a busy intersection. The car/driver almost drove straight into cross traffic, ended up blocking a lane without moving for like 15 seconds before it turned right (while signalling left) and almost crashed again into the oncoming traffic coming the other way. Seriously unsafe

ubermonkey 4y ago

Both predictable AND overdue.

pellucide 4y ago

Folks with Tesla FSD, please find an empty parking lot and drive all you want. It helps Tesla's mission. Please don't test it on real roads. At least not on busy roads

w0mbat 4y ago

An automatic software update is not a recall.

asdff 4y ago
Why is it not? a recall just means there is something wrong that needs to be fixed in all models. Whether the fix is a software update or a new screw is irrelevant.
freejazz 4y ago
Apparently, it is!
therealcamino 4y ago
IANAL! But maybe it's a recall when 49 CFR 573 says it is. Defects or noncompliance with motor vehicle safety standards are what make it a recall. It's not defined as whether you have to take it to the dealer or not.
rootusrootus 4y ago
So say the Tesla fans, because they don't like the optics. But in the real world, there are legal definitions, and recall is exactly the right term for what is happening.

jeffbee 4y ago

The word "assertive" does not appear in the comments but this recall is about the "Assertive" FSD profile, which speeds and runs stop signs. It is not a defect it is a design flaw.

t0mas88 4y ago
It's a defect in Tesla's engineering teams to release that kind of thing. Their self driving is a fraud, it does not work. Their CEO has claimed "it will be ready next year" for literally 8 years now. How much more bullshit is he going to sell?
- jeffbee 4y ago
  Yeah. I'm just saying it's not a mistake, they did this on purpose. Whatever PEs were involved in shipping this need to have their licenses reviewed.
- TheCoelacanth 4y ago
  It's a defect in the US legal system that Musk didn't see the inside of a jail cell five minutes after that feature was inflicted upon public roads.

bdastous 4y ago

They should rename it KSD.

jdelman 4y ago

The confusion from multiple HN posters here confirms that the "recall" language is inadequate to capture what is happening here. Obviously attention should be drawn to the fact that there is a critical safety update being pushed OTA, but "recall" is too overloaded a term if it means both "we're taking this back and destroying it because it's fundamentally flawed" vs. "a software update is being pushed to your vehicle (which may or may not be fundamentally flawed...)" I do think something beyond "software update" is necessary, though - these aren't your typical "bug fixes and improvements" type release notes that accompany many app software releases these days. I don't think it would be too difficult to come up with appropriate language. "Critical Safety Update"?

2h 4y ago
I think recall is just fine. Recall offers no ambiguity in my mind. It means the manufacturer fucked something up, big time. Everything else is just details. In the current world of forced updates (looking at you Android), the word "update" itself is kind of toxic, and doesn't (and I would argue cant) represent what has happened here, even if its technically more correct.
redundantly 4y ago
In this scenario 'recall' is a legal/compliance term. It's appropriately used.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
tsgagnon 4y ago
Obviously attention should be drawn to the fact that there is a critical safety update being pushed OTA, but "recall" is too overloaded a term if it means both "we're taking this back and destroying it because it's fundamentally flawed" vs. "a software update is being pushed to your vehicle (which may or may not be fundamentally flawed...)" How many times in history has a vehicle recall meant the cars were returned and destroyed? What makes this situation any more confusing than all the previous times vehicles were recalled?

panick21_ 4y ago

I wish all the ink spilled on controversy over Tesla would instead be spilled on doing basic safety improvement to the road system that are cheap and proven to save many lives. Lets be real here, automated driving or not, having actually save roads helps prevent death and harm in many cases. The hyper focus on high tech software by all the agencies engaged in 'automotive security' is totally wrongly focused. What they should actually do is point out how insanely unsafe and broken the infrastructure is, specially for people outside of cars. See: "Confessions of a Recovering Engineer: Transportation for a Strong Town"

2h 4y ago
I disagree. If someone is a bad driver, and causing crashes, we don't say "we need to improve the road system". We suspend the drivers license until they can prove they are capable of being a safe driver. We should hold this software to the same standard. Until it can demonstrate safety at or above human level, it should be outlawed. Road systems should always be worked on, but when a crash happens its usually the drivers fault, except in a minority of cases where bad road engineering is to blame. this self driving is fucking up enough that it cannot be blamed on the roads anymore, if it ever could.
- jjcon 4y ago
  Tesla publishes their safety data quarterly no need for your many assumptions and speculations - Teslas are already much safer than the average driver, especially when autopilot is on https://www.tesla.com/VehicleSafetyReport https://www.tesla.com/VehicleSafetyReport
  - dmix 4y ago
    One interesting bit from a different 3rd party study: > Cambridge Mobile Telematics also found that people driving Teslas were 21% less likely to engage in distracted driving with their phone in their Tesla compared to when they drove their other car. Maybe the software integration helps avoid this? Lots of other cars have much more complicated interfaces to hook up calls and reading texts. My mom struggled to figure out her car even supported Android Auto. It might just be it's a higher end car, but they didn't see it for an EV Porsche > These findings include an analysis of Tesla drivers who also operate another vehicle. These drivers are nearly 50% less likely to crash while driving their Tesla than any other vehicle they operate. We conducted the same analysis on individuals who operate a Porsche and another vehicle. In this case, we observed the opposite effect. Porsche drivers are 55% more likely to crash while driving their Porsche compared to their other vehicle. The reduction in speed is likely influenced by automated driving, especially considering how fast a Tesla car can accelerate vs normal cars: > They were 9% less likely to drive above the speed limit. https://electrek.co/2022/05/27/tesla-owners-less-likely-crash-than-their-other-cars/ https://electrek.co/2022/05/27/tesla-owners-less-likely-cras...

kbos87 4y ago

The amount of hyperbole and completely uninformed takes around FSD is eye opening. I’ll completely agree that “Full self driving” is a misleading name, and they should be forced to change it, full stop. That being said, it’s exceptionally clear that all the responsibility is on you, the driver, while you are using it. The messaging in the vehicle is concise and constant (not just the wall of text you read when opting in.) Eye tracking makes sure you are actually engaged and looking at the road, otherwise the car will disengage and you’ll eventually lose the ability to use FSD. Why is there never a mention of this in any coverage? Because it’s more salacious to believe people are asleep at the wheel. Is it perfect? No, though it’s a lot better than many people seem to want the world to believe. It’s so easy to overlook the fact that human drivers are also very, very far from perfect.

InCityDreams 4y ago
>....“Full self driving” is a misleading name, and they should be forced to change it, full stop. Problem and solution. Nothing more need be said.
- culi 4y ago
  This one issue is one of the primary reasons Google ended up deciding not to acquire Tesla really early on. Google's been way ahead of them for a long time and their engineers were extremely aware of how reckless this type of marketing from Musk was But the marketing worked. They sold the dream to people and only got sued a couple times and still got the most subsidization of any automaker
Barrin92 4y ago
>That being said, it’s exceptionally clear that all the responsibility is on you, the driver Virtually every study ever done on human-machine interaction shows that users will inevitably lose reaction time and attention when they are engaged with half automated systems given that constant context switching creates extreme issues. Waymo did studies on this in the earlier days and very quickly came to the conclusion that it's full autonomy or nothing. Comparisons to human performance are nonsensical because machines don't operate like human beings. If factory floor robots had the error rate of a human being you'd find a lot of limbs on the floor. When we interact with autonomous systems that a human can never predict precision needs to far exceed that of a human being for the cooperation to work. A two ton blackbox moving at speeds that kill people is not something any user can responsibly engage with at all.

1970-01-01 4y ago

I found an interesting phrase in the official report. NHTSA formally says that not respecting 'local driving customs' is a defect: ...the feature could potentially infringe upon local traffic *laws or customs* while executing certain driving maneuvers... Do they want Tesla to create a DB with 'allowed' and 'locally faux pas' driving maneuvers? It sure reads like they do.

idop 4y ago
Yes, and good that they do.

saudade97 4y ago

The amount of Tesla apologism in HN is nasueasting. Per the NHTSA, a safety recall is issued if either the manufacturer or the NHTSA determines that a vehicle or its equipment pose a safety risk or do not meet motor vehicle safety standards. On its face, Tesla's situation clearly calls out for classification as a recall.

Kranar 4y ago
Meh, the term recall conjures images of vehicles having to be taken back to the dealership to get repaired, replaced, or refunded. The recall announced here is just an over the air software update. It's worth pointing this out.
- notyourwork 4y ago
  It’s really not a differentiator. Is it? Issue is still an issue and must be addressed. OTA doesn’t change that.
  - literalAardvark 4y ago
    It certainly is different. Recalls are expensive and annoying for the user, involving drives and waiting times. This is an OTA update.
- billiallards 4y ago
  In the same way that the term "full self driving" or "autopilot" conjures images of vehicles driving themselves? Not sure that Tesla should be opening the "what do words mean" can of worms right now.
  - Domenic_S 4y ago
    > In the same way that the term "full self driving" or "autopilot" conjures images of vehicles driving themselves? I disagree with your point here, but whether correct or not you should be consistent: if words conjuring things is important, then the previous commenter's point is valid.

nmca 4y ago

Because this is a mandatory OTA patch and does not involve stock being physically returned or taken for repair (as is typically implied by "recall") this headline is clearly very misleading.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

londons_explore 4y ago

This just a few days before the much anticipated 'v11' software release... V11 supposedly uses neural nets for deciding the driving path and speed (rather than hand coded C++ rules).

londons_explore 4y ago
I would imagine v11 will be cancelled or at least massively delayed to deal with this recall...

tevon 4y ago

These articles really need to add a denominator to their numbers.

oblib 4y ago

Splitting hairs on the definition of "recall" of a potential deadly flaw in 362,758 automobiles is silly. But is is the correct word for that industry when there is one. I worked at a Oldsmobile dealer in the 80s and fixed all kinds of issues on cars that were "recalled" and that is what we called it way back then and long before it. Some were trivial and others were serious safety issues. https://www.kbb.com/car-advice/what-do-i-need-to-know-about-recalls/ https://www.kbb.com/car-advice/what-do-i-need-to-know-about-...

1970-01-01 4y ago
The news headlines coming out are also interesting. 'Tesla Recalls' vs 'Tesla Voluntary Recalls' are technically both true, however the former is a much more popular headline while being less precise.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]