4 ms·

But it's... out right now. You can literally use it today.

rvnx 2y ago
And it sort of works in limited cases. FSD is like ChatGPT, it works in many cases, it does some mistakes, but it is certainly not “useless”. It won’t replace full time humans yet (the same way that ChatGPT does not replace a developer) but can still work in some scenarios. To the investor, ChatGPT is sold as “AGI is just round the corner”.
- tlonny 2y ago
  If ChatGPT emits a fragment of code that doesn’t compile, a developer can simply undo and try again. No such luxury is granted to the driver using FSD who has just collided with another vehicle.
  - vachina 2y ago
    Very low bar to have code that just compiles.
  - pipes 2y ago
    Or produces code that compiles but is subtly wrong it probably won't kill someone, well until we start developing safety critical systems with it. One day we might have only developers that can't actually write code fluently and we'll expect them massage what ever LLMs produce into something workable. Oh well.
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
- joeldo 2y ago
  I guess the difference is ChatGPT is less likely to cause death if it makes a mistake. Users generally have time to decide if the output ChatGPT provides is accurate and worth actioning.
  - ben_w 2y ago
    At this point, I'd be surprised if ChatGPT has not yet given someone a response which caused them to make a mistake that resulted in a death. We found out about the lawyers citing ChatGPT because they were called out by a judge. We find out about Google Maps errors when someone drives off a broken bridge. https://edition.cnn.com/2023/09/21/us/father-death-google-gps-drive-off-bridge-lawsuit-north-carolina/index.html https://edition.cnn.com/2023/09/21/us/father-death-google-gp... For other LLMs we see mistakes bold enough that everyone can recognise them — the headlines about Google's LLM suggesting eating rocks and putting glue on your pizza (at least it said "non-toxic glue"). All it takes is some subtle mistake. The strength and the weakness of the best LLMs is their domain knowledge is part way between a normal person and a domain expert — good enough to receive trust, not enough to deserve it.
- grumbelbart 2y ago
  But "works in limited cases" is absolutely not enough, given what it promises. It drove into static objects a couple of times, killing people. Recent videos still show behavior like speeding through stop signs: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MGOo06xzCeU&t=990s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MGOo06xzCeU&t=990s Meaning that it's really not reliable enough to take your hands off the wheel. Waymo shows that it is possible, with today's technology, to do much much better.
  - steelbrain 2y ago
    > Meaning that it's really not reliable enough to take your hands off the wheel. Soooo just like ChatGPT then? As the parent comment said.
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
  - DennisP 2y ago
    It's not enough for robotaxis yet, and Tesla doesn't claim that it is. They just think they'll get there. What they do claim is that with human supervision, it lowers the accident rate to one per 5.5 million miles, which is a lot better than the overall accident rate for all cars on the road. And unlike Waymo, it works everywhere. That's worthwhile even if it never improves from here. Fwiw you can take your hands off the wheel now, you just have to watch the road. They got rid of the "steering wheel nag" with the latest version.
    - pas 2y ago
      > it works everywhere. where there's enough bandwidth > you just have to watch the road ... and then react in a split second, or what? it's simpler to say goodbyes before the trip. > They just think they'll get there. of course. I think too. eventually they'll hire the receptionist from Waymo and he/she will tell them to build a fucking world model that has some object permanence.
      - 2y ago
- ProxCoques 2y ago
  I think this is one of my fave FSD predictions: https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/tesla-driverless-cars_n_5990136 https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/tesla-driverless-cars... Oct 2014: "Five or six years from now we will be able to achieve true autonomous driving where you could literally get in the car, go to sleep and wake up at your destination."
  - hardlianotion 2y ago
    That’s metaphysics.
  - ddalex 2y ago
    And waymo got there, in limited conditions
    - ProxCoques 2y ago
      Indeed. "Limited conditions" being the issue here (and as per the article).
NicoJuicy 2y ago
Not much better than assisted driving, which actually says what it does.

rvnx 2y ago

And it sort of works in limited cases. FSD is like ChatGPT, it works in many cases, it does some mistakes, but it is certainly not “useless”. It won’t replace full time humans yet (the same way that ChatGPT does not replace a developer) but can still work in some scenarios. To the investor, ChatGPT is sold as “AGI is just round the corner”.

tlonny 2y ago
If ChatGPT emits a fragment of code that doesn’t compile, a developer can simply undo and try again. No such luxury is granted to the driver using FSD who has just collided with another vehicle.
- vachina 2y ago
  Very low bar to have code that just compiles.
- pipes 2y ago
  Or produces code that compiles but is subtly wrong it probably won't kill someone, well until we start developing safety critical systems with it. One day we might have only developers that can't actually write code fluently and we'll expect them massage what ever LLMs produce into something workable. Oh well.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
joeldo 2y ago
I guess the difference is ChatGPT is less likely to cause death if it makes a mistake. Users generally have time to decide if the output ChatGPT provides is accurate and worth actioning.
- ben_w 2y ago
  At this point, I'd be surprised if ChatGPT has not yet given someone a response which caused them to make a mistake that resulted in a death. We found out about the lawyers citing ChatGPT because they were called out by a judge. We find out about Google Maps errors when someone drives off a broken bridge. https://edition.cnn.com/2023/09/21/us/father-death-google-gps-drive-off-bridge-lawsuit-north-carolina/index.html https://edition.cnn.com/2023/09/21/us/father-death-google-gp... For other LLMs we see mistakes bold enough that everyone can recognise them — the headlines about Google's LLM suggesting eating rocks and putting glue on your pizza (at least it said "non-toxic glue"). All it takes is some subtle mistake. The strength and the weakness of the best LLMs is their domain knowledge is part way between a normal person and a domain expert — good enough to receive trust, not enough to deserve it.
grumbelbart 2y ago
But "works in limited cases" is absolutely not enough, given what it promises. It drove into static objects a couple of times, killing people. Recent videos still show behavior like speeding through stop signs: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MGOo06xzCeU&t=990s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MGOo06xzCeU&t=990s Meaning that it's really not reliable enough to take your hands off the wheel. Waymo shows that it is possible, with today's technology, to do much much better.
- steelbrain 2y ago
  > Meaning that it's really not reliable enough to take your hands off the wheel. Soooo just like ChatGPT then? As the parent comment said.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
- DennisP 2y ago
  It's not enough for robotaxis yet, and Tesla doesn't claim that it is. They just think they'll get there. What they do claim is that with human supervision, it lowers the accident rate to one per 5.5 million miles, which is a lot better than the overall accident rate for all cars on the road. And unlike Waymo, it works everywhere. That's worthwhile even if it never improves from here. Fwiw you can take your hands off the wheel now, you just have to watch the road. They got rid of the "steering wheel nag" with the latest version.
  - pas 2y ago
    > it works everywhere. where there's enough bandwidth > you just have to watch the road ... and then react in a split second, or what? it's simpler to say goodbyes before the trip. > They just think they'll get there. of course. I think too. eventually they'll hire the receptionist from Waymo and he/she will tell them to build a fucking world model that has some object permanence.
    - 2y ago
ProxCoques 2y ago
I think this is one of my fave FSD predictions: https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/tesla-driverless-cars_n_5990136 https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/tesla-driverless-cars... Oct 2014: "Five or six years from now we will be able to achieve true autonomous driving where you could literally get in the car, go to sleep and wake up at your destination."
- hardlianotion 2y ago
  That’s metaphysics.
- ddalex 2y ago
  And waymo got there, in limited conditions
  - ProxCoques 2y ago
    Indeed. "Limited conditions" being the issue here (and as per the article).

NicoJuicy 2y ago

Not much better than assisted driving, which actually says what it does.