9 ms·
Tesla in self-drive mode slams into police car in Orange County
- LadyCailin 2y ago[flagged]
- teom 2y ago[flagged]
- salawat 2y ago[flagged]
- boredemployee 2y agoFull self driving"."
- stephenr 2y agoIt’s a typo, it’s meant to say “fool”
- 0x1ceb00da 2y agoWhy does it say "fatal crash" both driver and police officer survived?
- helf 2y ago[dead]
- NoahKAndrews 2y agoThe cop was responding to a fatal crash.
- KennyBlanken 2y ago...because the officer was parked, using their vehicle to block the scene of a fatal motorcycle crash?
- adrianmonk 2y agoBecause the news story covered two crashes, and it's describing the one that was fatal.
- belter 2y ago"Tesla in self-drive mode slams into police car responding to fatal crash": https://youtu.be/ukq6h55GnvE https://youtu.be/ukq6h55GnvE
- Kerbonut 2y agoThe reporter claims "autopilot" yet the description and title of the youtube video says "self-drive mode". Probably the reporter was correct and it was changed for clickbait reasons.
- belter 2y agoYou are asking for a YouTube video to be precise when Tesla is ambiguous?
- para_parolu 2y agoOne bad behavior doesn’t justify another
- throwup238 2y ago> The spokesperson said that the Tesla was in self-drive mode and the driver admitted to being on a cellphone at the time of the crash. > It was unclear if the driver would be cited. Oh, come on!
- rcdemski 2y agoIt seems like a fair statement from the reporter. Unless they know definitively whether the driver is cited or not then the outcome is unclear. That said I hope there are repercussions for the driver
- newaccount74 2y agoI hope there are also repercussion for whoever named this tech "full self driving"
- silverquiet 2y agoI believe this is where it I was a Tesla apologist, I would say you can’t really expect full self driving to fully self drive the car. That said, given that over my lifetime, we seem to have legalized all sorts of fraud and removed as many consumer protections as possible, I can see why people get a bit confused.
- EA-3167 2y agoThere are, I hear he just got a $56bn dollar bonus. Worth every penny that Elon, his work is so fine and free from flaw. Sigh
- yreg 2y agoA bonus that shareholders previously approved for very concrete goals that he has met.
- yreg 2y agoDo we even know it was in FSD? The source mentions autopilot.
- blackeyeblitzar 2y ago[flagged]
- utensil4778 2y agoElon's pay package did make it to the front page.
- srid 2y agoAnd received negative comments about Musk as usual. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40666289 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40666289
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- blackeyeblitzar 2y agoI did not see it on the front page the entire day when the results came out. Is there anything you can share that provides evidence for this?
- qarl 2y ago[flagged]
- jamiek88 2y agoThought and discussion terminating meme twitter phrases like that bring the discourse level a lot lower on here. There was much discussion in the relevant thread about the pay issue. You’re a new account of 67 days, perhaps learn the culture here before spouting twitter / Reddit type culture war shit?
- blackeyeblitzar 2y agoLooking at someone’s profile to find something irrelevant to discredit them, like you are doing with the age of my account, is the real Reddit behavior. It really has no logical bearing on the point I am making. As for the point I’m making: minor incidents that are not newsworthy get upvoted as long as they are unfavorable to Elon Musk. On the other hand, one of the most significant pieces of financial news this year, the reapproval of his pay package from several years ago, did not make the front page and had barely any comments for how significant it is, because many HN users cannot stand to acknowledge anything that is favorable to Elon Musk. This is the type of overly politicized ideological and tribal thinking that should not have a place here.
- iamleppert 2y agoAutomatically Supervised Manual Mode Full Self Driving
- belter 2y agoReady since 2019: https://youtu.be/5cFTlx68itk https://youtu.be/5cFTlx68itk Robot taxi: https://youtu.be/5cFTlx68itk?t=121 https://youtu.be/5cFTlx68itk?t=121
- mikewarot 2y agoIt boggles my mind that any self driving system would knowingly drive into any object, no matter what it is, as large as a police car. I'd be willing to bet that Elon's insistence on only using cameras is combining with the flashing lights to effectively make objects that appear in some frames of video, and not in others, as the camera recovers from the flash... and this makes it appear as noise, and below a certain threshold, ignored. Or, it could be the reflective decals... who knows.
- sheepscreek 2y agoAFAIK the latest betas have switched to a cutting edge “transformer” model (or models?). I wonder if it’s prone to hallucinations like its LLM cousins. On a different note, I like how Mercedes changes the color of external lights when in self-driving mode to make others aware. A bit like outsourcing the responsibility externally - but maybe this is the way forward until the tech is reliable/better than people.
- t0mas88 2y agoI like the Mercedes idea, but haven't seen it in practice yet. It would be useful to have a universal outside light that informs drivers behind you that the reason you're keeping a safe distance ahead is that the car is on adaptive cruise control. Some people feel like 2 seconds distance is a reason to try crazy stunts to get around you. And then once the road is clear drive slower in front of you than the speed you had set...
- Rinzler89 2y ago>I wonder if it’s prone to hallucinations like its LLM cousins. When was their vision system not glitching? A year ago it was seeing the moon on the sky as a perpetual yellow traffic light.
- yreg 2y agoThat's not hallucination, that's image recognition issue.
- ein0p 2y agoOne of those situations where it’d be advisable to examine the recorded telemetry. Prediction: the car wasn’t in self driving mode and the owner just wanted a get out of the jail free card. This happened several times in the past.
- t0mas88 2y agoSure, but you can't trust Tesla on that and they're the only ones that have the data. If Tesla claims next week "it wasn't self driving at the time of the crash" that doesn't tell you anything. Because they will claim that even if the car self drove right into the police car but disengaged self driving mode 0.1 seconds before the crash. Their CEO is a pathological liar that will say anything to make the stock price go up.
- ein0p 2y agoNot the only ones. I’m sure the court will have access to it, too. That data is there for this exact reason. Lying about this would be pretty devastating for Tesla and easy to prove through in-cabin video recording
- JamesBell 2y agoAre you saying there are CEOs who won't lie to make their stock price go up? Because I have not seen them.
- geodel 2y agoMay be Tesla is looking to gain support from anti police activists. After Musk's antics sales must have gone down among rich coastal liberals.
- olliej 2y agoSelf drive mode is fundamentally unsafe. This bullshit where companies are allowed to say “the driver must always be in control”, is just that. Either it is self driving, or it is not. You cannnot make a product that is physiologically impossible to use, and then say that fault lies with anything other than the product. This is before you get to it being labeled and advertised explicitly as literally “full self driving” which is objectively fraud.
- olliej 2y agoTo clarify on the physiologically impossible bit: 1. The NTSB and FAA both found repeatedly, as have pretty much every other study - academic or otherwise - that people _cannot_ focus on watching a task without actually being involved in or doing the task. Any "self driving" model that requires the non-operator to be engaged in driving is simply not humanly possible. So the only reason for that stated rule is the manufacturers know these systems are unsafe, but nonetheless want to make themselves not be liable for their faulty products. 2. The only other "vehicle completely controls itself" system in practice is aircraft flight, where the pilots are necessarily engaged in all critical times, and for the remainder of the time all the systems either give sufficient warning before anything goes wrong (e.g. when autopilot disengages on an aircraft you have a substantial amount of time before impact - not the <=2s warning Tesla gives people), or the aircraft systems have specific extremely heavily trained signals for which there is only a single action and no immediate requirement to regain situational awareness (stall, acas, tcas, etc). The time these "self driving" systems provide to regain situational awareness and then take appropriate action is less than what we expect of trained pilots, yet it's somehow acceptable for random drivers. The current self driving "you are expected to be in charge of the vehicle at all times" is entirely liability shifting: manufacturers are knowingly selling unsafe products, especially Tesla, they are lying about the capabilities of those products, and then they are saying it is the drivers fault when they fail. What manufacturers are doing is no different from a manufacturer selling a car with an ABS system that fails, and saying "the driver is responsible for identifying ABS has failed and pumping the brakes if it does, if they fail to do so we do not accept liability for the ABS failing"
- 2y ago
- kjfbxca 2y ago[dead]
- eurleif 2y agoThis article reads like it generated by an LLM, and its source looks like similar junk content, claiming for example that Tesla "operates on an operating system built on the Python programming language" -- if there is a human author, that author definitely doesn't know what an operating system is. I can find no reputable source making the same claim, and in fact, Elon Musk referred to ">300k lines of C++ code" in a previous version of FSD.[0] Meanwhile, your account is less than an hour old, and you seem to have made it just for this comment. Are you sure you're not just trying to help this content farm-looking blog gain search engine ranking by shoehorning it into this thread? [0] https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1686513363495346178 https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1686513363495346178
- hughesjj 2y agoPerceiving safety based on programming language is dumb and cringe, unless you're talking about something formally verifiable.
- Aeglaecia 2y agodriving two tons of steel is a safety critical context, the less moving parts the better
- acchow 2y ago> “ It was unclear if the driver would be cited.” They admitted to being on their phone. This is an easy choice
- _moof 2y agoIn aircraft, legal liability is unaffected by whether the autopilot is on; the pilot in command is responsible no matter what. I see no reason for cars to be any different.
- hypothesis 2y agoWhat happens when one of the tools is malfunctioning? Say autopilot doesn’t turn off? Is it still blamed on captain?
- cynical_spar 2y agoYes, because there are usually no less then 4 separate ways to turn it off (AP disconnect, trim switch, circuit breaker(s), servo override) and this includes small GA airplanes. The autopilot does not fly the airplane on intuition. It flies based on the way the pilot programmed it, malfunctions are expected and trained for and memory items are required for quick disabling of malfunctioning systems. I’m a pilot and airplane owner.
- _moof 2y agoAutopilot not turning off is not a realistic scenario. There are multiple ways to turn them off, including cutting power entirely by pulling a circuit breaker. You'll often see a colored plastic ring attached to the AP breaker for this exact reason.
- yumraj 2y agoYesterday a Model X just changed lane into me. I barely avoided hitting it. Not 100% sure but it almost seemed that it was in self drive mode. Or, the guy with MIT sticker at the back was just a bleeping bad driver. They are making things worse for everyone.
- thejazzman 2y agoIt could also be a Model X from a decade ago. They're not all equally equipped.
- lopkeny12ko 2y agoYou are responsible for your vehicle at all times when FSD is engaged.
- thebruce87m 2y agoEven when the wife is driving?
- 1vuio0pswjnm7 2y ago"It was unclear if the driver would be cited."