6 ms·

"FSD is just around the corner, guys. each tesla converted to robotaxi will make you 42069% returns a month, buy stonks!!" - a prayer from a typical elmo fan. I

"FSD is just around the corner, guys. each tesla converted to robotaxi will make you 42069% returns a month, buy stonks!!" - a prayer from a typical elmo fan. I wonder when this clownfest finally implodes

chroma 2y ago
I bought a Model 3 back in 2020 and got the self-driving option mostly on a whim. Until recently, it was a handy feature on freeways but a gimmick on surface streets. Ever since the update a couple months ago, it actually does drive itself. I can't remember the last time I intervened. If I did, it was probably to make the car do something dangerous or technically in violation of traffic laws, as you have to be aggressive sometimes in city driving. You also have people like John Carmack saying, "I have made multiple two hour drives without touching the wheel." His main complaint is that the car makes him touch the steering wheel if he's wearing sunglasses (because it can't track his eyes to determine whether he's paying attention). I don't think owners will rent out their cars as taxis any time soon, but the technology really does seem to be there. 1. https://twitter.com/ID_AA_Carmack/status/1814687334366912530 https://twitter.com/ID_AA_Carmack/status/1814687334366912530
- llamaimperative 2y ago
  The technology really isn't there. Individuals' subjective experience of safety is totally irrelevant when you're talking about a system as huge as "automobile travel." Even 99.999% reliable miles is still dangerous at 3.2 trillion miles per year
  - iamronaldo 2y ago
    Would the comparison not be human drivers? If it's 99% percent reliable I would say that's far safer than humans and makes far more sense already? What am I missing
    - oblio 2y ago
      People would rather die due to their action or inaction than due a botched software update somewhere.
    - metalliqaz 2y ago
      It's not 99% reliable, but even if it was, the issue is lawyers. Who is going to take responsibility when a pedestrian is hit?
    - Veserv 2y ago
      You think humans are only 99% reliable on a per-mile basis?! That would mean your average person crashes every ~100 miles, or about once every two days. You can not just go around asserting comparative advantage when your baseline is so far off it is farcical.
    - alemanek 2y ago
      According to the link below there are 529 accidents per 100 million miles driven for people aged 20-29. That is a bit better than 99.999% reliable. Self driving needs to get down to 1 intervention in 200k miles to match the average 20 year old. They have a long way to go. https://www.friedmansimon.com/faqs/how-common-are-car-accidents/ https://www.friedmansimon.com/faqs/how-common-are-car-accide...
- bagels 2y ago
  I did not have the same experience with the free trial. It tried to crash in to curbs, and really drives in ways that make you think it isn't really planning very far ahead: driving towards parked cars and swerving at the last second instead of making an early correction to move over in the lane slightly, driving too fast for conditions, hard braking at stop signs, stopping very early, or very late for stop signs. This is in addition to all the other bad behavior: getting confused about where lanes are and blaring the alarm sound, taking no regard for other cars when merging, trouble following curves smoothly and respecting limit lines.
  - huntertwo 2y ago
    Curious because I don’t have the Tesla but have been impressed by city driving in YouTube videos in SF (I think it’s the beta version). When did you have the free trial and where was this experience?
    - bagels 2y ago
      It was a couple months ago, whenever the free trial for everyone was. Bay Area peninsula suburbs. The neighborhoods that Tesla engineers live and drive in frequently.
- henning 2y ago
  Well if two people say it on the Internet without providing any documentation, evidence or references to larger-scale reports, that sure proves the claim, doesn't it?
- aetherspawn 2y ago
  We must have the old version in Australia because we bought extended autopilot for our 2024 M3 Highland and it drives for about 10 seconds before drifting into the left or right adjacent lanes and making everyone nervous. And it tried to kill me on the freeway when it pretended it was going to merge and then just kept driving straight into the gutter. In fact I have been thinking about asking for a refund because it is LESS capable than our 2020 Corolla’s adaptive cruise. Really crappy situation to be waiting for someone to fix software that you paid for. If EAP is actually OK overseas, why don’t we have it here??
  - chroma 2y ago
    In Australia, self-driving features beyond lane keeping are banned, and lane keeping is limited to imparting a maximum lateral acceleration of 3 meters per second squared. Because of these restrictions, all Teslas in Australia are using a gimped version of autopilot from 2-3 years ago.
    - aetherspawn 2y ago
      I figured. That sucks.
moralestapia 2y ago
Even if that was true ..., What's the issue with people buying the stocks they like? (as long as it's not $GME of course, we wouldn't want to push hedge funds to illegally manipulate the market to stay afloat :P)
huntertwo 2y ago
Assuming Waymo is able to drive safely, it seems like a matter of time until Tesla is able to achieve the same, no? I can’t see why Waymo should be able to do it but Tesla should not given enough time.
- rozap 2y ago
  This could be outdated info, but don't they have quite a bit of hardware bolted to the car that Tesla doesn't have? Tesla seems to be betting that they can work some software magic with fairly basic hardware, whereas Waymo (I think) has taken an approach that relies on input from quite a few more sensors.
- kryptiskt 2y ago
  Waymo's cars have an extensive sensor suite that is missing on Teslas, which rely on cameras only.
- dmicah 2y ago
  For one, Waymo has more sensor modalities in comparison to Tesla, such as Lidar.
- Yossarrian22 2y ago
  Lack of Lidar may be a factor
- fragmede 2y ago
  Because of underlying decisions about their respective approaches, it's not certain that Tesla will actually be able to achieve the same as Waymo. Specifically, Waymo does pre-mapping, and uses LIDAR, probably other things, that Tesla won't do, so with those two differences, it's not clear that the computing power is available for Tesla to achieve the same level of self driving as Waymo.
  - huntertwo 2y ago
    Seems like quite the blunder - maybe Tesla thinks they can add LIDAR to their own fleet of robo-taxis. Otherwise they bet the future of the company pretty foolishly.
harmmonica 2y ago
I've commented on a few Waymo threads about how I'm a total convert to self-driving cars (or at least to Waymos) so it does seem like it's possible for autonomous cars to work at some level. On this subject, though, I happened to ride a Waymo to a destination only 1-mile away (hurt my knee last week! Not that lazy! Cost ~$8.00 btw) to meet a friend yesterday and it's the first time I got into the Waymo and didn't even watch the road because I guess I'm over the hump of worrying it's going to do something dumb (probably not sensible to give over so quickly, but just sharing how my behavior has changed over maybe 15-20 rides). The friend I met also happened to have a Model 3 with FSD and he offered to give me a ride home in it with FSD enabled. Aside from this blue prompt on the display that forces the driver to interact with the wheel to say "I'm still here" it didn't have any material difficulties with the route. Very short drive of course. But he did have to intervene because of the prompt at least 3 or 4 times, and even one time when we were stopped at a light FSD started turning the wheel even though we were going straight. You could see the car to the left of us get nervous because it noticed this wheel turn and so they moved over a little fearful that the Model 3 was going to go into their lane either right there at the red light or when it turned green. However, once the light turned green the wheel went straight and FSD just proceeded us through the intersection. An oddity for sure. We couldn't quite figure out why it thought it needed to turn the wheel. The reason I bring this up is to share a datapoint of 1, but also because it got me thinking about Tesla's rollout of robotaxis. It seems like before they actually let these cars drive without a driver they're going to have to remove that blue, take-the-wheel prompt while drivers are still in the driver's seat. And then they'll have to have a bunch (hundreds of thousands, millions?) of miles under their belt where there's zero/near-zero intervention from the driver to confidently deploy an actual robotaxi. So I guess the point at which you hear that Tesla no longer requires the driver to take the wheel is the point at which the public will know that Tesla now thinks it's getting close to having a robotaxi. That assumes Tesla does the sensible thing of course and takes that intermediate step. Would be odd to skip it for sure while you have a "safety driver" in the driver's seat.

chroma 2y ago

I bought a Model 3 back in 2020 and got the self-driving option mostly on a whim. Until recently, it was a handy feature on freeways but a gimmick on surface streets. Ever since the update a couple months ago, it actually does drive itself. I can't remember the last time I intervened. If I did, it was probably to make the car do something dangerous or technically in violation of traffic laws, as you have to be aggressive sometimes in city driving. You also have people like John Carmack saying, "I have made multiple two hour drives without touching the wheel." His main complaint is that the car makes him touch the steering wheel if he's wearing sunglasses (because it can't track his eyes to determine whether he's paying attention). I don't think owners will rent out their cars as taxis any time soon, but the technology really does seem to be there. 1. https://twitter.com/ID_AA_Carmack/status/1814687334366912530 https://twitter.com/ID_AA_Carmack/status/1814687334366912530

llamaimperative 2y ago
The technology really isn't there. Individuals' subjective experience of safety is totally irrelevant when you're talking about a system as huge as "automobile travel." Even 99.999% reliable miles is still dangerous at 3.2 trillion miles per year
- iamronaldo 2y ago
  Would the comparison not be human drivers? If it's 99% percent reliable I would say that's far safer than humans and makes far more sense already? What am I missing
  - oblio 2y ago
    People would rather die due to their action or inaction than due a botched software update somewhere.
  - metalliqaz 2y ago
    It's not 99% reliable, but even if it was, the issue is lawyers. Who is going to take responsibility when a pedestrian is hit?
  - Veserv 2y ago
    You think humans are only 99% reliable on a per-mile basis?! That would mean your average person crashes every ~100 miles, or about once every two days. You can not just go around asserting comparative advantage when your baseline is so far off it is farcical.
  - alemanek 2y ago
    According to the link below there are 529 accidents per 100 million miles driven for people aged 20-29. That is a bit better than 99.999% reliable. Self driving needs to get down to 1 intervention in 200k miles to match the average 20 year old. They have a long way to go. https://www.friedmansimon.com/faqs/how-common-are-car-accidents/ https://www.friedmansimon.com/faqs/how-common-are-car-accide...
bagels 2y ago
I did not have the same experience with the free trial. It tried to crash in to curbs, and really drives in ways that make you think it isn't really planning very far ahead: driving towards parked cars and swerving at the last second instead of making an early correction to move over in the lane slightly, driving too fast for conditions, hard braking at stop signs, stopping very early, or very late for stop signs. This is in addition to all the other bad behavior: getting confused about where lanes are and blaring the alarm sound, taking no regard for other cars when merging, trouble following curves smoothly and respecting limit lines.
- huntertwo 2y ago
  Curious because I don’t have the Tesla but have been impressed by city driving in YouTube videos in SF (I think it’s the beta version). When did you have the free trial and where was this experience?
  - bagels 2y ago
    It was a couple months ago, whenever the free trial for everyone was. Bay Area peninsula suburbs. The neighborhoods that Tesla engineers live and drive in frequently.
henning 2y ago
Well if two people say it on the Internet without providing any documentation, evidence or references to larger-scale reports, that sure proves the claim, doesn't it?
aetherspawn 2y ago
We must have the old version in Australia because we bought extended autopilot for our 2024 M3 Highland and it drives for about 10 seconds before drifting into the left or right adjacent lanes and making everyone nervous. And it tried to kill me on the freeway when it pretended it was going to merge and then just kept driving straight into the gutter. In fact I have been thinking about asking for a refund because it is LESS capable than our 2020 Corolla’s adaptive cruise. Really crappy situation to be waiting for someone to fix software that you paid for. If EAP is actually OK overseas, why don’t we have it here??
- chroma 2y ago
  In Australia, self-driving features beyond lane keeping are banned, and lane keeping is limited to imparting a maximum lateral acceleration of 3 meters per second squared. Because of these restrictions, all Teslas in Australia are using a gimped version of autopilot from 2-3 years ago.
  - aetherspawn 2y ago
    I figured. That sucks.

moralestapia 2y ago

Even if that was true ..., What's the issue with people buying the stocks they like? (as long as it's not $GME of course, we wouldn't want to push hedge funds to illegally manipulate the market to stay afloat :P)

huntertwo 2y ago

Assuming Waymo is able to drive safely, it seems like a matter of time until Tesla is able to achieve the same, no? I can’t see why Waymo should be able to do it but Tesla should not given enough time.

rozap 2y ago
This could be outdated info, but don't they have quite a bit of hardware bolted to the car that Tesla doesn't have? Tesla seems to be betting that they can work some software magic with fairly basic hardware, whereas Waymo (I think) has taken an approach that relies on input from quite a few more sensors.
kryptiskt 2y ago
Waymo's cars have an extensive sensor suite that is missing on Teslas, which rely on cameras only.
dmicah 2y ago
For one, Waymo has more sensor modalities in comparison to Tesla, such as Lidar.
Yossarrian22 2y ago
Lack of Lidar may be a factor
fragmede 2y ago
Because of underlying decisions about their respective approaches, it's not certain that Tesla will actually be able to achieve the same as Waymo. Specifically, Waymo does pre-mapping, and uses LIDAR, probably other things, that Tesla won't do, so with those two differences, it's not clear that the computing power is available for Tesla to achieve the same level of self driving as Waymo.
- huntertwo 2y ago
  Seems like quite the blunder - maybe Tesla thinks they can add LIDAR to their own fleet of robo-taxis. Otherwise they bet the future of the company pretty foolishly.

harmmonica 2y ago

I've commented on a few Waymo threads about how I'm a total convert to self-driving cars (or at least to Waymos) so it does seem like it's possible for autonomous cars to work at some level. On this subject, though, I happened to ride a Waymo to a destination only 1-mile away (hurt my knee last week! Not that lazy! Cost ~$8.00 btw) to meet a friend yesterday and it's the first time I got into the Waymo and didn't even watch the road because I guess I'm over the hump of worrying it's going to do something dumb (probably not sensible to give over so quickly, but just sharing how my behavior has changed over maybe 15-20 rides). The friend I met also happened to have a Model 3 with FSD and he offered to give me a ride home in it with FSD enabled. Aside from this blue prompt on the display that forces the driver to interact with the wheel to say "I'm still here" it didn't have any material difficulties with the route. Very short drive of course. But he did have to intervene because of the prompt at least 3 or 4 times, and even one time when we were stopped at a light FSD started turning the wheel even though we were going straight. You could see the car to the left of us get nervous because it noticed this wheel turn and so they moved over a little fearful that the Model 3 was going to go into their lane either right there at the red light or when it turned green. However, once the light turned green the wheel went straight and FSD just proceeded us through the intersection. An oddity for sure. We couldn't quite figure out why it thought it needed to turn the wheel. The reason I bring this up is to share a datapoint of 1, but also because it got me thinking about Tesla's rollout of robotaxis. It seems like before they actually let these cars drive without a driver they're going to have to remove that blue, take-the-wheel prompt while drivers are still in the driver's seat. And then they'll have to have a bunch (hundreds of thousands, millions?) of miles under their belt where there's zero/near-zero intervention from the driver to confidently deploy an actual robotaxi. So I guess the point at which you hear that Tesla no longer requires the driver to take the wheel is the point at which the public will know that Tesla now thinks it's getting close to having a robotaxi. That assumes Tesla does the sensible thing of course and takes that intermediate step. Would be odd to skip it for sure while you have a "safety driver" in the driver's seat.