6 ms·

What do you mean "No" ? I am asking if it's traversing red lights while they are otherwise safe to traverse (no lateral traffic). What's with this amazing pes

by sova 2y ago

What do you mean "No" ? I am asking if it's traversing red lights while they are otherwise safe to traverse (no lateral traffic). What's with this amazing pessimism infecting this forum lately.

CalRobert 2y ago
So you have no lateral traffic and run over the person walking across the street?
- teqsun 2y ago
  Is FSD running red lights with no lateral traffic and running people walking across the street over?
  - p51-remorse 2y ago
    Usually HN engineers are able to compartmentalize and correctly answer questions like this, but it’s a lost cause with Tesla for some reason. They’re unable to separate “it did a dangerous thing, but did not cause harm” in their minds. Yes, it has problems. Yes, it has regressions. Yes, sometimes it does dangerous things. But it drove me 400 miles, door to door, last week and did fine. There’s clearly something historic happening here, but all HN can talk about is flaws. If someone developed a warp drive, and 25% of the time it turned the operator into jelly, we wouldn’t sit here talking exclusively about jelly. We’d talk about how warp drive is cool and what the path to fixing stuff is. It’s really bizarre.
    - jrflowers 2y ago
      This is a good point. HN posters have some difficulty looking at the objective reality of this situation, for example some are missing the obvious comparison to a completely unrelated sci-fi hypothetical that exists in your head.
      - p51-remorse 2y ago
        Breaking my own rule only once: My car, that I own as a consumer, drove me through town, on the freeway, through another town, and into a parking lot four hundred miles away. Twenty years ago, that was sci-fi. HN would have been able to reason clearly about it twenty years ago. (Yes, I know HN wasn’t around in 2004. You don’t need to nitpick that)
        jrflowers 2y ago
        This is a thread about Teslas running red lights. Your story about a trip wherein that didn’t happen has no real bearing on this topic. Your nice trip aside, no sci-fi hypotheticals make running red lights acceptable either. “What if we invented a reverse microwave but it made everything smell like cheese?” or “What if we invented an interpretive dance that solved climate change but only people over 6’4” could do it?” have the same amount of relevance to Teslas running red lights as the human jelly machine you’ve conjured in your mind.
    - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
      > If someone developed a warp drive, and 25% of the time it turned the operator into jelly, we wouldn’t sit here talking exclusively about jelly. We’d talk about how warp drive is cool and what the path to fixing stuff is What? Who? We'd ask why the hell people are being put in it. The hackers of yore, the ones we respect, weren't terrorists. When they phreaked the phone company they didn't try to take down 911. > did not cause harm Tesla's FSD has killed people [1]. It's also been the subject of multiple recalls by federal agencies. [1] https://www.tesladeaths.com https://www.tesladeaths.com
      - ripjaygn 2y ago
        > Tesla's FSD has killed people [1] I looked at the very first one on the list and it says someone drunk in a non-Tesla hit a Tesla and resulted in a death of the Tesla driver. > According to the Albuquerque Police Department, on July 1, Sandoval-Martinez was driving drunk, speeding, and without a license when he ran a red light and hit Tiger Gutierrez’s Tesla, as well as a Toyota Corolla. Not sure why the website is putting that under a Tesla death, probably to inflate counts since there aren't many Tesla deaths due to them being very safe cars. Why are you attributing and referencing these incidents as FSD killing people?
        JumpCrisscross 2y ago
        > Why are you attributing and referencing these incidents as FSD killing people? Nobody is. The first entry, case No. 432, appears to have a null value in the Autopilot claimed and Verified Tesla Death columns. The first Autopilot claimed death is No. 410 [1]. > probably to inflate counts since there aren't many Tesla deaths due to them being very safe cars How is 555 deaths across millions of cars sold refuting that? The bold text at the top clearly states "Tesla Deaths is a record of Tesla accidents that involved a driver, occupant, cyclist, motorcyclist, or pedestrian death, whether or not the Tesla or its driver were at fault." [1] https://www.kiro7.com/news/local/charges-filed-against-tesla-driver-fatal-motorcycle-accident/FFXZIGDW45CWXCMZJFD4LPLUPI/ https://www.kiro7.com/news/local/charges-filed-against-tesla...
        2y ago
    - rootusrootus 2y ago
      > it drove me 400 miles, door to door, last week and did fine I call BS. Even in perfect weather on perfect roads with perfect visibility, 400 miles is at least 10 times as long as FSD can go without a disengagement.
      - p51-remorse 2y ago
        I dunno what to tell you. It did it. A disengagement every 40 miles is not what I’m seeing on my car. (By the way, this is part of the reason Tesla owners get called Elon-worshipers: we see the sentiment in places like this, it doesn’t line up with the reality we’re seeing every day, and trying to correct the discrepancy comes across as worship. It’s not, it’s just that it seems like something other than truth is driving these conversations.)
        jcranmer 2y ago
        It would not shock me if you simply mentally blocked out all recollections of disengagements or other self-driving issues.
        p51-remorse 2y ago
        I’m not insane, my ability to remember instances of my car trying to kill me is quite well developed. Are you assuming good faith?
        jcranmer 2y ago
        400 miles is at least 5 hours of driving, which is a bit long for not even having a pee break. Since you're driving a BEV, it's also above the maximum range of your car, so you had to have stopped at some point, which suggests that there are details in your claim that are already missing because (you feel) those details don't matter to the essential truth of your statement. I believe that you believe you made a 400-mile drive with full self-driving without any issues. But I also believe that belief can be made in good faith even if there were issues during that drive--either the things that did come up you don't mentally classify as issues, or you've just failed to commit what did happen to memory. That's not a knock on you, by the way; recently, I've been struck in a number of instances the times where I have physical proof something happened yet I have absolutely no memory whatsoever of it happening while feeling that I would have had to have that memory. Human memory is notoriously finicky and fallible.
    - CalRobert 2y ago
      I actually generally agree with you. It’s amazing. And I actually feel safer with waymo than human drivers. But the idea that running a stop sign is safe because there aren’t other cars is the issue here.
  - windowshopping 2y ago
    Yes
    - p51-remorse 2y ago
      [citation-needed]
      - wtfwhateven 2y ago
        What you're asking for was already linked in this thread ~30 minutes ago, at the very top. I doubt you didn't already see that.
- jcgrillo 2y ago
  It doesn't even have to run over a pedestrian to be dangerous, such a move could very well lead to the driver being pulled over and extrajudicially executed by a trigger happy cop
lostemptations5 2y ago
No
wtfwhateven 2y ago
You asked whether or not the FSD ran the red lights safely. You were given the answer of "No". You never, at any point, asked whether or not "it's traversing red lights while they are otherwise safe to traverse (no lateral traffic)" which is a question that contradicts itself. If you ask a question, someone answers, and you start berating them because they were either not able to read your mind to determine what the actual question you're asking is or gave you an answer you did not like, then why ask the question? The article you posted a comment to shows a video of numerous instances of the FSD trying to run a red light when it is absolutely "not safe" to do so.

by sova 2y ago

What do you mean "No" ? I am asking if it's traversing red lights while they are otherwise safe to traverse (no lateral traffic). What's with this amazing pessimism infecting this forum lately.

CalRobert 2y ago

So you have no lateral traffic and run over the person walking across the street?

teqsun 2y ago
Is FSD running red lights with no lateral traffic and running people walking across the street over?
- p51-remorse 2y ago
  Usually HN engineers are able to compartmentalize and correctly answer questions like this, but it’s a lost cause with Tesla for some reason. They’re unable to separate “it did a dangerous thing, but did not cause harm” in their minds. Yes, it has problems. Yes, it has regressions. Yes, sometimes it does dangerous things. But it drove me 400 miles, door to door, last week and did fine. There’s clearly something historic happening here, but all HN can talk about is flaws. If someone developed a warp drive, and 25% of the time it turned the operator into jelly, we wouldn’t sit here talking exclusively about jelly. We’d talk about how warp drive is cool and what the path to fixing stuff is. It’s really bizarre.
  - jrflowers 2y ago
    This is a good point. HN posters have some difficulty looking at the objective reality of this situation, for example some are missing the obvious comparison to a completely unrelated sci-fi hypothetical that exists in your head.
    - p51-remorse 2y ago
      Breaking my own rule only once: My car, that I own as a consumer, drove me through town, on the freeway, through another town, and into a parking lot four hundred miles away. Twenty years ago, that was sci-fi. HN would have been able to reason clearly about it twenty years ago. (Yes, I know HN wasn’t around in 2004. You don’t need to nitpick that)
      - jrflowers 2y ago
        This is a thread about Teslas running red lights. Your story about a trip wherein that didn’t happen has no real bearing on this topic. Your nice trip aside, no sci-fi hypotheticals make running red lights acceptable either. “What if we invented a reverse microwave but it made everything smell like cheese?” or “What if we invented an interpretive dance that solved climate change but only people over 6’4” could do it?” have the same amount of relevance to Teslas running red lights as the human jelly machine you’ve conjured in your mind.
  - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
    > If someone developed a warp drive, and 25% of the time it turned the operator into jelly, we wouldn’t sit here talking exclusively about jelly. We’d talk about how warp drive is cool and what the path to fixing stuff is What? Who? We'd ask why the hell people are being put in it. The hackers of yore, the ones we respect, weren't terrorists. When they phreaked the phone company they didn't try to take down 911. > did not cause harm Tesla's FSD has killed people [1]. It's also been the subject of multiple recalls by federal agencies. [1] https://www.tesladeaths.com https://www.tesladeaths.com
    - ripjaygn 2y ago
      > Tesla's FSD has killed people [1] I looked at the very first one on the list and it says someone drunk in a non-Tesla hit a Tesla and resulted in a death of the Tesla driver. > According to the Albuquerque Police Department, on July 1, Sandoval-Martinez was driving drunk, speeding, and without a license when he ran a red light and hit Tiger Gutierrez’s Tesla, as well as a Toyota Corolla. Not sure why the website is putting that under a Tesla death, probably to inflate counts since there aren't many Tesla deaths due to them being very safe cars. Why are you attributing and referencing these incidents as FSD killing people?
      - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
        > Why are you attributing and referencing these incidents as FSD killing people? Nobody is. The first entry, case No. 432, appears to have a null value in the Autopilot claimed and Verified Tesla Death columns. The first Autopilot claimed death is No. 410 [1]. > probably to inflate counts since there aren't many Tesla deaths due to them being very safe cars How is 555 deaths across millions of cars sold refuting that? The bold text at the top clearly states "Tesla Deaths is a record of Tesla accidents that involved a driver, occupant, cyclist, motorcyclist, or pedestrian death, whether or not the Tesla or its driver were at fault." [1] https://www.kiro7.com/news/local/charges-filed-against-tesla-driver-fatal-motorcycle-accident/FFXZIGDW45CWXCMZJFD4LPLUPI/ https://www.kiro7.com/news/local/charges-filed-against-tesla...
        2y ago
  - rootusrootus 2y ago
    > it drove me 400 miles, door to door, last week and did fine I call BS. Even in perfect weather on perfect roads with perfect visibility, 400 miles is at least 10 times as long as FSD can go without a disengagement.
    - p51-remorse 2y ago
      I dunno what to tell you. It did it. A disengagement every 40 miles is not what I’m seeing on my car. (By the way, this is part of the reason Tesla owners get called Elon-worshipers: we see the sentiment in places like this, it doesn’t line up with the reality we’re seeing every day, and trying to correct the discrepancy comes across as worship. It’s not, it’s just that it seems like something other than truth is driving these conversations.)
      - jcranmer 2y ago
        It would not shock me if you simply mentally blocked out all recollections of disengagements or other self-driving issues.
        p51-remorse 2y ago
        I’m not insane, my ability to remember instances of my car trying to kill me is quite well developed. Are you assuming good faith?
        jcranmer 2y ago
        400 miles is at least 5 hours of driving, which is a bit long for not even having a pee break. Since you're driving a BEV, it's also above the maximum range of your car, so you had to have stopped at some point, which suggests that there are details in your claim that are already missing because (you feel) those details don't matter to the essential truth of your statement. I believe that you believe you made a 400-mile drive with full self-driving without any issues. But I also believe that belief can be made in good faith even if there were issues during that drive--either the things that did come up you don't mentally classify as issues, or you've just failed to commit what did happen to memory. That's not a knock on you, by the way; recently, I've been struck in a number of instances the times where I have physical proof something happened yet I have absolutely no memory whatsoever of it happening while feeling that I would have had to have that memory. Human memory is notoriously finicky and fallible.
  - CalRobert 2y ago
    I actually generally agree with you. It’s amazing. And I actually feel safer with waymo than human drivers. But the idea that running a stop sign is safe because there aren’t other cars is the issue here.
- windowshopping 2y ago
  Yes
  - p51-remorse 2y ago
    [citation-needed]
    - wtfwhateven 2y ago
      What you're asking for was already linked in this thread ~30 minutes ago, at the very top. I doubt you didn't already see that.
jcgrillo 2y ago
It doesn't even have to run over a pedestrian to be dangerous, such a move could very well lead to the driver being pulled over and extrajudicially executed by a trigger happy cop

lostemptations5 2y ago

wtfwhateven 2y ago

You asked whether or not the FSD ran the red lights safely. You were given the answer of "No". You never, at any point, asked whether or not "it's traversing red lights while they are otherwise safe to traverse (no lateral traffic)" which is a question that contradicts itself. If you ask a question, someone answers, and you start berating them because they were either not able to read your mind to determine what the actual question you're asking is or gave you an answer you did not like, then why ask the question? The article you posted a comment to shows a video of numerous instances of the FSD trying to run a red light when it is absolutely "not safe" to do so.