6 ms·
One example from the first day, where the vehicle spends a bit of time driving into oncoming traffic: https://youtu.be/_s-h0YXtF0c?t=0h7m15s https://youtu.be/_
by AlotOfReading 1y ago
One example from the first day, where the vehicle spends a bit of time driving into oncoming traffic:
https://youtu.be/_s-h0YXtF0c?t=0h7m15s https://youtu.be/_s-h0YXtF0c?t=0h7m15s
- smallmancontrov 1y agoHere's a human doing the same thing in the same video for the same reason: https://youtu.be/_s-h0YXtF0c?t=906 https://youtu.be/_s-h0YXtF0c?t=906
- mahkeiro 1y agoAnd so it’s ok to break traffic rules? In my country, as a human this will get you easily a one month license suspension.
- smallmancontrov 1y agoNo, just a bit of perspective. I'm sure the video record of your car would be squeaky clean with no violations whatsoever.
- pixelpoet 1y agoIf I said I've never had a driver's licence, can we get back to the topic at hand? What's the thesis here, humans are imperfect drivers and therefore we should accept self driving cars driving into incoming traffic, and if anyone objects, focus on their faults instead?
- smallmancontrov 1y agoWe allow imperfect humans, we should allow similarly imperfect robots. The robots will get better. The humans, in aggregate, will not.
- vhcr 1y agoHumans on the aggregate can definitely get better, that's why Norway has 2.14 / 100k traffic-related deaths per year and the United States has 12.84 / 100k.
- smallmancontrov 1y agoNorwegians drive half as much. Even if we ignore the other components of the gap, closing that 50% will require rebuilding 300000 square km of urban sprawl into dense urban centers with good public transit. It's a nice thought, but my money is on the robots.
- timeon 1y agoRobots are not going to fix other problems with sprawl. People there are focusing on wrong solutions.
- smallmancontrov 1y agoThe "human drivers are shit" problem kills a million people every year. Solving it is good. If we let the great be the enemy of the good we will never fix anything.
- int_19h 1y agoIt's not a binary. That particular case is pretty egregious since the car signals to turn, gets into the turn lane, actually starts turning, and then swerves back (across the oncoming traffic lanes in the middle of an intersection!) and tries to get back into the correct lane to drive straight, but only manages to achieve that after driving for a bit in the lane for oncoming traffic. That is a major fuckup. And this all happens on a road with fresh clear marking, on a sunny day with perfect visibility.
- djaychela 1y agoThey shouldn't be on the road either. That's not a positive argument for the Tesla experience, it's a negative one for whoever was driving that car.
- smallmancontrov 1y agoI don't like what that person did, but I don't think their license should be taken away for it.
- djaychela 1y agoI believe that driving is a privilege, not a right. However, I'm not saying that their licence should be taken away (we've all made mistakes - I should have made that clear), but if that is representative, it is dangerous. I rode motorbikes for many years, and you can spot people who are dangerous very quickly from their 'car body language'. And an error like that in another circumstance could kill someone. I knew people whose driving had deteriorated like this (my late mother and her friends spring to mind). They refused to accept they were not capable any more, and she used to do things that terrified me. I had discussions (kindly!) about her driving standards and errors and she refused to accept that she was making the errors she was. And they were not as bad as what I saw in the video.
- xiphias2 1y agoLicense should be just revoked instantly for the sake of Tesla. At least with not fully autonomous I can override it. They need to get a feedback that they are not ready.
- sunflowerfly 1y agoTexas just passed a law to license autonomous driving, but does not take effect until this fall.
- djaychela 1y agoIf I was in a car with a human driving that badly, I'd leave ASAP! No-one beyond a learner would traverse in such an uncertain, jerky way. And this is on a day with perfect visibility and no adverse conditions that are visible in the video.
- pixxel 1y ago[dead]
- dstroot 1y agoAnyone who owns a Tesla with “full self driving” knows how this is going to go. Teslas using only camera vision just don’t have the sensor package and programming to actually perform self driving. I just don’t see this going well for Tesla as it’s more likely to reveal the weaknesses in their technology than be a showcase.
- jfoster 1y agoGiven that and given that they know the data better than anyone, what's your hypothesis as to why they would deploy if the data isn't in their favor?
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- tapoxi 1y agoMusk needs to keep hyping the next big thing to justify the insane valuation. So it was going to launch regardless of how ready or safe it was. Still seems nuts to me, they're pretending Waymo doesn't already regularly drive without supervision. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_predictions_for_autonomous_Tesla_vehicles_by_Elon_Musk https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_predictions_for_autono...
- jfoster 1y agoBut if you're correct, then won't it be a massive harm to the valuation once they are at fault in many accidents over the coming weeks? They have the Q2 earnings call coming up next month. It seems like it would be a really bad idea to put this out there if they know from the data that it will cause lots of accidents.
- rurp 1y agoIt depends on how much autonomous driving they actually do. My guess is that they will only drive a miniscule amount in favorable conditions for the foreseeable future. That would maximize the hype:risk ratio. It's also possible they quietly rely on remote operators to a large extent. The fake robot PR stunt wasn't even that long ago, the company might try the same thing here.
- jfoster 1y agoWaymo has had many such incidents like this, but they're still (correctly) considered much safer than human drivers. Whilst a wheel wobble & veering somewhere it's not supposed to go looks bad, it's very difficult to do worse than the average human driver in terms of safety.
- AlotOfReading 1y agoIt's actually the opposite. Humans, for all their faults, are amazingly safe drivers. Depending on exactly how you choose to measure things, we achieve anywhere from 5-8 9s of reliability or more. It's statistically unlikely that we'd see an issue like this on the first day of a limited deployment if FSD was hitting those numbers.
- jfoster 1y agoThat's true. As part of this deployment they haven't driven enough miles to prove safety, but from their FSD data overall they should have a pretty good understanding of where they stand.
- ahahahahah 1y ago> from their FSD data overall they should have a pretty good understanding of where they stand They know where they stand when there is a safety driver behind the wheel. I'd expect if that data were really good, they'd be less secretive about it. But still, it says very little about where they stand without that driver.
- quantified 1y agoHow many accidents have you been in?
- jfoster 1y agoIncluding being not the driver? Four. How is it relevant though?
- mgoetzke 1y agoBut there was no traffic. It changed its mind, but it handled it pretty perfectly otherwise. People have some sort of beef with Elon and thus FSD, but Waymo has made WAY WAY worse mistakes
- misiti3780 1y agohere are some examples. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44302724 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44302724