4 ms·

Here is what I didn't like about this video: - The scary effect music shows it's intended as a hit piece. - The constant intermixing of Autopilot and Full Sel

Here is what I didn't like about this video: - The scary effect music shows it's intended as a hit piece. - The constant intermixing of Autopilot and Full Self Driving, two very different things. - Implying that driving just based on visual input is unsafe, when that is how all humans drive. Of course, that the video is an unserious hit piece doesn't mean these Tesla features are safe. But I need something more serious to be convinced.

OsrsNeedsf2P 1y ago
I was waiting for the video to share data on the safety of Tesla self driving versus human drivers, but... No. I guess those numbers wouldn't have supported the argument.
- FireBeyond 1y ago
  Oh, you mean the data (that Tesla chooses to release, anyway) that compares the subsets of driving on only the roads where FSD is available, active, and has not or did not turn itself off because of weather, road, traffic or any other conditions" versus "all drivers, all vehicles, all roads, all weather, all traffic, all conditions? Or the accident stats that don't count an accident any collision without airbag deployment, regardless of injuries?
  - igor47 1y ago
    Don't forget: https://arstechnica.com/cars/2025/08/how-a-hacker-helped-win-a-wrongful-death-lawsuit-against-tesla/ https://arstechnica.com/cars/2025/08/how-a-hacker-helped-win...
- kylebenzle 1y ago
  [dead]
lttlrck 1y ago
I am not convinced that a camera fixed in place is equivalent to eyeballs with 6 degrees of freedom. That freedom significantly boosts the available parallax for depth and distance perception something fixed in place cameras lack.
- woodrowbarlow 1y ago
  nor that current algorithms come close to matching our biological ability to infer 3-dimensional information from the sensor data
- BurningFrog 1y ago
  Teslas have 8 cameras monitoring the full 360° surroundings. This enables far better world modeling than our two eyes 3 inches apart.
  - ahahahahah 1y ago
    Tesla can't even figure out how to detect rain, they very clearly do not have better world modeling than our two eyes. A fucking two year old child can detect rain better than them.
    - kylebenzle 1y ago
      [dead]
opello 1y ago
> Implying that driving just based on visual input is unsafe, when that is how all humans drive. Except that's not at all how humans drive. Sure, there's visual input, but human vision is largely based on expectations. You see what you expect and ignore a lot of things. The predictive engine of the brain does a lot more than evaluate the present environment. This is both good and bad insofar as safety is concerned.
- BurningFrog 1y ago
  Of course Teslas also have software interpreting the video streams and maintaining a model of the surroundings at all times. Not really clear what the argument is meant to be here...
  - jmye 1y ago
    That the car’s model sucks? That saying “yeah but that’s how people, who are notoriously, horribly unsafe drivers do it” is meaningless, cheerleading nonsense? Should I go on? This is trivial stuff, man.
    - xboxnolifes 1y ago
      Well, that wasnt the claim made.
      - jmye 1y ago
        That the car’s model sucks was the bottom line of the prior comment. I’m begging some of you to learn how to read for context.
  - opello 1y ago
    The point is that the automation system is better in some ways and far, far worse in others. And of course to also highlight that reducing the human in the loop to visual sensors is unreasonably reductive. An interesting question might be if the automation system can be evaluated against the human perceptual system, or amalgamation of systems. This seems like an exceedingly difficult premise to evaluate though, given the varied and dynamic nature of the real-world driving environment.
Veserv 1y ago
> Implying that driving just based on visual input is unsafe, when that is how all humans drive. Implying that driving just based on single-eye 20/120 vision [1] is safe, when that is in fact illegal. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44129317 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44129317
- BurningFrog 1y ago
  Teslas actually use 8 cameras for Autopilot/FSD, getting a full 360° view around the car! Pretty wild to see several comments condemning their imaginary single camera system. Where do these lies come from? Here is a diagram: https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Locations-of-cameras-on-a-Tesla-vehicle_fig1_378671275 https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Locations-of-cameras-on-...
  - Veserv 1y ago
    You appear to have a total misunderstanding of what I said and then went on to engage in a bad-faith accusation. First of all, it is convenient that you ignored the part about 20/120 vision which is below the legal minimum requirements for driving and thus no human is legally allowed to drive with such poor vision. As for your misunderstanding, a human has two eyes placed in a binocular orientation on a swivel mount allowing for binocular depth perception when the head is pointed in a direction. That is how humans drive. Except for the forward direction, the Tesla cameras have largely non-overlapping fields of view. As they are not mounted on a swivel, they only have single-eye vision in any non-forward direction. In the forward direction, the Tesla cameras do have overlapping fields of view, but are not only too close to support binocular perception, they also have different focal distances preventing binocular perception. As such, Teslas only have single-eye vision in the forward direction as well. So, they only have single-eye perception for objects. Adding on their visual acuity far below minimum requirements for legal human driving, it is safe to say that their sensors are, in fact, not at all how humans drive. Any manufacturer who would claim as such is making false claims willfully and knowingly.

OsrsNeedsf2P 1y ago

I was waiting for the video to share data on the safety of Tesla self driving versus human drivers, but... No. I guess those numbers wouldn't have supported the argument.

FireBeyond 1y ago
Oh, you mean the data (that Tesla chooses to release, anyway) that compares the subsets of driving on only the roads where FSD is available, active, and has not or did not turn itself off because of weather, road, traffic or any other conditions" versus "all drivers, all vehicles, all roads, all weather, all traffic, all conditions? Or the accident stats that don't count an accident any collision without airbag deployment, regardless of injuries?
- igor47 1y ago
  Don't forget: https://arstechnica.com/cars/2025/08/how-a-hacker-helped-win-a-wrongful-death-lawsuit-against-tesla/ https://arstechnica.com/cars/2025/08/how-a-hacker-helped-win...
kylebenzle 1y ago
[dead]

lttlrck 1y ago

I am not convinced that a camera fixed in place is equivalent to eyeballs with 6 degrees of freedom. That freedom significantly boosts the available parallax for depth and distance perception something fixed in place cameras lack.

woodrowbarlow 1y ago
nor that current algorithms come close to matching our biological ability to infer 3-dimensional information from the sensor data
BurningFrog 1y ago
Teslas have 8 cameras monitoring the full 360° surroundings. This enables far better world modeling than our two eyes 3 inches apart.
- ahahahahah 1y ago
  Tesla can't even figure out how to detect rain, they very clearly do not have better world modeling than our two eyes. A fucking two year old child can detect rain better than them.
  - kylebenzle 1y ago
    [dead]

opello 1y ago

> Implying that driving just based on visual input is unsafe, when that is how all humans drive. Except that's not at all how humans drive. Sure, there's visual input, but human vision is largely based on expectations. You see what you expect and ignore a lot of things. The predictive engine of the brain does a lot more than evaluate the present environment. This is both good and bad insofar as safety is concerned.

BurningFrog 1y ago
Of course Teslas also have software interpreting the video streams and maintaining a model of the surroundings at all times. Not really clear what the argument is meant to be here...
- jmye 1y ago
  That the car’s model sucks? That saying “yeah but that’s how people, who are notoriously, horribly unsafe drivers do it” is meaningless, cheerleading nonsense? Should I go on? This is trivial stuff, man.
  - xboxnolifes 1y ago
    Well, that wasnt the claim made.
    - jmye 1y ago
      That the car’s model sucks was the bottom line of the prior comment. I’m begging some of you to learn how to read for context.
- opello 1y ago
  The point is that the automation system is better in some ways and far, far worse in others. And of course to also highlight that reducing the human in the loop to visual sensors is unreasonably reductive. An interesting question might be if the automation system can be evaluated against the human perceptual system, or amalgamation of systems. This seems like an exceedingly difficult premise to evaluate though, given the varied and dynamic nature of the real-world driving environment.

Veserv 1y ago

> Implying that driving just based on visual input is unsafe, when that is how all humans drive. Implying that driving just based on single-eye 20/120 vision [1] is safe, when that is in fact illegal. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44129317 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44129317

BurningFrog 1y ago
Teslas actually use 8 cameras for Autopilot/FSD, getting a full 360° view around the car! Pretty wild to see several comments condemning their imaginary single camera system. Where do these lies come from? Here is a diagram: https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Locations-of-cameras-on-a-Tesla-vehicle_fig1_378671275 https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Locations-of-cameras-on-...
- Veserv 1y ago
  You appear to have a total misunderstanding of what I said and then went on to engage in a bad-faith accusation. First of all, it is convenient that you ignored the part about 20/120 vision which is below the legal minimum requirements for driving and thus no human is legally allowed to drive with such poor vision. As for your misunderstanding, a human has two eyes placed in a binocular orientation on a swivel mount allowing for binocular depth perception when the head is pointed in a direction. That is how humans drive. Except for the forward direction, the Tesla cameras have largely non-overlapping fields of view. As they are not mounted on a swivel, they only have single-eye vision in any non-forward direction. In the forward direction, the Tesla cameras do have overlapping fields of view, but are not only too close to support binocular perception, they also have different focal distances preventing binocular perception. As such, Teslas only have single-eye vision in the forward direction as well. So, they only have single-eye perception for objects. Adding on their visual acuity far below minimum requirements for legal human driving, it is safe to say that their sensors are, in fact, not at all how humans drive. Any manufacturer who would claim as such is making false claims willfully and knowingly.