6 ms·

US opens Tesla probe after more crashes involving its "full self-driving"

85 points by c420 1y ago

FirmwareBurner 1y ago
Why didn't they call it more accurately Supervised Self-Driving which is based on the long term used by them. The marketing name FSD or Full Self-Driving with (Supervised) in small font and brackets is incredibly misleading.
- afavour 1y ago
  They didn't because no-one forced them to, and why not oversell your product when no-one is stopping you from doing it? Regulatory agencies have been toothless towards Tesla for a long time.
  - dylan604 1y ago
    Regulatory agencies are always going to be behind for a long time when a new comes along. Regulations still have not caught up to social media. The unfortunate part is that by the time regulations are obviously needed, the company that would be regulated has grown to some massive behemoth with lots of money to spread around the regulators to ensure that regulations come in to not stop them but make it difficult for anyone to follow as a competitor.
    - deleted 1y ago
      [deleted]
awongh 1y ago
I think it's very possible that we won't get self-driving cars because, similar to nuclear energy, we'll decide that the risks aren't worth it. But it'll be based on risks introduced by preventable human error- hubris, etc. All it will take is some viral video of a Tesla running over a child or something terrible like that.
- bluGill 1y ago
  What I fear is that self driving will be statistically significantly better than human drivers, but because it isn't perfect we won't allow it anyway.
  - WJW 1y ago
    At the moment it seems much more likely it will be significantly worse, statistically speaking, but because of massive lobbying it will be allowed anyway.
    - DiscourseFan 1y ago
      It is statistically safer for cars using LIDAR, like Waymo. Tesla’s system is sleeker, but involves far more human risk.
      - lokar 1y ago
        We don’t know that. All of the players, including Waymo give out only partial data that makes a sound analysis impossible.
      - raxxorraxor 1y ago
        Lidar has problems too. It works quite well if there is a limited number of cars that use it too. Of course if all of those were Waymos you could synchronize sensors to not interfere with each other. Of course if that fails, perhaps they could use honking as backup sensor.
        vardump 1y ago
        Lidar also destroys camera sensors. That might become a huge problem in the future.
        thrill 1y ago
        Optical filters have been around for awhile, including anti-lasers for cameras, though only for a few years.
josefritzishere 1y ago
[flagged]
bdcravens 1y ago
I'd like to believe that this is done in the interest of driver safety. However unlike past administrations, where most departments tended to stay in their lane (no pun intended), everything these days seems driven from the top, with punishment and retribution often the goal. I can't help but think this is an opportunity to get back at Musk for his post on X saying that Trump was in the Epstein files (the post was deleted, and Musk issued a hand-wavy apology, but he never retracted the statement)
- jeremyjh 1y ago
  Tesla is shady as hell though; they intentionally market this technology as something that it is not. The idea that people will stay engaged in the driving task when they are not actually doing it is absurd. Either cars should be level 2 or level 4/5; level 3 is a completely broken idea and Tesla isn't even actively pursuing certifications beyond it. They want to pretend its a level 2 system and not their problem. We don't let people sell cars that are known to explode on contact, and we shouldn't allow people to sell cars that use a completely discredited automation model. Just six more months though...
  - maxdo 1y ago
    Level 2-3 is a just a buzzword that doesn't mean anything. In reality the car is safe enough to drive in the wild or not. It's a binary state, the rest is just a regulatory patchwork.
    - jeremyjh 1y ago
      It is not just a buzzword, but I don't care what words you want to use. I think my comment is very clearly critiquing the set of capabilities in level 3, where the car can do almost all the driving in many conditions but relies on a human to respond in a few seconds when it disengages. That is a broken idea that has been thoroughly discredited.
Workaccount2 1y ago
Elon has already switched the narrative to "Optimus robot is the future of Tesla" He knows shareholders value your company far more when it's their dreams guiding valuation, rather than what exists in reality.
- rsynnott 1y ago
  Simply have the magic humanoid robot drive the car!
traceroute66 1y ago
Generously putting the broader "full self driving" discussion to one side.... Moving from mixed hardware to camera-only is only ever likely to result in articles such as the one linked to being written. No amount of AI bullshit is going to save you from the brick wall that the camera can't see because there is fog etc. in the way.
- rsynnott 1y ago
  In this _particular_ case, the accidents seem to be the thing just breaking lights (specifically, stopping for the light, but then starting again while it's still red for no obvious reason), so presumably more shoddy software than anything else; this is something that they _should_ be able to manage on cameras. I'd agree in the general case, but better sensors likely wouldn't have saved them here.
maxdo 1y ago
typical US lagging system, most of the reports are 2-3 generations back on hardware and software, Sure you can open investigation, but isn't that too late ? p.s. i've been a long sceptic of FSD from tesla, but latest changes, really really shows huge progress, even 1 year away and now these are two different worlds.
- IT4MD 1y ago
  By progress, do you mean things like they can now disable FSD even faster before an accident to avoid liability? Maybe they are better at obscuring the crash data now? or just blackhole it?
  - fragmede 1y ago
    While there are issues, as you point out, it works well enough that people are using the thing. Why are you so fighty about it?
    - IT4MD 1y ago
      Because it's unsafe and I'm on the same road with people using an unsafe FSD, that's sold as a working, safe product, despite literal evidence to the contrary. So you're ok with them nuking crash data, to avoid a lawsuit? You're ok with them turning off FSD moments before a crash in a childish attempt at avoiding liability for a product they created that doesn't work as sold? Why are you ok with them using your life as a beta test for profits?
      - fragmede 1y ago
        "A new car built by my company leaves somewhere traveling at 60 mph. The rear differential locks up. The car crashes and burns with everyone trapped inside. Now, should we initiate a recall? Take the number of vehicles in the field, A, multiply by the probable rate of failure, B, multiply by the average out-of-court settlement, C. A times B times C equals X. If X is less than the cost of a recall, we don't do one." -Chuck Palahniuk, Fight Club. 1999 for the movie, 1996 for the book. That a corporation is acting in its own best interests at the cost of human lives neither shocks nor surprises me. NHTSA is investigating the issue, specifically about disengagements, but also the broader issues. They took down Cruise for lying to them Their CEO should have had to face criminal charges. Politics being what it is, it bothers me a great deal how fair any investigations will be, but let's not get distracted by that. Tesla's far from the first car company to make a profit while human lives in the mix. It won't be the last. You can totally find histrionic videos of constructed scenarios where the system fails and get all worked up about it. The algorithm thrives on engagement, and getting you all worked up makes them money. It's as if you were a fiddle, that gets content shown to you, and then they make money from it. Do you enjoy that? Mark Rober does have a good one though. Over the many years of driving I've done, of the accidents I've gotten into, the accidents I've avoided, as a driver, as a passenger; of the accidents my friends and family have gotten into, what it comes down to for me is that human drivers drive when they shouldn't have been driving, every single day. I'm already forced to share the road with those assholes, what's one more? Human drivers suck. They drive when they're tired, when they're drunk. From glancing at other drivers while I'm driving, texting's gotten quite popular for drivers. One accident I'm aware of, the driver passed out from doing fentanyl while driving. Not sure how that one happens. Now, I'm sure you're an excellent driver. Better than FSD. But how are you at driving when you're passed out from a stroke or some other freak accident? Freak accidents happen to computers too, but in my mind, they're different. On top of that, a computer's not going to get hopping mad that it struck out at the bar at 1 am and drive home really mad and also drunk so hey let's drive by my ex's house while we're at it. Obviously, I'd rather that driver not do that in the first place, but since we can't prevent that, I'd rather live in a world where a computer drives their car than have them drive it around in that state. I'm a night owl. I frequently end up being outside at those hours. So no matter how good the good drivers are who would never do that are, statistically my chances of encountering bad drivers who do shit like that that are higher than average. In life you have to contend with unknowns, and we, the general public don't actually know how many Tesla robotaxis are actually driving around right now. If you're in one of the supported locations you can try it out, and watch for yourself whether the human who's got one of the most boringest jobs ever is or is not actually driving the car. If it's so bad, shouldn't we be hearing about them crashing, non-stop? All I've heard of is the three in Austin at launch, but it doesn't seem like there have been any after that. I haven't heard about any crashes in San Francisco, but I also haven't gone looking super deep. Do I wish both Tesla and Elon Musk behaved better than they do now? Absolutely. Not sure how much that counts or actually affects anything though.
fortran77 1y ago
One think that concerns me with Tesla FSD (and I use it every day in my Plaid) is the transition between FSD on and off. Sometimes I catch myself forgetting to steer or slow down because I just switched it off to get off an exit early, etc. and my mind hasn’t switched modes along with it.
deeg 1y ago
Let me guess...the stock went up?
_23sd 1y ago
From the NHTSA release [1]: > ODI has identiﬁed six Standing General Order ("SGO") reports in which a Tesla vehicle, operating with FSD engaged, approached an intersection with a red traﬃc signal, continued to travel into the intersection against the red light and was subsequently involved in a crash with other motor vehicles in the intersection. Of these incidents, four crashes resulted in one or more reported injuries. At least some of the incidents appeared to involve FSD proceeding into the intersection after coming to a complete stop. I've experienced this bug on every FSD 13.x version, including the current 13.2.9. When you're the first to pull up to a red light, the car stops and waits, then after a while it sometimes (maybe 1 time in 100 or so) just decides to go even if the light is still red. Horrifying because sitting at a red light doesn't seem like a dangerous situation, but in fact it might be the most dangerous place on FSD right now. Hopefully this forces them to fix it because my colorful language on the voice feedback apparently hasn't convinced them. [1] https://www.nhtsa.gov/?nhtsaId=PE25012 https://www.nhtsa.gov/?nhtsaId=PE25012
- keeda 1y ago
  Yes! This has happened to me once as well. The car slowed down to a rolling stop because it saw a yellow light... and then just as the light turned red, the car took off and broke the red light. WTF! And just as you said, I had mentally switched off in anticipation of a long wait, so I was in absolutely no state to react. Fortunately there was no accident and there were no cops around or apparently traffic cameras. Somehow I think "Sorry, the car broke the red light, not me!" would not have been a compelling thing to say to a cop or a judge. The only thing I could do was hit the dashcam record button as some sort of proof, but the video itself has no indication FSD was engaged. I suspect I would have to subpoena or forensically extract any data that could exonerate me, which is just not practical if the worst I got was a ticket.
  - walls 1y ago
    It still wouldn’t exonerate you, it’s your job to pay attention and be ready to take over. This is why FSD is a joke.
- smt88 1y ago

85 points by c420 1y ago

Why didn't they call it more accurately Supervised Self-Driving which is based on the long term used by them. The marketing name FSD or Full Self-Driving with (Supervised) in small font and brackets is incredibly misleading.

afavour 1y ago
They didn't because no-one forced them to, and why not oversell your product when no-one is stopping you from doing it? Regulatory agencies have been toothless towards Tesla for a long time.
- dylan604 1y ago
  Regulatory agencies are always going to be behind for a long time when a new comes along. Regulations still have not caught up to social media. The unfortunate part is that by the time regulations are obviously needed, the company that would be regulated has grown to some massive behemoth with lots of money to spread around the regulators to ensure that regulations come in to not stop them but make it difficult for anyone to follow as a competitor.
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]

awongh 1y ago

I think it's very possible that we won't get self-driving cars because, similar to nuclear energy, we'll decide that the risks aren't worth it. But it'll be based on risks introduced by preventable human error- hubris, etc. All it will take is some viral video of a Tesla running over a child or something terrible like that.

bluGill 1y ago
What I fear is that self driving will be statistically significantly better than human drivers, but because it isn't perfect we won't allow it anyway.
- WJW 1y ago
  At the moment it seems much more likely it will be significantly worse, statistically speaking, but because of massive lobbying it will be allowed anyway.
  - DiscourseFan 1y ago
    It is statistically safer for cars using LIDAR, like Waymo. Tesla’s system is sleeker, but involves far more human risk.
    - lokar 1y ago
      We don’t know that. All of the players, including Waymo give out only partial data that makes a sound analysis impossible.
    - raxxorraxor 1y ago
      Lidar has problems too. It works quite well if there is a limited number of cars that use it too. Of course if all of those were Waymos you could synchronize sensors to not interfere with each other. Of course if that fails, perhaps they could use honking as backup sensor.
      - vardump 1y ago
        Lidar also destroys camera sensors. That might become a huge problem in the future.
        thrill 1y ago
        Optical filters have been around for awhile, including anti-lasers for cameras, though only for a few years.

josefritzishere 1y ago

[flagged]

bdcravens 1y ago

I'd like to believe that this is done in the interest of driver safety. However unlike past administrations, where most departments tended to stay in their lane (no pun intended), everything these days seems driven from the top, with punishment and retribution often the goal. I can't help but think this is an opportunity to get back at Musk for his post on X saying that Trump was in the Epstein files (the post was deleted, and Musk issued a hand-wavy apology, but he never retracted the statement)

jeremyjh 1y ago
Tesla is shady as hell though; they intentionally market this technology as something that it is not. The idea that people will stay engaged in the driving task when they are not actually doing it is absurd. Either cars should be level 2 or level 4/5; level 3 is a completely broken idea and Tesla isn't even actively pursuing certifications beyond it. They want to pretend its a level 2 system and not their problem. We don't let people sell cars that are known to explode on contact, and we shouldn't allow people to sell cars that use a completely discredited automation model. Just six more months though...
- maxdo 1y ago
  Level 2-3 is a just a buzzword that doesn't mean anything. In reality the car is safe enough to drive in the wild or not. It's a binary state, the rest is just a regulatory patchwork.
  - jeremyjh 1y ago
    It is not just a buzzword, but I don't care what words you want to use. I think my comment is very clearly critiquing the set of capabilities in level 3, where the car can do almost all the driving in many conditions but relies on a human to respond in a few seconds when it disengages. That is a broken idea that has been thoroughly discredited.

Workaccount2 1y ago

Elon has already switched the narrative to "Optimus robot is the future of Tesla" He knows shareholders value your company far more when it's their dreams guiding valuation, rather than what exists in reality.

rsynnott 1y ago
Simply have the magic humanoid robot drive the car!

traceroute66 1y ago

Generously putting the broader "full self driving" discussion to one side.... Moving from mixed hardware to camera-only is only ever likely to result in articles such as the one linked to being written. No amount of AI bullshit is going to save you from the brick wall that the camera can't see because there is fog etc. in the way.

rsynnott 1y ago
In this _particular_ case, the accidents seem to be the thing just breaking lights (specifically, stopping for the light, but then starting again while it's still red for no obvious reason), so presumably more shoddy software than anything else; this is something that they _should_ be able to manage on cameras. I'd agree in the general case, but better sensors likely wouldn't have saved them here.

maxdo 1y ago

typical US lagging system, most of the reports are 2-3 generations back on hardware and software, Sure you can open investigation, but isn't that too late ? p.s. i've been a long sceptic of FSD from tesla, but latest changes, really really shows huge progress, even 1 year away and now these are two different worlds.

IT4MD 1y ago
By progress, do you mean things like they can now disable FSD even faster before an accident to avoid liability? Maybe they are better at obscuring the crash data now? or just blackhole it?
- fragmede 1y ago
  While there are issues, as you point out, it works well enough that people are using the thing. Why are you so fighty about it?
  - IT4MD 1y ago
    Because it's unsafe and I'm on the same road with people using an unsafe FSD, that's sold as a working, safe product, despite literal evidence to the contrary. So you're ok with them nuking crash data, to avoid a lawsuit? You're ok with them turning off FSD moments before a crash in a childish attempt at avoiding liability for a product they created that doesn't work as sold? Why are you ok with them using your life as a beta test for profits?
    - fragmede 1y ago
      "A new car built by my company leaves somewhere traveling at 60 mph. The rear differential locks up. The car crashes and burns with everyone trapped inside. Now, should we initiate a recall? Take the number of vehicles in the field, A, multiply by the probable rate of failure, B, multiply by the average out-of-court settlement, C. A times B times C equals X. If X is less than the cost of a recall, we don't do one." -Chuck Palahniuk, Fight Club. 1999 for the movie, 1996 for the book. That a corporation is acting in its own best interests at the cost of human lives neither shocks nor surprises me. NHTSA is investigating the issue, specifically about disengagements, but also the broader issues. They took down Cruise for lying to them Their CEO should have had to face criminal charges. Politics being what it is, it bothers me a great deal how fair any investigations will be, but let's not get distracted by that. Tesla's far from the first car company to make a profit while human lives in the mix. It won't be the last. You can totally find histrionic videos of constructed scenarios where the system fails and get all worked up about it. The algorithm thrives on engagement, and getting you all worked up makes them money. It's as if you were a fiddle, that gets content shown to you, and then they make money from it. Do you enjoy that? Mark Rober does have a good one though. Over the many years of driving I've done, of the accidents I've gotten into, the accidents I've avoided, as a driver, as a passenger; of the accidents my friends and family have gotten into, what it comes down to for me is that human drivers drive when they shouldn't have been driving, every single day. I'm already forced to share the road with those assholes, what's one more? Human drivers suck. They drive when they're tired, when they're drunk. From glancing at other drivers while I'm driving, texting's gotten quite popular for drivers. One accident I'm aware of, the driver passed out from doing fentanyl while driving. Not sure how that one happens. Now, I'm sure you're an excellent driver. Better than FSD. But how are you at driving when you're passed out from a stroke or some other freak accident? Freak accidents happen to computers too, but in my mind, they're different. On top of that, a computer's not going to get hopping mad that it struck out at the bar at 1 am and drive home really mad and also drunk so hey let's drive by my ex's house while we're at it. Obviously, I'd rather that driver not do that in the first place, but since we can't prevent that, I'd rather live in a world where a computer drives their car than have them drive it around in that state. I'm a night owl. I frequently end up being outside at those hours. So no matter how good the good drivers are who would never do that are, statistically my chances of encountering bad drivers who do shit like that that are higher than average. In life you have to contend with unknowns, and we, the general public don't actually know how many Tesla robotaxis are actually driving around right now. If you're in one of the supported locations you can try it out, and watch for yourself whether the human who's got one of the most boringest jobs ever is or is not actually driving the car. If it's so bad, shouldn't we be hearing about them crashing, non-stop? All I've heard of is the three in Austin at launch, but it doesn't seem like there have been any after that. I haven't heard about any crashes in San Francisco, but I also haven't gone looking super deep. Do I wish both Tesla and Elon Musk behaved better than they do now? Absolutely. Not sure how much that counts or actually affects anything though.

fortran77 1y ago

One think that concerns me with Tesla FSD (and I use it every day in my Plaid) is the transition between FSD on and off. Sometimes I catch myself forgetting to steer or slow down because I just switched it off to get off an exit early, etc. and my mind hasn’t switched modes along with it.

deeg 1y ago

Let me guess...the stock went up?

_23sd 1y ago

From the NHTSA release [1]: > ODI has identiﬁed six Standing General Order ("SGO") reports in which a Tesla vehicle, operating with FSD engaged, approached an intersection with a red traﬃc signal, continued to travel into the intersection against the red light and was subsequently involved in a crash with other motor vehicles in the intersection. Of these incidents, four crashes resulted in one or more reported injuries. At least some of the incidents appeared to involve FSD proceeding into the intersection after coming to a complete stop. I've experienced this bug on every FSD 13.x version, including the current 13.2.9. When you're the first to pull up to a red light, the car stops and waits, then after a while it sometimes (maybe 1 time in 100 or so) just decides to go even if the light is still red. Horrifying because sitting at a red light doesn't seem like a dangerous situation, but in fact it might be the most dangerous place on FSD right now. Hopefully this forces them to fix it because my colorful language on the voice feedback apparently hasn't convinced them. [1] https://www.nhtsa.gov/?nhtsaId=PE25012 https://www.nhtsa.gov/?nhtsaId=PE25012

keeda 1y ago
Yes! This has happened to me once as well. The car slowed down to a rolling stop because it saw a yellow light... and then just as the light turned red, the car took off and broke the red light. WTF! And just as you said, I had mentally switched off in anticipation of a long wait, so I was in absolutely no state to react. Fortunately there was no accident and there were no cops around or apparently traffic cameras. Somehow I think "Sorry, the car broke the red light, not me!" would not have been a compelling thing to say to a cop or a judge. The only thing I could do was hit the dashcam record button as some sort of proof, but the video itself has no indication FSD was engaged. I suspect I would have to subpoena or forensically extract any data that could exonerate me, which is just not practical if the worst I got was a ticket.
- walls 1y ago
  It still wouldn’t exonerate you, it’s your job to pay attention and be ready to take over. This is why FSD is a joke.
smt88 1y ago