Hacker News Reader

Comment by toomuchtodo | Hacker News Reader

Other automaker AEB (automatic emergency braking) systems have the same stationary object detection deficiency and specifically indicate that the system can fail under these circumstances [1].

Tesla gets called out because their autosteer is so good at lane keeping, comparatively speaking. Their new high resolution radar [2] (Phoenix) they’ve registered with the FCC, as well as a retrofit campaign across the fleet, will likely resolve this gap. If so, I’m unsure what happens when other automakers continue to have this deficiency as their autosteer capability improves but they don’t have high res forward facing radar. Will NHTSA hold legacies to the same standard?

[1] https://www.caranddriver.com/features/a24511826/safety-featu...

[2] https://www.autoevolution.com/news/tesla-backpedals-on-the-u...

View on HN

> Their new high resolution radar [2] (Phoenix) they’ve registered with the FCC, as well as a retrofit campaign across the fleet, will likely resolve this gap.

Is a retrofit confirmed or is it just your assumption? They even sold hundreds of thousands of "vision only" cars (including mine) with Musk and Karpathy claiming radar is useless for them. Funny how they've walked it back with this new radar news.

I was always _shocked_ that Musk was such a genius that he figured out how to do self driving without RADAR or LIDAR. If only the hundreds of engineers at Google and Cruise could have made the same discovery. /s

Strong assumption NHTSA will issue a recall due to the severity of the issue and Tesla offers up sensor fusion as the fix.

Tesla Vision was a successful strategy to keep shipping units during supply chain issues (inability to source radar units), but it is clearly not sustainable based on the Vision codebase maturity reflected by operational performance.

AEBs and lane-keeping systems on other automakers vehicles are much more conservative in their function, and therefore aren't as conducive to passive driving behavior.

The driving dynamics of different vehicles result in different outcomes not just due to those dynamics themselves, but also in the driving behavior they elicit. (and even further, in that drivers of different driving habits often exhibit selection bias in the vehicles they choose)

>Tesla gets called out because their autosteer is so good at lane keeping, comparatively speaking.

Yeah, Tesla gets "called out" because their technology is so good, not because their implicit marketing claims the cars can drive themselves.

There are full time shills whose entire focus is demonstrating on YouTube how the cars can drive themselves. You don't think that has something to do with this? Arguing "That's FSD this is Autopilot" misses the entire point. Elon has 100M followers on Twitter; go scan through any thread. People think they've solved FSD, people think they have humanoid robots, people think he already owns Twitter for crying out loud.

So, yes, if Mary Barra got in her Chevy Bolt and told a reported the car can drive itself and someone died doing the same thing, I think GM would be held to the same standard.

GM's "Super Cruise" uses lidar map data, radar, cameras, and has an interior camera monitoring the driver to make sure they are paying attention.

Tesla's don't.

It’s not just the feature that’s unsafe, it’s the feature plus the marketing.

If the other manufacturers start throwing “full self-driving” around to describe their cruise control/lane keeping/automatic breaking, and people start crashing because they rely on that, then yes. I expect there would be some regulatory activity.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com