So to be clear, your car almost drove itself into oncoming traffic with your child in it and your first instinct was "Hey, maybe give it two more tries"?
Agree raw data, or even just per 10K mile stats, from Tesla should be table stakes. Why aren't they required to report such things by law?
Tesla releasing the actual raw data would be much more helpful, but of course they are refusing to do that, most likely because it would betray how overhyped, unreliable and dangerous the software is.
Is that enough? The software could decide to accelerate and switch lanes at such a fast rate that the driver wouldn't have time to intervene. It hasn't happened yet to my knowledge. But it may happen.
As an automotive engineer: Agreed. Realistic experience reports are useful, and that includes also e.g. what drivers are willing to attempt and how they risk-rate.
I don't know what the original poster would do, but hopefully they will be more inclined to think twice next time they consider performing the behavior in question. If they do think twice and the situation is unsafe, I certainly hope they won't put their kid at more risk just to spite an internet stranger.
But my primary interest is in the many more people who might be inclined to imitate the poster's behavior when they get the chance. Having the behavior contextualized like this can only help encourage them to think about the risks.
Unfortunately, it increasing looks like the experiment has failed. But not because of us. We're pissed because Musk isn't doing his part in the deal. He's not pulling his weight. At this point, he's becoming more and more an anchor around the neck of technological progress. That didn't need to happen. It didn't need to be this way. So yeah, we're pissed off, not just because of the money we paid, but also because we feel like we were defrauded by his failure to pull his own weight in the deal.
I wouldn't be surprised to see him make his escape to the Bahamas before this decade is up.
Why not restrict your beta testing to a closed course? A race track? Some land you bought out in the middle of the desert? Have the kids make some some stop signs, plow your new roads, etc.
No one else on the road is consenting to a technology that could rapidly accelerate and course correct into their vehicle at some undetermined time.
Funding responsible self driving research seems like a great use of money to me, but testing an flawed system in the wild does not.
For those that didn't buy it, you can 'rent' it for a monthly subscription fee.
I hate to say it but starting to get this vibe too, particularly when I watch interviews from him which are 1-3 years old. They don't age well.
They're full of promises like, "only do good things for your fellow man, be useful etc" and those ethos seem to be lost now.
The fact that you associate those ideals with purchasing a consumer product made by a public company is intentional.
Even when it's as bad as throwing you in the wrong lane of traffic.
This police officer was responding to an RV which had run off the road, and was speaking with the driver. The driver, a bit shook up from the experience explained that he was driving down the highway, turned on the cruise control, and got up to make himself a sandwich...
I think the Simpsons done it at least 30 years ago.
Those other cars don't claim to drive themselves.
But, he'd definitely risking other road users and pedestrians if that car keeps trying to run up sidewalks and cause other havoc on the roadway.
Now if the car failed in such a way that you couldn't disengage FSD, THAT would be a serious, catastrophic problem... but as far as I know, that's not really an issue here. (If that were an issue, obviously, it would be cause to have the whole damn car recalled.)
All of this to say, I think we can leave the guy alone for sharing his anecdote. When properly attentive, it shouldn't be particularly dangerous.
If a product being overhyped prevents you from using it after you paid for it, you're gonna have to live with no computer, no phone, no internet, no electricity, no cars, no bikes.
Every piece of technology has a variety of failure modes, some more likely than others. FSD is not likely to take aim at a pedestrian and floor it, just like your brakes aren't likely to explode, and neither of you are irresponsible for making those assumptions
No single human fully understands these AI models, and they can change daily. Yet Tesla is putting them in control of multi-ton vehicles and leaving all liability on humans with worse reaction time and little to no understanding of how it works or tends to go wrong.
I think you are making scenarios that no reasonable person would assume. There is a difference between 'getting confused at an intersection and turning wrong' and 'actively trying to kill the occupant by accelerating at max speed while turning the steering'.
FSD is a blackbox. Even Tesla appears to be unable to prevent regressions. One of the most sophisticated companies in the world can't prevent regression in a safety critical software they frequently update. Let that sink in.
Regardless, you haven't answered the point about the quote. "Judge not lest ye be judged" does not mean we have to empty-headedly refrain from any sort of moral criticism. In context, it's about hypocrisy, reminding us to apply our standards to ourselves as stringently as we do others. I think it's only appropriate here if tsigo somehow indicated he would happily endanger his own children, which I don't see any sign of.
Deciding that you want to put your family into that steel slug for the very first test seems to me to be an entirely different level of poor decision making.
I was expecting FSD to be bad, but I sure wasn't expecting it to be that bad.
Maybe without disengaging any of the three incidents could have become problems, but for someone who knows how Autopilot works it was more comical than dangerous.
I think the software is a half-baked gimmick but come on "look guys, I care about children too" variety of in-group signaling with a side of back seat parenting adds less than nothing to the discussion of the subject at hand.
And INB4 someone intentionally misinterprets me as defending the quality of Tesla's product, I'm not.