Hacker News Reader

Comment by deepzn | Hacker News Reader

I've only seen 2 comments about Tesla on this thread. But, it seems people underestimate Tesla on here (I'm not the biggest fan). Though they are having great progress in their FSD beta- one way to mark this is by the number of users with access to it, which has increased significantly. This allows them to collect a lot more real world data then their competitors. Once this gets better and is able to prove better driving than a human, which seems possible in certain metros at least as Waymo is doing, then they can do an autonomous Uber network of their Teslas.

But I think this is a smart move to join forces, and will give the consumer healthy competition in this space.

View on HN

People should underestimate Tesla:

1. Lack of LiDAR sensors. Vision is still not (and IMHO will never be) an adequate replacement.

2. Waymo/Cruise etc. can upgrade their taxis easily with capabilities over time. Tesla is restricted by their promise that FSD will work on previously shipped cars.

If Tesla's competitors were able to get government FSD permits without all that data. Maybe that data isn't really important to achieve the target

if we're talking about overall effectiveness, then I think it is. Maybe passing a minimum threshold and having a safety effective of say 95% vs 99% or something. It's obviously going to be a very high percentage threshold that needs to be crossed to allow the public to use it.

So, right now it's like a trial experiment with FSD, but I definitely feel like a data advantage would play out into a higher safety rating before it's in GA. Maybe eventually others will catch up, that could be quicker than longer, but it's a valid potential advantage for Tesla.

just to nitpick, but with airline travel about five or six nines (99.9999%) safe, that is, one fatality every million miles of travel or so, 95% vs 99% is nowhere near good enough.

https://www.flightglobal.com/airlines/how-safe-were-commerci...

One million flights not one million miles of travel. There'd be a lot of dead frequent fliers if it was a death per million miles.

Yes it will be likely needing a 99.99%+ accuracy. I just made a vague suggestion, as I didn't have time to look it up. Elon mentioned it too, it doesn't just need to better than a human, but massively better. I don't know the exact accident stats for human drivers. But self-driving cars will need to be much higher.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com