Hacker News Reader

Comment by matsemann | Hacker News Reader

> Basically if Tesla decided to self-insure when autopilot is engaged, it would be the same.

So it's not the same as Tesla. Reading Reddit now that FSD has been available to not just those having bought into the hype has been interesting. It seems more stressful to use than just driving yourself.

View on HN

Can confirm Tesla FSD is more stressful than driving yourself. I’ve been using it for a few weeks since they offered everyone free trial.

Seems to be improved from the previous version, but still requires a ton of interventions every single drive. It’s cool to experience for people who are tech savvy, but nowhere near the realm of being useful and replacing your driving needs.

Agreed. Every time I’ve used it or been in a Tesla as a passenger with FSD engaged, human intervention has been required several times each trip to avoid accidents, harm to pedestrians, or moving violations. It’s frankly embarrassing to use and terrifying to imagine the masses relying on it in any way in its current form.

Not in the situations that Mercedes is allowing L3: some roads in traffic. The Tesla does really well there.

Then Tesla should take liability in those conditions, if they are confident.

I think it would be too confusing to have a third state:

  - manual driving

  - supervised autopilot

  - unsupervised autopilot

Agreed. Remove the useless middle one. It only adds danger when people aren't paying attention.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com