This is where they are as of April 2024: https://static.nhtsa.gov/odi/inv/2022/INCLA-EA22002-14498.pd...
"ODI completed an extensive body of work via PE21020 and EA22002, which showed evidence that Tesla’s weak driver engagement system was not appropriate for Autopilot’s permissive operating capabilities. This mismatch resulted in a critical safety gap between drivers’ expectations of the L2 system’s operating capabilities and the system’s true capabilities. This gap led to foreseeable misuse and avoidable crashes. During EA220002, ODI identified at least 13 crashes involving one or more fatalities and many more involving serious injuries, in which foreseeable driver misuse of the system played an apparent role. ODI’s analysis conducted during this investigation, which aligns with Tesla’s conclusion in its Defect Information Report, indicated that in certain circumstances, Autopilot’s system controls and warnings were insufficient for a driver assistance system that requires constant supervision by a human driver."
Just s/driver/user/g and it sounds like a lot of contemporary LLM hype.
IMO, Tesla's not an outlier -- in today's stock-price-is-king world, it's common to see such overselling in various domains.
"Tesla driver using self-driving mode slammed into police cruiser in Orange County" - https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2024-06-13/self-dri...
"Tesla in self-drive mode slams into police car responding to fatal crash": https://youtu.be/ukq6h55GnvE
> “Tesla is far ahead in self-driving cars,” Huang said in an exclusive interview with Yahoo Finance.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/nvidia-ceo-says-tesla-far-ahe...
Yes.
Waymo works in limited places and relies on a ridiculous number of sensors. Have you seen one in real life with all its equipment? Surely that makes it less advanced or at less ambitious. Assuming something malicious about Nvidia’s CEO seems like a big leap.
Funny enough, The original topic was that looking sexier was more profitable than working.
Yes, it makes the cars more expensive but at some point, these parts will get mass produced and they will be cheap as hell.
The more data a car has, the better it should drive.
Or, more likely, no lessons will be learned and people will still trust what the company says in the future for arbitrary reasons.
But in this case it means the car now trusts you to trust it by not putting your hands on the wheel?
If you think Waymo doesn’t have thousands of people doing the same but remotely - I have bridge to sell you.
Any remote watcher can't be expected to avoid a crash in realtime.
Waymo is trusted to behave safely without supervision, but of course they monitor everything to validate and improve.
Also it still kills people: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YgFPW5esM04
Like FSD, too, you mean.
When the dust settles, it will certainly be taught in business schools. And Musk will be in prison (not for FSD specifically).
I watched the shareholders meeting yesterday - it was amazing. Elon repeated all the same things, he kept telling for the past 5 years at least, none of which is close to become a reality. And none was described in any tangible detail - all very vague promises.
As for FSD, autonomy and Robotaxis, one has to remember when it was announced and promoted - when Tesla was close to bankruptcy (per Elon himself).
Or closer to formal political power.
(even though it is very unlikely, but give it some years and there might be the next iteration of someone leading a state like a company trope)
Clearly Musk understands this very well and plays that game expertly.
It's really not necessary for all his promises to come true, as long as he can point to a track record of having made some of those wild things come true. So far, that's working.
That’s the problem with research; much of it turns out to be a dead-end, or exponentially more difficult as you approach the goal. FSD looked extremely likely there for a time, but I think the problem was actually AGI in disguise.
And that tricks you into thinking that the hard parts are done, and you just need to polish the thing, fill in the last few cases, and you're done!
Except, the work needed to go from 90% there to 91% there is astronomically higher than the work needed to go from 0% to 90%. And the work needed from 91% to 92% is even higher. Partly because the complexity of the corner cases increase exponentially, and partly because everyone involved doesn't actually know how the model works. It's been hilarious watching Tesla flail at this, because every new release that promises the moon always has these weird regressions in unrelated areas.
My favourite example of complexity is that drivers need to follow not only road signs and traffic lights, they also need to follow hand signals from certain people. Police officers, for example, can use hand signals to direct traffic, and it's illegal not to follow those. I can see a self-driving system recognizing hand signals and steering the car accordingly, but suddenly you get a much harder problem: How can the car know the difference between lawful hand signals, and some dude in a Halloween police uniform waving his hands?
You want to drive autonomously coast to coast? Cool, now the car needs to know how to correctly identify local police officers, highway patrol officers, state police officers, and county sheriffs, depending on the car's location.
Good luck little toaster!
And to detect when someone is doing a prank or just a homeless guy yelling and waving their fist at cars etc
Yeah, because if it understands hand gestures, it totally won't be used by criminals, directing it to a chop shop where they can disable it and cut it to pieces. What are you gonna do as the owner?
You have to wonder if she is dumb, or just knows Tesla investors are totally delusional.
Or perhaps, when you come upon an OG delusional musk worshipper, and call them out, they can point at their money pile and call you the idiot...
God will make it go to $2000.
It is very nearly standard practice in startupland to describe a yet-to-be-developed product in the present tense prior to/during development.
Strictly speaking, it’s lying/fraud, but it is so pervasive and widespread as to be expected and could rightly be called standard industry practice.
This is in no way a Tesla-specific thing.
*: The definition of "work" includes veering incl. but not limited to other vehicles, road shoulders or road divisions, sometimes self stabbing the car incl., but not limited to its driver with road railings or other roadside objects. The car might catch fire as a result or independent of the event if its feelings are hurt, or just feels like it, and burns for days, releasing its densely packed magic smoke, sweat, blood vapor and condensed tears of its designers and builders. The fumes might be toxic. Please don't inhale them.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_fatality_rate_in...
Most dangerous way to travel, full stop. FSD or not. I don't think a perfect safety record is possible. Only better than what people currently accomplish given the inherent unsafety of the whole system. If safety were a top priority, the cars would be on rails.
Did I say anything resembling or implying that? I don't think so.
> Most dangerous way to travel, full stop.
I love a quote from a famous driver, paraphrasing: "Racing is some people knowing what they're doing driving in a closed circuit. Traffic is the same, but with people who don't know what they're doing".
On top of that, I had enough incidents to know that what humans can do in traffic. They make good stories though.
> I don't think a perfect safety record is possible.
Me, too.
> Only better than what people currently accomplish given the inherent unsafety of the whole system.
I think cars with driver monitoring is more secure than cars with FSD or hands-free driving. I love to drive cars with lane hold, adaptive cruise and driver monitoring, because these systems improve safety and augment humans at the same time.
I don't believe that AI and/or computer vision is close to matching human perception and reasoning to handle a 2ton steel box like humans. Augmenting humans' capabilities is a far safer and reliable (if not unsexier) way.
> the cars would be on rails.
I love trains to death, but they're not perfect either.
There’s a timeline where Theranos was acquired for 9b by UnitedHealth if they could keep the grift alive juuust a bit longer and Elizabeth Holmes ascends to the tech firmament permanently while her enablers congratulate each other.
Tesla has even more and deeper financial and branding defense mechanisms. That said, the clock is ticking, now, I think
Holmes and at least some of her supporters still ardently insist, to this day, now that everything is out of the bag, the "pulling filing cabinets in front of doors to specific labs on FDA inspection days so they only see the labs we want them to" crap, all of it, that she, and humanity, have been robbed of the truly magnificent biomedical advances that Theranos was just about to solve.
FSD is like ChatGPT, it works in many cases, it does some mistakes, but it is certainly not “useless”. It won’t replace full time humans yet (the same way that ChatGPT does not replace a developer) but can still work in some scenarios.
To the investor, ChatGPT is sold as “AGI is just round the corner”.
No such luxury is granted to the driver using FSD who has just collided with another vehicle.
Users generally have time to decide if the output ChatGPT provides is accurate and worth actioning.
We found out about the lawyers citing ChatGPT because they were called out by a judge. We find out about Google Maps errors when someone drives off a broken bridge.
https://edition.cnn.com/2023/09/21/us/father-death-google-gp...
For other LLMs we see mistakes bold enough that everyone can recognise them — the headlines about Google's LLM suggesting eating rocks and putting glue on your pizza (at least it said "non-toxic glue").
All it takes is some subtle mistake. The strength and the weakness of the best LLMs is their domain knowledge is part way between a normal person and a domain expert — good enough to receive trust, not enough to deserve it.
Meaning that it's really not reliable enough to take your hands off the wheel.
Waymo shows that it is possible, with today's technology, to do much much better.
Soooo just like ChatGPT then? As the parent comment said.
What they do claim is that with human supervision, it lowers the accident rate to one per 5.5 million miles, which is a lot better than the overall accident rate for all cars on the road. And unlike Waymo, it works everywhere. That's worthwhile even if it never improves from here.
Fwiw you can take your hands off the wheel now, you just have to watch the road. They got rid of the "steering wheel nag" with the latest version.
where there's enough bandwidth
> you just have to watch the road
... and then react in a split second, or what? it's simpler to say goodbyes before the trip.
> They just think they'll get there.
of course. I think too. eventually they'll hire the receptionist from Waymo and he/she will tell them to build a fucking world model that has some object permanence.
Being more specific: Product either requires a certification, like a driving license, or is foolproof.
"By 2019 it will be financially irresponsible not to own a Tesla, as you will be able to earn $30K a year by utilizing it as a robotaxi as you sleep."
This was always horseshit, and still is:
If each Tesla could earn $30K profit a year just ferrying people around (and we'd assume more, in this scenario, because it could be 24/7), why the hell is Tesla selling them to us versus printing money for themselves?
Tesla only counts pyrotechnic deployments for their own numbers which NHTSA states is only ~18% of all crashes which is derived from publicly available datasets. Tesla chooses to not even account for a literal 5x discrepancy derivable from publicly available data. They make no attempt to account for anything more complex or subtle. No competent member of the field would make errors that basic except to distort the conclusions.
The usage of falsified statistics to aggressively push product to the risk of their customers makes it clear that their numbers should not only be ignored, but assumed to be malicious.
[1] https://static.nhtsa.gov/odi/inv/2022/INCR-EA22002-14496.pdf
Yes, it was a stupid system and you are right to criticize it. And as a Tesla driver in a country that still only has that same Autopilot system and not FSD, I'm very aware of it.
But the current FSD is rebuilt from the ground up to be end-to-end neural, and they have the occupancy network now (which is damn impressive) giving a 3d map of occupied space, which should stop that problem occurring.
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/tesla-driverless-cars...
Oct 2014: "Five or six years from now we will be able to achieve true autonomous driving where you could literally get in the car, go to sleep and wake up at your destination."