carmudgeons.com  

Go Back   carmudgeons.com > Automotive Forums > Car Talk > Perseverators Anonymous

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old Yesterday, 11:39 AM   #831
rumatt
Mugwump
 
rumatt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Carmudgeonly Ride: E46 330i, E91 325xi, Chevy Colorado, Cayman R
Location: NY
Posts: 16,530
Quote:
Originally Posted by clyde View Post
How many people have to die? And how many apologists do we need?
Pretty sure he means people are confused about pre-paying for a speculative feature... not whether FSD is a good idea.
rumatt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 11:41 AM   #832
clyde
Chief title editor
 
clyde's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 22,853
Quote:
Originally Posted by rumatt View Post
Pretty sure he means people are confused about pre-paying for a speculative feature... not whether FSD is a good idea.
Doesn't change my questions.
__________________
OH NOES!!!!!1 MY CAR HAS T3H UND3R5T33R5555!!!!!!1oneone!!!!11

Team WTF?!
What are you gonna do?
clyde is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 12:06 PM   #833
JST
195
 
JST's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 20,037
Quote:
Originally Posted by clyde View Post
How many people have to die? And how many apologists do we need?
FSD doesn't actually exist yet, and even the hardware that they'll use for it doesn't exist yet. So it hasn't killed anyone yet.

It's interesting watching the screen on my car now that I have the v9 upgrade. I don't have autopilot, but the screen gives you a readout of what the car is seeing anyway. V9 has enhanced the car's ability to see and discriminate; it can now differentiate between cars and vans and SUVs and buses. It's...mostly right. It can also see on the side and rear of the car now, too (previously it didn't use the cameras for that, just the ultrasonic sensors). Again...it mostly works.

There's a long time between now and when it's ready for FSD, but presumably they're gathering a lot of data.

As for your "how many people have to die" question, the answer is "more than zero." People will die using FSD no matter how it's implemented. The real question is whether fewer people will die using FSD (or any other autonomous tech) than not. My guess is that the answer is yes, though I'd really like to make sure the (independently collected and verified) data bears that out.
JST is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 12:44 PM   #834
clyde
Chief title editor
 
clyde's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 22,853
Quote:
Originally Posted by JST View Post
FSD doesn't actually exist yet, and even the hardware that they'll use for it doesn't exist yet. So it hasn't killed anyone yet.

It's interesting watching the screen on my car now that I have the v9 upgrade. I don't have autopilot, but the screen gives you a readout of what the car is seeing anyway. V9 has enhanced the car's ability to see and discriminate; it can now differentiate between cars and vans and SUVs and buses. It's...mostly right. It can also see on the side and rear of the car now, too (previously it didn't use the cameras for that, just the ultrasonic sensors). Again...it mostly works.

There's a long time between now and when it's ready for FSD, but presumably they're gathering a lot of data.

As for your "how many people have to die" question, the answer is "more than zero." People will die using FSD no matter how it's implemented. The real question is whether fewer people will die using FSD (or any other autonomous tech) than not. My guess is that the answer is yes, though I'd really like to make sure the (independently collected and verified) data bears that out.
I don't disagree with the validity of any of that. I also firmly believe that the day of fully autonomous vehicles mixing in with human driven vehicles and being involved in fewer at fault collisions with and without injuries and fatalities is in the very near future.

What I continue having a problem with is that manufacturers have unleashed these technologies upon all of us and marketed the hell out of them without adequate testing proving they're safe (or even "safe enough"), nor being transparent about what they know about how safe they are or aren't...and then hide behind "it's beta" and "the driver wasn't using it as intended" meaning "they didn't follow all the beta instructions and disclaimers and instead acted as any reasonable person might and/or bought into our ghastly hyperbolic marketing hype."
__________________
OH NOES!!!!!1 MY CAR HAS T3H UND3R5T33R5555!!!!!!1oneone!!!!11

Team WTF?!
What are you gonna do?
clyde is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 12:51 PM   #835
rumatt
Mugwump
 
rumatt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Carmudgeonly Ride: E46 330i, E91 325xi, Chevy Colorado, Cayman R
Location: NY
Posts: 16,530
Quote:
Originally Posted by clyde View Post
What I continue having a problem with is that manufacturers have unleashed these technologies upon all of us and marketed the hell out of them without adequate testing proving they're safe (or even "safe enough"), nor being transparent about what they know about how safe they are or aren't...and then hide behind "it's beta" and "the driver wasn't using it as intended" meaning "they didn't follow all the beta instructions and disclaimers and instead acted as any reasonable person might and/or bought into our ghastly hyperbolic marketing hype."
I made this argument to someone at work and they replied with ,"If they're going to release something that isn't ready, it's good to call it Beta so people know, right?"

Tesla also has a "shadow" mode for certain features... (I think only emergency accident avoidance for now?). I believe they're attempting to collect data (without taking action) to approximate

a) how many accidents they believe they would have avoided by taking action when the human didn't
b) how many times they would have taken action that proved to be unnecessary (because the human didn't and all was fine)

I can see these numbers being manipulated easily, but that aside I do like the approach.
rumatt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 03:38 PM   #836
clyde
Chief title editor
 
clyde's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 22,853
Quote:
Originally Posted by rumatt View Post
I made this argument to someone at work and they replied with ,"If they're going to release something that isn't ready, it's good to call it Beta so people know, right?"
You work with mathy and computery people, right?

Quote:
Tesla also has a "shadow" mode for certain features... (I think only emergency accident avoidance for now?). I believe they're attempting to collect data (without taking action) to approximate

a) how many accidents they believe they would have avoided by taking action when the human didn't
b) how many times they would have taken action that proved to be unnecessary (because the human didn't and all was fine)

I can see these numbers being manipulated easily, but that aside I do like the approach.
That's reasonable, but if it's not transparent or independently verifiable, is it worth the 0s and 1s it's made of?
__________________
OH NOES!!!!!1 MY CAR HAS T3H UND3R5T33R5555!!!!!!1oneone!!!!11

Team WTF?!
What are you gonna do?
clyde is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 06:28 PM   #837
equ
Alphanumeric
 
equ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Carmudgeonly Ride: 981S, 535i, macanurbo
Posts: 7,707
The word choice of "fully self-driving" has reached an entirely different level of marketing b.s. compared to "auto-pilot" which was mere innuendo.
equ is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:18 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Forums 2003-2008, 'Mudgeon Enterprises - Site hosting by AYN & Associates, LLC