Tesla Influencers Tried Coast-to-Coast Self-Driving, Hit Debris Before 60 Miles

The alternative is taking control of the car all the time. Something nobody is going to practically do.

And then when something goes wrong, you are unceremoniously handed a plane with potentially some or all of those protections no longer active.

As an analogy, imagine your FSD car was trying to slow down for something, but along the way there is some issue with a sensor. So it gives up and hands control back to you while it's in the middle of braking, yet now your ABS is no longer active.

So now the situation is much more sudden than it would have been (if you had been driving the car you would have been aware of it and slowing down for it youself earlier in the game), you likely weren't paying as much attention in the first place because of the automation, and some of the normal protection isn't working.

So it's almost three levels of adding insult to injury. Potentially related discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43970363

Passively monitoring a situation continuously and reacting quickly when needed is something humans are not good at. Even with airline pilots, where we do invest a lot in training and monitoring, it's a well-understood issue that having to take over in a surprising situation often leads to confusion and time needed to re-orient before they can take effective action. Which for planes is often fine, because you have the time buffer needed for that, but not always.

... wait, do they actually claim that? I mean that's just nonsense.

Right now it’s easily double to triple that, even with Musks behavior.

The passive investing / market cap weighted ETF complex tends to help big valuations stay big, but a company like Tesla still needs that sharp shot in the arm followed by frenzied buying occasionally in order to stay aloft (be it by traders, retail participants, shorts covering, etc).

I suppose they could replace Musk with another hype salesman, but the "hate" that Tesla gets is a big part of these upside shock cycles for the stock, because the ticker is a siren call for short sellers, who are ultimately guaranteed future buyers.

I suspect a significant proportion of Tesla's stock price comes from people who are using it as a proxy for his other companies that the public can't invest in, primarily xAI (as all AI companies are in a horrific bubble right now) and SpaceX.

They have the best selling vehicle by a little under 1%, with the Tesla Model Y just edging out the Toyota Corolla. But Toyota also has the 3rd best selling model (RAV4) that is about 7% behind the Model Y. And they have a third model in the top 10, the Camry, at a little over half the Model Y sales.

Just those 3 Toyota models combined sell about 30% more than all Tesla models combined.

Across all models Toyota sells 6 times as many cars as Tesla.

By number of cars sold per year Tesla is the 15th biggest car maker. The list is Toyota, Volkswagen, Hyundai-Kia, GM, Stellantis, Ford, BYD, Honda, Nissan, Suzuki, BMW, Mercedes-Benz, Renault, Geely, and then Tesla.

If we go by revenue from sales rather than units sold it is 12th. The list is: Toyota, Volkswagen, Hyundai-Kia, Stallantis, GM, Ford, Mercedes-Benz, BMW, Honda, BYD, SAIC Motor, and then Tesla.

Yet Tesla has something like 6 times the market cap of Toyota and around 30 times the market caps of VW and Honda. That's pretty much all hype.

The debris? The very visible piece of debris? The piece of debris that a third party camera inside the car did in fact see? Adding 2 radars and 5 LIDARs would totally solve that!

For fuck's sake, I am tired of this worn out argument. The bottleneck of self-driving isn't sensors. It was never sensors. The bottleneck of self-drivng always was, and still is: AI.

Every time a self-driving car crashes due to a self-driving fault, you pull the blackbox, and what do you see? The sensors received all the data they needed to make the right call. The system had enough time to make the right call. The system did not make the right call. The issue is always AI.

A human would rather be involved in a crash because of its own doing, rather than because they let the machine take control and put trust in it.

Do they? "Many humans" would hit that? The humans in the car spotted the debris at least 8s before the impact. I don't think any humans would hit that in broad daylight unless they were asleep, completely drunk, or somehow managed to not look at the road for a full 10s. These are the worst drivers, and there aren't that many because the punishment can go up to criminal charges.

The argument that "a human would have made that mistake" backfires, showing that every Tesla equipped with the "safer than a human driver" FSD is in fact at best at "worst human driver" level. But if we still like the "humans also..." argument, then the FSD should face the same punishment a human would in these situations and have its rights to drive any car revoked.