News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Tesla's 'Full Self-Driving Capability' Falls Short of Its... by heavyset_go on Saturday September 05, 2020 @09:11PM (#24388164)
When a civil engineer designs a structure that fails and kills people, not only are they held liable for the deaths, they stand to lose their licenses. In civil engineering, there is a culture of ensuring it never happens again after engineers design something that kills.

Who at Tesla was held liable for designing a system that failed and resulted in death? Who at Tesla lost their licenses in the wake of deaths caused by their self-driving systems? Where is the culture of ensuring that their cars don't kill anyone again?

Re:Tesla's 'Full Self-Driving Capability' Falls Short of Its... by nwienert on Saturday September 05, 2020 @10:17PM (#24388465)
These are great questions and I’m glad you’re bringing ethics in. But the parent posters context was that the “solid engineering” by google === faster delivery. I think that’s backwards. If you are an advocate of being more conservative with engineering to be safer - then you can’t have your cake and eat it too, you should hope it goes slowly. That’s literally the whole point.

I’ll be the first to criticize Tesla for the shoddy, dangerously worded rollout of Autopilot. Totally. Has it saved more lives than lost? Who knows.

But to argue that googles more conservative approach should somehow deliver FSD faster is just a contradiction. Perhaps they brute force it like I said already. But the fast rollout by Tesla == more dangerous == more data. If you’re talking engineering delivery time, then yea Tesla is taking a calculated risk of getting much more data much faster. They should be able to deliver faster, engineering-wise.