Tesla’s “Full Self-Driving” sees pedestrian, chooses not to slow down

Re:Tesla’s “Full Self-Driving” sees pedestrian, chooses not ... by mikestew on Tuesday May 16, 2023 @03:53PM (#35966900)

If you would put a camera in a 1000 cars fully driven by humans and film each for a day, how many of such recordings could be found?

Already with the whataboutism? Automated driving is supposed to promise safer driving than humans, not bug-for-bug compatibility.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Tesla’s “Full Self-Driving” sees pedestrian, chooses not ... by DennisP on Tuesday May 16, 2023 @04:18PM (#35967200)

The video didn't look unsafe to me. The pedestrian was walking in from the left side of the road and never got close to the car. In my state that's perfectly legal.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Tesla’s “Full Self-Driving” sees pedestrian, chooses not ... by ahahahahah on Tuesday May 16, 2023 @05:05PM (#35967755)

> never got close to the car

Yes, because the pedestrian slowed down when it saw the Tesla was not giving them right of way (as the Tesla is required to in the state of california).

> In my state that's perfectly legal.

In most states its illegal to force a vehicle or pedestrian or whatever that has right of way to slow to a near stop to avoid a collision with you that you could have easily stopped and avoided. I don't know of a state where a pedestrian in a crosswalk would not have right of way in this situation.

Now, there are many states where a pedestrian in a crosswalk doesn't have like right of way over everything (though, technically, not california), but for the most part this applies to vehicles that could cross the crosswalk without affecting the pedestrian.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Tesla’s “Full Self-Driving” sees pedestrian, chooses not ... by DennisP on Friday May 19, 2023 @01:04PM (#36004273)

I don't see any particular slowing by the walker, and neither did another HN commenter who replied to you.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Tesla’s “Full Self-Driving” sees pedestrian, chooses not ... by dondeng on Tuesday May 16, 2023 @03:59PM (#35966959)

But if humans do this 10 out of 1000 and automated cars do it 1 out of 1000 times isn’t the automated driving safer than humans then?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Tesla’s “Full Self-Driving” sees pedestrian, chooses not ... by wilg on Tuesday May 16, 2023 @03:58PM (#35966946)

This is an asinine argument. It’s not necessarily safer right out of the gate! Maybe they just need to fix the bug.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Tesla’s “Full Self-Driving” sees pedestrian, chooses not ... by nuancebydefault on Tuesday May 16, 2023 @04:50PM (#35967575)

Every bug needs solving. But also: every bug will _never_ be solved. Why would you think any system or even component should be perfect? Name one perfect system. More simple systems like traffic lights, headlights, tires, brakes,... each of them can fail. Trains can derail, so we should not trust trains?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Tesla’s “Full Self-Driving” sees pedestrian, chooses not ... by nickthegreek on Tuesday May 16, 2023 @05:01PM (#35967708)

The “bug” involves a breathing, thinking human being who didn’t opt into being a lab rat.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Tesla’s “Full Self-Driving” sees pedestrian, chooses not ... by nuancebydefault on Tuesday May 16, 2023 @04:51PM (#35967613)

I think in this respect it is already safer than human driving, my point being.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Tesla’s “Full Self-Driving” sees pedestrian, chooses not ... by mikestew on Tuesday May 16, 2023 @05:00PM (#35967700)

Okay, I see what you're saying. But wouldn't an automated system be consistent in its behavior? IOW, if it does not respect crosswalk laws in one case, should we not expect it to do the same in all, or at least most cases? At least some (and hopefully most) human drivers are staying out of pedestrian-occupied crosswalks.

[ Parent | on HN ]