5 ms·

so when you have a student driver, or a new driver, the lives of not just them but the people around them are being risked just to test a system. so we should j

by 00F_ 3y ago

so when you have a student driver, or a new driver, the lives of not just them but the people around them are being risked just to test a system. so we should just stop all new drivers. no more new drivers. because a new driver, especially a teenage one, is orders of magnitude more dangerous than the current fsd.

ceejayoz 3y ago
Student drivers are typically subject to significant limitations - no other kids in car, no driving past certain hours, parental supervision for a certain period of time, etc. They're not learning for a billionaire's profit, and they're fairly unlikely to get a software update that causes a whole bunch of them to make the same mistake in a short period of time.
- 00F_ 3y ago
  so where is your proposal to limit the passengers of a self driving car, all of the countless brands who are advertising level 2 systems? where is your proposal for compromise? there are none because nobody who likes pouring cold water on tesla is coming from a place of intellectual honesty. so self driving cars could only exist for a billionaires profit? how about for the countless lives that will be saved by this technology? tens of thousands of people die every year. cmon dude.
  - ceejayoz 3y ago
    > so where is your proposal to limit the passengers of a self driving car That limit is in place for student drivers to limit distractions; it's a specific mitigation to a problem specific to them. FSD needs its own. > where is your proposal for compromise? I'd like to see safety data reporting requirements that come from regulators, not Tesla, whose self-reported cherry-picked data points I find quite suspect. (Example of this issue: https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2022-12-27/tesla-stopped-reporting-autopilot-safety-statistics-online https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2022-12-27/tesla-stop...) I'd like to see safety-critical beta software in cars undergo independent audits prior to widespread release. (My dream would be for it to be open source, but that's probably unrealistic.) I'd like to see formalized safety testing processes of such software at the regulatory level, similar to how crash testing is currently conducted. I'm sure others have specific, useful suggestions. > there are none because nobody who likes pouring cold water on tesla is coming from a place of intellectual honesty. This, ironically, doesn't sound like it comes from a place of intellectual honesty. > how about for the countless lives that will be saved by this technology? I certainly hope that happens someday.
    - 00F_ 3y ago
      these compromises are productive and show that you do come from a place of intellectual honesty. if the federal government had been tasked with overseeing the early versions of fsd, it would have been swiftly shut down because of the nature of the federal government, not to mention the politics. but thanks to the private sector we now have modern fsd which is bar none the most advanced and capable self-driving solution in the world. now that self driving has gotten this far, its probably much less likely to be aborted if subjected to government intervention and oversight. in light of the huge benefits that self-driving cars stand to create, measured in human lives, compromise is the only rational proposal. shutting down fsd like mouth-breathing internet commenters talk about would be objectively wrong given the state of its competitors and the nature of the problem. edit: your bio says 'fuck elon musk.' making a two dimensional character out of elon musk isnt a good way to understand him or his projects. when the time comes and elon musk uses his influence and money to do something really bad, it might be boy crys wolf thanks to your camp.
      - ceejayoz 3y ago
        > your bio says 'fuck elon musk.' My Twitter bio does. Added shortly after he banned links to Mastodon, broke Tweetbot (and lied about them breaking the rules), and announced breaking changes to the Twitter APIs I use extensively at work with a few days warning.
        00F_ 3y ago
        you seem passionate and knowlegable about this so i will ask you. i want to know more about the API changes. detractors say that it was at best an irresponsible change to the API that inconvenienced companies that use it. proponents say that musk simply stopped making the API free which was always unsustainable and people should have known better. what was really going on?
        ceejayoz 3y ago
        Entire businesses had their products cease to function, with no warning, and no explanation from Twitter, until a couple of days later they got vaguely libeled by Twitter's developer account. (https://twitter.com/TwitterDev/status/1615405842735714304 https://twitter.com/TwitterDev/status/1615405842735714304) They then announced the free API would go away entirely with a week's notice and pricing details "next week". (https://twitter.com/TwitterDev/status/1621026986784337922 https://twitter.com/TwitterDev/status/1621026986784337922) That change got delayed several times. Absolute clown show. If they'd said "in 90 days we're shutting down third-party clients and implementing a paid tier", people would've grumbled but seen it as fairly reasonable. Kneecapping devs who've been building Twitter apps and integrations for a decade was cruel and unnecessary.

by 00F_ 3y ago

ceejayoz 3y ago

Student drivers are typically subject to significant limitations - no other kids in car, no driving past certain hours, parental supervision for a certain period of time, etc. They're not learning for a billionaire's profit, and they're fairly unlikely to get a software update that causes a whole bunch of them to make the same mistake in a short period of time.

00F_ 3y ago
so where is your proposal to limit the passengers of a self driving car, all of the countless brands who are advertising level 2 systems? where is your proposal for compromise? there are none because nobody who likes pouring cold water on tesla is coming from a place of intellectual honesty. so self driving cars could only exist for a billionaires profit? how about for the countless lives that will be saved by this technology? tens of thousands of people die every year. cmon dude.
- ceejayoz 3y ago
  > so where is your proposal to limit the passengers of a self driving car That limit is in place for student drivers to limit distractions; it's a specific mitigation to a problem specific to them. FSD needs its own. > where is your proposal for compromise? I'd like to see safety data reporting requirements that come from regulators, not Tesla, whose self-reported cherry-picked data points I find quite suspect. (Example of this issue: https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2022-12-27/tesla-stopped-reporting-autopilot-safety-statistics-online https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2022-12-27/tesla-stop...) I'd like to see safety-critical beta software in cars undergo independent audits prior to widespread release. (My dream would be for it to be open source, but that's probably unrealistic.) I'd like to see formalized safety testing processes of such software at the regulatory level, similar to how crash testing is currently conducted. I'm sure others have specific, useful suggestions. > there are none because nobody who likes pouring cold water on tesla is coming from a place of intellectual honesty. This, ironically, doesn't sound like it comes from a place of intellectual honesty. > how about for the countless lives that will be saved by this technology? I certainly hope that happens someday.
  - 00F_ 3y ago
    these compromises are productive and show that you do come from a place of intellectual honesty. if the federal government had been tasked with overseeing the early versions of fsd, it would have been swiftly shut down because of the nature of the federal government, not to mention the politics. but thanks to the private sector we now have modern fsd which is bar none the most advanced and capable self-driving solution in the world. now that self driving has gotten this far, its probably much less likely to be aborted if subjected to government intervention and oversight. in light of the huge benefits that self-driving cars stand to create, measured in human lives, compromise is the only rational proposal. shutting down fsd like mouth-breathing internet commenters talk about would be objectively wrong given the state of its competitors and the nature of the problem. edit: your bio says 'fuck elon musk.' making a two dimensional character out of elon musk isnt a good way to understand him or his projects. when the time comes and elon musk uses his influence and money to do something really bad, it might be boy crys wolf thanks to your camp.
    - ceejayoz 3y ago
      > your bio says 'fuck elon musk.' My Twitter bio does. Added shortly after he banned links to Mastodon, broke Tweetbot (and lied about them breaking the rules), and announced breaking changes to the Twitter APIs I use extensively at work with a few days warning.
      - 00F_ 3y ago
        you seem passionate and knowlegable about this so i will ask you. i want to know more about the API changes. detractors say that it was at best an irresponsible change to the API that inconvenienced companies that use it. proponents say that musk simply stopped making the API free which was always unsustainable and people should have known better. what was really going on?
        ceejayoz 3y ago
        Entire businesses had their products cease to function, with no warning, and no explanation from Twitter, until a couple of days later they got vaguely libeled by Twitter's developer account. (https://twitter.com/TwitterDev/status/1615405842735714304 https://twitter.com/TwitterDev/status/1615405842735714304) They then announced the free API would go away entirely with a week's notice and pricing details "next week". (https://twitter.com/TwitterDev/status/1621026986784337922 https://twitter.com/TwitterDev/status/1621026986784337922) That change got delayed several times. Absolute clown show. If they'd said "in 90 days we're shutting down third-party clients and implementing a paid tier", people would've grumbled but seen it as fairly reasonable. Kneecapping devs who've been building Twitter apps and integrations for a decade was cruel and unnecessary.