Cited on HN 7 times, 2022, never outright recommendedscore 0
Years with an HN recommendation, 2007–2026
Cited as evidence that FSD beta is unsafe and that self-driving is far from solved.
AI Addict reviews a Tesla Full Self-Driving Beta drive, showing hard braking, red-light running, wrong-way turns and a collision with a bollard. The video is timestamped by incident.
1 citations · 6 critical · News · news from the time
Crash starts from the 3:26 mark: [0]. Had they not intervened, the damage would have been much worse. Further in the video, it has repeatedly become confused in trying to drive through the pylons - again the driver intervenes. This is just one of the many reasons why FSD is not only putting drivers at risk, but it is really turning its customers into real-life crash dummies. A more accurate re-brand of this product should be something more like 'Fools Self Driving' than 'Full Self Driving', given the false advertising and lack of safety features for these drivers using the product. [0] [this video]
Interestingly at the beginning of the video the route planning seems to work overtime to avoid making a specific turn. See about 25s in: [this video] That's kind of like what you're describing, but more dumb where the car tries to avoid the trouble spot entirely.
Melbourne doesn't generally have what Autopilot would consider "normal" roads, though. The incident involved someone getting off a tram, so the road would have looked something like this: [link] In the future, perhaps Teslas will handle this well, but you only need to watch a few videos of them encountering similar markings on YouTube to know that this type of road currently results in massive confusion for a Tesla. Example: [this video]
> Works just fine for my two cars thanks.. This just reads 'Works fine on my machine' . > I feel like you haven't driven one? One does not need to be a beta tester or a crash test dummy to see enough reports and tests from others over the years, risking their lives on using this 'safety-critical' beta quality software to know that this contraption needs to be investigated and the reports speak for themselves. [0] [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [0] [this video] [1] [link] [2] [link] [3] [link] [4] [link]
On a straight highway in sunny california maybe, in the city, on a mountain road, anywhere with snow or heavy rain or fog, it's game over and will always be if we keep using the current techs [this video]
> No, I think this argument is largely correct. And frankly settled: anyone who's driven recent FSD beta versions knows very well that the cars "see just fine". They don't hit anything, they see and avoid obstacles. Only if you ignore times where intervention stopped it from hitting something, times where it did actually hit something, massive amounts of jitter and popping in the visual output, phantom braking, etc. Unless of course "recent" means n+1 where n is the version that crashed into something. Collision with bollard in Feb 2022: [this video] attempts to plow through cyclist Feb 2022: [link] almost crashes into tram (can't gauge speed or direction?) Jun 2022: [link] Crashes into curb Aug 2022: [link] Phantom brake Sep 2022: [link] Almost colliding with bridge pillar 2 weeks ago: [link] Crashes into various objects in testing 2 weeks ago: [link]
Video list and Hacker News comment labels from HackerTube (prompted by @karpathy), released under ODC-By 1.0, built on the open-index/hacker-news archive. Hacker News data is provided by Y Combinator; comments remain the work of their authors. Video titles, channel names and thumbnails belong to their creators and are shown via YouTube. HackerTube Watch is an unofficial edition. Data export of 2026-10-31.
Plays via YouTube's privacy-enhanced embed
7 Hacker News comments
From the HN archive; up to 20 kept per video, favoring different commenters. Recommendations first.
Read more