In the piece — titled “Can You Fool a Self Driving Car?” — Rober found that a Tesla car on Autopilot was fooled by a Wile E. Coyote-style wall painted to look like the road ahead of it, with the electric vehicle plowing right through it instead of stopping.

The footage was damning enough, with slow-motion clips showing the car not only crashing through the styrofoam wall but also a mannequin of a child. The Tesla was also fooled by simulated rain and fog.

  • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    108
    ·
    7 hours ago

    As Electrek points out, Autopilot has a well-documented tendency to disengage right before a crash. Regulators have previously found that the advanced driver assistance software shuts off a fraction of a second before making impact.

    This has been known.

    They do it so they can evade liability for the crash.

    • Simulation6@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      2 hours ago

      If the disengage to avoid legal consequences feature does exist, then you would think there would be some false positive incidences where it turns off for no apparent reason. I found some with a search, which are attributed to bad software. Owners are discussing new patches fixing some problems and introducing new ones. None of the incidences caused an accident, so maybe the owners never hit the malicious code.

    • bazzzzzzz@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      5 hours ago

      Not sure how that helps in evading liability.

      Every Tesla driver would need super human reaction speeds to respond in 17 frames, 680ms(I didn’t check the recording framerate, but 25fps is the slowest reasonable), less than a second.

      • orcrist@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        20
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 hours ago

        They’re talking about avoiding legal liability, not about actually doing the right thing. And of course you can see how it would help them avoid legal liability. The lawyers will walk into court and honestly say that at the time of the accident the human driver was in control of the vehicle.

        And then that creates a discussion about how much time the human driver has to have in order to actually solve the problem, or gray areas about who exactly controls what when, and it complicates the situation enough where maybe Tesla can pay less money for the deaths that they are obviously responsible for.

      • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        34
        ·
        5 hours ago

        It’s not likely to work, but them swapping to human control after it determined a crash is going to happen isn’t accidental.

        Anything they can do to mire the proceedings they will do. It’s like how corporations file stupid junk motions to force plaintiffs to give up.

  • wabafee@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    41
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    5 hours ago

    I bet the reason why he does not want the LiDAR in the car really cause it looks ugly aestheticly.

    • AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      64
      ·
      edit-2
      7 hours ago

      It costs too much. It’s also why you have to worry about panels falling off the swastitruck if you park next to them. They also apparently lack any sort of rollover frame.

      He doesn’t want to pay for anything, including NHTSB crash tests.

      It’s literally what Drumpf would have created if he owned a car company. Cut all costs, disregard all regulations, and make the public the alpha testers.

      • Ledericas@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        4 hours ago

        it did cost too much at the time, but currently he doesnt want to do it because he would have to admit hes wrong.

      • werefreeatlast@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 hours ago

        The guy bankrupted a casino, not by playing against it and being super lucky, but by owning it. Virtually everything he has ever touched in business has turned to shit. How do you ever in the living fuck screwup stakes at Costco? My cousin with my be good eye and a working elbow could do it.

        And now its the country’s second try. This time unhinged, with all the training wheels off. The guy is stepping on the pedal while stripping the car for parts and giving away the fuel. The guy doesn’t even drive, he just fired the chauffeur and is dismantling the car from the inside with a shot gun…full steam ahead on to a nice brick wall and an infinity cliff ready to take us all with him. And Canada and Mexico and Gina. Three and three quarters of a year more of daily atrocities and law breakage. At least Hitler boy brought back the astronauts.

        • AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          edit-2
          7 hours ago

          I was mostly lambasting fElon, not Drumpf. You’re correct on Drumpf though. I was discussing the swastitruck, after all. Drumpf showed that he’s scared to drive any of the swasticars when he pretended to know how to sell anything, much less an EV.

          Oh, and Drumpf bankrupted 3-4 casinos in the late '80s to early '90s in Atlantic City, NJ. Literally the golden age of AC casinos.

          • Maiq@lemy.lol
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            6 hours ago

            It’s all money laundering for russian mob/fsb. Still pretty hard to bankrupt a business that basically prints $$$ though. Epic levels of incompetence!

        • AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          edit-2
          7 hours ago

          I mean, I haven’t ever heard of his father referring to Stockton as “retarded,” according to his teachers and professors, the way that I absolutely have heard about both Drumpf and fElon.

          Other than that, yeah. Bullshit techbro shit, and landleech shit.

    • Dr. Moose@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      29
      ·
      8 hours ago

      Cost cutting. Lidar is cheaper now but was relative expensive and increased tech debt and maintenance. Also he legit thought that “human see good - then car see good too”. Tesla is being led by a literal idiot.

      • Captain Aggravated@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 hours ago

        There was a comedy channel on Youtube aeons ago that would do “if x were honest” videos. Their slogan for Valve was “We used to make games. Now we make money.”

    • FrChazzz@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      30
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      8 hours ago

      Read about this somewhere. Iirc, Elon felt cameras were better than LiDAR at a time when that was kinda true, but the technology improved considerably in the interim and he pridefully refuses to admit he needs to adapt. [Edit: I had hastily read the referenced article and am incorrect here; link to accurate statements is linked in a reply below.]

        • FrChazzz@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          39
          ·
          8 hours ago

          Found the article! I had breezed through the thing. I was incorrect about the LiDAR/camera thing. Instead it was: ‘Elon even admitted that “very high-resolution radars would be better than pure vision”, but he claimed that “such a radar does not exist”’

          He, of course was incorrect and proven incorrect, but ‘the problem is that Musk has taken such a strong stance against [LiDARs] for so long that now that they have improved immensely and reduced in prices, he still can’t admit that he was wrong and use them.’

          • ChickenLadyLovesLife@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            2 hours ago

            he claimed that “such a radar does not exist”

            Lol just like his Nazi forefathers in WWII who refused to believe (more than once!) the British had the advanced radar that they actually did have.

      • SkyezOpen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        37
        ·
        9 hours ago

        I don’t even understand that logic. Use both. Even if one is significantly better than the other, they each have different weaknesses and can mitigate for each other.

      • blady_blah@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        8 hours ago

        He didn’t think they were better. He thought Tesla could get away without the more expensive lidar. Basically “humans can drive with just vision, that should be enough for an autonomous vehicle also.” Basically he did it because lidar is more expensive.

        • ChapulinColorado@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          7 hours ago

          Even if humans can drive with just vision:

          1. Human vision has superb dynamic range, auto focus and other features that cameras thousands of dollars could only dream of (for most).
          2. I don’t want self driving cars to drive like humans. Humans make too many mistakes and are prone to bad decisions (see the need for safety systems in the first place).
          3. Train and bus transport is better for most people. Driving is a luxury, we’ve forced people that should not be driving to do so in order to keep a job and barely survive.
        • atzanteol@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          7 hours ago

          I didn’t think it was about the cost. I think he just likes to be contrarian because he thinks it makes him seem smart. He then needs to stick by his stupid decisions.

        • FrChazzz@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          8 hours ago

          I added a correction in another reply. Basically he stubbornly refuses to believe a powerful enough LiDAR exists. So I suppose he is all-in on “LieDAR” technology instead (yes, I kinda feel bad about this pun too)

        • Draces@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          7 hours ago

          He could. In fact Waymos, for instance, do and are fully autonomous commercial taxis while Tesla are still 2 years out from full self driving for the tenth year in a row

    • 50MYT@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      9 hours ago

      The supplier he was using couldn’t supply lidar fast enough, and it was at risk of slowing his manufacturing.

      So he worked in a way to not need it, and tell everyone this solution was superior.

  • TommySoda@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    280
    ·
    12 hours ago

    Notice how they’re mad at the video and not the car, manufacturer, or the CEO. It’s a huge safety issue yet they’d rather defend a brand that obviously doesn’t even care about their safety. Like, nobody is gonna give you a medal for being loyal to a brand.

    • can@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      119
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      12 hours ago

      These people haven’t found any individual self identity.

      An attack on the brand is an attack on them. Reminds me of the people who made Stars Wars their meaning and crumbled when a certain trilogy didn’t hold up.

      • Billiam@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        60
        ·
        11 hours ago

        An attack on the brand is an attack on them.

        Thus it ever is with Conservatives. They make $whatever their whole identity, and so take any critique of $whatever as a personal attack against themselves.

        I blame evangelical religions’ need for martyrdom for this.

        • CarbonatedPastaSauce@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          ·
          9 hours ago

          You pretty much hit the nail on the head. These people have no identity or ability to think for themselves because they never needed either one. The church will do all your thinking for you, and anything it doesn’t cover will be handled by Fox News. Be like everyone else and fit in, otherwise… you have to start thinking for yourself. THE HORROR.

      • stoly@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        24
        ·
        11 hours ago

        The term you are looking for is “external locus of identity”. And, yes.

      • jumperalex@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 hours ago

        So literally every single above average sports fan?

        The pathological need to be part of a group so bad it overwhelmes all reason is a feature I have yet to understand. And I say that as someone who can recognize in myself those moments when I feel the pull to be part of an in group.

    • rtxn@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      34
      ·
      12 hours ago

      The styrofoam wall had a pre-cut hole to weaken it, and some people are using it as a gotcha proving the video was faked. It would be funny if it wasn’t so pathetic.

      • scops@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        7 hours ago

        For more background, Rober gave an interview and admitted that they ran the test twice. On the first run, the wall was just fabric, which did not tear away in a manner that was visually striking. They went back three weeks later and built a styrofoam wall knowing that the Tesla would fail, and pre-cut the wall to create a more interesting impact.

        • Confused_Emus@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          5 hours ago

          Particularly disappointing part of that interview was Rober saying he still plans to buy a new Tesla. Safety issues aside, why would anyone want to do that?

          • hovercat@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 hours ago

            Knowing the insanity of die-hard Tesla fans, it’s likely to try and protect himself.

            “I love my Tesla, but” has been a meme for years now because if you ever went on forums to get help or complain what a giant heap of shit the car was, and didn’t bookend it with unabashed praise, you’d have people ripping you to shreds calling you a FUDster and Big Oil shill who’s shorting the stock and trying to destroy the greatest company the world has ever known.

            People have learned over the years that even with the most valid of criticism for the company, the only way to even attempt to have it received is by showing just how much you actually love Tesla and Daddy Elon, and your complaints/criticism are only because you care so much about the company and want them to do better. Yes, it’s fucking stupid and annoying, but sadly this is the reality we’ve created for ourselves.

      • TommySoda@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        39
        ·
        10 hours ago

        Yeah, but it’s styrofoam. You could literally run through it. And I’m sure they did that more as a safety measure so that it was guaranteed to collapse so nobody would be injured.

        But at the same time it still drove through a fucking wall. The integrity doesn’t mean shit because it drove through a literal fucking wall.

      • samus12345@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        8 hours ago

        Yeah, because he knew that thing probably wasn’t gonna stop. Why destroy the car when you don’t have to? Concrete wouldn’t have changed the outcome.

        • rtxn@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          11 hours ago

          Hopefully with a Mythbusters-style remote control setup in case it explodes. And the trunk filled with ANFO to make sure it does.

    • Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 hours ago

      me waving a little handheld flag on a tiny pole that just says “Brand loyalty”

      …what? No medal???

  • u/lukmly013 💾 (lemmy.sdf.org)@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    158
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    13 hours ago

    I wondered how the hell it managed to fool LIDAR, well…

    The stunt was meant to demonstrate the shortcomings of relying entirely on cameras — rather than the LIDAR and radar systems used by brands and autonomous vehicle makers other than Tesla.

    • Weirdfish@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      128
      ·
      12 hours ago

      If I could pass one law, requiring multiple redundant scanning tech on anything autonomous large enough to hurt me might be it.

      I occasionally go to our warehouses which have robotic arms, autonomous fork lifts, etc. All of those have far more saftey features than a self driving Tesla, and they aren’t in public.

    • Joeffect@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      29
      ·
      10 hours ago

      It didn’t fool lidar… The car equipped with lidar stopped before hitting the wall because it saw the obstacle not what was on the obstacle

      • Shdwdrgn@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        10 hours ago

        You didn’t see the quote in the above comment that specifically states Teslas don’t have lidar but other brands using it weren’t fooled?

          • redbeardgecko@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            10
            ·
            9 hours ago

            They wondered that before/while reading the article, then got to the quoted part that explains that Teslas don’t have Lidar, and understood that it did not in fact fool it: it just wasn’t there.

          • Goretantath@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            9 hours ago

            “Wondered” past tense, as in now they realise after reading the quote that the car they thought had lidar in it actually does not.

    • thesohoriots@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      111
      ·
      12 hours ago

      The tl;dr here is that Elon said that humans have eyes and they work, and eyes are like cameras, so use cameras instead of expensive LIDAR. Dick fully inside car door for the slam.

    • deegeese@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      67
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      12 hours ago

      They used to have it but Elmo removed it years ago as a cost cutting move.

      Now they’re the only self driving car that drives into immovable objects.

      You might remember a few years ago a guy got decapitated when his Model S drove straight into the side of a semi trailer.

      • Armok_the_bunny@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        49
        ·
        12 hours ago

        To be clear, Elon Musk removed radar from Tesla vehicles and not Lidar, but a) he had it removed even from vehicles that had the hardware for radar and b) radar would have been enough to pass all the tests in the video anyway.

    • Ledericas@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 hours ago

      tesla doesnt use lIDAR anymore, not since '18, it relies on cameras solely.

      • hovercat@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 hours ago

        They removed radar in 2021 for cost-cutting reasons and have never had LiDAR, which Elon called “a fool’s errand”.

        Source: I worked on their ADAS systems.

    • can@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      12 hours ago

      I see you didn’t catch just how dumb teslas are. If it wouldn’t result in actual human harm I would have liked to paint one of these.

  • ZeroGravitas@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    84
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    12 hours ago

    Painted wall? That’s high tech shit.

    I got a Tesla from my work before Elon went full Reich 3, and try this:

    • break on bridge shadows on the highway
    • start wipers on shadows, but not on rain
    • break on cars parked on the roadside if there’s a bend in the road
    • disengage autopilot and break when driving towards the sun
    • change set speed at highway crossings because fuck the guy behind me, right?
    • engage emergency break if a bike waits to cross at the side of the road

    To which I’ll add:

    • moldy frunk (short for fucking trunk, I guess?), no ventilation whatsoever, water comes in, water stays in
    • pay attention noises for fuck-all reasons masking my podcasts and forcing me to rewind
    • the fucking cabin camera nanny - which I admittedly disabled with some chewing gum
    • the worst mp3 player known to man, the original Winamp was light years ahead - won’t index, won’t search, will reload USB and lose its place with almost every car start
    • bonkers UI with no integration with Android or Apple - I’m playing podcasts via low rate Bluetooth codecs, at least it doesn’t matter much for voice
    • unusable airco in auto mode, insists on blowing cold air in your face

    Say what you want about European cars, at least they got usability and integration right. As did most of the auto industry. Fuck Tesla, never again. Bunch of Steve Jobs wannabes.

    • Ronno@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      5 hours ago

      This, if the so called Tesla fans even drive the car, they know all of the above is more or less true. Newer cars have fewer of these issues, but the camera based Auto Pilot system is still in place. The car doesn’t even allow you to use cruise control under certain circumstances, because the car deems visibility too poor. The camera also only detects rain when its pouring, every other situation it will just randomly engage/disengage.

      I drive a Tesla Model 3 (2024) daily and I wouldn’t trust the car driving itself towards a picture like that. It would be an interesting experiment to have these “Tesla Fans” do the same experiment and use a concrete wall for some additional fun. I bet they won’t even conduct the experiment, because they know the car won’t detect the wall.

    • Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      46
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      11 hours ago

      It’s brake, the car brakes.

      It probably breaks as well, but that’s not relevant right now.

    • OwlHamster@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      6 hours ago

      Frunk is short for front trunk. The mp3 issues mostly goes away if you pay for LTE on the car. The rest of the issues I can attest to. Especially randomly changing the cruise control speed on a highway because Google maps says so, I guess? Just hard breaking at high speeds for no fucking reason.

    • Korhaka@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 hours ago

      Tbh false stopping is a lot better than driving over children by mistake

  • riodoro1@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    26
    ·
    3 hours ago

    What would definitely help with the discussion is if Mark Rober the scientist left a fucking crumb of scientific approach in his video. He didn’t really explain how he was testing it just slam car into things for views. This and a collaboration with a company that makes lidar made the video open to every possible criticism and it’s a shame.

    Discovery channel level of dumbed down „science”.

      • riodoro1@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        3 hours ago

        I fucking hate tesla and elon musk. Also I fucking hate people calling unverifiable shit science

        • Valmond@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          3 hours ago

          Well, it was published, up to you to do a peer review I guess!

          Also, this isn’t needing science, it blatantly shows that things does infact not function as intended.

          • johnynolegs@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 hours ago

            Just fyi, they used AEB in one car and cruise control in another. Far from even. I think it was a fail from the start considering they couldn’t get AEB to even fire on the Tesla driving without cruise control. Insane

          • riodoro1@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            1 hour ago

            Were is a robust description of the experiment? Or am I supposed to look frame by frame at the screen in the car to deduce the testing conditions?

            All he had to do was tell us clearly what is enabled on each car and what his inputs are. That would solve all the tesla fanbois comments about him cheating. Maybe he didn’t for „engagement”.

              • riodoro1@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 hour ago

                He made an elaborate test track specifically to make interesting observations.

                He set up dozens of cameras to record interesting observations from multiple angles.

                He collected footage of interesting phenomena he observed as they were happening in his elaborate test environment.

                He then cut the footage up so much it’s impossible for us to say exactly what really happened.

                If he went to all this trouble, and then made claims based on his experiment would it really hurt the video to explain the testing process a little bit more?

        • nyctre@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          2 hours ago

          You’re upset that made up people in your head called this video a research project or something? Because the closest thing I could find to what you’re complaining about is his YouTube channel’s description where it says “friend of science”.

          He never claimed to be a scientist, doesn’t claim to be doing scientific research. In his own words, he’s just doing some tests on his own car. That’s it.

      • Crampon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        3 hours ago

        So Tesla owners have a monopoly on caring about the process of an experiment?

        A logic conclusion by that is anyone not a Tesla owner is incapable of critical thought?

        How is this a win?

          • Crampon@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            2 hours ago

            I have no doubt the car will crash.

            But I do feel there is something strange about the car disengaging the auto pilot (cruise control) just before the crash. How can the car know it’s crashing while simultaneously not knowing it’s crashing?

            I drive a model 3 myself, and there is so much bad shit about the auto pilot and rain sensors. But I have never experienced, or heard anyone else experiencing a false positive were the car disengage the auto pilot under any conditions the way shown in the video with o sound or visual cue. Considering how bad the sensors on the car is, its strange they’re state of the art every time an accident happens. There is dissonance between the claims.

            Mark shouldn’t have made so many cuts in the upload. He locks the car on 39mph on the video, but crashes at 42mph. He should have kept it clean and honest.

            I want to see more of these experiments in the future. But Marks video is pretty much a commercial for the Lidar manufacturer. And commercials shouldn’t be trusted.

    • Polderviking@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      2 hours ago

      Okay, but what would you like him to elaborate on, other than showing you that the Tesla is fooled by a road runner type mural, fog and dense rain?

      How much more info other than just “car didn’t stop” (where other car did stop) do you need to be convinced this is a problem?

      • riodoro1@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 hour ago

        Did he enable the autopilot? When? What his inputs to the car were? Is if fsd? What car is that?

        You can make every car hit a wall, that is the obvious part, but by claiming (truthfully, I have no doubt) that the car hit it on its own I would like to know what made it do it.

      • Crampon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 hours ago

        I have no doubt the car will crash.

        But I do feel there is something strange about the car disengaging the auto pilot (cruise control) just before the crash. How can the car know it’s crashing while simultaneously not knowing it’s crashing?

        I drive a model 3 myself, and there is so much bad shit about the auto pilot and rain sensors. But I have never experienced, or heard anyone else experiencing a false positive were the car disengage the auto pilot under any conditions the way shown in the video with o sound or visual cue. Considering how bad the sensors on the car is, its strange they’re state of the art every time an accident happens. There is dissonance between the claims.

        Mark shouldn’t have made so many cuts in the upload. He locks the car on 39mph on the video, but crashes at 42mph. He should have kept it clean and honest.

        I want to see more of these experiments in the future. But Marks video is pretty much a commercial for the Lidar manufacturer. And commercials shouldn’t be trusted.

        • riodoro1@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 hour ago

          I want to see more of these experiments in the future. But Marks video is pretty much a commercial for the Lidar manufacturer. And commercials shouldn’t be trusted.

          This. If the video presented more facts and wasn’t paid for by competition it would be trustworthy. Otherwise it’s just clickbait (very effective judging by the fact we’re discussing it).

  • Catoblepas@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    45
    ·
    12 hours ago

    Tesla cars are stupid tech. As the cars that use lidar demonstrated, this is a solved problem. There don’t have to be self driving cars that run over kids. They just refuse to integrate the solution for no discernible reason, which I’m assuming is really just “Elon said so.”

    • Mishmash2000@lemmy.nz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      10 hours ago

      Yeah, it’s infuriating! Elon said something along the lines of Humans drive all the time just using their eyes, so we can replicate that with just cameras. Leaving out the fact that one of the benefits of a self driving system should surely be that it’s in many ways BETTER than humans which are often terrible at driving in fog, torrential rain, low light/night time etc!? It was almost a point of pride that his cars would be every bit as shitty as a human driver to a fault!

      I guess his robots are going to be just as weak and frail as humans and need sick days and simulate getting tired and dropping things too?? I can just imagine one of his robots entering a room and saying What did I come in here for again?? I think I need a nap!?

    • dual_sport_dork 🐧🗡️@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      44
      ·
      12 hours ago

      It’s even worse than that. Not only is it a solved problem, but Tesla had it solved (or closer to solved, anyway) and then intentionally regressed on the technology as a cost cutting measure. All the while making a limp-wristed attempt to spin the removal of key sensor hardware – first the radar and later the ultrasonic proximity sensors – as a “safety” initiative.

      There isn’t a shovel anywhere in the world big enough for that pile of bullshit.

      • rocket_dragon@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        11 hours ago

        “human eyes are like cameras so cameras are sufficient” is definitely a thought that came out of Elon’s brain while deep in a k-hole.