this post was submitted on 18 Oct 2024
783 points (98.4% liked)

Technology

58799 readers
3877 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

The U.S. government’s road safety agency is again investigating Tesla’s “Full Self-Driving” system, this time after getting reports of crashes in low-visibility conditions, including one that killed a pedestrian.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration says in documents that it opened the probe on Thursday with the company reporting four crashes after Teslas entered areas of low visibility, including sun glare, fog and airborne dust.

In addition to the pedestrian’s death, another crash involved an injury, the agency said.

Investigators will look into the ability of “Full Self-Driving” to “detect and respond appropriately to reduced roadway visibility conditions, and if so, the contributing circumstances for these crashes.”

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] billwashere@lemmy.world 32 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Makes you wonder if removing the lidar and using fucking cameras isn’t part of the problem… cheap bastards.

[–] BottleOfAlkahest@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Was that cause of the cost? Didnt Elon come out claiming lidar was a "crutch" or something?

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 1 points 23 hours ago

Well he said all sorts to try and justify it but really it was a cost-cutting exercise, of course it was a cost cutting exercise, why else would they do it?

Anyway that explanation doesn't make sense, if using lidar was a crutch then surely that's a good solution right. It's a bit like going, no you shouldn't use wings on your aircraft that's a crutch, you should be using the antigravity tech that we don't have yet.

In the long run there probably are going to be better solutions (that's how civilizations advance), but those better solutions don't exist yet, so... maybe we should use what we have.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world 24 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Charge the stupid fuck Tesla chain of decision making with murder. This bullshit "self driving" advertising is premeditated, that's no longer manslaughter.

And charge the driver(s) with manslaughter under aggravating circumstances.

But oh no, muh profts, hurr-durrr....

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 1 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

Wouldn't it be death by negligence rather than pre-meditated murder. After all I don't think anyone at Tesla actually wanted this particular person to die, they just didn't really care to take any action to prevent it.

[–] raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world 1 points 21 hours ago

"I aimed my rifle at that person's head and pulled the trigger, but I swear I didn't want them to die"

Tesla should be broken up and reassembled with zero overlap in management.

And yes, legally it won't stick, but the shitty south african oligarch should absolutely be tried for murder.

[–] rsuri@lemmy.world 60 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (6 children)

Musk has said that humans drive with only eyesight, so cars should be able to drive with just cameras.

This of course assumes 1) that cameras are just as good as eyes (they're not) and 2) that the processing of visual data that the human brain does can be replicated by a machine, which seems highly dubious given that we only partially understand how humans process visual data to make decisions.

Finally, it assumes that the current rate of human-caused crashes is acceptable. Which it isn't. We tolerate crashes because we can't improve people without unrealistic expense. In an automated system, if a bit of additional hardware can significantly reduce crashes it's irrational not to do it.

[–] SkyeStarfall@lemmy.blahaj.zone 46 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Also, on a final note...

Why the fuck would you limit yourself to only human senses when you have the capability to add more of any sense you want??

If you have the option to add something that humans don't have, why wouldn't you? As an example, humans don't have gps either, but it's very useful to have in a car

[–] xthexder@l.sw0.com 28 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Unfortunately the answer to that is: Elon's cheap and Radar is expensive. Not so expensive that you can't get it in a base model Civic though, which just makes it that much more absurd.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 1 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago)

Lidar isn't that expensive, it's more expensive than the cameras but it's probably more useful than the cameras so perhaps you could install less cameras and more Lidar. Also the cost will go down as production rates go up, currently it's high price has a lot to do with its limited applications and thus limited customer base. The more cars that have lidar, the more customers there will be, and the less each individual unit will cost.

[–] sue_me_please@awful.systems 16 points 3 days ago

Because a global pandemic broke your sensor supply chain and you still want to sell cars with FSD anyway, so cameras-only it is!

[–] blady_blah@lemmy.world 22 points 3 days ago (3 children)

This is directly a result of Elon's edict that Tesla cars don't use lidar. If you aren't aware Elon set that as a requirement at the beginning of Tesla's self driving project because he didn't want to spend the money on lidar for all Tesla cars.

His "first principles" logic is that humans don't use lidar therefore self driving should be able to be accomplished without (expensive) enhanced vision tools. While this statement has some modicum of truth, it's obviously going to trade off safely in situations where vision is compromised. Think fog or sunlight shining in your cameras / eyes or a person running across the street at night wearing all black. There are obvious scenarios where lidar is a massive safety advantage, but Elon made a decision for $$ to not have that. This sounds like a direct and obvious outcome of that edict.

[–] WoodScientist@lemmy.world 16 points 3 days ago (1 children)

His “first principles” logic is that humans don’t use lidar therefore self driving should be able to be accomplished without (expensive) enhanced vision tools.

This kind of idiocy is why people tried to build airplanes with flapping wings. Way too many people thought that the best way to create a plane was to just copy what nature did with birds. Nature showed it was possible, so just copy nature.

[–] Schadrach@lemmy.sdf.org 8 points 2 days ago

To be fair, we achieved flight by copying nature. Once we realized the important part was the shape of a wing more than the flapping.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Moah@lemmy.blahaj.zone 18 points 3 days ago (3 children)

Humans move with only feet so cars should be limited to using feet. And only 2 of them.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] breadsmasher@lemmy.world 146 points 3 days ago (15 children)

Eyes can’t see in low visibility.

musk “we drive with our eyes, cameras are eyes. we dont need LiDAR”

FSD kills someone because of low visibility just like with eyes

musk reaction -

[–] conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works 86 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (6 children)

It's worse than that, though. Our eyes are significantly better than cameras (with some exceptions at the high end) at adapting to varied lighting conditions than cameras are. Especially rapid changes.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] expatriado@lemmy.world 69 points 3 days ago (2 children)

if he was truthful: "the cost of adding lidar cuts in my profits"

[–] III@lemmy.world 29 points 3 days ago

Correction - Older Teslas had lidar, Musk demanded they be removed because they cut into his profits. Not a huge difference but it does show how much of a shitbag he is.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works 26 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

He really is a fucking idiot. But so few people can actually call him out... So he just never gets put in his place.

Imagine your life with unlimited redos. That's how he lives.

load more comments (12 replies)
[–] fluxion@lemmy.world 116 points 3 days ago (3 children)

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is now definitely on Musk's list of departments to cut if Trump makes him a high-ranking swamp monster

[–] lurker8008@lemmy.world 94 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Why do you think musk dumping so much cash to boost Trump? The plan all along is to get kickbacks like stopping investigation, lawsuits, and regulations against him. Plus subsidies.

Rich assholes don't spend money without expectation of ROI

He knows Democrats will crack down on shady practices so Trump is his best bet.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] FiskFisk33@startrek.website 90 points 3 days ago (11 children)

Tesla, which has repeatedly said the system cannot drive itself and human drivers must be ready to intervene at all times.

how is it legal to label this "full self driving" ?

[–] kiku@feddit.org 17 points 3 days ago (4 children)

If customers can't assume that boneless wings don't have bones in them, then they shouldn't assume that Full Self Driving can self-drive the car.

The courts made it clear that words don't matter, and that the company can't be liable for you assuming that words have meaning.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] ChaoticEntropy@feddit.uk 26 points 3 days ago (1 children)

"I freely admit that the refreshing sparkling water I sell is poisonous and should not be consumed."

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[–] Etterra@lemmy.world 62 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Tesla: Why would we need lidar? Just use visual cameras.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world 34 points 3 days ago (4 children)

Really fucking stupid that we as a society intentionally choose to fuck around and find out rather than find out before we fuck around.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] KonalaKoala@lemmy.world 22 points 3 days ago (3 children)

Every time I hear something about pedestrian being killed by something self-driving, it begins to irk me as to why are we pushing for such and such technology.

[–] Cethin@lemmy.zip 36 points 2 days ago (11 children)

The bad news is people hitting and killing pedestrians is so common you don't hear about it. Fuck Musk and all that, but some number of people are always going to get killed. Even the FSD system that was as close to perfect as possible would still occasionally kill someone in large enough numbers, because there's too many variables to account for. If the numbers are lower than a human driving, it's a positive.

We should be trying to move away from cars though ideally. Fuck electric cars, FSD cars, and all other cars. A bus, train, bike, or whatever else would be safer and better for the environment.

[–] fne8w2ah@lemmy.world 8 points 2 days ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Public transport is the way to go, just need to break the cycle of six decades of automobile addiction.

[–] beanlink@lemmy.world 6 points 2 days ago

Lets install adaptive headlights to stop blinding people or allowing manufacturers to install chrome accents on the rear of a vehicle to again stop blinding people or even just maybe make a smaller truck that isn't lifting ego and instead actual building materials.

NHSTA:

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] PeroBasta@lemmy.world 21 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Because it is generally proven to save lifes. You'll never hear of "thanks for the auto-brake system no one got injured and everything was boring as usual" but it happened a lot (also to me in first person).

I don't like Musk but in general its a good thing to push self driving cars IMO. I drive 2 hours per day and the amount of time where I see retarded people doing retarded stuff at the wheel is crazy.

[–] KonalaKoala@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

No, it is not generally proven to save lives, you are listening to lies somewhere. Its not a good thing to push self-driving cars and Musk is the one being retarded. Plus he supports Trump and not Harris.

[–] PeroBasta@lemmy.world 1 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

The technology behind it is proven to save lifes. The reaction time of a full brake to stop a car crash i had the "luck" of experiencing on a Volkswagen was outstanding.

Same thing for the lane assist function if you are sleepy

[–] KonalaKoala@lemmy.world 1 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

Same thing for the lane assist function if you are sleepy

If you are sleepy behind the wheel, you need to pull over, get off the road, and take a rest.

[–] PeroBasta@lemmy.world 1 points 19 minutes ago

Thanks mom. I brought cases to prove my point I'm not saying you should go on a road trip while sleepy.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Psythik@lemmy.world 6 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Because self-driving cars are safer than human drivers, when implemented properly. A proper one is absolutely loaded with sensors, radar, laser, sonar; not just some cameras like Tesla's system.

If you ever get the chance to, hop in a Waymo and you'll become a believer too (currently available only in Cali and AZ). These little robotaxis see everything at all times, not just what's in front of them like humans. I trust them more than I'd trust any human driver. They can avoid accidents that you and I would never see coming. Witnessed this first-hand.

[–] KonalaKoala@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

There is no proof they are safe, and we should stop trying to replace people.

[–] Psythik@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Again, ride in one yourself when you get the chance and I promise you you'll change your mind immediately.

[–] KonalaKoala@lemmy.world 1 points 13 hours ago

Again, not only no valid proof they are safe, but they are being used to put people out of work like Taxi and Uber drivers.

[–] jlh@lemmy.jlh.name 61 points 3 days ago (10 children)

Humans know to drive more carefully in low visibility, and/or to take actions to improve visibility. Muskboxes don't.

[–] hannesh93@feddit.org 48 points 3 days ago (1 children)

They also decided to only use cameras and visual clues for driving instead of using radar, heat cameras or something like that as well.

It's designed to be launched asap, not to be safe

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[–] KingThrillgore@lemmy.ml 33 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Full Self Driving shipping ~~2025~~ ~~2026~~ ~~2027~~ ~~3098~~ ~~4484~~ 1e+156

                       ^

                   You are here
load more comments
view more: next ›