775

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 28 points 18 hours ago

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

[-] BottleOfAlkahest@lemmy.world 3 points 13 hours ago

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

[-] interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml 3 points 12 hours ago

It's an extra 60k.

[-] raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world 20 points 19 hours ago

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....

[-] awholenewworld@leminal.space 1 points 13 hours ago
[-] interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml 4 points 12 hours ago

The government for letting tesla get away with false advertising. They let them do it because they swallowed the hype along with Musk climate saviorism.

[-] KonalaKoala@lemmy.world 22 points 1 day ago

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.

[-] Psythik@lemmy.world 5 points 13 hours ago

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.

[-] Cethin@lemmy.zip 35 points 22 hours ago

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 18 hours ago

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

[-] beanlink@lemmy.world 6 points 21 hours 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 1 day ago

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.

[-] ano_ba_to@sopuli.xyz 2 points 17 hours ago

Air travel is generally safer than driving too, but every accident is studied thoroughly. Self-driving is fine, but anyone trying to implement it should be held to a high standard. Boeing slacked off and they're facing some backlash.

[-] DillyDaily@lemmy.world 5 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago)

This is the thing. Musk and everything his company does in terms of labour and marketing, and just their whole ethos is unethical as fuck, and I can't stand that as a society we are celebrating Tesla.

But self driving cars are not inherently bad or dangerous to persue as a technological advancement.

Self driving cars will kill people, they'll will hit pedestrians and crash into things.

So do cars driven by humans.

Human driven cars kill a lot of people.

Self driving cars need to be safer than human driven cars to even consider letting them on the the road, but we can't truly expect a 0% accident rate on self driving cars in the early days of the technology when we don't expect that of the humanity driven cars.

[-] rsuri@lemmy.world 57 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

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 45 points 1 day ago

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 1 day ago

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.

[-] sue_me_please@awful.systems 16 points 1 day 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 21 points 1 day ago

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.

[-] notacat@lemmy.today 2 points 16 hours ago

My vacuum robot uses lidar. How expensive could it be??

[-] WoodScientist@lemmy.world 16 points 1 day ago

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 7 points 23 hours 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 (7 replies)
[-] finitebanjo@lemmy.world 34 points 1 day ago

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

[-] raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world 2 points 19 hours ago

You got one part wrong. The people fucking around aren't the ones having to do the "finding out" part.

[-] finitebanjo@lemmy.world 2 points 18 hours ago

By refusing to vote in competent regulatory bodies, the ones finding out are a part of the problem with the societal ails. I don't want specific people punished with prejudice, I want a rule of law that holds all people accountable as equals and averts all harm before it can happen.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] FiskFisk33@startrek.website 90 points 1 day ago

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 1 day ago

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.

[-] dev_null@lemmy.ml 3 points 23 hours ago

I sometimes find a small seed in seedless watermelons.

[-] rolling_resistance@lemmy.world 2 points 23 hours ago

It's the same issue, although the seeds are unlikely to harm you.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (11 replies)
[-] breadsmasher@lemmy.world 145 points 1 day ago

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 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

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.

[-] Buddahriffic@lemmy.world 2 points 18 hours ago

Not only that, when we have trouble seeing things, we can adjust our speed to compensate (though tbf, not all human drivers do, but I don't think FSD should be modelled after the worst of human drivers). Does Tesla's FSD go into a "drive slower" mode when it gets less certain about what it sees? Or does its algorithms always treat its best guess with high confidence?

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (16 replies)
[-] Etterra@lemmy.world 62 points 1 day ago

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

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] fluxion@lemmy.world 116 points 1 day ago

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

[-] skyspydude1@lemmy.world 3 points 19 hours ago

This is legitimately one of the real reasons Musk is pushing for Trump so hard. NHTSA (and all the other regulatory agencies) were effectively gutted completely by the Trump admin and it's basically the entire reason Elon could grift his way to where he is today. The moment Biden got into office, basically every single agency in existence began investigating him and pushing blocks out of the proverbial Jenga tower of the various Musk companies. He's praying that Trump will get elected and allow him to keep grifting, because otherwise he's almost definitely going to jail, or at a minimum losing the vast majority of his empire.

[-] lurker8008@lemmy.world 94 points 1 day ago

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 (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 18 Oct 2024
775 points (98.4% liked)

Technology

58774 readers
3152 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