People are arguing about autopilot being disabled during the drive, but even if it was, the emergency braking system should tried to do something.
Autopilot literally switched ITSELF off less than half a second from the moment of impact. it didn’t try to stop the car, it just shut itself off so it couldn’t be blamed.
Imagine if someone whipped throwing knives at your back and then tried to argue “but your honor I was not holding any knives at the time of the stabbing”
Fuck Tesla, fuck Elon, fuck every simp who shits excuses out their mouths for him
(I mean, not YOU, you aren’t doing any of those things; I’m just saying, those people. In general.)
It’s like a pilot bailing out of a plane and then claiming he was not responsible for the crash because he was in Vegas at the time the plane crashed.
AP is supposed to disable itself if a fault or abnormality is detected. Pretty much all advanced cruise control systems do this.
I don’t think it’s fair to say the car was hiding evidence of AP being used unless it was intentionally logging the data in shady way. We’d need to see the logs of the car, and there are some roundabout ways for a consumer to pull those. That would probably be an interesting test for someone on YouTube to run.
These systems disable right before a crash because the national traffic safety org in the US requires manufacturers to report if these systems were engaged during an accident.
It is not for safety or because of a malfunction, it’s for marketing. Car companies dont want the features that they sell for 3-8k coming up all the time in crash statistics.
Tesla is the biggest offender here, likely due to vehicles sold, but also due to their camera only system and their aggressively false “full self driving” and “autopilot” marketing that far over promises.
Just saying I’d like to see some more data. I get that Musk is not someone who should be trusted. Especially if it’s around complying with regulators.
That said, I could see that system being disengaged by some intended safety triggers.
At the very least the system should initiate an emergency break when it disengages like that and there is no conflicting human input.
100% agree. My stupid Volvo does that, and it doesn’t have lidar or a million cameras around it.
it’s always been doing this. it’s so that they claim AP wasn’t active during the crash and evade liability
I think elon made sure that it switches off so he doesnt get liability that the autopilot is at fault.
Mark did an interview with Philip Defranco and posted raw footage showing/explaining that Autopilot turned itself off instead of hitting the brakes.
They also did two takes, it did the same thing both times. The first time, they just used a poster instead of a full foam wall. They decided to add the foam for a better visual once they realized it would just happily plow through it.
Finally there’s some argument of Autopilot vs FSD; but both rely on the same cameras and should have at least tried to brake. The LIDAR car braked and it was just using emergency braking, no self driving at all.
It shows they didn’t even watch the video. The only reason Mark used autopilot was because without it the car failed the simplest test.
The test was with a kid being in the middle of the street and Tesla didn’t even stop in time.
It shows they didn’t even watch the video.
Of course they didn’t. Musk fanboys are an echo chamber of morons worshipping a Nazi oligarch. They’re quick to react, and they dismiss evidence and facts if it doesn’t suit their narrative.
I watched some Tesla-sympathetic youtuber for balance and here are the key points brought up:
-
He had a death grip on the wheel (because y’know, he knew he was going to crash). Exerting enough force over time on the steering wheel disables autopilot, because the system assumes you want to manually override what it’s doing.
-
FSD apparently is much more capable, but this Tesla only had the common AutoPilot turned on. Despite having FSD available (Mark apparently claimed he didn’t know he could turn it on without adding a destination)
-
Mark might have some sort of sponsorship deal with the LIDAR company featured in the video, which is why LIDAR was shown in a much better light (e.g it was shown stopping for a dummy behind the water spray, but in reality a LIDAR based system would just brake for the water spray itself)
Now all of those might be true, but you’re also correct in that the emergency braking system should be operational even when AP is disabled. Unless the system malfunctioned (just having a dirty camera is enough). I know my Subaru throws out the adaptive cruise ALL the time. Stupid camera based system. You’d think it’s better off because the cameras are at the top of the windshield, compared to most cars front grille mounted radars, but nah, it just keeps turning off.
Even without the fanboys justifications, what did this test prove that the others didn’t, since it didn’t mimic a real world scenario like the tests where the tesla demolished the kid? I’ve driven through fog and lights and heavy rain, but have yet to encounter an unexpected Wile E Cayote wall in the road.
The absurd test was mostly for the spectacle/views. Sometimes science is doing wacky things because we’re curious to find the limits.
Someone else mentioned a blue truck at the crest of hill was invisible to the system, resulting in a crash. That’s probably the closest to Wile E scenerio you’re going to get.
If nothing else, Mark did say that the company LiDAR supplied the car, but that’s it, they had no say in the test, didn’t give him any money, apparently they did put the video up on their site for a bit, but took it down either because it looked bad given the backlash, or because Mark told them to take it down as it did go against their agreement.
Of course he could have lied about the spo sponsorship, but he said he’s fine with a lawsuit, so that would be a bold strategy.
-
Why would it? It sees a road in front of itself, the whole car is built + programmed to go by what it sees, as an image.
The car is doing exactly what it is built to do. It just so happens that “safety of road traffic” is not among the things it is built for, and explicitly so.
I think it’s a good example of how vastly over hyped a lot of AI stuff is though. Any person could tell that that was a wall from hundreds of feet away. You can even tell in the video and it would be more obvious in real life with actual depth perception.
The entire problem with AI are corner cases. This is just taking that corner case to an absurd level. But it’s not much different than the real world case of a Tesla vehicle getting confused on a highway if a billboard ad has a stop sign on it.
on a tesla, no way.
I love that they had pre-cut the styrofoam wall in a cartoony hole shape because they knew it was going to happen.
From following video with raw footage they initially used a poster, but seeing that Tesla would just plow through it they built the styrofoam wall for a better effect.
With the visual there’s no way it would not have. It’s not hard to foresee.
They also didn’t need to put an actually wall behind the photo and destroy the Tesla, but why not?
Pretty sure that tesla is in fine condition. It’s styrofoam, odds are the car didn’t even get a scratch.
Of course, if the styrofoam was even mildly damp, the Tesla will be rusting now. 😅
How would the photo stand up without some kind of wall?
Looks like they have some kind of lines under tension, possibly staked into the ground. Could be done without a wall. But a wall would make it easier.
You know, with how distracted your average Tesla driver is, I’m pretty sure this would trick them even with them “driving” with AP on.
You mean without AP on?
I mean clearly it makes no difference but yeah, lol
ACME electric car.
Pyrotechnics included.
FSD was promised but never delivered because they need lidar for rain/snow/etc weather.
The FSD promise was mostly just market manipulation. Sure they might actually get it done at some point. But the time line they proposed was just a scam. And it worked seeing the market cap.
My old m3 has lidarr, but the fucker shut it off because he’s an epic nazi fucker.
i was confused that you meant a BMW M3. I owned one for a few years. I guess less common than Model 3’s
And people are pissy about it. Tesla sucks. Grow up
It’s weird, an optical sensor should fall for this, but LiDAR detects objects in 3D.
Teslas famously don’t use lidar because Musk declared that cameras were good enough. Reality disagrees, but reality owns no shares of Tesla.
Musk declared that cameras were good enough
And then disabled existing lidar sensors in teslas, so his team could just focus on camera vision only
He’s a dumbass
I believe he disabled radar, I’m not sure tesla ever had lidar. Radar would solve this problem anyway.
A decent camera only vision system should still be able to detect the wall. I was actually shocked at the fact that Tesla failed this test so egregiously.
If you use two side by side cameras you can determine distance to a feature by calculating the offset in position of the feature between the two camera images. I had always assumed this was how Tesla planned to achieve camera only FSD, but that would make too much sense.
https://www.intelrealsense.com/stereo-depth-vision-basics/
Even if they wanted to avoid any redundant hardware and only go with one camera for each direction, there is still a chance they could’ve avoided this kind of issue if they used structure through motion, but that’s much harder to do if the objects could be moving.
I used to bullseye womp rats in my T-16 back home, they’re not much bigger than 2 meters.
AP aside, worst car manufacturer.
I mean, I get the purpose of the test but I’m pretty sure a human would crash too.
The other self-driving car didn’t though
Humans with two working eyes can tell the difference between a flat painted surface and a 3D world. Humans with only one eye might crash, though.
I doubt someone without depth perception would crash either. They’d notice the straps on the side, and things not being the exact colour shade. Might think it was a big piece of glass set up on the road, but that wouldn’t be something you’d just plow through.
Results may vary depending on the alcohol currently running in the human blood.
One of the things I am advocate for self driving cars is that they cannot get drunk and drive.
Edit: aaah yes, Lemmy, downvoted per telling that people drink and drive. Classic Lemmy.
This is on bar with the comment that was something on the lines of “yes Tesla is bad and crashes but humans can be on their phone and crash too so why criticize self-driving cars?” Nice whataboutism.
This is a response to a comment that said that a human being would drive better to specify that it’s being vastly proven that that is not the truth.
But, once again, we are in Lemmy. So New Technology = bad.
Great, a computerized car gets tricked by things that innebriated humans might also get tricked by.
That’s quite the bar being set.
Drunk humans get tricked by things that computerized cars does not, though.
But by the state of the current butlerian yihad anything technologically advanced is to be criticized and destroyed, even if it saves lives.
technologically advanced
Err… sir this is about Teslas, not about technologically advanced self-driving cars.
Most people have exactly the same opinion about any self-driving car. Even those using lidar.
Lemmy has a high anti technology bias.
then you don’t get the purpose of this test
Not defending Tesla or anything but let’s not pretend like the majority of people on the road looking at their phone would not have done the exact same thing
Someone should make looking at your phone while driving illegal. Maybe even slap it with a catchy name like “distracted driving” and make the issue a whole big deal.
Maybe they should be a responsible driver and look at the road instead or better yet take public transit.
Would be nice, but i live in reality unfortunately
Tell me you are twelve without telling me you are twelve.
