all 69 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 93 points 1 year ago (8 children)

I'm reading the comments about this video, and I think people are missing the point.

It's not about the Telsa running into the kid. It's about the Tesla completely ignoring the FLASHING FUCKING STOP SIGN at the side of the bus, which resulted in it hitting the kid dummy.

This could have been a pedestrian crossing, railroad stop, intersection, etc.

These vehicles aren't "smart" and should not be allowed on the road. Any idiot can have greater awareness than a Tesla.

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 23 points 1 year ago (3 children)
  • [–] 19 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

    Yeah, it might kill the kid, it might not.

    Im still gonna stick to my ford F50000 Fleshreaper (BLOOD FOR THE CAR GOD!™) driven by a good old fashioned human to get the job done.

    Besides, it avoids the whole mess of theological issues about who gets moloch's love.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -8 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Oh, now I get it. Didn‘t know it’s not allowed to pass the bus even when it’s on the other side of the street. In our country we teach the kids to not run across the street when they get out of the bus.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    You might be allowed to pass a stopped school bus if the road has a concrete divider, but if there isn't one of those you are't allowed to pass it in either direction. Kids are stupid and will gladly run into traffic if they see their parent on the other side of it. Also, there isn't really a point in stopping traffic in only one direction, with cars passing on the other side you can't cross the road anyway.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago

    Kids will do stupid things sometimes, no avoiding that. In Germany you can pass a stopped bus on the other side of the road, but if it has its hazards on, you can't go faster than walking speed.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 18 points 1 year ago

    It's fine, they'll fix these issues in time for the robotaxi rollout ten years from now.

    What's that? They're planning on launching the robotaxis at the end of this month? Well then.

  • source
  • [–] 15 points 1 year ago

    That's pretty good, they're fairly small targets.

  • source
  • [–] 14 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    If I worked at Tesla, I would very much be doing a crappy job and slipping bad ideas into what looks like good code. The Lord's work.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
    [–] 13 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Didn’t I just read this like a few weeks ago? But there’s a Jun 15 date in the article. So did this happen again?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 22 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Well there is the problem right there, FSD shouldn't be doing these tests in the first place! How else is Tesla supposed to get their amazing cyber taxi out of it has to follow all these dumb rules?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Pretty normal for a Tesla.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    I'm a school bus driver. This is also totally normal for human-driven vehicles.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    That makes sense, Tesla use real driver data to train the cars. The cars ignore the traffic controls humans ignore, follows the rules humans follow

    They try to fix bad behaviour, but I bet there haven't been enough human driven Teslas illegally passing school buses and having a collision for Tesla to notice that FSD ignores a rule it shouldn't

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] 16 points 1 year ago (1 child)
  • [–] 47 points 1 year ago (21 children)

    Sounds like a typical driver in the US

  • source
  • hideshow 21 child comments
  • [–] 30 points 1 year ago (8 children)
  • [–] 18 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    What the hell is wrong with the author of that article? Jesus christ

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (3 children)
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    It predates ChatGPT so I doubt it. This is organic incompetence

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    The guy who wrote this is an idiot. Vehicles with self driving should always follow the driving law to the letter regardless of what normal human behavior is. Human drivers do an immense amount of stupid shit in cars so imitating them with a computer is extremely dangerous.

    If anything people should have extra safety requirements for self driving cars such as "always 5km/h below speed limit", "2s stop at stop sign" and "slow down to -10km/h below speed limit before an intersection".

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (10 children)

    I'm a school bus driver and this year we finally got the automatic cameras that catch people going past our red flashers and stop signs. My camera has captured about two to three drivers per day doing this. I would have rather had the automatic machine guns but the camera is a fine second choice.

    Edit: the funniest thing I've had happen with the camera so far is one person that came flying past my reds, noticed the lights and stop sign as they were passing me, slammed on their brakes and then backed up past me again while mouthing "I'm so sorry" to me. Yes, they received two tickets for this - and I had nothing to do with it as the cameras are completely automated.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (9 children)

    do they get tickets in the mail?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (8 children)

    Yeah, that's how it works. A lot of people just never pay them, though.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

    That must impact their insurance even if they try to avoid the tickets though?

    Glad you got cameras for your bus!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    Most automated camera tickets for buses, red lights, or speeding only result in municipal fines and no insurance complications. The camera can reliably get the lisence plate but the tech and bureaucracy isn't ready to prove who was driving each car.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    Do people in the US just get away with not paying tickets?

    Over here, if you don't pay fines, it will get escalated until the point of seizure, and if you have nothing else to seize, they will take your car.

    Not paying isn't really an option.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (4 children)

    Apparently, the issue with mail-in tickets specifically is that while the camera can catch the license plate number, it can't really prove who was driving the car. So whereas an in-person ticket from a cop for passing a school bus will result in points on your license, a mail-in ticket from a camera like this won't. The same problem applies to people that just don't pay the mail-in tickets - the state doesn't really know who to go after specifically.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    That's some weird legal loopholes.

    Over here, if you own a car you are responsible for who drives it. So if you get a mail-in ticket, you can either name the driver (and in case of a dispute prove that they were the driver) or you yourself are counted as the driver.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

    Oh, so you're saying your country does something better than my country? Take your xenophobia and stick it where the sun doesn’t shine.

    :D

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    mail-in ticket from a camera like this won’t

    Damn, imagine now if one could put such a camera anywhere and it would

    • either be moved away if below a threshold after a period, e.g. 1 week
    • or stay as long as it pays for itself then when it pays for a 2nd one, that new one would be randomly nearby
  • source
  • parent
  • Great, they've invented Christine.

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago
    [–] 3 points 1 year ago

    That's fine because those were non fascist kids

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    I'll give you my uneducated findings: self driving cars are not ready.

    I doubt they will ever be really ready, they'll eventually be considered "ready enough" no software will always work without flaws. When that software controls a car a minor flaw might mean 20 deaths.

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Isn't Waymo in San Francisco completely self driving? And if their own recently released data is anything to go by, it would seem self driving cars are more ready than manually controlled cars. Because people are absolutely awful at driving.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago

    Waymo cars use much better technology than Tesla.

    Nobody is disputing that a machine that is never distracted and has reaction times down to fractions of a second would make a better driver than even the most skilled human, but Tesla's FSD hardware and software aren't there yet and probably never will be.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    Comparing self driving cars to American driving standards is kinda a moot point because the american safety standards are so low that death and injury is considered the cost of doing business.

    I'd be curious to see how well waymo performs compared to a country with far safer road designs and drivers that are better trained and respect rules of the road more frequently.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago*

    40.000 deaths by traffic accident by year (in the US). Only 20 deaths would be a major improvement. Obviously "cars" is a highly irrational discussion though.

    And it's not just the victims who could be spared their lives, it's also the mental toll on those who kill people on accident. Blaming it on a flaw in the software that can be improved and flaws permanently fixed is great.

    I say let the mechanized reduced slaughter begin!

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

    I’ve seen some comments elsewhere about how it can be trusted.

    Edit; like really straight up trusted. The delusion is unreal.

  • source
  • [+] -15 points 1 year ago (10 children)

    Still safer than a human driver tbh

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    That's shrimply not true. The numbers Tesla releases are heavily cooked.

    Had a quick look around but I didn't manage to find any numbers that weren't either using Tesla'd numbers, or guessing.

    But it's pretty well known that FSD sucks (have been in a car using it .. terrifying af) and that it'll turn itself off before an accident to pass accountability to the driver.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (5 children)

    I love how this keeps getting repeated by everyone everywhere

    it’ll turn itself off before an accident to pass accountability to the driver.

    But both Tesla (5 seconds) and the NHSTA (30 seconds) count any incident where a L2 system was on before the accident as having happened with the system active. So no, they do not use it for that purpose.

    You know that video going around a few weeks ago where some dude with FSD on darted across the rode into a tree? Well, he got the cars data, and it turns out it was disabled due to enough torque on the wheel which is one of the ways you disable it. He probably nudged the wheel too hard by mistake and disabled it, or there was a mechanical failure which disabled it, but the accident counted as FSD in the report he got from Tesla as ON even though it was OFF at the time of the accident when he started going out of his lane.

    So please just stop it with that nonsense.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    I may be buying the foolishness of the masses, but your anecdotes are only as good as mine.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago*

    Which part don't you like?

    I could source the crash report and a video explaining what likely happened, but if you simply don't believe that Tesla truly stands by the 5s rule in their self reported data even with the crash report, then that's another matter entirely.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (2 children)

    what about this one? https://youtu.be/V2u3dcH2VGM

    I don't know anything about self driving, but I can't imagine why it would turn off right before a crash instead of keeping the breaks held

    (also I know the drivers is a total idiot and it's 100% their fault, I just want to know why it turned off)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago*

    My guess is that Automatic Emergency Breaking (AEB) is a separate feature from autopilot.

    AEB is something that is always on and watching even if AP/FSD is off, but it's only intended (originally anyway) to turn on when a crash is imminent to slow forces, not prevent a crash. So my guess is AP fails to detect the cop car as radar couldn't see it, vision finally sees it tries to brake but it's too late, AEB detects a crash is inevitable and kicks in which turns AP off.

    It'd actually be nice if we got a straight answer from Tesla as to why it happens this way. This would have been reported as ON as it was within 5 seconds, and obviously NHSTA was investigating it as ON.

  • source
  • parent
  • 5 comments in c/hackernews@lemmy.bestiver.se view that post
    [–] 33 points 1 year ago

    Here in Austin, both Waymo and Zoox have already hit the streets with very little fanfare and no incidents I'm aware of. Not only is Musk's technology inferior, but even if it worked well, what would make his service any better than the two existing services?

    He has made a serious mistake hyping "robotaxis" as the future of Tesla, because:

    • He has direct competition that's already more successful than his service.
    • Those competitors are funded by Google and Amazon, who have diverse revenue streams and could undercut Tesla until Tesla breaks.
    • He has created impossibly high expectations from investors with a hard cutoff that's next week.
    • He's looking to operate this service in cities, where 90% of people hate him personally.
    • He's dependent on those cities to allow him to operate, and they'll revoke his permits the second there's an incident.
    • Elon has demonstrated himself to be such an awful human being that his vehicles are likely to be subject to vandalism, dramatically increasing his costs.

    I think Tesla is absolutely fucked as a company. If I had the money, I'd short Tesla stock like a motherfucker.

  • source
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago (2 children)
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child)

    I see the problem, the car was in "eat shit, kid" mode, based on how long it took to break.

    That said, most SUV drivers aren't going to see any kids.

    Edit: my point is that most drivers would slow down immediately when seeing children and/or a school bus, or even a city bus that's doing a stop. The fact that the car just did a fast pass in this situation seems it just wanted to Christine some children.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago

    This feels like they're just training them to kill kids now.

  • source