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

Technology

59092 readers
6622 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.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] breadsmasher@lemmy.world 145 points 2 weeks ago (8 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 87 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (2 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.

[–] Buddahriffic@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks 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?

[–] expatriado@lemmy.world 68 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

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

[–] III@lemmy.world 29 points 2 weeks 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.

[–] normanwall@lemmy.world 24 points 2 weeks ago

Honestly though, I'm a fucking idiot and even I can tell that Lidar might be needed for proper, safe FSD

[–] Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works 25 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks 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.

[–] RandomStickman@fedia.io 25 points 2 weeks ago

You'd think "we drive with our eyes, cameras are eyes." is an argument against only using cameras but that do I know.

[–] helenslunch@feddit.nl 19 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

The whole "we drive with our eyes" thing is such bullshit. Humans are terrible drivers. Autonomous driving should be better than humans.

That goes for OpenPilot too. They actually openly advertise that their software makes the same mistakes as humans, as if it's some sort of advancement. Like if I could plug Lidar into my brain, I totally would.

[–] refurbishedrefurbisher@lemmy.sdf.org 15 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

How Can Cameras Be Real If Our Eyes Aren't Real?

[–] flames5123@lemmy.world 10 points 2 weeks ago

The cars used to have RADAR. But they got rid of that and even disabled it on older models when updating because they “only need cameras.”

Cameras and RADAR would have been good enough for most all conditions…

[–] aramis87@fedia.io 8 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

What pisses me off about this is that, in conditions of low visibility, the pedestrian can't even hear the damned thing coming.

[–] SmoothLiquidation@lemmy.world 8 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

I hear electric cars all the time, they are not much quieter than an ice car. We don’t need to strap lawn mowers to our cars in the name of safety.

[–] QuadratureSurfer@lemmy.world 9 points 2 weeks ago

You can hear them, but manufacturers had to add external speakers to electric cars to make them louder.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_vehicle_warning_sounds

[–] 1984@lemmy.today 3 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

I think they are a lot more quiet. I've turned around and seen a car 5 meter away from me, and been surprised. That never happens with fuel cars.

I think if you are young, maybe there isn't a big difference since you have perfect hearing. But middle aged people lose quite a bit of that unfortunately.

[–] idunnololz@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I'm relatively young and it can still be difficult to hear them especially the ones without a fake engine sound. Add some city noise and they can be completely inaudible.

[–] spacesatan@lazysoci.al 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

'city noise' you mean ICE car noise. We should be trying to reduce noise pollution not compete with it.

[–] idunnololz@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago

It's not safe for cars to be totally silent when moving imo since I'd imagine it's more likely to get run over.