35 ms·
Ford Mustang Mach-E using BlueCruise at time of crash: NTSB
- LASR 3y agoI own a model 3 with FSD. One of the key realizations I had after a few months with it is that self-driving at the moment is like supervising a newbie teenager driving. You have to stay alert and watchful, but also don’t have the direct control. When you are teaching a new driver it’s worth it. Honestly, it’s a lot less work to just do it yourself. This is one of those engineering situations where the 0.0001% edge cases matter, and could lead to fatalities. I don’t know if any of the implementations are up to the mark. FSD isn’t.
- mhh__ 3y agoWith an LLM in there (if that even) one wonders if each software version deployed to a driveless / level [can't remember] car should literally have to pass a driving test. I say this because in line with what you say about teenagers is that the driving test is about being safe-enough to not kill someone, not being a good driver.
- al_borland 3y agoEven with normal cruise control and adaptive cruise control, when there is a lot of traffic, it’s easier to turn it off and take control. All these features seem great when no one else is on the road, to give the driver a bit of a rolling break, but that’s about it.
- renewiltord 3y agoThat's funny, I only ever use adaptive cruise when I'm in a lot of traffic on the highway. At slow speeds it's not going to do anything and I'm pretty much just going to follow the car in front at low speed. I use lane keeping the rest of the time and it really reduces fatigue.
- ajross 3y agoYeah, there is a lot of variation in interpretation here. I'm farther along the spectrum still: I'm on FSD essentially 100% of the time in highway environments now because I absolutely trust the car's attentiveness and precision more than my own. Think back on how many times you've started a lane change and aborted because there was a car there, how many times you've looked down to navigate and hit the rumble strip, how many times you've had to rely on ABS to avoid hitting the car you didn't notice stopping in front of you, etc... Not once in almost three years and 40k miles in my Model Y has it done something like this. That's not to say it's never going to, but 100%, for sure, it's better than I am.
- danielheath 3y agoJesus Christ. If _any_ of those things happen to you regularly, please do something about changing that before you kill someone.
- ajross 3y agoThere are two kinds of drivers: drivers who know they're fallible, and fallible drivers who don't. Maybe you're an outlier who doesn't make these mistakes, and if so I applaud your skill. But most likely you're just like the rest of us, and have the added handicap of self-censoring your mistakes as "someone else's fault". Data filtering is a hell of a drug, as it were.
- toasterlovin 3y agoI’ve had ABS activate like twice in my entire life. Agree with the person you’re responding to: if ABS activates regularly when you’re driving then you may not be a safe driver.
- cdchn 3y agoI think for this person FSD might actually be an improvement.
- kelnos 3y agoI love my adaptive cruise during traffic; frankly I think that's where it provides the most value. Stop-and-go is the most annoying thing. Having the car do it for me is fantastic.
- causality0 3y agoYeah I don't understand it either. They're features that seemed aimed directly at one customer: the guy who is already watching YouTube and texting while going down the interstate and just keeping a vague idea of where the lines and cars are.
- Krasnol 3y agoI never drove one of these, but I always wonder if we're already past the "way too old person behind the wheel"-point where I rather see those people in a car driven by a computer than having them in control. It becomes quite a discussion if a really horrible ancient happens here in Germany, but since this population group loves to go voting and Germany is a car nation, it dies down pretty fast when the topic of mandatory tests for elderly people come up. It's the same problem with those who just got the license, of course, too.
- MBCook 3y agoI have a Mach E and have used Blue Cruise. That’s not how I would put it. I don’t feel unsafe with it. It doesn’t feel like a new driver at all, I trust it to do its job. I haven’t used FSD but from what I’ve heard it sounds less trustworthy to me (mostly because it tries to do more in more situations, BC is very tightly controlled). But its job is to stay in the lane and keep a good speed even in traffic. When using BC your job just like less advanced lane centering + cruise control: maintain situational awareness for what’s comping up + what other cars are doing. Additionally I keep my hands on the wheel anyway to take over when needed even though BC is hands free. I do find it a benefit. But it’s “just” a lane keep + radar CC system that’s a bit more advanced. Just like every single other system on the market you can’t take your eyes off the road. Ford enforces it. If it was still active they couldn’t have been looking away for too long.
- 38 3y agomach e slammed into a stopped car at full speed, killing the driver of the stopped car. if that doesn't give you pause I dont know what will.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- mitchell209 3y agoIt annoyingly hugs the right side of the lane for some reason, especially when you're activating BC. Once it goes far enough right it works well. There's a few spots on my 20 minute commute that it likes to disengage because they repainted lines and did a shitty job but that isn't strictly the car's fault.
- MBCook 3y agoMy car does that too, BC 1.0. Newer versions, 1.2 and up, are supposed to be far better. Even moving over a bit in the lane when next to a big truck. That may be 1.3. Everyone will be getting upgraded to 1.4. We’re just waiting for the OTA update. It’s overdue, but anyone who had followed BC so far knows that’s just par for the course. History for those unfamiliar: the Mach E was shipped before BlueCruise was ready. It took 9 months or so before there was an update available at the dealer for it. Eventually newer cars cane with 1.2. Older cars were promised 1.2 but for various reasons it got delayed and a recall issue took priority. Then they released 1.3 on new deliveries, and the promise became everyone gets 1.3. That got delayed a bit and they were ahead on 1.4 so Ford decided to just move everyone to 1.4 as it was done early. But they hit problems on the rollout beta test for existing vehicles. Between that and seeming to give priority to the recent updates to work with Tesla superchargers, 1.4 missed the promised date of Q1. It’ll come. And it’s supposed to be a very big improvement over 1.0 from those who have tested it. But Mach E owners who follow the forums know not reliable Ford software update dates are.
- grecy 3y ago> I don’t know if any of the implementations are up to the mark. FSD isn’t. It is very clearly called "Beta" software. You can agree or disagree if Tesla should be allowed to put that out there, but I don't think it should come as any surprise that software labelled as beta is not 100% flawless.
- MBCook 3y agoGmail was labeled “beta” for like 15 years. It doesn’t mean anything. And if it did, so what? You’re dealing with people’s lives. No one will care what Greek letter they used to describe it.
- grecy 3y agoSo get angry at the regulators, they are allowing it.
- eropple 3y agoIt is, in fact, possible to have an ill opinion of multiple bad actors in a system. "Don't hate the player, hate the game" elides the choice to not play.
- MBCook 3y agoI am. I don’t think ADAS system should just be able to be blindly unleashed on the roads without some sort of standard testing for minimum safety/non dangerousness. But above I was just arguing slapping a word on the end doesn’t release you from responsibility.
- FireBeyond 3y agoListening to you, any flaws or incidents involving FSD are anyone's fault but Tesla's. People who don't understand 'beta', regulators, and so on. Mind you, that's Tesla's belief too.
- teddyfrozevelt 3y agoTesla does not label it as beta anymore. https://insideevs.com/news/714524/tesla-fsd-beta-supervised-name/ https://insideevs.com/news/714524/tesla-fsd-beta-supervised-...
- ximeng 3y agoThe latest version 12 FSD beta seems significantly better, to the extent that experience with previous versions is less relevant. There's no real reason to expect these systems to get worse, they'll only improve. Today's videos versus those of even just a year or two ago shows huge progress. Not better than doing yourself today in general, but it will be in more and more situations. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpoXr_z_6a4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpoXr_z_6a4 is illustrative of the current level of ability. A good example where the self-driving compares favorably with poor human driving is at 10:15 in the video. There are some pretty major gaps (for example, limited ability to reverse and read signs), but I wouldn't bet on them not being resolved in the next five years.
- kid64 3y ago[flagged]
- wlesieutre 3y agoWill they only improve? Or will they get better at most things while old previously handled edge cases sneak back in without warning? There are so many situations that it needs to handle 100% correctly.
- zaptrem 3y agoIirc Tesla has a giant internal validation sets of edge-case-related disengagements they test against using a simulator whenever they’re gonna deploy a new version.
- wlesieutre 3y agoThat’s good to hear. It’s a huge problem space, and seems like it’d be rather difficult to test completely.
- NegativeK 3y agoI've tried FSD a handful of times during this month's beta and, while it's way better than when I tried it for a month a while back, it's at the point where I can very much see why the NTSB/etc are concerned about people trusting it too much. It's generally really impressive and then suddenly very wrong. As in, it navigated a four-way stop with a in the crosswalk flawlessly. And then, later, it was lining up for a left turn into a parking lot and decided that the oncoming truck wasn't relevant, so it spun the steering wheel very quickly and lurched forward until I mashed the brake. I'm very hopeful that we can replace the mistake-prone meatbags that drive cars now, but I'm incredibly concerned with people on other forums saying that they trust it completely.
- phkahler 3y ago>> I don’t know if any of the implementations are up to the mark. FSD isn’t. Having talked to engineers in the industry over the years, I feel confident to say they are not. It's a problem where the base functionality - following a well marked lane - is actually f-ing easy, but every nonideality beyond that gets harder and harder. So people look at the base case and get all impressed. It really takes AGI to do properly. Management looks at each failure as if "just one more fix" is all they need.
- buildbot 3y agoI went to a conference focused on self driving cars back in 2019 - even back then, the best talk was from some professor in Florid, who's main point was that you probably don't have an alligator crossing the road in your training data. The point being, you really, really, actually do need nearly an AGI to drive safely. The entire world is out there!
- BuckRogers 3y agoThis is why I consider adaptive cruise to be close enough to FSD. Steadying the wheel is the easy part, I just want the speed taken care of as that’s the stressful part for me. That said I’ve only had rentals. I drive a 2005 Tacona that doesn’t even have cruise control.
- mlsu 3y agoThe CRV was stopped with hazards and lights off, at night, in the center lane of a 10 lane freeway. Certainly a human driver could have easily made this mistake.
- JumpCrisscross 3y agoAnd it was occluded by the driver in front, given "she was able to change lanes and avoid hitting the Honda." (Friendly reminder to always have safety triangles, e.g. [1], in your car.) [1] https://www.mcmaster.com/products/traffic-warning-triangles/ https://www.mcmaster.com/products/traffic-warning-triangles/
- alright2565 3y ago(but maybe don't try and deploy them when you're stopped in the middle of a 5-lane highway with your lights off)
- cdchn 3y agoDarn if only there was some easy to reach button for the driver to deploy flashing lights to notify other drivers of the potential hazard.
- dboreham 3y agoLess so a machine with radar. Oh wait...
- TaylorAlexander 3y agoPerhaps true, though I suspect the public will demand higher safety than humans to feel comfortable with these on the roads, even if such fears could be irrational.
- JumpCrisscross 3y ago> I suspect the public will demand higher safety than humans to feel comfortable with these on the roads Hasn't this ship sailed? The people angry about self-driving cars aren't other drivers. They're people upset about displaced taxi jobs.
- JumpCrisscross 3y agoThis is great! We're starting to treat car crashes like plane crashes [1]. [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/31/health/31safe.html https://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/31/health/31safe.html
- saulrh 3y agoNow we just need people to treat car crashes like plane crashes even when humans are driving. Unfortunately, given that that would result in dozens to hundreds of fatality accident investigations a day, this is likely impossible. It's like self-driving cars suddenly sidestepped a hundred years of normalized deviance and everyone is finally, suddenly realizing that cars are fundamentally, spectacularly, and unrelentingly lethal.
- Free-is-Freedom 3y ago[flagged]
- CSMastermind 3y agoBicyclists make up nearly 15% of annual average highway fatalities. An easy solution if you care about public safety is to ban cyclists.
- bobbylarrybobby 3y agoKilling is different from being killed.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- adriancr 3y agoA car stopped on the highway with no warning lights or anything in center lane, at night... I'm not sure I'd be able to spot and react in time, this is what I would expect radar and other sensors on car to pick up and break on... those also failed...
- pants2 3y agoEspecially on Texas highways where speed limits exceed 80mph, you'd have to be very alert and likely have to swerve over into the next lane (like the other driver did). At 80mph, the stopping distance of an average car is around 300 feet once the brake is fully engaged. That exceeds most car radar systems. And with no warning lights the camera won't do much good either.
- _dark_matter_ 3y agoThis seems insane, are you telling me that these cars will travel at a speed whose distance is longer than the radar can detect? That is _guaranteeing_ crashes.
- JumpCrisscross 3y ago> are you telling me that these cars will travel at a speed whose distance is longer than the radar can detect? "Low beams or dipped lights should shine about 150 to 200 feet ahead, while high beams or brights should shine about 350 to 400 feet ahead" [1]. Would it be customary for someone on that highway to have their high beams engaged? [1] https://autoily.com/how-far-should-headlights-shine/ https://autoily.com/how-far-should-headlights-shine/
- toast0 3y agoHigh beams are really for rural roads with very little traffic. If there are at least three lanes of traffic in one direction[1] and enough traffic that a car in front was able to see the collision in their rear view mirror, high beams are not advised. Using them in this situation will cause major glare from mirrors of the drivers in front, and possibly for the drivers in the opposing direction. [1] as indicated by the stopped vehicle being reported in the center lane
- usaphp 3y ago> According to the NTSB, a witness had come across the stopped CR-V prior to the collision and noted that neither its taillights or hazard lights were illuminated I’m shocked by how many people drive at night with daylight running lights in US, they seem to be completely oblivious of that, even when I stop next to them at a traffic light and try to tell them - they fail to understand that daylight lights don’t have a rear light
- LASR 3y agoDo you mean without DRL?
- modeless 3y agoNo, he means what he said. You shouldn't drive at night with only daytime running lights. You need to turn the headlights on because they are brighter but more importantly because that turns on the taillights too.
- ChrisMarshallNY 3y agoI leave my headlights set to "auto." Since I have a cheap-ass subie, they work well. Quite binary, and no frou-frou. I understand that more expensive "smart" headlights are problematic; especially at dawn or dusk.
- mkl 3y agoIME it's not people with their lights on auto that are the problem, it's people who just haven't turned their lights on. Around dusk it may be that it was light when they started driving, and they haven't been paying attention. When I'm driving I can occasionally communicate the problem successfully by flashing my lights, but I'm usually on a bike, and it's almost impossible to get it across visually or audibly, and so they stay dangerous.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- gravescale 3y agoI am so glad that I am not involved with self driving systems (except as a squishy object on the same road). The systems are so incredibly complicated and convoluted that I just cannot see how they could ever be assumed safe. I've worked on (relatively) large legacy hairball embedded systems where you don't have confidence in the behaviour determinism and it was deeply discomfiting even when the highest price of being wrong was broken hardware or ruining a production run and having the customer give a support engineer an earful. I can't imagine the stress of having to deal with a much larger, more complex system that ends up in an open, public, uncontrolled environment where the price of a mistake is smearing a once-living human into paste. I'm also intrigued by how these systems are tested. Presumably, as well as unit testing everything to death, you use some kind of integration test where you replay scenarios and check outcomes, and/or some stochastic generated scenarios. This must take a lot of time and resources. As a shower thought, wouldn't it be interesting if you could get a virtual car model of a public-road self driving car and be able to play scenarios at it at will to allow external testing.
- metaphor 3y ago> According to the NTSB, a witness had come across the stopped CR-V prior to the collision and noted that neither its taillights or hazard lights were illuminated, She was able to change lanes and avoid hitting the Honda, but after she passed it, she saw the Mach-E strike the stopped crossover in her rearview mirror. This scenario sounds like what I refer to as a "peek-a-boo rear ending". You see it exaggerated in movies with high speed chase scenes, but its real world equivalent is a very common road going scenario and almost certainly leads to a collision if at 45+ mph and the rear car driver isn't maintaining situational awareness of traffic flow several cars ahead...a scenario that aggressive tailgaters simply don't take into account in their public behavioral risk calculus, and clearly BlueCruise isn't capable of handling either.
- dtjb 3y agoI would've thought a stopped vehicle without any visible lights would be much easier to detect with a lidar/sensor based system vs human reaction. Do these platforms like BlueDrive and FSD not constantly survey the distance of objects in front of and around you? Or do they still rely on visuals like tail lights?
- mkl 3y agoThe problem is the stopped car was hidden by the moving car that avoided it successfully. Only when that car swerved to avoid the stopped one did the BlueCruise car have line-of-sight to the stopped one. There was no visual at all, and no lidar, but possibly some indirect radar.
- MBCook 3y agoAnd radar generally ignores all stopped objects because there are too many false returns. It’s really only useful for objects traveling at some speed. If the CRV had been going even 5 miles an hour it maybe it would’ve been detected. Every radar system has this issue. It’s basically the same thing that caused that Tesla to run into the side of a semi so many years ago. The semi was stationary (relative to the road direction) so if the radar saw it probably ignored it. I’ve never heard of a system that uses the cameras. Except Tesla since they removed the radar I guess. No one else seems to.
- 762236 3y agoFord should have acquired Ghost Autonomy.
- dangus 3y agoBlueCruise or not, the fact that our society accepts the number of highway fatalities that we do while underinvesting in obvious rail corridor and public transit opportunities is saddening. The amount of yearly daily car crash fatalities would be like if 20 fully loaded commercial airliners crash every day. We would never just sit back and accept that in the world of commercial aviation. Philadelphia and San Antonio are two very large cities where many daily car trips could be eliminated (this does not mean I'm telling people to sell their cars and walk everywhere) with even a moderateley conservative amount of public transit investment.
- ghhdghgd 3y ago[flagged]
- MBCook 3y agoIs this the first publicized crash of a hands-free system in a non-Tesla consumer vehicle? I’m not counting the Cruze autonomous one, it wasn’t a consumer. For what it’s worth I own a Mach E and have used BC. I like it but it’s just L2.
- sevensevennine 3y agoWhen I'm using BlueCruise, I can't look at a sign beside the road without beeping warning me to keep my eyes on the road. There are few roads where BlueCruise even remains active for long without reverting to "hands-free" mode, so that if my hands aren't positioned properly on the wheel, or if my hands even rest too passively on the wheel during turns, there's an alarm. I honestly don't know how people lose track of the road using BlueCruise. Wearing glasses with eyes painted on them, with rubber hands hooked onto the wheel?
- MBCook 3y agoI’ve got the same question because of the eye monitoring. The best I can think of is that they looked away at just the wrong time and it hadn’t quite timed out yet. Which means it was incredibly inopportune. Or, they actually were looking ahead, but lost in thought or something and not paying attention. You can’t do the “fall asleep in the front seat” thing that you could in Teslas when Autopilot first came out.
- droopyEyelids 3y agoThe eye tracking with blue cruise is really strict. It made me realize how much I took my eyes off the road before I had it. Even my 'glances' at the instrument panel often exceeded the warning threshold.
- testfrequency 3y agoAs expected, half of these comments are victim blaming and trying to validate that this isn’t BlueCruise’s fault…and any human would have done the same. At the same time, everyone keeps ignoring the fact that a car, moments before, drove around the vehicle safely. So many Tesla haters here with vindictive mentalities
- KennyBlanken 3y agoI think the Tesla hate is well deserved given that it turns out Teslas apparently disable autopilot right before a crash so the car isn't "technically" in autopilot when the crash happens. https://www.motortrend.com/news/nhtsa-tesla-autopilot-investigation-shutoff-crash/ https://www.motortrend.com/news/nhtsa-tesla-autopilot-invest...
- MBCook 3y agoDepending on how close the Ford was following they may not have had enough time (if driving manually) even though the driver ahead managed to avoid it. That would still make it their fault. This is just sad for everyone involved. I find it an intersection discussion though. I would qualify as a Tesla hater. I also own a Mach E and like BlueCruise. It’s just not that black and white.
- CatWChainsaw 3y agoIf "vindictive mentalities" are negative, then what's your specific mental contortion for defending Musk's?
- ken47 3y agoAnyone who knows anything about AI would only use it to drive their car as a last resort. The driving public's ignorance about AI's capabilities is astonishing.
- MBCook 3y agoBlueCruise is not AI. This isn’t FSD. It’s automatic cruise control + lane keep assist backed by radar, camera, GPS, and laser scans of highways.
- ken47 3y agoFSD ⊆ AI. To implicitly equate the two is ignorance of the kind described in the post to which you responded.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- aidenn0 3y ago> It’s automatic cruise control + lane keep assist backed by radar, camera, GPS, and laser scans of highways. If that doesn't count as AI, then we have No True Scottsman'd the term to be meaningless.
- MBCook 3y agoWhat I meant is that I believe it’s just a rules engine. A set of predefined if-then actions humans created. I don’t think it’s a trained neural network making its own decisions. That’s sort of my personal demarcation. Ever since the term got hot people have applied AI to everything from things for simpler things for far more complex. It’s not quite as easy to talk about as it used to be. I know that seems like a lot of sensors, but in my mind it’s quite simple. GPS knows where it is. Using that it can look up the laser scan map that was previously created. From there it knows what the highway SHOULD look like. The cameras can see where the lanes are, same as systems have been doing for more than 10 years. It can check that those match the map and get some fine-tuned guidance that way. And radar lights at see how close it is to the car in front and if it is getting closer or not. Just to be clear, since I’m not sure what I wrote was, the laser scans are not being done by the vehicle. They were done by Ford. For the vehicle it’s just a data source to consult that’s more accurate than a standard GPS map.
- cdchn 3y agoWould the pre-collision avoidance systems that are standard in a lot of vehicles now been able to prevent an accident with this kind of "peek a boo" scenario?
- MBCook 3y agoNo. Mach E has the same thing. They all rely on radar and radar can’t detect stopped objects reliably enough at speed. Way too many false positives. Every vehicle manual will warn you about stopped objects when discussing their system.
- Royce-CMR 3y agoI see a number of negative stories, so sharing my positive story with self driving cars. Two weeks ago driving home, Tesla Model Y with FSD, FSD on, nighttime, suburban streets. Car phantom brakes and I can’t see a reason why. Glance down and I see the UI thinks a human is running into the street. I look back up, canceling FSD and taking over… and a damn invisible guy in dark brown jacket and black pants races past my headlights. He had stopped before crossing my lane, but when he saw FSD slow down he booked it across. Other cars slowed after he cut straight into my headlights as they noticed him for the first time. No one else saw him either. I was super impressed with FSD. The promised perfect future isn’t here - you can’t take a nap and the car drives you - but the current state is a value add.
- KennyBlanken 3y agoIt's not a value-add given it causes chain-reaction crashes from phantom braking and quite regularly slams into the back of emergency vehicles on the side of the road (likely because the cameras are blinded by the emergency lights.) Teslas had radar assist. It was too expensive for Musk. And to keep new car owners from being annoyed by older Telsas having more features than theirs, he ordered that the older Teslas have their radar units be disabled.
- machdiamonds 3y agoDo you actually have any examples of FSD v12 hitting emergency vehicles?
- hokumguru 3y agoAnecdotal I know, but I bought a model Y last year without radar. We’ve used FSD substantially and haven’t seen phantom braking issues even once. I think it’s been mostly resolved.
- dmix 3y agoI've never driven one but I follow a youtube channel that documents beta FSD, posting raw video feeds and analyzing/critiquing them, and I've noticed they've been gushing about it more and more this past year. Far more than in the past he's always talking about how its mastered very complex stuff it would have disengaged or awkwardly completed only half a year earlier. I think the platform has improved quite a bit in recent years. Of course opinions on the internet will have been established from headlines in prior years so who knows how much impact it will have on discourse if it turns out to be the case.
- zip1234 3y agoGreat, lets investigate every single fatal crash and make actual changes based on those. Let's not limit it to crashes involving systems like Bluecruise or Autopilot. If human drivers caused a fatal crash, let's make changes so that doesn't happen again as well.
- KennyBlanken 3y agoI suppose Ford could just do what Tesla does and have the car disable BlueCruise right before the crash, so the car isn't _technically_ 'self driving' when the crash happened. https://www.motortrend.com/news/nhtsa-tesla-autopilot-investigation-shutoff-crash/ https://www.motortrend.com/news/nhtsa-tesla-autopilot-invest...
- ajross 3y agoSo, neither that article nor you substantiate the "_technically_" part of the argument. It's obviously true that autopilot will routinely disengage in circumstances where collisions are imminent, either because the car isn't responding to the controls (e.g. in a spin) or because the driver grabbed the wheel or hit the brake, which overrides and causes a disengagement. But you and Motor Trend are going farther, and implying that this is some kind of trick invented to reduce the number of accidents reported. Which (1) clearly isn't working, since the NTSB got reports about the accidents, (2) isn't substantiated by any reporting about the company behavior, and (3) is directly contradicted by the one place where Tesla does make public numbers about AP safety. They explicitly say it includes all accidents where AP was enable within 5 seconds of impact. To wit: this is a conspiracy theory, and you need to stop repeating it.
- FireBeyond 3y ago> They explicitly say it includes all accidents where AP was enable within 5 seconds of impact. This was an NTSB requirement added in 2019.
- xyst 3y agoDriving on the roads just gets a little bit more anxiety ridden with every douche overestimating the technology. Personal vehicles as the primary mode of transportation is the greatest failed experiment in this country.
- nfriedly 3y agoI wish we put 10% as much money into public transit as we do for cars and their associated infrastructure. The roads would be more open for people who do enjoy driving. And folks like me could kick back and let the bus driver/train engineer/etc. handle it. Self-driving vehicles just seem like a subpar way of solving the problem of getting someone from A to B without requiring their full attention.
- avidiax 3y agoTraffic never gets better just by small infrastructure improvements. You are just lowering the price in time for a trip from A to B for people with cars. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Induced_demand https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Induced_demand
- Yeri 3y agoLooks like they block any Singaporean IP. Sorry, you have been blocked You are unable to access fordauthority.com
- can16358p 3y agoSame for Turkey. WTH is wrong with these people?
- lucasoelverlund 3y ago[flagged]
- lucasoelverlund 3y ago[flagged]
- lucasoelverlund 3y agoEj have af little Pet expense to your daddy
- wisswazz 3y agoI believe cars with autodrive etc often interpret surroundings by looking at objects moving relative to its surroundings. If an object is first seen by the car when stationary it is much harder for the software to filter it out from the “backdrop”
- KingLancelot 3y ago[dead]
- alphabettsy 3y agoI almost had an accident like this. I was driving home on the freeway late at night and there was a car on its roof that had been in an accident in the lane I was in. It was at the end of a long sweeping curve and I just barely saw it in time. I was really glad I was in the car I was in and paying enough attention. I was in my fun car going too fast but was also more alert because of that.