13 ms·
Tesla influencers tried coast-to-coast self-driving, hit debris before 60 miles
- gdulli 1y agoI thought the title meant the software crashed, but it was the car that crashed: "They didn’t make it out of California without crashing into easily avoidable road debris that badly damaged the Tesla Model Y ... In the video, you can see that the driver doesn’t have his hands on the steering wheel. The passenger spots the debris way ahead of time. There was plenty of time to react, but the driver didn’t get his hands on the steering wheel until the last second."
- lazide 1y agoThe issue with ‘driver in the loop only for emergencies’ is that it’s harder for someone to be prepared to react only occasionally (but still promptly and correctly) when outlier behavior happens, not easier. For automated tools like CNC machines, there is a reason it’s just ‘emergency stop’ for instance, not ‘tap the correct thing we should do instead’. But doing an e-stop on a road at speed is a very dangerous action as well, which is why that isn’t an option here either.
- UncleMeat 1y agoAnd you don't even know until it is too late even if you are paying attention. Suppose you see the obstruction well in advance. You expect the car to change lanes. You get past the point where you would have changed lanes but there's still time. You aren't yet aware that the car is missing the obstruction. A moment later you are much closer and make the judgement that the car is making a mistake. You grab the wheel but now it's too late. The alternative is taking control of the car all the time. Something nobody is going to practically do.
- lazide 1y agoYeah, in many ways the only way a human can know for sure that it’s not seeing something is past the point of no return/the absence of action, which is always hard.
- detaro 1y agoAnd why many "real" self-driving systems that share the road with other users are often quite speed-limited, to allow them to come to a full stop relatively safely if needed, and give a human time to take over properly. (E.g. the Mercedes system will stick way below the usual speed limits, which means it's main use currently is handling heavy traffic with stop-and-go, or many of the autonomous "busses" for dense city spaces/campuses/...) Passively monitoring a situation continuously and reacting quickly when needed is something humans are not good at. Even with airline pilots, where we do invest a lot in training and monitoring, it's a well-understood issue that having to take over in a surprising situation often leads to confusion and time needed to re-orient before they can take effective action. Which for planes is often fine, because you have the time buffer needed for that, but not always.
- anonymars 1y agoThere's sort of an analogous conundrum with Airbus-style automation: the system has various levels of automation and protection (e.g. preventing you from stalling the plane) And then when something goes wrong, you are unceremoniously handed a plane with potentially some or all of those protections no longer active. As an analogy, imagine your FSD car was trying to slow down for something, but along the way there is some issue with a sensor. So it gives up and hands control back to you while it's in the middle of braking, yet now your ABS is no longer active. So now the situation is much more sudden than it would have been (if you had been driving the car you would have been aware of it and slowing down for it youself earlier in the game), you likely weren't paying as much attention in the first place because of the automation, and some of the normal protection isn't working. So it's almost three levels of adding insult to injury. Potentially related discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43970363 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43970363
- kayodelycaon 1y agoIt’s important to point out that airline pilots are trained to handle sudden emergencies. This has been incredibly successful at scale. But it came great expense of both money and lost lives. And it still isn’t perfect. The level of training required to oversee full automation is non-trivial if you have to do more than press a stop button.
- lazide 1y agoNotably, it’s likely harder than… just driving yourself.
- Coffeewine 1y agoI’ll defend airbus a little - there are flight laws that more or less provide at any given moment as much automation as is possible given the state of the sensors and computers. So it doesn’t just go ‘oops, a sensor failed, now you have direct control of the plane.’ It does have the same problem - if 99.999% of your flight time is spent in normal law you are not especially ready to operate in one of the alternate laws or god forbid direct law, which is similar to the case of a driver who perhaps accustomed to the system forget how to drive. But I think we have a ways before we get there. If the car could detect issues earlier and more gradually notify the driver that they need to take control, most every driver at present retains the knowledge of how to directly operate a car with non-navigational automation (abs as you mentioned, power stearing, etc)
- catapart 1y agoAnd if the car was fully self driving and capable of seeing debris that was clearly seen by two humans (whom tesla claims have inferior eyes), it could have taken the opportunity to change lanes and avoid the obstruction. They want to pretend you'll only need to actually intervene in 'edge case' situations, but here we have an example of perfect conditions requiring intervention. Regardless of the buzzwords they can attach to whatever methods they are using, it doesn't feel like it works.
- rsynnott 1y ago> whom tesla claims have inferior eyes ... wait, do they actually claim that? I mean that's just nonsense.
- xeromal 1y agoThey were aware of the debris but intervening would lessen the impact of the video. I'm glad they didn't intervene. This is a bad look for FSD.
- petesergeant 1y ago> Tesla’s EV business is in decline and the stock price depends entirely on the self-driving and robot promises I don't think that's right; I think the stock price entirely depends on people seeing it a vehicle to invest in Musk. If Musk died tomorrow, but nothing else changed at Tesla, the stock price would crater.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- Mistletoe 1y agoI actually think the stock price would go up. His detour to fascism and megalomania has chased off tons of liberal environmentalists like myself that are the target audience for electric cars. I cancelled what would have been our replacement Tesla when he was implying on Twitter there can be good reasons for sneaking into the speaker of the house’s house and hitting her husband in the head with a hammer.
- iwontberude 1y agoNah Morgan Stanley and Wedbush would know the gig is up, the fraud would no longer be maintainable without Elon.
- lazide 1y agoYup. The effect of the reality distortion field has weakened, but remains plenty strong enough for now.
- sidibe 1y agoThe reality distortion field is at ATH. Tesla stock is nearing its high, which it had when it was growing quickly and very profitable. Now they are shrinking sales and margins and the stock is soaring again
- 1y ago
- HPsquared 1y agoIt's so clear, dry, perfect lighting, no traffic or anything. That's shocking.
- coreyh14444 1y agoThe debris is pretty close to the color of the road. Seems like a good case for radar/lidar ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
- lazide 1y agoWho knew spending more on extra sensors would help avoid issues like this? So weird.
- raisedbyninjas 1y agoSensor fusion is too hard is the new cope.
- cosmicgadget 1y agoTo paraphrase sarcastically: "But what happens when the sensors disagree???"
- burnt-resistor 1y ago[Insert red herring about MCAS and cop out about how redundancy is "hard" and "bad" "complexity".] Have a minimum quorum of sensors, disable one if it generates impossible values (while deciding carefully what is and isn't possible), use sensors that are much more durable, reliable, and can be self-tested, and integration and subsystem test test test thoroughly some more.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- petermcneeley 1y agoAnd yet the humans detected it without lidar?
- lm28469 1y agoTwo more years guys, just give him two more years, a few more billion, a bit more political power and I promise he'll give you your fancy self driving toy. (Repeat from 2012 ad infinitum)
- cedws 1y agoSolar roofs, Dojo, Hyperloop, robotaxi, roadster, semi, mission around the Moon, man on Mars by 2020, it’s all coming guys he promised!
- iwontberude 1y ago[flagged]
- asah 1y agothe problem is that TSLA (the company) is pivoting hard to humanoid robots, which is a relatively easier problem, perfectly big market and Musk is a terrific salesguy. Medium/long term, humanoid robots are commodity but so were electric cars and TSLA (the stock) rode that to glory.
- hliyan 1y agoBoring Company. Whatever happened to those tunnels?
- 1y ago
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- thefourthchime 1y agoI use Tesla FSD 99% of the time. I recently drove from Austin to Florida and back. The only time I had to take over was for road debris on the highway. Off the highway it’s very good about avoiding it. My guess is Tesla has not been focusing on this issue as it's not needed for robotaxi for phase one.
- gregoriol 1y agoThe fact that it works well in good conditions doesn't make it good. It's the unexpected situations that determine if someone lives or dies.
- thefourthchime 1y agoIt doesn't have to do with the conditions. It has to do with whether or not it's on the highway or not. The car uses a different Stack for highway and off highway, the highway has been a step child for quite a long time now
- AlotOfReading 1y agoThat used to be true. Autopilot was for highways, FSD was for other roads. FSD can be enabled on both since v12 though and this video is specifically an attempt to use FSD on highways to go cross country.
- thefourthchime 1y agoAutopilot and FSD are completely different technologies. When v12 came out it only worked on city streets, and it used V11 for the highway. Later, V12, which is the end-to-end neural network, worked on highways as well, but they use different stacks behind the scenes.
- gregoriol 1y agoThe user doesn't care about implementation details: it works or it doesn't work
- curiousObject 1y agoIt’s an accident that could also happen to an inattentive human driver. (Ask me how I know :( ) But, if you watch the car’s display panel, it looks as if the car didn’t see anything and just went full speed ahead. That’s not great. It should have slowed down and alerted the driver that something was there. I didn’t watch the complete video so maybe there’s more.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- ForHackernews 1y agoIf you watch the video, the human non-drivers in the car noticed the road debris and could have reacted, but seemed not to because they were waiting for the computer to respond first.
- saberdancer 1y agoThey were testing FSD so I understand why they would do it. It also looked like roadkill and didn't expect it to be a hard obstacle.
- mynameisvlad 1y ago> They were testing FSD So if that was a human and they ran them over it'd be okay because they were testing FSD? They're putting themselves (fine) and everyone around them (far less fine) in danger with this stunt.
- curiousObject 1y agoYou are correct that they were testing the system, so they probably waited too long to react. But Tesla’s car didn’t do well in this incident A competent human driver would instinctively slow down, look at the potential obstruction, and think about changing lanes or an emergency stop. Most probably, the visible object is just some water spilled on the road or that kind of thing. But if it isn’t then it’s very dangerous This car appeared to be blind to any risk. That’s not acceptable
- jarym 1y ago"is a Level 2 driver assistance system that requires constant supervision by a human driver" - the reason for human supervision might have something to do with uncommon situations (debris in road being such a situation). Elon's estimates have always been off but it is irresponsible to see an obstacle up ahead and assume the computer would do something about it while the driver and passenger debate on what the said obstacle is. I am not sure if they were trying to win a Darwin Award and I say that as no particularly fan of Musk!
- datadrivenangel 1y agoLevel 2 is very dangerous because it's so good that humans are only needed in emergencies...
- aetherspawn 1y agoI honestly don’t know if I would have seen and avoided that, it came up really fast. And based on the video it looked like a cardboard box or something not worth avoiding until it was within 2-3 seconds range.
- chmod775 1y agoIt may look like that on video, but in fact you can hear the two guys pointing it out and chatting about it a whole 8 seconds before impact. Also of course you're avoiding an unknown object that large, especially when there's plenty of space to go around it on either side. If you still don't think you can avoid something like that, please get off the road for everyone's safety.
- arm32 1y agoIt's easy to give you credit here—you would have seen it and avoided it. They saw it and had plenty of time to steer to the left, in the open lane, to avoid it.
- jansan 1y agoIt was at least six seconds between the co driver pointing it out and the car hitting the object. The screen shows 77mph, which means he saw it from approx. 200m distance. Anybody would at least be able to prepare or slow down in such a situation.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- agildehaus 1y agoA friend of mine who loves Tesla watched this video and said "many humans would have hit that". I feel we'll be hearing a lot of that excuse.
- mynameisvlad 1y agoIt's their standard go-to excuse. "I would have done that too" really says more about them as drivers than anything else.
- rob74 1y agoWell, I have to admit that your friend has a point. Humans are bad at reacting quickly and correctly to unexpected situations, and some debris large enough to damage your car showing up from out of nowhere after several hours of boring driving along a largely straight highway with little traffic is definitely one of these situations. But a self-driving system worth its salt should always be alert, scanning the road ahead, able to identify dangerous debris, and react accordingly. So, different pair of shoes...
- agildehaus 1y agoThe humans in the vehicle spotted it fine, and we should not tolerate self-driving systems that are only as good as the worst of us.
- mynameisvlad 1y ago> and we should not tolerate self-driving systems that are as good as the worst of us The person you replied to didn't do that, though: > But a self-driving system worth its salt should always be alert, scanning the road ahead, able to identify dangerous debris, and react accordingly. So, different pair of shoes...
- amelius 1y agoThey never said they did.
- thibran 1y ago[flagged]
- lotsofpulp 1y agoThere would be nothing to hit if it were called "Almost self driving but you still have to pay attention", instead of "Full Self Driving".
- general1465 1y agoTangentially - If you as a European happen to drive on US highways, you will noticed that they are heavily littered with fallen cargo, aluminum ladders, huge amount of shredded tires and occasionally a trailer without a towing car... It has been so bizarre for me to observe this. Nobody is cleaning that?
- comrade1234 1y agoI just got back from a trip to the USA where I spent about five days driving around Michigan, Illinois, and Wisconsin and the number of shredded truck tires on the highways was flabbergasting. From what I understand, in the USA when a truck tire wears down they put a new layer of tread on it. But it doesn't seem to work very well as it eventually peels off.
- rkomorn 1y agoTruck tire chunks on freeways was one of the biggest surprises to me.
- __alexs 1y agoRetredding like this is also entirely normal in Europe. I guess they just have more trucks?
- disiplus 1y agoRetreading is legal but only specified companyes with its own E mark legally can do it. And combine that with more in depth 12 or 6 months inspection for > 3.5t trucks it usually means that the tires are in better condition.
- potato3732842 1y agoThose are called retreads and they are not uncommon worldwide. If you're seeing anything other than long thin strips of tread on the road it's not a retread related failure. Every now and then the Karens get to screeching about it and it reaches a critical mass and the NHTSA does a study and they find that most of the debris you're seeing has nothing to do with retreads. Here's the summary of a recent one: https://www.moderntiredealer.com/industry-news/commercial-business/article/11505007/nhtsa-releases-final-report-on-tire-debris-study-2009-01-20 https://www.moderntiredealer.com/industry-news/commercial-bu...
- tedggh 1y agoI got my first Tesla last year and my first trip with FSD was just after the launch of V13, so I could not compare it to earlier versions. But I was shocked by how good it was. I completed a 800 miles trip with a handful of interventions, most or all of them likely unnecessary. Even with rain the system worked well. I don’t understand how the system was not able to see this obstacle and slow down or change lanes. Did they have traffic tailgating? I can see some edge cases where there’s really no way to avoid something like this safely. In any case it’s pretty unfortunate and it will make me be even more cautious when using FSD.
- Lionga 1y agoEven with traffic tailgating it would need to brake or go to then right. Your comment sounds like a Tesla ad written by someone from Tesla or a heavy, heavy fan boy.
- thefourthchime 1y agoWhen they first released V13, the highway stack was still the old C++ code. It wasn't until another four or five months that they switched it to a neural network. It doesn't seem like they've put much focus on it since then.
- AlotOfReading 1y agoTesla FSD still uses C++. What you're referring to is control policy code that was deleted. FSD also doesn't have a separate "highway stack" and hasn't since v12.
- agildehaus 1y agoIt's because anecdotal experience means very little. In ~2021, these vehicles could almost never make it from A to B without a safety-critical intervention. That they can today doesn't mean they can do the same route 10,000 times without a safety-critical intervention. In fact, public tracking indicates Tesla's numbers are MUCH lower than that.
- lapcat 1y ago> Did they have traffic tailgating? No. If you continue to watch the video after the collision, it's clear that there was no traffic tailgating. They even slowed down and pulled over to the side of the road. No other cars.
- mv4 1y agoI've been using FSD lately on trips from CT to NYC and back (and the car performed well). My biggest fear has been debris (like shown in the video), or deer.
- bambax 1y agoWhat is the point of "testing" something that everyone knows doesn't work and only exists because a serial liar said so? If Musk says you will survive a fall from a 90-stories high-rise... don't test it.
- spacebanana7 1y agoWe should rigorously test the things we’re most skeptical of. You shouldn’t take pills a stranger gives you at a music festival without checking them for loads of things, for example. Even if you don’t ever intend on consuming them it’s nice to have specific accusations with evidence.
- bambax 1y agoOr you can discard them right away. I'm not the police, I don't investigate strangers.
- motiw 1y agoWould lidar detect such debris?
- Bengalilol 1y agoYes. Everything that is/has a volume gets detected. The problem with the camera thing is that the debris doesn't move, is quite small and is dark. I suspect it overran it because of maybe a fix/patch on this behavior: https://www.reddit.com/r/TeslaFSD/comments/1kwrc7p/23_my_with_hw4_swerves_to_avoid_tire_tracks_on/ https://www.reddit.com/r/TeslaFSD/comments/1kwrc7p/23_my_wit...
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- guywithahat 1y agoIt would depend on how dense the point cloud is, however at 100ft I'm guessing the resolution for something like waymo would be on the order of 10-20cm, which would suggest it wouldn't be able to detect it (at a minimum it wouldn't know its height, and thus it wouldn't know if it's a piece of paper or a steel box). My guess is it also wouldn't know until it's right on top of it
- gundmc 1y agoWhere did you get 10-20 cm? That sounds wildly off. Commercial lidar would get you to ~3-5 cm at 100 feet easily and Waymo's is said to be better than the commercially available units.
- sidibe 1y agoCameras, like the other lidar-using companies also have, would just like they should here. Teslas problems go beyond a lack of Lidar.
- SillyUsername 1y agoA lot of apologists say that "a human would have hit that". That's kind of irrelevant, this technology is meant to be safer and held to a higher standard. Comparing to a human is not a valid excuse...
- Lionga 1y agoA human would not have hit that, the two guys see it coming from a long time and would have stopped or changed lanes like.
- keyle 1y agoIndeed... You can see the driver reaching for the wheel, presumably he saw it coming, and would have hit the breaks. He left the car to do its thing thinking it knows better than him... maybe.
- littlecranky67 1y ago> That's kind of irrelevant, this technology is meant to be safer and held to a higher standard I don't think that is the case. We will judge FSD whether you make more or less accidents than humans, not necessarily in the same situations. The computer is allowed to make mistakes that a human wouldn't, if in reverse the computer makes a lot less mistakes in situations where humans would. Given that >90% of accidents are easily avoidable (speeding, not keeping enough safety distance, drunk/tired driving, distraction due to smartphone usages) I think we will see FSD be safer on average very quickly.
- pbasista 1y agoAnecdotal: I am surprised how the basic Tesla autopilot often cannot even read the speed limit signs correctly. In perfect lighting conditions. It just misses a lot of them. And it does not understand the traffic rules enough to know when the speed limit ends. I know that the basic autopilot is a completely different system than the so-called FSD. But equipped with that experience from the basic autopilot, it does not surprise me that a large debris on the road was completely missed by the FSD.
- tedggh 1y agoI use autopilot for local driving (city - suburbs) and I pay for FSD when on long road trips (>300 miles). You are correct, they are completely different things so one doesn’t correlate to the other one.
- mbreese 1y agoThat they are different things is really disappointing. If you want people to trust the system enough to buy FSD, the autopilot mode should use the same system, with limited functions. There is no reason why the vision/detection systems should be different. Especially if you already have the proper hardware installed…
- samrus 1y agoCompletely agree. Like a rate limiting model the way LLMs do. Where you get like 5 FSD drives on the free tier per month or something
- eurleif 1y agoIn FSD, there's an annoying bug where Georgia minimum speed signs are misinterpreted as speed limit signs. It's because most states that do minimum speed signage combine it with the speed limit into a single sign, but Georgia has separate, freestanding minimum speed signs. Thankfully, recent versions of FSD don't immediately start slowing down anymore when a misinterpreted sign makes the car think that the speed limit on a highway is 40; but the sign comprehension bug has remained unresolved for years.
- helge9210 1y agoI would try to pass it between the wheels and would crash the same. At least for me there was nothing indicating there is not enough clearance.
- kayodelycaon 1y agoI’d disagree. :/ It’s a huge chuck metal well over a foot long in the middle of a lane. The center of a lane is usually higher than sides and an uneven patch of road can cause a slight bounce before it, further reducing clearance. I’d worry about my RAV4 (8 inches) clearing it safely. At first, I thought it was possibly a tire tread, which tend to curl up.
- cosmicgadget 1y agoYour eyes work differently when not looking at a screen.
- rstuart4133 1y agoHere is a better picture of the thing you are saying you would "drive over": https://www.proxibid.com/_next/image?url=https%3A%2F%2Fimages.proxibid.com%2FAuctionImages%2F321%2F178782%2F211_7.jpg&w=3840&q=75 https://www.proxibid.com/_next/image?url=https%3A%2F%2Fimage...
- gyanchawdhary 1y agoFor those following along and curious about the tone and intensity of the criticism against Musk and Tesla (both here and in general) this blog post is a solid framework for understanding what drives many of the responses https://medium.com/incerto/the-most-intolerant-wins-the-dictatorship-of-the-small-minority-3f1f83ce4e15 https://medium.com/incerto/the-most-intolerant-wins-the-dict...
- TheAceOfHearts 1y agoOne of my biggest criticisms of Elon is that he rarely takes accountability for his words and nobody ever holds him accountable by asking directly. This isn't a high bar to clear, but some people continuously excuse him as being "overly-eager" in his predictions. If that was the case, he could still provide reasonable updates when a predicted date is missed along with an explanation, even if it's just: "Hey, it turns out this problem was much more difficult than we initially expected and it'll take longer". A lot of the problems that he's trying to solve are actually quite difficult, so it's understandable that predictions will be imprecise... But when you realize that your predictions are going to be wrong, you should have the basic decency to update people. When you're wielding immense amounts of money, power, and influence I think it's worth trying to do the bare-minimum to hold people accountable for their words and claims. Otherwise your words are meaningless.
- tokioyoyo 1y agoIn America, you fail the second you apologize or take accountability. Ignoring criticism and deflecting all the time gets you further, as it is part of the game. Unfortunately, this is just an accepted social science-y thing at this point. It is a very much cultural thing of the past couple of decades.
- amelius 1y agoIsn't the case in engineering cultures, like Boeing before they changed into a business culture.
- ActionHank 1y agoIs there any engineering culture left in the US? I feel like this is the case across the board.
- JohnFen 1y agoYes, there is. In every place that I've worked, including my current position, acknowledging when you're wrong or have failed at something increases trust in you and your professionalism. People who always have an excuse, try to shift blame, etc., are assumed to be lacking in competency (let alone ethics and trustworthiness).
- pirates 1y agoProps to the article for including a gif of the crash so we don’t have to give these people any more views on youtube.
- cosmicgadget 1y agoAlso that gif is amazing on its own. Def going in the memebank.
- zzzeek 1y agoI rant about Elon a lot but can someone just explain to me how this keeps going on ? FSD is almost completely a solved problem by the likes of Waymo etc. Why does anyone care what Tesla is failing to do with FSD? Is this all about, "how can we invent FSD without lidar"? Why are we bothering, because cybertruck owners don't want a dorky box on top of their truck? Does their truck already not look ridiculous?
- dmix 1y agoIt's almost entirely a product/economic gamble. Basically: "How do we get self-driving into millions of regular consumer cars without doubling the price by adding expensive sensors and redesigning the vehicle around huge chunky sensors" Waymo is focused on Taxis for a reason because it's likely going to be unaffordable, except to people driving Lambos. But that also may be fine for a big chunk of the public who don't want to own cars (or want to rent their own as a service). Some consumer car companies are experimenting with adding smaller LIDAR sensors like recent Volvo Ex90 which costs ~$100k. But they aren't as sophisticated as Waymo
- senordevnyc 1y agoIs LIDAR full of unobtainium? Is there some fundamental first-principles reason that the cost of LIDAR can't go down by orders of magnitude? Isn't that kind of reasoning from first principles what Elon's genius was supposed to be about, like with cost of accessing space? But apparently he thinks a spinning laser is always going to cost six figures?
- dmix 1y agoNo you are right, the economics of LIDAR could turn out to be insignificant over another decade of serious manufacturing investment in China. But Elon is a naive tech optimist like many of us engineers, so 5-6yrs ago he played the risky hand hoping that vision only would work out if they invested hard into it. Back then Comma AI did the same thing choosing cheap cameras, Geohot the founder is similar to Elon being someone who prefers bucking trends and taking risks. He made a good public argument around that time for using Cameras and betting on more data = better output. And I guess Elon thought so too. It also happened to involve less hardware engineering and let them focus on software. Which is an easier decision as a business. If it doesn’t work out I’m sure it will die a quick death and LIDAR will take over. State regulators won’t tolerate it long.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- xnx 1y agoGuy in the video calls it a "girder", but it is almost certainly a trailer ramp: https://www.proxibid.com/lotinformation/54574457/2006-murray-16tire-expando-lowboy-trailer https://www.proxibid.com/lotinformation/54574457/2006-murray... That was my hunch, but Google Lens was able to ID it. Possible that Waymo vehicles can do this too, but that must take some serious compute and optimization to do at highway speeds.
- rstuart4133 1y agoA lot of photo's on that page, this is the ramp in question: https://www.proxibid.com/_next/image?url=https%3A%2F%2Fimages.proxibid.com%2FAuctionImages%2F321%2F178782%2F211_7.jpg&w=3840&q=75 https://www.proxibid.com/_next/image?url=https%3A%2F%2Fimage... It's huge, far bigger than it looks in the video. You would have to be asleep at the wheel to miss it.
- xnx 1y agoThanks for the direct link. That accident could've been so much worse if the ramp had caught an edge under the car. It could easily have flipped it. They were really taking a risk letting the car run over it.
- xnx 1y agoRespect to these guys for commiting to the bit and letting the Tesla hit it. This is real journalism. Stark contrast to so much of the staged engagement-bait on YouTube.
- desolate_muffin 1y agoI noticed that, too. They seemed to tense up and notice it with enough time to spare to manually intervene and either slam on the brakes or swerve to avoid it.
- ThinkBeat 1y agoIt seems well documented that the Tesla system is at level 2. and it requires "hands on supervision". Has Elon lied about the capabilities? Yes, on many occasions. Crashing your car to prove it seems lilke a waste. When the documentation is clear. """ Tesla Autopilot is an advanced driver-assistance system (ADAS) developed by Tesla, Inc. that provides partial vehicle automation, corresponding to Level 2 automation as defined by SAE International """ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla_Autopilot https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla_Autopilot """ Drive Autonomously: No manufacturer has achieved Level 4 or Level 5 autonomy for road use. Tesla has not achieved Level 3 conditional autonomy like Mercedes-Benz’s DrivePilot system. A Tesla cannot drive itself. The driver must remain attentive at all times. Tesla now qualifies Autopilot and Full Self-Driving with a (Supervised) parenthetical on its website. Tesla’s Level 2 system is a hands-on system that requires the driver to regain control immediately. Torque sensors confirm the driver’s hands are on the wheel or yoke. Level 2 Driving on City Streets: Tesla does list Autosteer on City Streets as a feature of Full-Self Driving. But notably, its website provides no further """ https://insideevs.com/news/742295/tesla-autopilot-abilities-fsd/ https://insideevs.com/news/742295/tesla-autopilot-abilities-... """ In a statement addressing the US recall, Tesla declared its technology is a ‘Level Two’ semi-autonomous driving system – not the more advanced ‘Level Three’ system which is already being developed and rolled out by rival car-makers. """ https://www.drive.com.au/news/tesla-full-self-driving-level-2-autonomous/ https://www.drive.com.au/news/tesla-full-self-driving-level-...
- senordevnyc 1y agoNo manufacturer has achieved Level 4 or Level 5 autonomy for road use. Waymo has achieved Level 4, with hundreds of thousands of paid rides per week and a stellar safety record. But they're not technically a manufacturer I guess.
- monkeyelite 1y agoI was hoping to learn more about self-driving here but mostly see Elon gossip.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- toss1 1y ago"One test is worth a thousand opinions." And here, the too-frequently posted excuse that "oh, many humans would have hit that too" is utter nonsense. In that situation, with light traffic, clear daylight visibility, and wide shoulders, any human who would have hit that is either highly distracted, incompetent, or drunk. Both driver and passenger saw the object at least 7-8 seconds ahead of time; at 0:00sec the passenger is pointing and they are commenting on the object, at 0:05sec passenger is leaning forward with concern and the Tesla drives over it at 0:08sec. The "Full Self Driving" Tesla didn't even sound any warning until a second AFTER it hit the object. Any alert half-competent driver would have certainly lifted off the accelerator, started braking and changing lanes in half that time. They didn't because of the expectation the Tesla would take some corrective action — bad assumption. "My 'Full Self Driving' is as good as a drunk" is not a worthwhile claim. Worse yet, the entire concept of [it drives and then hands control to the human when it can't handle a situation] is actively dangerous to levels of insanity. Human perceptual and nervous systems are terrible at tasks requiring vigilance —it is like our brains are evolved for attention to wander. Having a life-critical task that can literally kill you or others ALMOST fully handled autonomously is situation designed for the human to lost attention and situational awareness. Then, demanding in a split second that (s)he immediately become fully oriented, think of a reaction plan, and then execute it, is a recipe for disaster. In this case, it is even worse. The Tesla itself gave the humans zero warning. The driver and passenger saw the object well in advance of the Tesla and in in 3-4 times the time and distance it would take to react effectively. But, they had an assumption nothing was wrong because they assumed the Tesla would handle the situation and they were not in a driving mindset, instead waiting to see what the Tesla would do. They were not actively driving the car in the world. Fortunately, the only result was a mangled Tesla — this time.
- KevinMS 1y agoThat just seems like bad luck for the experiment. I've never seen anything like that driving on the highway. Was the claim that it could go coast to coast no matter what was thrown at it?
- queenkjuul 1y agoMajor debris has been a regular part of highway driving throughout my life
- krosaen 1y agoWe've lost our sense making ability in our coverage of AV progress. Setting aside Elon's polarizing behavior (which is a big thing to set aside) all of these things seem true: - Elon bullshits wildly and sometimes delivers - FSD is far ahead of other available personally owned autonomy - no other system even attempts to drive on surface level streets. FSD works better than you would think - I've been in several flawless rides across town in conditions I didn't expect it to handle. - FSD doesn't work well enough to rely on it yet, so what's the point for real consumers who don't want to sit there nervously hovering their hands over the wheel even if it is impressive and you might have to ride several hours before anything goes awry. - We can't really know how close FSD is to being reliable enough because all we have is marketing claims from Tesla, fan boy clips on YouTube, and haters who can't seem to discern where FSD really is ahead, even as it falls far short of hype What I wish we had was a common metric audited by a third party reliably published in terms of hours until disengagement or something like that across all systems in various conditions.
- guywithahat 1y agoI sort of thought this was going to be a head on collision; it was a piece of debris in the highway that I think a lot of people may have hit. Still, we expect autonomous vehicles to do better than people, but it didn't hit a car or injure anyone
- mcculley 1y agoI do not understand the official position of Tesla on FSD (Supervised). The owner's manual Tesla has posted on www.tesla.com says, "Full Self-Driving (Supervised) is a hands-on feature that requires you to pay attention to the road at all times. Keep your hands on the steering wheel at all times..." [0] The owners of Tesla vehicles are saying that they can just relax and not keep hands on the wheel. Is Tesla maintaining a more conservative stance while encouraging drivers to do dumb things? Or is the owner's manual just out of date? 0: https://www.tesla.com/ownersmanual/modely/en_us/GUID-2CB60804-9CEA-4F4B-8B04-09B991368DC5.html https://www.tesla.com/ownersmanual/modely/en_us/GUID-2CB6080...
- Taterr 1y agoAt 14:40 in the video they show the footage to a cop who's immediate reaction is "To be honest with you. {talked over} you decide to change lane. How come you, did you think to change lanes or you just kinda froze up in that moment?" He clearly thought they had plenty of time to react to it.
- mocheeze 1y agoIn part 2 they had to go to a radiator and muffler shop to weld up some parts: https://youtu.be/qYpJF0mxiuo https://youtu.be/qYpJF0mxiuo
- disqard 1y agoI'm surprised this isn't flagged yet. Musk's army must've missed this one.
- frenchman_in_ny 1y agoI had to chuckle at the footage (@12:45) of N439B being hauled by on a trailer.