OK, its just a deer, but the future is clear. These things are going to start kill people left and right.

How many kids is Elon going to kill before we shut him down? Whats the number of children we’re going to allow Elon to murder every year?

  • whotookkarl@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    22 days ago

    It doesn’t have to not kill people to be an improvement, it just has to kill less people than people do

    • rigatti@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      21 days ago

      True in a purely logical sense, but assigning liability is a huge issue for self-driving vehicles.

      • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        21 days ago

        As long as there’s manual controls the driver is responsible as they’re supposed to be ready to take over

          • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            21 days ago

            Because it’s not, it’s a car with assisted driving, like all cars you can drive at the moment and with which, surprise surprise, you are held responsible if there’s an accident while it’s in assisted mode.

    • ano_ba_to@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      21 days ago

      That’s a low bar when you consider how stringent airline safety is in comparison, and that kills way less people than driving does. If sensors can save people’s lives, then knowingly not including them for profit is intentionally malicious.

  • Kbobabob@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    22 days ago

    Is there video that actually shows it “keeps going”? The way that video loops I know I can’t tell what happens immediately after.

    • NeoNachtwaechter@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      21 days ago

      The way that video loops I know I can’t tell what happens immediately after.

      SRSLY?

      Have you ever been in a car, going fast?

      You can see in the video that the car does NOT brake hard before the crash. Not even in the very last second.

      What did YOU think what happens in the next second?

      • Kbobabob@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        21 days ago

        What I think doesn’t matter. I’d like to actually see the whole video though. Then I nor you would need to hypothesize about it either.

      • LordKitsuna@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        21 days ago

        Inb4 it actually stopped with hazards like I’ve seen in other videos. Fuck elon and fuck teslas marketing of self driving but I’ve seen people reach far for karma hate posts on tesla sooooooo ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

        • TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          21 days ago

          The poster, who pays Tesla CEO Elon Musk for a subscription to the increasingly far-right social media site, claimed that the FSD software “works awesome” and that a deer in the road is an “edge case.” One might argue that edge cases are actually very important parts of any claimed autonomy suite, given how drivers check out when they feel the car is doing the work, but this owner remains “insanely grateful” to Tesla regardless.

          Yeah nah. This person is the absolute opposite of a Tesla or Musk hater. They’ve had this experience and are expressing fucking gratitude to Tesla. Some people really are crazy.

  • pdxfed@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    21 days ago

    You just need to buy the North America Animal Recognition AI subscription and this wouldn’t be an issue plebs, it will stop for 28 out of 139 mammals!

    • bluGill@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      22 days ago

      Deer often travel in herds so where there is one there are often more. In rural area you can go miles without seeing one, and then see 10 in a few hundred feet. There are deer in those miles you didn’t see them as well, but they happened to not be near the road then.

  • Nytixus@kbin.melroy.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    22 days ago

    I roll my eyes at the dishonest bad faith takes people have in the comments about how people do the same thing behind the wheel. Like that’s going to make autopiloting self-driving cars an exception. Least a person can react, can slow down or do anything that an unthinking, going-by-the-pixels computer can’t do at a whim.

    • Lets_Eat_Grandma@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      21 days ago

      How come human drivers have more fatalities and injuries per mile driven?

      Musk can die in a fire, but self driving car tech seems to be vastly safer than human drivers when you do apples to apples comparisons. It’s like wearing a seatbelt, you certainly don’t need to have one to go from point A to point B, but you’re definitely safer with it - even if you are giving up a little control. Like a seatbelt, you can always take it off.

      • Semi-Hemi-Lemmygod@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        21 days ago

        I honestly think it shouldn’t be called “self driving” or “autopilot” but should work more like the safety systems in Airbusses by simply not allowing the human to make a decision that would create a dangerous situation.

      • atempuser23@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        21 days ago

        The real companies doing this as a serious endeavor yes. With all the added sensors, processing and tech are safer. Elons cars are years behind the competition . It’s not Tesla gathering the safe driving data it’s companies like Waymo.

  • blady_blah@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    ·
    21 days ago
    1. Vehicle needed lidar
    2. Vehicle should have a collision detection indicator for anomalous collisions and random mechanical problems
  • werefreeatlast@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    22 days ago

    Just a small clarification… Teslas only kill forward or backwards. Hardly ever has a car killed left or right 😂.

  • NutWrench@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    22 days ago

    For the 1000th time Tesla: don’t call it “autopilot” when it’s nothing more than a cruise control that needs constant attention.

    • LordKitsuna@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      21 days ago

      Real Autopilot also needs constant attention, the term comes from aviation and it’s not fully autonomous. It maintains heading, altitude, and can do minor course correction.

      It’s the “full self driving” wording they use that needs shit on.

      • Saik0@lemmy.saik0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        21 days ago

        Real Autopilot also needs constant attention

        Newer “real” autopilot systems absolutely do not need constant attention. Many of them can do full landing sequences now. The definition would match what people commonly use it for, not what it was “originally”. Most people believe autopilot to be that it pilots itself automatically. There is 0 intuition about what a pilot actually does in the cockpit for most normal people. And technology bares out that thought process as autopilot in it’s modern form can actually do 99% of flying, where take-off and landing isn’t exempted anymore.

        • LordKitsuna@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          21 days ago

          Looked it up some, In ideal conditions, and with supervision. The pilot can’t just take a nap and forget about it. Which, two Tesla’s credit when you activate the feature for the first time it does make you read a large unskippable warning that you need to be paying attention at all times. I still don’t mind the name autopilot I just hate that they are marketing it as fully autonomous self-driving because that’s the part that implies you don’t need to be watching over it (to me)

    • GoodEye8@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      22 days ago

      It is autopilot (a poor one but still one) that legally calls itself cruise control so Tesla wouldn’t have to take responsibility when it inevitably breaks the law.

  • Madnessx9@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    37
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    21 days ago

    Full speed in the dark, I think most people would failed to avoid that. What’s concerning is it does not stop afterwards

    • jj4211@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      40
      ·
      21 days ago

      Note that part of the discussion is we shouldn’t settle for human limitations when we don’t have to. Notably things like LIDAR are considered to give these systems superhuman vision. However, Tesla said ‘eyes are good enough for folks, so just cameras’.

      The rest of the industry said LIDAR is important and focus on trying to make it more practical.

      • linearchaos@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        19 days ago

        Hell, even not having lidar The thing was pretty clearly a large road obstacle a second and a half out. They had a whole left lane open At least enough time to do a significant speed reduction.

      • EndlessNightmare@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        20 days ago

        The rest of the industry said LIDAR is important and focus on trying to make it more practical.

        Volvo is using LIDAR. I trust them way more than Tesla when it comes to something pertaining to safety.

        • frezik@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          21 days ago

          The cameras alone should be able to see IR. There’s filters over most digital cameras to prevent that, but no reason to do it here.

          Tesla is just advertising technology that isn’t ready, and people are dying as a result.

          • fatalError@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            21 days ago

            For any camera to see IR, there must be IR light there to be seen. LIDAR and proximity sensors emit their own light, but TIL tesla doesn’t have any… Great tech…my 300€ vacuum bot has LIDAR… Ofc it doesn’t go 130KM/h in the dark, but I was 99.99% sure any self-driving car had the bare minimum of sensors, but I guess Tesla isn’t one of them.

          • cows_are_underrated@feddit.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            21 days ago

            And its also always to have multiple layers of defence. Its straight up stupid to remove the redundancy in safety measures because you trust your tech.

            • EndlessNightmare@reddthat.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              20 days ago

              Not only redundancy, but different types of sensors actually serve different purposes because they excel at different tasks.

      • alsimoneau@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        21 days ago

        Sensors that the Tesla famously doesn’t have (afaik, didn’t check) because Elon is a dumbass.

    • iAvicenna@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      21 days ago

      Isn’t Elon advertising AI as orders of magnitudes better reaction time and much less error prone than a human though…

      • lando55@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        21 days ago

        Remember when they removed ultrasonic and radar sensors in favor of “Tesla Vision”? That decision demonstrably cost people their lives and yet older, proven tech continues to be eschewed in favor of the cutting edge new shiny.

        I’m all for pushing the envelope when it comes to advancements in technology and AI in its many forms, but those of us that don’t buy Teslas never signed up to volunteer our lives as training data for FSD.

    • interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      21 days ago

      reading this, I am scared how dulled I have become to the danger posed from my 45 minute daily commute back from work. 65 kilometer driving into the black at 100km/h

  • Rhaedas@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    22 days ago

    Is there a longer video anywhere? Looking closely I have to wonder where the hell did that deer come from? There’s a car up ahead of the Tesla in the same lane, I presume quickly moved back in once it passed the deer? The deer didn’t spook or anything from that car?

    This would have been hard for a human driver to avoid hitting, but I know the issue is the right equipment would have been better than human vision, which should be the goal. And it didn’t detect the impact either since it didn’t stop.

    But I just think it’s peculiar that that deer just literally popped there without any sign of motion.

    • TimeSquirrel@kbin.melroy.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      22 days ago

      Ever hear the phrase “like a deer caught in headlights”? That’s what they do. They see oncoming headlights and just freeze.

      • Rhaedas@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        22 days ago

        It depends. If it’s on the side of the road it may do the opposite and jump in front of you. This one actually looked like it was going to start moving, but not a chance.

        It’s the gap between where the deer is in the dark and the car in front that’s odd. Only thing I can figure is the person was in the other lane and darted over just after passing the deer.

        • snooggums@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          22 days ago

          The front car is probably further ahead than you think, and a deer can move onto the road quickly and freeze when looking at headlights or slow down if confused. I think in this case the deer was facing away and may not have even heard the vehicle approaching so it wasn’t trying to avoid danger.

          I avoided a deer in a similar situation while driving last week, and the car ahead of us was closer than this clip. Just had to brake and change lanes.

      • Buelldozer@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        22 days ago

        Sure and living in Wyoming I’ve seen that happen often enough right in front of me but the more I watch this video the more I want to know how that deer GOT there.

        I can see a small shrub in the dark off the (right) side of the road but somehow you can’t see the deer enter the lane from either the right or left. The car in front of the Tesla is maybe 40 feet past the deer at the start of the video (watch the reflector posts) but somehow that car had no reaction to the deer standing in the middle of the lane?!

      • Pandemanium@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        22 days ago

        That’s why you flash your lights on and off at them, to get them to unfreeze before you get too close.

    • catloaf@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      22 days ago

      Deer will do that. They have absolutely no sense of self-preservation around cars.

      • snooggums@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        22 days ago

        That is because at a distance they freeze in case a predator hasn’t noticed them yet. Theey don’t bolt until they think an attack is imminent, and cars move to fast for them to react.

    • Buelldozer@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      22 days ago

      Is there a longer video anywhere? Looking closely I have to wonder where the hell did that deer come from?

      I have the same question. If you watch the video closely the deer is located a few feet before the 2nd reflector post you see at the start of the video. At that point in time the car in front is maybe 20’ beyond the post which means they should have encountered the deer within the last 30-40 feet but there was no reaction visible.

      You can also see both the left and right sides of the road at the reflector well before the deer is visible, you can even make out a small shrub off the road on the right, and but somehow can’t see the deer enter the road from either side?!

      It’s like the thing just teleported into the middle of the lane.

      The more I watch this the more suspicious I am that the video was edited.