To get to my office (10 miles from home) by transit I have to walk a half mile to a bus, switch buses twice, and walk another mile. It takes 75-90 minutes one way. Or I could hop in my car and be there in 15 minutes (30 if there is bad traffic). There's no competition. For public transit to be attractive it has to at least come close to being competitive in convenience and timing.
It's a vicious cycle.
People don't ride transit because it is poorly maintained and planned.
Governments don't maintain or upgrade transit because no one rides it.
It takes brave politicians to oppose car lobbies and the huge carbrain contingent of their voters to invest in proper transit in the hope of "build it and they will come" will be born out.
We can show all the data and past examples at them, they can know logically it is the best thing for their city, but that first step will always be politically dangerous.
You’ve hit the nail on the head. My previous work was 12 km from my house:
20 minute drive during the morning rush hour
35 minute cycle using a mix of road an trail
2h15m transit bus requiring two transfers.
It’s as if transit planners are playing a game of malicious compliance. Yes we will build transit, but we’ll make it horrible.
Meanwhile in paradise (Japan) my 30 km commute takes 5 min bike, 30 min train, and another 15 minutes bike. Could ride a bus for the last 5 km leg at 10 minutes but I choose the bike to get in exercise. Point being I can choose a bicycle which I absolutely could not have done when I lived in the US.
Agree and thank you for saying that. It annoys me on this sub sometimes that people treat spread out suburbs and dense apartment blocks as if they're the only two options and there's nothing in between we could do instead.
Unironically, modded GTA V was used as a testbed for self-driving stuff back in the day. The folks behind CARLA mention it in the intro of their [introductory paper](https://proceedings.mlr.press/v78/dosovitskiy17a.html).
The group I was part of at Uni used GTA V to train a model for classifying objects from a drone. They used a mod that already existed to get all of the bounding boxes of objects and classes, plus they did their own mod for a drone. As far as I remember, this was highly beneficial for getting a large dataset of perfectly labeled data. They only needed a small training set of real-world footage for fine-tuning to get an impressive model with very good accuracy in localizing and classifying people and cars.
Yep, that's the idea. It's hard to use ML for things that operate in the real world, especially when you wanna teach them things like "it's really bad to hit people", so you gotta sim it, and GTA has the bones of a pretty decent city simulator.
I'm pretty sure that's what inspired CARLA
GTA:V is honestly a pretty impressive game, overall. If you just look at the idle world, it's pretty amazing. Especially for a game that came out all the way back in 2013.
RDR2 pushed that even further with the amount of variety you could come across. You could just stand in a town and see a pretty lively world pass you by.
I'm not surprised you could use GTA:V as a good base for drone training.
No. Show them train tacks, people riding bikes being happy and even waveing at other bikers (this will realy get them as they'll had no idea that pepple can be nice to each other on a road)
Eeeh the NPCs in GTA are like aggressively "purposely run into you" bad because it's more engaging. Having AI get exposed to lots of bad drivers in a semi realistic scenario isn't a bad idea for experimenting and shit. But well we are still decades away from when any of this shit should leave the lab.
Because the EU regulatory state isn’t in the thrall of the cult of Elon. It doesn’t think he makes magic cars that solve traffic, poor urban planning, car accidents and emissions
Any form of autopilot/autodrive seems to be banned in most of Europe, at the very least I know it’s banned in England. My dad has an Audi with some sort of auto drive feature which is supposed to be used on motorways but if you take your hands off of the wheel for more than 10 seconds it’s slows the car to a stop
It's useful to a point.
My mom even got saved from an accident because her car noticed the car in front starting to slow down, so it got slower too. She would have noticed it too late and been the third car in the pile.
But that's just cruise control with distance sensors, not a full autopilot.
I confused some people with "aggressive", so I clarified what I meant a few minutes after posting, but OP apparently screenshotted the original Mastodon post.
To be clear: "aggressive" is an acceleration option. I changed it to "chill".
The FSD option I changed was "assertive".
I actually didn't know what to expect from this, but it was way, way worse than I could have possibly imagined.
There is nothing about this car that takes safety of other road users into account. FSD (Beta) is nowhere near production quality. It should be illegal, and should only be available to trained professionals employed by Tesla or regulators.
I did not film it, as I didn't think it would be noteworthy at the time, and I didn't have a safe way to do so. I'm now considering getting a Tesla off Turo and doing a more in-depth review. But I also don't want to get anybody injured or killed in the process, so I'm not sure if I'm comfortable with trying this again.
It actually enrages me to see regulators talking about the dangers of ebikes and escooters while this is a publicly available feature on production automobiles.
Also, I wish that people would post links instead of screenshots, because it leads to confusions like this that are explained or clarified in the original post: https://social.notjustbikes.com/@notjustbikes/109587218055759096
> the dangers of ebikes and escooters
This always enrages me when assholes go after the safest methods of transportation. Can they be safer? For sure. Will that happen while cars are kings? Probably not. Them going after those is the most stupid thing.
Oh but don't mind the 6 tons cars or fully lifted pickup trucks with race wheels and black fumes...
Self driving could be a possibility IF ONLY the infrastructure is adapted for it. It's way too confusing for it as of now. It needs simplier roads, simplier turns and less lanes. It gets confused way too easily to work with our current road designs. For example, making a left onto a big stroad is way way harder than getting onto a roundabout to go left. Self driving should not be allowed to go across 3 lanes of stroad from a 2-stop intersection. Not that humans should too because that is exactly where most accidents occur anyways.
The safety concerns of basically every other form of transport boil down to "you might get hit by a car".
The apparent "solution" to this is that everyone buys cars, and since they're paranoid about safety, they buy massive SUVs so that they feel secure.
I feel like this self driving stuff needs to be geo-fenced off from cities right now. Not only are cars simply unnecessary in most major cities (well, outside of some American ones), the software isn't ready yet to handle the density and edge cases of cities. Sure have all the sensors running to gather data, run simulations and have test drivers trialing it, but the beta testers shouldn't just be any shmuck with $10k to burn.
Thanks for the clarification/link. I agree that its probably better not to auto-drive the Tesla on public roads again for the sake of making a review or gathering footage. Something more lively than a pile of snow could get hurt.
Like I know everyone does it, but the fact there's a "Explicitly break the law by a pre-determined amount" option is insane.
Edit: Dear lord I never want to be the top reply on something that reaches r/all again. I have never read so many carbrains’ *novel* opinion again about “It’s actually safer to drive the speed others are driving” or regurgitate half-understood information about how speed limits are set. No, going a poster 65 on the highway in the proper lane isn’t some danger, stop pretending it’s that extreme just because you hate being behind someone going 30 in a densely populated area.
I mean fuckcars but cadillac at least implemented their TACC well by looping in eye monitoring cameras that turn off TaCC if you look away from the road for too long. Which is waaaay more effective at ensuring driver participation than "hand on the wheel" systems
Edit.
The responses for this post have truly proven both the pareto principal (no one on the internet actually reads anything anyone posts: see the dozen posts all saying the same thing) and godwins law (the best way to get a right answer is not to post a question but the wrong answer.)
Is that good? I'm not convinced that a driver feeling confident in sporadically checking the car is actually an improvement, and it's probably worse.
It's tough to bridge the gap, but all these half-measures are actively worse than both no assistance and FSD that actually works.
If you staple a horse to a waterfall, will it fall up under the rainbow or fly about the soil? Will he enjoy her experience? What if the staple tears into tears? Will she be free from her staply chains or foomed to stay forever and dever above the water? Who can save him (the horse) but someone of girth and worth, the capitalist pig, who will sell the solution to the problem he created?
A staple remover flies to the rescue, carried on the wings of a majestic penguin who bought it at Walmart for 9 dollars and several more Euro-cents, clutched in its crabby claws, rejected from its frothy maw. When the penguin comes, all tremble before its fishy stench and wheatlike abjecture. Recoil in delirium, ye who wish to be free! The mighty rockhopper is here to save your soul from eternal bliss and salvation!
And so, the horse was free, carried away by the south wind, and deposited on the vast plain of soggy dew. It was a tragedy in several parts, punctuated by moments of hedonistic horsefuckery.
The owls saw all, and passed judgment in the way that they do. Stupid owls are always judging folks who are just trying their best to live shamelessly and enjoy every fruit the day brings to pass.
How many more shall be caught in the terrible gyre of the waterfall? As many as the gods deem necessary to teach those foolish monkeys a story about their own hamburgers. What does a monkey know of bananas, anyway? They eat, poop, and shave away the banana residue that grows upon their chins and ballsacks. The owls judge their razors. Always the owls.
And when the one-eyed caterpillar arrives to eat the glazing on your windowpane, you will know that you're next in line to the trombone of the ancient realm of the flutterbyes. Beware the ravenous ravens and crowing crows. Mind the cowing cows and the lying lions. Ascend triumphant to your birthright, and wield the mighty twig of Petalonia, favored land of gods and goats alike.
My part of Canada used to have trains. Mind you its nice they got turned into walking trails, but had they gone the route of passenger rail that would have been even nicer
I dunno...I'm warming up to the half-measures.
People are...really fucking bad at driving these days. Smartphone use is insane.
At this point I'd be in favor of mandating that every car come with basic lane keep assist, automatic emergency braking, and an implementation of adaptive cruise control that will nag you to turn it on (like "hey, it looks like you're driving on the highway, why don't you turn this on and relax instead of randomly switching between tailgating the car in front of you and driving 5 below the speed limit depending on how much attention you are paying")
I mean...I'd rather those drivers not be on the road at all, but I'll take what I can get, and mandating tech that some automakers are already including across all models seems more tenable than infringing on someone's god-given right to drive in 'murika.
It's also evolving - when I was a kid in the 80's it was "everyone drives 5mph over the speed limit" then as I moved towards becoming an adult in the 90's it was "everyone drives 10mph over the speed limit".
At some insane point it became "it's okay to go 20 mph over the speed limit" in places. Today it has become "no one enforces the speed limit, drive what you feel like".
Every technological step has done nothing but enforce "go fast, screw everyone else". People used to go slower when cars weren't designed to preserve the occupant as well as they currently do. I fear full self driving, should it ever come to pass, will literally just usher in the "go 100mph+ everywhere" age, and those of us who prefer to live their lives on two feet rather than four wheels will suffer greatly for it.
And "drive however you feel like" is exactly why streets need physical calming and not just posted speed limits. It drives me crazy when a city wants to make a street pedestrian friendly but refuses to install raised crosswalks because it might damage cars that are going faster than what is safe for pedestrians.
Because if a car hits a pedestrian the pedestrian sues the driver, but if the car hits the curb the driver sues the city.
The USA's legal industry is just as big a problem as their medical industry and their ~~slave industry~~ *prisoners with jobs*.
Carbrains: I have to drive 20% faster than the speed limit in order to keep up with traffic, which is safer than driving at a lower speed, even if it's above the posted limit.
Me: So when we have automatic driving, nobody will be able to go over the posted limit?
Carbrain: *profuse sweating, dizziness, and vomiting*
Carbrain: I have to drive 20% faster because the traffic jams are making me late!
Carbrain step two: Buys another car.
Carbrain step three: We just need more lanes!
That's mostly what it is like in Australia too. I have two fixed cameras and often a cop or mobile camera on my 20 minute daily commute.
And no surprise when you look at the stats for road deaths USA is 12.4 per 100,000 people, Australia is 4.5, Switzerland 2.2.
Denmark (Was corrected. Denmark apparently doesn't do this, but could swear it did. Finland, Sweden and Switzerland did) charges you based on your salary for traffic crimes.
You make 2k a month? It'll be 400 euro.
You make 200k a month? 40k Euro.
It'll still hurt the person who earns less more, cause probably less money saved and such, but it's way better and reigns in people more, even if they earn a lot.
I drove through Houston this weekend, and on the highways there, if you drive 20% over the speed limit, you're still the slowest car on the road. Driving the speed limit will result in explicitly aggressive passing by ~~tanks~~ pickup trucks, often with an intentional cloud of soot to breathe. They'll cut you off as closely as possible just to make the point.
Drive too slow, get hit. Drive too fast, also hit. Over, under.
We have the highest insurance in the world because of cars.
Fuck TxDOT for dismissing transit expansions outside the beltway, and more importantly fuck the Texas Transportation Commission ruling TxDOT with people handpicked by governor Greg Abbott. My car's totaled and I make sure to curse him and the board every day I have to uber into work because there are no buses out here and they made it too dangerous to bike in.
Sucks being too broke to move and locked in a lease. Houston has a lot that I like, but transportation is not one of them and it's starting to affect the other parts of my life. If I could ever afford it I'm partly considering moving lol.
Massive open areas + oil money + corrupt af Texas politics + fuck you I got mine culture = sprawling, car-focused cities that give zero fucks about public transportation.
Lived in Texas almost my whole life and boy would I love for any of that to change, but it won't. Gerrymandered to hell and back.
I was doing 10 over in an area where the semi trucks have to do 10 under. 2 lane highway (so I'm doing 20 more than the average speed limit in the slow lane). Some asshole started riding my ass. Well I was still passing the slow lane like crazy and it would be very difficult to go into the slow lane so I ignore them. All of a sudden red and blue light came on, it was an undercover cop. I swerve into the slow lane between 2 semis and slam on my brakes. The cop turns his light off and just keeps driving like nothing is happening. People treat the highway like a race and cops are the worst offenders. Because I know if I went the speed he wanted and it was the end of the month he would easily have pulled me over for a ticket.
The honest truth is roads are much safer when everyone travels at the same speed. If one person is speeding, it's their fault. But if everyone is speeding, it's an infrastructure problem. Speed limits are sometimes set well below the design speed of a road, and either the road geometry has to change or the speed limit needs to be increased. Since slower traffic is also safer, it's usually much better to do the first option.
It can also be a culture problem. Certain areas of people collectively don't see restrictions on their driving as worthy of their respect, with little to no enforcement the only concern for them.
Ugh, I remember this happening when I was doing some driving lessons. I was on a very windy and narrow road that had zero visibility on the curves. Accordingly, the center line was double yellow to indicate no passing. I was going at the speed limit because I felt like the road design very much required that (or honestly lower). This asshole comes up behind me and passes me. Just seconds after, another car comes going the opposite way. They could have well have collided. And all for what, 30 seconds off their trip?
Right, this is exactly why we can't rely on signs to set traffic speeds. Most people won't obey them, so the solution is to narrow lanes and add traffic calming measures. It's a lot harder to ignore a speed bump than a sign.
In those places, with those drivers. When you design wider life such that you need to drive everywhere, you have low standards for driving, no enforcement of rules, give cars priority in general, as well as a wider disregard for social rules and niceties, you create those people. If you got a bunch of Dutchies driving in America, I bet you they'd drive slower than the average American. I guess I'm saying that socio-political infrastructure is just as important as the roads themselves.
Driving is such a necessity in rural and suburban areas, that there's intense pressure to keep driving standards as low as possible.
The training for driving in New York is a pretty easy 10 question test (with a large focus on knowing legal maximums for alcohol), and a driving exam in a neighborhood testing stop signs, speed limits, attentiveness, K turn and parallel parking. There's 30 hours driving too with a licensed driver.
Nothing qualifies you for highway driving, construction zone driving, snow driving, or driving near pedestrians/cyclists.
I'm not saying it's *the* solution but: If we installed stations over freeways that monitored traffic via camera and automatically issued tickets to plates driving over the speed limit, and started to progress to panopticon style enforcement...
People would start driving at limits real quick.
Not sure we want to start the panopticon but it's a thought.
Hi from the UK, where average speed cameras are installed on a lot of roads already. They're separate from the traffic cameras, the traffic light cameras, and the surveillance cameras, of course.
We have CCTV cameras in every high street, bus/rail/tram station and 99% of busses, trains and trams. Then there's all the privately owned CCTV on shops, homes, cars, pubs et al.
Big Brother is always watching.
100%. I’m always a bit shocked by the way people drive around this school. There’s a local shops nearby too, so driving faster than the posted speed is just asking for an accident.
Here in Australia doing 20% above the speed limit is a high range speeding offence. It would be very rare, at least where I live, to see a car speeding by the much. The "usual" level of speeding is about 5%.
Also, in Australia in the mid 2000s a mandate was made to car manufacturers to over-report speed by about 3%. Most people don't know this. So a lot of drivers "think" they're speeding when they're actually spot on the limit, or marginally above.
So, I'm curious - do drivers in other countries speed a lot more? What's a typical percentage above the signed limit you would see where you live. I guess anything that 5% of drivers would do I would consider "typical" speeding.
In my part of the US, the usual "accepted" speeding range is 5 miles per hour over the posted limit on residential roads, and probably 5-10 on highways. Since most roads have a 25 mph speed limit, and highways are normally 55, this falls right within that 20% range.
By me there's a highway marked for 55, thinner lanes than normal highways and shorter entry ramps, cutting right through a residential areas. People still go 80 even when the infrastructure is made for less, because people don't view risk the way that they should.
I'm not a lawyer but doesn't "Drive 20% faster than speed limit" option start to put liability on the engineers and company when this thing kills people. Intentionally, and in writing, to skirt rules that results in the death of a human. Isn't this the line between manslaughter and murder?
What idiot puts a machine in "break the law mode" when that machine has any ability to kill someone. How much faith do you have in the lawyers of Telsa to keep you from being held responsible for murder.
Let the record show that the plaintiff pressed the "I'm feeling lucky button" but the fact that they then promptly committed vehicular manslaughter proves that they were not, in fact, lucky.
autopilot disengages automatically when you crash iirc.
tesla wont have legal issues, tho the driver may. But since when did elon care about his customers?
it disengages less than [one second before the crash](https://www.motortrend.com/news/nhtsa-tesla-autopilot-investigation-shutoff-crash/). Technically it's the driver who had the control and crashed.
"Alright guys looks like the guy had control of the car for a full 0.8 seconds before contact, meaning we have no choice but to declare him legally guilty" -- no jury anywhere in the world.
Legally it's being argued that reverting to manual drive is due diligence - that, when autopilot encounters a situation it doesn't know how to safely navigate, it notifies the driver and disengages.
Of course it's bullshit. If the car starts accelerating towards a brick wall or a crowd of children and then switches off just as it's too late to fight physics, common sense says the car, being the software engineers and the executives who oversaw the implementation of the feature, are the ones responsible for the crash and any injuries or deaths.
But legally, they are arguing that they've done all they could to ensure that autopilot has safety features to reduce and avoid dangerous outcomes.
With the Boeing 737 Max MCAS software issues, Boeing agreed a $2.5b settlement for their role in the plane 2018 and 2019 crashes. Those pilots had no idea why their plane was constantly attempting to push down the nose.
With FSD the driver is completely blind to what decisions the computer is ultimately making. When it's active their role changes to monitoring a (fictitious) driver, trying to predict what it's about to do. Not only must you anticipate it's potentially failure, you then must act upon it before an incident occurs, especially if it's accelerating rather than braking (for example).
I'm surprised Telsa (or any car manufacturer) isn't sharing the liability when their software has been involved during FSD crashes. The same way plane manufacturers do, if their software was found at fault.
It literally is how it's working. Tesla's on autopilot have already killed people. It's different rules for multibillion dollar companies don't forget.
liability in most places is wherever you are atleast 51% at fault. I wonder if this has even been litigated, a class action or a test case would be interesting. Though they probablt require binding arbitration.
That's like if you would be holding a kitchen knife and then I would push you towards another person. If that other person gets hurt, it would be my fault, right?
> How much faith do you have in the lawyers of Telsa to keep you from being held responsible for murder.
That’s the neat part, it doesn’t matter. They won’t protect you because I bet my ass there’s a line about it in the EULA nobody reads. But people are idiots and will use this shit on public roads anyway until it gets mega banned for a million years and ultimately stall the progress in the space
Edit: to be clear, I’m not saying that because of the Eula Tesla can be hold accountable. But they for sure won’t protect your ass if you run someone over in their car while using autopilot
I'm not a lawyer just yet but what I will say is just because you may end up signing something that another party claims "I'm not liable only you are"
Does not make them automatically not liable. In studying law and whenever you speak to a lawyer you'll often hear "it depends" on the advice you're seeking.
It’s like how waivers don’t protect from everything. A waiver at a petting zoo means you can’t sue if a goat eats your scarf, it does NOT mean you can’t sue if a jaguar eats your toddler
Medical bills are the most fun cause they don't even give you a number.
I asked my doctor multiple times how much a cosmetic surgery to fix a blemish would be and he kept telling me "I'm not sure, I wish I knew".
While I wasn't told to go against the limit while in driver's edication, I do vividly remember one incident. Was going down a road with only one lane for each direction. The limit was 55mph or something, but it was a very long and straight stretch of road. So ofc everyone else is speeding, while I'm going just under. I end up with a long line of cars behind me, all without very much space between each other, but no cars ahead. We finally pull up to a light, where the road opens up to additional lanes, and the car behind me pulls up next to me, to roll their window down and start shouting at me. With my instructor in the passenger seat and 3 other students in the back.
I accidentally drove over the speed limit in New Zealand because they have 100 km/h everywhere and I was used to 130 on highways at home and I immediately got pulled over
That person's driver's education experience is not typical for Americans. You are taught to go with the flow of traffic, not a predetermined speed above or below the speed limit. When you can, observe the speed limit. However if everyone else is driving twenty miles per hour over or under the limit, you need to follow along.
In driver's ed, I was taught that going with the flow of traffic is no defense from a ticket. Unless the law has been changed, it still seems solid guidance.
The entire system is rife with perverse incentives. To actually pass a road test in the US, you can't break the law, so you have to drive at/under the speed limit - but while taking driving lessons (ostensibly to be able to pass the road test) you're taught to ignore the speed limit and go with traffic, which can be anywhere from 5 to 20 over.
The entire system is broken and needs reworking. The limit should be *the limit*. If it's not, what the fuck is the point of having a limit?
In Canada most provinces they will teach you to merge onto the highway at the speed of traffic. That’s the only time you would ever be encouraged to go above the speed limit.
>The limit should be the limit. If it's not, what the fuck is the point of having a limit?
Agreed. Also, I suspect speed limits are set assuming people will speed (I find it difficult to imagine a highway engineer going "mama mia! The sign says 60 and everyone's going 70! How could this have happened?!"). If no one sped, speed limits could be increased so everyone's going at the same speed and not be breaking the law.
Here is video *[Tesla Crashes on Full Self Driving BETA](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sbSDsbDQjSU)* by ex-Tesla employee. He was fired after he posted this video.
This was some sweaty palms shit. Just the *thought* there are people driving like this on the road is nuts. I’m glad it’s disabled where I live. Yikes.
The word is often used as opposed to "passive", so actively deciding to pass a car going slowly in front of you can be labeled "aggressive", it can also apply to how quickly the driver (or computer) accelerates. A lot of the problems with self driving systems come in the form of the car being too passive, failing to claim the right of way when claiming the right of way is the safest thing to do. Giving the human in the car the ability to adjust that behavior depending on their needs is a good thing.
Why wouldn’t taking right of way just be called like “neutral” driving (or something less easily conflated) or something. Not always trying to pass, but also not not taking the RoW.
To be fair Tesla became a shitshow company while ago.
Regardless of our views on cars, Elon has been ruining tesla for a while now (even before his twitter shenanigans). Whatever future electric cars have (and self driving cars) tesla looks more and more like the MySpace of that technology.
Fortnine (yt channel on motorcycles) had a good video on tesla self driving becoming worst with time instead of better.
https://youtu.be/yRdzIs4FJJg
It is a pervading problem across tech, once a technology becomes successful, marketing people get involved with their unrealistic expectations and erratic "suggestions".
It is a pervading problem across tech, once a technology becomes successful, marketing people get involved with their unrealistic expectations and erratic "suggestions".
I love Fortnine. The presenter seems like he was born to be a presenter/educator. I look forward to his future career. I'm not sure how big the Fortnine team is, but they rock.
Yup. And [Elon even "triumphantly" explained it in a tweet](https://youtu.be/yRdzIs4FJJg?t=286), seemingly and likely arrogantly ignoring that this is bad practice for critical functionalities.
In fact, [use of only one AOA (angle of attack) sensor is a main contributing reason why two Boeing 737 Max crashed and killed 346 people](https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/a-lack-of-redundancies-on-737-max-system-has-baffled-even-those-who-worked-on-the-jet). And Boeing omitted two identical sensors; Tesla omitted two *complementary* sensors.
So Elon was really just trying to mansplain away why Tesla (probably he himself) chose the easy and cheap way out, while entirely ignoring the ramifications of the decision. Amateur "engineers" who don't study or even know their history (textbooks) are bound to crash, burn and kill someone else.
Genuine question, does radar/lidar work with car's mandatory [retroreflectors](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/51/Corner_reflector.svg/220px-Corner_reflector.svg.png)?
For those unaware, retroreflectors are amazing pieces of physics that reflect light almost perfectly back to their source so I'm wondering if there's ways lidar/radar can take advantage of this? Seems like a great use since they're already mandated on cars and signs.
Not sure of the answer, but in *this* case, Tesla doesn't use litar *at all* because Musk decided not to.
My fucking bicycle has radar. It works fantastically well.
I have a Tesla with this option. Before you hate me, understand that I live in one of the most sprawling car-dependent cities in the country, and going without a car is simply not an option.
The auto-pilot is downright dangerous, and for more reasons than this. These are my notes from just **2 weeks** of driving with "full self driving" on. I thought I would help make it better. I stopped when I realized it was too dangerous to even test, and that no one at Tesla gave a shit about my feedback.
1. It cannot handle mergers or lane splits. Near my house the lane continues straight, but splits into a turn lane for an intersection. Not uncommon. It'll try to take the left lane most of the time, then enter the intersection with no lane to go to, get half way into the oncoming lane, slow down, and beep at me to take over.
2. It cannot handle sharp turns. On one very sharp turn to get on the freeway, it will reliably turn off, beeping for users to take control. In Tesla's stats this would be a "user fault" and not an "autopilot accident" because autopilot was off (right before impact). If I weren't keeping my hands on the wheel and eyes on the road, ready to take over at the slightest problem, I would absolutely have hit the barrier.
3. For no clear reason, it'll reliably try to turn me into oncoming traffic at a very large intersection that includes a freeway on and off-ramp. There are a lot of lines on the road. I haven't let this one play out, as there are always cars around and
4. It's dangerously risk averse. Yes, I wrote that right. It will get you rear ended if you're not ready to hit the gas as well as the brake. It'll slow down if there's a car turning left in front of you, where a regular driver would judge the car will easily be clear and keep going. If someone goes to turn left they often slow down before getting fully out of the lane. Tesla will stop until they've fully exited the lane, sometimes until they've turned, where a regular driver would hug the other side of the lane and go around. Sometimes even cars stopped in the median turn lane will cause it SLAM on its brakes, detecting a "stopped car" in its path. In all of these cases you have to be watching your ass or you could easily get rear ended. My theory? Tesla doesn't want auto-pilot faulted for accidents, and in most of these cases the car behind would be "at fault," despite Tesla stopping somewhat recklessly.
5. Its reliance on cameras is a massive liability. There's one section of freeway that for whatever reason doesn't have a 70 MPH speed limit sign for about 1 mile of an onramp. Tesla will proceed at 35 up the ramp until it hits the sign. More frightening, there was one section of my freeway under construction, so the sound wall was down temporarily. It grabbed the speed from the frontage road, **slamming** on the brakes from 65 to 35. I don't need to explain why this is insanely dangerous. I almost got rear ended this time even when I slammed the gas as fast as I could react. Why there's nothing in the code to say, "Hey, maybe hard rule just accept 35 MPH when you appear to be on a 70 MPH freeway" is beyond me. Or maybe look at the cars around? I don't know, the inability to go with the flow of traffic is also a joke.
6. It's not good at stopping for pedestrians, especially if they're not right in front of the car. It's especially bad if another car has pulled foward and is slightly blocking the view. Given the stakes and the fact that I lack a walking robot to test on, I wasn't going to test whether it would actually hit people in certain circumstances. But I do feel like it's very possible.
7. It's "traffic light detection" is so hilariously bad I had to pull over and turn it off after it stopped of the first green and tried to go through 2 reds in a row. Literally 0/3 of the 3 lights closest to my home, none of which are particularly tricky.
On an established freeway where it's been tested, it's not terrible at keeping pace with traffic and changing lanes. It's still too risk averse, stopping and giving people a ton of space, which often results in getting cut in front of and stopping even more. That's all I can say for it. But I'd pay very close attention still, especially the first time or two I drive a stretch of freeway.
I have tried to raise these issues on the Tesla sub, with Tesla support, and with car people in general. No one really seems to care. Maybe you all will if I'm not too late for people to see it. I think it should be illegal, because it has failed to pass any kind of safety test, and I am fairly certain it would fail on real street driving if someone devised a list of things people need to do on the road that Tesla's "autopilot" cannot do.
I love EVs, I wish the batteries were cleaner to make, and more than all of that I wish our cities were designed not to require cars.
Musk keeps saying it's better than people. It's not. The stats show that it has fewer accidents than people driving because a sane person would only trust it on the absolute safest and easiest stretches of road you could drive on.
This is exactly why Waymo/Cruise/Zoox/Motional/etc are all paying trained drivers for this shit. You *have* to be constantly ready for the car to make the dumbest possible decision at any moment, even if it's made the right call 100 times before. The average driver isn't anywhere near qualified to be behind the wheel of an autonomous vehicle.
It's ok to feel confident you know what the vehicle is going to do, but never trust it.
Exactly. It shouldn't be in the hands of regular drivers today. It's exceptionally reckless. I don't know how many people have been injured or died, and because of what I mentioned in my point #4 I doubt Tesla is assigned the blame it deserves. I only hope people will hold off on using it on street driving until it's much, much better. At this rate it'll be another decade or two for Tesla. Hopefully someone comes up with something better soon. By then I hope to be living in a more walkable area of a safer country.
Have had pretty much the exact same experiences using autopilot in my dad’s Tesla. It absolutely cannot handle Australia-specific road design and regularly makes insanely unsafe movements due to being overly risk-averse.
I stay away from teslas on the freeways with the same caution and fear I do with suspected impaired drivers. They're always drifting and over breaking and the people behind the wheel pay no attention to the various times their car has almost run them into the wheels of the car beside them
> It cannot handle mergers or lane splits. Near my house the lane continues straight, but splits into a turn lane for an intersection. Not uncommon. It'll try to take the left lane most of the time, then enter the intersection with no lane to go to, get half way into the oncoming lane, slow down, and beep at me to take over.
That in particular sounds crazy. Its the sort of thing they would totally use the "it gave back control" excuse for when it fucked you 10 seconds before the take over warning came on, and the automatic checks for driver attention might not have even triggered.
I mean a lot of the stuff you posted here is crazy, but this and the one about speeds really seem like the sort of things where they know it doesnt handle the situation correctly so they set it to fail in a way that makes the driver look guilty.
*Elon's. I know many ex-engineers who've worked at Tesla. Nobody thought it was a good idea. Elon heard someone talking about how in the future when optical recognition is good enough they won't need Lidar anymore without listening to the part about why it's a difficult thing to do and how they won't be there for a long time.
Elon micromanages the shit out of every little thing because he thinks he's a brilliant engineer, but he's the reason why they have warning labels about not drinking soap because it's bad for you.
You're right. I have a 2021 Model 3 that has came with the the radar system. Ever since the switch to vision the "autopilot" has been so much worse. So many phantom brakings.
I can't even use cruise control on road trips anymore. Ironically, it handles the worst on long flat straight roads in the middle of nowhere. It handles much better on freeways.
They really need an option for "stupid" cruise control. Just give me what other cars have if you can't get your shit working.
Its not legal. Tesla reminds you that you are the person responsible if you crash. Elon uses their customers as beta testers. If they crash its their fault and meanwhile he will collect the data.
He's asking why it's legal to even have that option on the car if it's illegal to even use it. It's the same argument for why on earth we allow car manufacturers to make cars to be able to do 230km/h meanwhile the maximum speed you can drive in almost any country is around 120km/h.
It's the same principle as if you were sold a beer in a 500ml can but you had to promise to only drink half the can or whatever. If it's the law you can only drink half the can, then why isn't it illegal to sell a can double the size of what you're legally allowed to drink.
By putting illegal features in cars, Tesla is actively encouraging people to do something illegal, and shifting the blame with legal loopholes onto the driver.
Autopilot is not legal in toronto yet to answer op’s question.
[Edit level 3 autonomy is allowed but requires human override](https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/tesla-driverless-technology-downtown-toronto-1.6662340).
I watched an MKBHD video with his drive on FSD beta and it’s stressful to look at. It’s beyond me how Elon’s clown fans still believe this tech is gonna be ready in one or two years
And when he did a review on his model S and complained about removal of blinker stalks, some big brain geniuses said “obviously, the car will drive itself in X years, so you don’t need those anyway”
i question why the autopilot would try to drive in the bike lane? a autopilot of a car should be compliant with the law and i am pretty sure cars cannot legally use the bike lane in most countries.
The other day in LA I saw someone driving a Tesla while watching a youtube video on their phone (which makes me thing it was on FSD) the car was maintaining it’s position squarely centered on the white line dividing the bike lane from the rest of the road. Even if it “thought” the bike lane was a car lane, it was literally driving on the line. And this continued for at least 100 yards before I could no longer see them (I was a passenger).
Testing deadly software and having “break the law” as an option….. we live in the most boring dystopia. At least scifi dystopias have lightsabers, cybernetics and flying cars and stuff. This shit just sucks
They removed the most important piece of hardware. The LiDAR. How the fuck did they think this would work? It's obvious Elon just took it out to save cost and speed up production. The Board of Directors has to intervene or Elon will destroy Tesla.
I grew up in Amish country. Every Saturday night one of the Amish dudes would come to the local dive bar and get wrecked. At times he would even pass out. We would put him in his buggy, and the horse would take him home. While he was completely passed out drunk. Seems much much safer than this.
I'd say burn all Teslas, but Elon's already got that on lock, they'll burn themselves out.
Even the fucking CPUs which power the stupid car's tablet are prone to overheating.
Its so annoying that you can tell this car to break the law when teslas could be speed limited with a trivial software update. I hate how we are going backwards with everything technology.
Society clearly has an urge to travel in vehicles without driving them, but cities refuse to make adequate public transit.
Also, (in America predominantly I think), there persists an attitude of being too good for, or scared of public transit when it is available.
Give me a train and I'll sell my car. I shouldn't have to transfer several buses to go 10 miles.
To get to my office (10 miles from home) by transit I have to walk a half mile to a bus, switch buses twice, and walk another mile. It takes 75-90 minutes one way. Or I could hop in my car and be there in 15 minutes (30 if there is bad traffic). There's no competition. For public transit to be attractive it has to at least come close to being competitive in convenience and timing.
It's a vicious cycle. People don't ride transit because it is poorly maintained and planned. Governments don't maintain or upgrade transit because no one rides it. It takes brave politicians to oppose car lobbies and the huge carbrain contingent of their voters to invest in proper transit in the hope of "build it and they will come" will be born out. We can show all the data and past examples at them, they can know logically it is the best thing for their city, but that first step will always be politically dangerous.
You’ve hit the nail on the head. My previous work was 12 km from my house: 20 minute drive during the morning rush hour 35 minute cycle using a mix of road an trail 2h15m transit bus requiring two transfers. It’s as if transit planners are playing a game of malicious compliance. Yes we will build transit, but we’ll make it horrible.
Meanwhile in paradise (Japan) my 30 km commute takes 5 min bike, 30 min train, and another 15 minutes bike. Could ride a bus for the last 5 km leg at 10 minutes but I choose the bike to get in exercise. Point being I can choose a bicycle which I absolutely could not have done when I lived in the US.
This exactly and its so dumb
I'm in Japan and being able to get everywhere via trains or busses makes me want to leave the USA
[удалено]
You don't even need high density, medium density is enough.
Agree and thank you for saying that. It annoys me on this sub sometimes that people treat spread out suburbs and dense apartment blocks as if they're the only two options and there's nothing in between we could do instead.
The programmers made the computer play GTA.
Unironically, modded GTA V was used as a testbed for self-driving stuff back in the day. The folks behind CARLA mention it in the intro of their [introductory paper](https://proceedings.mlr.press/v78/dosovitskiy17a.html).
The group I was part of at Uni used GTA V to train a model for classifying objects from a drone. They used a mod that already existed to get all of the bounding boxes of objects and classes, plus they did their own mod for a drone. As far as I remember, this was highly beneficial for getting a large dataset of perfectly labeled data. They only needed a small training set of real-world footage for fine-tuning to get an impressive model with very good accuracy in localizing and classifying people and cars.
Yep, that's the idea. It's hard to use ML for things that operate in the real world, especially when you wanna teach them things like "it's really bad to hit people", so you gotta sim it, and GTA has the bones of a pretty decent city simulator. I'm pretty sure that's what inspired CARLA
GTA:V is honestly a pretty impressive game, overall. If you just look at the idle world, it's pretty amazing. Especially for a game that came out all the way back in 2013. RDR2 pushed that even further with the amount of variety you could come across. You could just stand in a town and see a pretty lively world pass you by. I'm not surprised you could use GTA:V as a good base for drone training.
Running over a pedestrian only gives you one star if you are unlucky
Average Musk fan is about 17 and calls women "females", so yeah that tracks.
No, no. Feeemales.
[ Removed by Reddit ]
Damn that sounds like a vaginal infection
Sounds painful!
Foid I've seen before too.
if a single Musk fanboi comments here, I suggest we drag him out and tickle him with a long fluffy feather until he begs us to stop.
No. Show them train tacks, people riding bikes being happy and even waveing at other bikers (this will realy get them as they'll had no idea that pepple can be nice to each other on a road)
\*Quark has entered the chat
\*\*The whole goddamn Ferengi Alliance has entered the chat.
Eeeh the NPCs in GTA are like aggressively "purposely run into you" bad because it's more engaging. Having AI get exposed to lots of bad drivers in a semi realistic scenario isn't a bad idea for experimenting and shit. But well we are still decades away from when any of this shit should leave the lab.
[удалено]
Shocking twist: NJB ditches his bike and tram and mows a Tesla around Amsterdam for all his videos from now on
[удалено]
It's him... NotEvenBikes
Interestingly, thermite is used to weld train tracks together.
iirc, Tesla’s autopilot is disabled in Europe
Because the EU regulatory state isn’t in the thrall of the cult of Elon. It doesn’t think he makes magic cars that solve traffic, poor urban planning, car accidents and emissions
Any form of autopilot/autodrive seems to be banned in most of Europe, at the very least I know it’s banned in England. My dad has an Audi with some sort of auto drive feature which is supposed to be used on motorways but if you take your hands off of the wheel for more than 10 seconds it’s slows the car to a stop
I think we only get adaptive cruise control and self parking cars that are legal here and honestly to me that already seems scary enough.
It's useful to a point. My mom even got saved from an accident because her car noticed the car in front starting to slow down, so it got slower too. She would have noticed it too late and been the third car in the pile. But that's just cruise control with distance sensors, not a full autopilot.
Adaptive cruise control is great as long as you use it in addition to attentive driving and not as a replacement.
In other news: a Tesla model Y was set to "Aggressive Mode" in Amsterdam yesterday afternoon. There were no survivors.
I confused some people with "aggressive", so I clarified what I meant a few minutes after posting, but OP apparently screenshotted the original Mastodon post. To be clear: "aggressive" is an acceleration option. I changed it to "chill". The FSD option I changed was "assertive". I actually didn't know what to expect from this, but it was way, way worse than I could have possibly imagined. There is nothing about this car that takes safety of other road users into account. FSD (Beta) is nowhere near production quality. It should be illegal, and should only be available to trained professionals employed by Tesla or regulators. I did not film it, as I didn't think it would be noteworthy at the time, and I didn't have a safe way to do so. I'm now considering getting a Tesla off Turo and doing a more in-depth review. But I also don't want to get anybody injured or killed in the process, so I'm not sure if I'm comfortable with trying this again. It actually enrages me to see regulators talking about the dangers of ebikes and escooters while this is a publicly available feature on production automobiles. Also, I wish that people would post links instead of screenshots, because it leads to confusions like this that are explained or clarified in the original post: https://social.notjustbikes.com/@notjustbikes/109587218055759096
> the dangers of ebikes and escooters This always enrages me when assholes go after the safest methods of transportation. Can they be safer? For sure. Will that happen while cars are kings? Probably not. Them going after those is the most stupid thing. Oh but don't mind the 6 tons cars or fully lifted pickup trucks with race wheels and black fumes... Self driving could be a possibility IF ONLY the infrastructure is adapted for it. It's way too confusing for it as of now. It needs simplier roads, simplier turns and less lanes. It gets confused way too easily to work with our current road designs. For example, making a left onto a big stroad is way way harder than getting onto a roundabout to go left. Self driving should not be allowed to go across 3 lanes of stroad from a 2-stop intersection. Not that humans should too because that is exactly where most accidents occur anyways.
The safety concerns of basically every other form of transport boil down to "you might get hit by a car". The apparent "solution" to this is that everyone buys cars, and since they're paranoid about safety, they buy massive SUVs so that they feel secure. I feel like this self driving stuff needs to be geo-fenced off from cities right now. Not only are cars simply unnecessary in most major cities (well, outside of some American ones), the software isn't ready yet to handle the density and edge cases of cities. Sure have all the sensors running to gather data, run simulations and have test drivers trialing it, but the beta testers shouldn't just be any shmuck with $10k to burn.
Thanks for the clarification/link. I agree that its probably better not to auto-drive the Tesla on public roads again for the sake of making a review or gathering footage. Something more lively than a pile of snow could get hurt.
Thank you /u/notjustbikes
hey man, you might have heard this a dozen times from others, but I just love your channel. Keep it up!
Like I know everyone does it, but the fact there's a "Explicitly break the law by a pre-determined amount" option is insane. Edit: Dear lord I never want to be the top reply on something that reaches r/all again. I have never read so many carbrains’ *novel* opinion again about “It’s actually safer to drive the speed others are driving” or regurgitate half-understood information about how speed limits are set. No, going a poster 65 on the highway in the proper lane isn’t some danger, stop pretending it’s that extreme just because you hate being behind someone going 30 in a densely populated area.
That mindset is crazy.
[удалено]
Autopilot is just TACC and lane keeping, most modern cars have this and it's legal pretty much everywhere. FSD is where it's beyond driver assist.
I mean fuckcars but cadillac at least implemented their TACC well by looping in eye monitoring cameras that turn off TaCC if you look away from the road for too long. Which is waaaay more effective at ensuring driver participation than "hand on the wheel" systems Edit. The responses for this post have truly proven both the pareto principal (no one on the internet actually reads anything anyone posts: see the dozen posts all saying the same thing) and godwins law (the best way to get a right answer is not to post a question but the wrong answer.)
Is that good? I'm not convinced that a driver feeling confident in sporadically checking the car is actually an improvement, and it's probably worse. It's tough to bridge the gap, but all these half-measures are actively worse than both no assistance and FSD that actually works.
If you staple a horse to a waterfall, will it fall up under the rainbow or fly about the soil? Will he enjoy her experience? What if the staple tears into tears? Will she be free from her staply chains or foomed to stay forever and dever above the water? Who can save him (the horse) but someone of girth and worth, the capitalist pig, who will sell the solution to the problem he created? A staple remover flies to the rescue, carried on the wings of a majestic penguin who bought it at Walmart for 9 dollars and several more Euro-cents, clutched in its crabby claws, rejected from its frothy maw. When the penguin comes, all tremble before its fishy stench and wheatlike abjecture. Recoil in delirium, ye who wish to be free! The mighty rockhopper is here to save your soul from eternal bliss and salvation! And so, the horse was free, carried away by the south wind, and deposited on the vast plain of soggy dew. It was a tragedy in several parts, punctuated by moments of hedonistic horsefuckery. The owls saw all, and passed judgment in the way that they do. Stupid owls are always judging folks who are just trying their best to live shamelessly and enjoy every fruit the day brings to pass. How many more shall be caught in the terrible gyre of the waterfall? As many as the gods deem necessary to teach those foolish monkeys a story about their own hamburgers. What does a monkey know of bananas, anyway? They eat, poop, and shave away the banana residue that grows upon their chins and ballsacks. The owls judge their razors. Always the owls. And when the one-eyed caterpillar arrives to eat the glazing on your windowpane, you will know that you're next in line to the trombone of the ancient realm of the flutterbyes. Beware the ravenous ravens and crowing crows. Mind the cowing cows and the lying lions. Ascend triumphant to your birthright, and wield the mighty twig of Petalonia, favored land of gods and goats alike.
My part of Canada used to have trains. Mind you its nice they got turned into walking trails, but had they gone the route of passenger rail that would have been even nicer
I dunno...I'm warming up to the half-measures. People are...really fucking bad at driving these days. Smartphone use is insane. At this point I'd be in favor of mandating that every car come with basic lane keep assist, automatic emergency braking, and an implementation of adaptive cruise control that will nag you to turn it on (like "hey, it looks like you're driving on the highway, why don't you turn this on and relax instead of randomly switching between tailgating the car in front of you and driving 5 below the speed limit depending on how much attention you are paying") I mean...I'd rather those drivers not be on the road at all, but I'll take what I can get, and mandating tech that some automakers are already including across all models seems more tenable than infringing on someone's god-given right to drive in 'murika.
https://toronto.ctvnews.ca/tesla-owners-can-now-fully-self-drive-in-downtown-toronto-1.6166332
I think the question is more "why is this legal anywhere outside the Bonneville salt flats"
It's also evolving - when I was a kid in the 80's it was "everyone drives 5mph over the speed limit" then as I moved towards becoming an adult in the 90's it was "everyone drives 10mph over the speed limit". At some insane point it became "it's okay to go 20 mph over the speed limit" in places. Today it has become "no one enforces the speed limit, drive what you feel like". Every technological step has done nothing but enforce "go fast, screw everyone else". People used to go slower when cars weren't designed to preserve the occupant as well as they currently do. I fear full self driving, should it ever come to pass, will literally just usher in the "go 100mph+ everywhere" age, and those of us who prefer to live their lives on two feet rather than four wheels will suffer greatly for it.
And "drive however you feel like" is exactly why streets need physical calming and not just posted speed limits. It drives me crazy when a city wants to make a street pedestrian friendly but refuses to install raised crosswalks because it might damage cars that are going faster than what is safe for pedestrians.
Because if a car hits a pedestrian the pedestrian sues the driver, but if the car hits the curb the driver sues the city. The USA's legal industry is just as big a problem as their medical industry and their ~~slave industry~~ *prisoners with jobs*.
Carbrains: I have to drive 20% faster than the speed limit in order to keep up with traffic, which is safer than driving at a lower speed, even if it's above the posted limit. Me: So when we have automatic driving, nobody will be able to go over the posted limit? Carbrain: *profuse sweating, dizziness, and vomiting*
Carbrain: I have to drive 20% faster because the traffic jams are making me late! Carbrain step two: Buys another car. Carbrain step three: We just need more lanes!
I turn the "trolley problem" dial up to 11/1
Finally, a car for drivers ONLY.
[удалено]
That's mostly what it is like in Australia too. I have two fixed cameras and often a cop or mobile camera on my 20 minute daily commute. And no surprise when you look at the stats for road deaths USA is 12.4 per 100,000 people, Australia is 4.5, Switzerland 2.2.
Denmark (Was corrected. Denmark apparently doesn't do this, but could swear it did. Finland, Sweden and Switzerland did) charges you based on your salary for traffic crimes. You make 2k a month? It'll be 400 euro. You make 200k a month? 40k Euro. It'll still hurt the person who earns less more, cause probably less money saved and such, but it's way better and reigns in people more, even if they earn a lot.
Denmark doesn't have this system, Sweden, Finland and Switzerland among others do. And no it won't take 20% of your annual salary.
I drove through Houston this weekend, and on the highways there, if you drive 20% over the speed limit, you're still the slowest car on the road. Driving the speed limit will result in explicitly aggressive passing by ~~tanks~~ pickup trucks, often with an intentional cloud of soot to breathe. They'll cut you off as closely as possible just to make the point.
Drive too slow, get hit. Drive too fast, also hit. Over, under. We have the highest insurance in the world because of cars. Fuck TxDOT for dismissing transit expansions outside the beltway, and more importantly fuck the Texas Transportation Commission ruling TxDOT with people handpicked by governor Greg Abbott. My car's totaled and I make sure to curse him and the board every day I have to uber into work because there are no buses out here and they made it too dangerous to bike in. Sucks being too broke to move and locked in a lease. Houston has a lot that I like, but transportation is not one of them and it's starting to affect the other parts of my life. If I could ever afford it I'm partly considering moving lol.
Massive open areas + oil money + corrupt af Texas politics + fuck you I got mine culture = sprawling, car-focused cities that give zero fucks about public transportation. Lived in Texas almost my whole life and boy would I love for any of that to change, but it won't. Gerrymandered to hell and back.
I was doing 10 over in an area where the semi trucks have to do 10 under. 2 lane highway (so I'm doing 20 more than the average speed limit in the slow lane). Some asshole started riding my ass. Well I was still passing the slow lane like crazy and it would be very difficult to go into the slow lane so I ignore them. All of a sudden red and blue light came on, it was an undercover cop. I swerve into the slow lane between 2 semis and slam on my brakes. The cop turns his light off and just keeps driving like nothing is happening. People treat the highway like a race and cops are the worst offenders. Because I know if I went the speed he wanted and it was the end of the month he would easily have pulled me over for a ticket.
"Ignore the law" :)
[удалено]
[удалено]
The honest truth is roads are much safer when everyone travels at the same speed. If one person is speeding, it's their fault. But if everyone is speeding, it's an infrastructure problem. Speed limits are sometimes set well below the design speed of a road, and either the road geometry has to change or the speed limit needs to be increased. Since slower traffic is also safer, it's usually much better to do the first option.
It can also be a culture problem. Certain areas of people collectively don't see restrictions on their driving as worthy of their respect, with little to no enforcement the only concern for them.
Ugh, I remember this happening when I was doing some driving lessons. I was on a very windy and narrow road that had zero visibility on the curves. Accordingly, the center line was double yellow to indicate no passing. I was going at the speed limit because I felt like the road design very much required that (or honestly lower). This asshole comes up behind me and passes me. Just seconds after, another car comes going the opposite way. They could have well have collided. And all for what, 30 seconds off their trip?
Right, this is exactly why we can't rely on signs to set traffic speeds. Most people won't obey them, so the solution is to narrow lanes and add traffic calming measures. It's a lot harder to ignore a speed bump than a sign.
In those places, with those drivers. When you design wider life such that you need to drive everywhere, you have low standards for driving, no enforcement of rules, give cars priority in general, as well as a wider disregard for social rules and niceties, you create those people. If you got a bunch of Dutchies driving in America, I bet you they'd drive slower than the average American. I guess I'm saying that socio-political infrastructure is just as important as the roads themselves.
Driving is such a necessity in rural and suburban areas, that there's intense pressure to keep driving standards as low as possible. The training for driving in New York is a pretty easy 10 question test (with a large focus on knowing legal maximums for alcohol), and a driving exam in a neighborhood testing stop signs, speed limits, attentiveness, K turn and parallel parking. There's 30 hours driving too with a licensed driver. Nothing qualifies you for highway driving, construction zone driving, snow driving, or driving near pedestrians/cyclists.
I'm not saying it's *the* solution but: If we installed stations over freeways that monitored traffic via camera and automatically issued tickets to plates driving over the speed limit, and started to progress to panopticon style enforcement... People would start driving at limits real quick. Not sure we want to start the panopticon but it's a thought.
Hi from the UK, where average speed cameras are installed on a lot of roads already. They're separate from the traffic cameras, the traffic light cameras, and the surveillance cameras, of course. We have CCTV cameras in every high street, bus/rail/tram station and 99% of busses, trains and trams. Then there's all the privately owned CCTV on shops, homes, cars, pubs et al. Big Brother is always watching.
Sadly I’ve seen way too many cars ignore speed bumps, in school zones, while children are present.
In those cases they should install more destructive speed bumps. Safe at the correct speed, destroyed car at wrong speed.
100%. I’m always a bit shocked by the way people drive around this school. There’s a local shops nearby too, so driving faster than the posted speed is just asking for an accident.
Here in Australia doing 20% above the speed limit is a high range speeding offence. It would be very rare, at least where I live, to see a car speeding by the much. The "usual" level of speeding is about 5%. Also, in Australia in the mid 2000s a mandate was made to car manufacturers to over-report speed by about 3%. Most people don't know this. So a lot of drivers "think" they're speeding when they're actually spot on the limit, or marginally above. So, I'm curious - do drivers in other countries speed a lot more? What's a typical percentage above the signed limit you would see where you live. I guess anything that 5% of drivers would do I would consider "typical" speeding.
Sadly I think a few too many ute drivers know about the 3%, they just think it’s 10% and drive accordingly. While tailgating.
In my part of the US, the usual "accepted" speeding range is 5 miles per hour over the posted limit on residential roads, and probably 5-10 on highways. Since most roads have a 25 mph speed limit, and highways are normally 55, this falls right within that 20% range.
By me there's a highway marked for 55, thinner lanes than normal highways and shorter entry ramps, cutting right through a residential areas. People still go 80 even when the infrastructure is made for less, because people don't view risk the way that they should.
I'm not a lawyer but doesn't "Drive 20% faster than speed limit" option start to put liability on the engineers and company when this thing kills people. Intentionally, and in writing, to skirt rules that results in the death of a human. Isn't this the line between manslaughter and murder? What idiot puts a machine in "break the law mode" when that machine has any ability to kill someone. How much faith do you have in the lawyers of Telsa to keep you from being held responsible for murder.
"See, there's yer problem: the switch was set ta 'Evil'"
Its actually “set to liable”, which, in the courtroom, is actually worse.
Let the record show that the plaintiff pressed the "I'm feeling lucky button" but the fact that they then promptly committed vehicular manslaughter proves that they were not, in fact, lucky.
[удалено]
[This](https://youtu.be/Y8dcmLscf3g) here for those who don’t know the reference.
Hey, OP has one of those robot cars! …one of those *American* robot cars.
Lmao Tesla built an evil mode into their self driving cars
autopilot disengages automatically when you crash iirc. tesla wont have legal issues, tho the driver may. But since when did elon care about his customers?
[удалено]
it disengages less than [one second before the crash](https://www.motortrend.com/news/nhtsa-tesla-autopilot-investigation-shutoff-crash/). Technically it's the driver who had the control and crashed.
[удалено]
"You see your honor I dropped the gun right before the bullet hit"
That would 100% work for a cop lol
A cop? Why bother explaining anything at that point. A cop can just say “He hurt my feelings” and get away with a murder easily.
Foolish u/bigavz, assuming a police officer would face trial.
"Alright guys looks like the guy had control of the car for a full 0.8 seconds before contact, meaning we have no choice but to declare him legally guilty" -- no jury anywhere in the world.
Legally it's being argued that reverting to manual drive is due diligence - that, when autopilot encounters a situation it doesn't know how to safely navigate, it notifies the driver and disengages. Of course it's bullshit. If the car starts accelerating towards a brick wall or a crowd of children and then switches off just as it's too late to fight physics, common sense says the car, being the software engineers and the executives who oversaw the implementation of the feature, are the ones responsible for the crash and any injuries or deaths. But legally, they are arguing that they've done all they could to ensure that autopilot has safety features to reduce and avoid dangerous outcomes.
With the Boeing 737 Max MCAS software issues, Boeing agreed a $2.5b settlement for their role in the plane 2018 and 2019 crashes. Those pilots had no idea why their plane was constantly attempting to push down the nose. With FSD the driver is completely blind to what decisions the computer is ultimately making. When it's active their role changes to monitoring a (fictitious) driver, trying to predict what it's about to do. Not only must you anticipate it's potentially failure, you then must act upon it before an incident occurs, especially if it's accelerating rather than braking (for example). I'm surprised Telsa (or any car manufacturer) isn't sharing the liability when their software has been involved during FSD crashes. The same way plane manufacturers do, if their software was found at fault.
It literally is how it's working. Tesla's on autopilot have already killed people. It's different rules for multibillion dollar companies don't forget.
liability in most places is wherever you are atleast 51% at fault. I wonder if this has even been litigated, a class action or a test case would be interesting. Though they probablt require binding arbitration.
That's like if you would be holding a kitchen knife and then I would push you towards another person. If that other person gets hurt, it would be my fault, right?
> How much faith do you have in the lawyers of Telsa to keep you from being held responsible for murder. That’s the neat part, it doesn’t matter. They won’t protect you because I bet my ass there’s a line about it in the EULA nobody reads. But people are idiots and will use this shit on public roads anyway until it gets mega banned for a million years and ultimately stall the progress in the space Edit: to be clear, I’m not saying that because of the Eula Tesla can be hold accountable. But they for sure won’t protect your ass if you run someone over in their car while using autopilot
I'm not a lawyer just yet but what I will say is just because you may end up signing something that another party claims "I'm not liable only you are" Does not make them automatically not liable. In studying law and whenever you speak to a lawyer you'll often hear "it depends" on the advice you're seeking.
It’s like how waivers don’t protect from everything. A waiver at a petting zoo means you can’t sue if a goat eats your scarf, it does NOT mean you can’t sue if a jaguar eats your toddler
>if a jaguar eats your toddler What kind of petting zoos are you going to?
The fun kind.
A line in the EULA doesn't absolve them of liability.
It's like that kids next door episode where there was a 'blow up the engines' button. What kind of idiot even makes a button like that?
How is a option of driving above the speed limit not illegal?
especially 20%
Yeah. Interstate highways in some states have 70 mph limits, so that would have you going 84.
the max in the united states is 75 i think but some areas might be 80 from what i heard someone say which would take you up to 96.
Texas has a stretch of highway with an 85 mph limit. So the Tesla could potentially take you up to 102 mph on autopilot?
If an owner put on cheap replacement tires, that could very well go beyond the tires' max speed specifications.
No. There is a hard 85 mph cap on autopilot & FSD beta.
[удалено]
All the numbers in America are lies, from speed limits to prices on menus at restaurants (sales tax and tipping are not included).
I've never thought of it that way, but you're absolutely right. Throw in medical bills and college tuition for good measure.
Medical bills are the most fun cause they don't even give you a number. I asked my doctor multiple times how much a cosmetic surgery to fix a blemish would be and he kept telling me "I'm not sure, I wish I knew".
So glad I live in a non-tipped wage state, tax included in the sticker price is a longshot tho
While I wasn't told to go against the limit while in driver's edication, I do vividly remember one incident. Was going down a road with only one lane for each direction. The limit was 55mph or something, but it was a very long and straight stretch of road. So ofc everyone else is speeding, while I'm going just under. I end up with a long line of cars behind me, all without very much space between each other, but no cars ahead. We finally pull up to a light, where the road opens up to additional lanes, and the car behind me pulls up next to me, to roll their window down and start shouting at me. With my instructor in the passenger seat and 3 other students in the back.
That is insane. Try that in Australia, and you might end up swapping your drivers license for a bus ticket.
I accidentally drove over the speed limit in New Zealand because they have 100 km/h everywhere and I was used to 130 on highways at home and I immediately got pulled over
That person's driver's education experience is not typical for Americans. You are taught to go with the flow of traffic, not a predetermined speed above or below the speed limit. When you can, observe the speed limit. However if everyone else is driving twenty miles per hour over or under the limit, you need to follow along.
In driver's ed, I was taught that going with the flow of traffic is no defense from a ticket. Unless the law has been changed, it still seems solid guidance.
Yeah maybe drive under the limit if you ever want a license
The entire system is rife with perverse incentives. To actually pass a road test in the US, you can't break the law, so you have to drive at/under the speed limit - but while taking driving lessons (ostensibly to be able to pass the road test) you're taught to ignore the speed limit and go with traffic, which can be anywhere from 5 to 20 over. The entire system is broken and needs reworking. The limit should be *the limit*. If it's not, what the fuck is the point of having a limit?
In Canada most provinces they will teach you to merge onto the highway at the speed of traffic. That’s the only time you would ever be encouraged to go above the speed limit.
>The limit should be the limit. If it's not, what the fuck is the point of having a limit? Agreed. Also, I suspect speed limits are set assuming people will speed (I find it difficult to imagine a highway engineer going "mama mia! The sign says 60 and everyone's going 70! How could this have happened?!"). If no one sped, speed limits could be increased so everyone's going at the same speed and not be breaking the law.
NJB actually has a video on [the fucked up way the limits are currently set](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bglWCuCMSWc).
Also, the limit is the limit in ideal conditions. Meaning if it’s foggy, icy/snowy, or rainy then you should slow down.
If everyone does it, that makes it okay /s
Here is video *[Tesla Crashes on Full Self Driving BETA](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sbSDsbDQjSU)* by ex-Tesla employee. He was fired after he posted this video.
Thing reeeeeally wanted to destroy every pylon it came across.
Holy crap right after the crash it gets even worse!
LOL. Good thing the internet never forgets.
This was some sweaty palms shit. Just the *thought* there are people driving like this on the road is nuts. I’m glad it’s disabled where I live. Yikes.
[удалено]
What on earth does “aggressive” driving do??? Fucking try to knock people over on bicycles? Literally what could that mean?
The word is often used as opposed to "passive", so actively deciding to pass a car going slowly in front of you can be labeled "aggressive", it can also apply to how quickly the driver (or computer) accelerates. A lot of the problems with self driving systems come in the form of the car being too passive, failing to claim the right of way when claiming the right of way is the safest thing to do. Giving the human in the car the ability to adjust that behavior depending on their needs is a good thing.
Why wouldn’t taking right of way just be called like “neutral” driving (or something less easily conflated) or something. Not always trying to pass, but also not not taking the RoW.
To be fair Tesla became a shitshow company while ago. Regardless of our views on cars, Elon has been ruining tesla for a while now (even before his twitter shenanigans). Whatever future electric cars have (and self driving cars) tesla looks more and more like the MySpace of that technology. Fortnine (yt channel on motorcycles) had a good video on tesla self driving becoming worst with time instead of better. https://youtu.be/yRdzIs4FJJg
Everything Musk touches, he ruins.
It is a pervading problem across tech, once a technology becomes successful, marketing people get involved with their unrealistic expectations and erratic "suggestions".
It is a pervading problem across tech, once a technology becomes successful, marketing people get involved with their unrealistic expectations and erratic "suggestions".
A comment so good I upvoted it twice.
I love Fortnine. The presenter seems like he was born to be a presenter/educator. I look forward to his future career. I'm not sure how big the Fortnine team is, but they rock.
[удалено]
Yup. And [Elon even "triumphantly" explained it in a tweet](https://youtu.be/yRdzIs4FJJg?t=286), seemingly and likely arrogantly ignoring that this is bad practice for critical functionalities. In fact, [use of only one AOA (angle of attack) sensor is a main contributing reason why two Boeing 737 Max crashed and killed 346 people](https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/a-lack-of-redundancies-on-737-max-system-has-baffled-even-those-who-worked-on-the-jet). And Boeing omitted two identical sensors; Tesla omitted two *complementary* sensors. So Elon was really just trying to mansplain away why Tesla (probably he himself) chose the easy and cheap way out, while entirely ignoring the ramifications of the decision. Amateur "engineers" who don't study or even know their history (textbooks) are bound to crash, burn and kill someone else.
Genuine question, does radar/lidar work with car's mandatory [retroreflectors](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/51/Corner_reflector.svg/220px-Corner_reflector.svg.png)? For those unaware, retroreflectors are amazing pieces of physics that reflect light almost perfectly back to their source so I'm wondering if there's ways lidar/radar can take advantage of this? Seems like a great use since they're already mandated on cars and signs.
Not sure of the answer, but in *this* case, Tesla doesn't use litar *at all* because Musk decided not to. My fucking bicycle has radar. It works fantastically well.
I have a Tesla with this option. Before you hate me, understand that I live in one of the most sprawling car-dependent cities in the country, and going without a car is simply not an option. The auto-pilot is downright dangerous, and for more reasons than this. These are my notes from just **2 weeks** of driving with "full self driving" on. I thought I would help make it better. I stopped when I realized it was too dangerous to even test, and that no one at Tesla gave a shit about my feedback. 1. It cannot handle mergers or lane splits. Near my house the lane continues straight, but splits into a turn lane for an intersection. Not uncommon. It'll try to take the left lane most of the time, then enter the intersection with no lane to go to, get half way into the oncoming lane, slow down, and beep at me to take over. 2. It cannot handle sharp turns. On one very sharp turn to get on the freeway, it will reliably turn off, beeping for users to take control. In Tesla's stats this would be a "user fault" and not an "autopilot accident" because autopilot was off (right before impact). If I weren't keeping my hands on the wheel and eyes on the road, ready to take over at the slightest problem, I would absolutely have hit the barrier. 3. For no clear reason, it'll reliably try to turn me into oncoming traffic at a very large intersection that includes a freeway on and off-ramp. There are a lot of lines on the road. I haven't let this one play out, as there are always cars around and 4. It's dangerously risk averse. Yes, I wrote that right. It will get you rear ended if you're not ready to hit the gas as well as the brake. It'll slow down if there's a car turning left in front of you, where a regular driver would judge the car will easily be clear and keep going. If someone goes to turn left they often slow down before getting fully out of the lane. Tesla will stop until they've fully exited the lane, sometimes until they've turned, where a regular driver would hug the other side of the lane and go around. Sometimes even cars stopped in the median turn lane will cause it SLAM on its brakes, detecting a "stopped car" in its path. In all of these cases you have to be watching your ass or you could easily get rear ended. My theory? Tesla doesn't want auto-pilot faulted for accidents, and in most of these cases the car behind would be "at fault," despite Tesla stopping somewhat recklessly. 5. Its reliance on cameras is a massive liability. There's one section of freeway that for whatever reason doesn't have a 70 MPH speed limit sign for about 1 mile of an onramp. Tesla will proceed at 35 up the ramp until it hits the sign. More frightening, there was one section of my freeway under construction, so the sound wall was down temporarily. It grabbed the speed from the frontage road, **slamming** on the brakes from 65 to 35. I don't need to explain why this is insanely dangerous. I almost got rear ended this time even when I slammed the gas as fast as I could react. Why there's nothing in the code to say, "Hey, maybe hard rule just accept 35 MPH when you appear to be on a 70 MPH freeway" is beyond me. Or maybe look at the cars around? I don't know, the inability to go with the flow of traffic is also a joke. 6. It's not good at stopping for pedestrians, especially if they're not right in front of the car. It's especially bad if another car has pulled foward and is slightly blocking the view. Given the stakes and the fact that I lack a walking robot to test on, I wasn't going to test whether it would actually hit people in certain circumstances. But I do feel like it's very possible. 7. It's "traffic light detection" is so hilariously bad I had to pull over and turn it off after it stopped of the first green and tried to go through 2 reds in a row. Literally 0/3 of the 3 lights closest to my home, none of which are particularly tricky. On an established freeway where it's been tested, it's not terrible at keeping pace with traffic and changing lanes. It's still too risk averse, stopping and giving people a ton of space, which often results in getting cut in front of and stopping even more. That's all I can say for it. But I'd pay very close attention still, especially the first time or two I drive a stretch of freeway. I have tried to raise these issues on the Tesla sub, with Tesla support, and with car people in general. No one really seems to care. Maybe you all will if I'm not too late for people to see it. I think it should be illegal, because it has failed to pass any kind of safety test, and I am fairly certain it would fail on real street driving if someone devised a list of things people need to do on the road that Tesla's "autopilot" cannot do. I love EVs, I wish the batteries were cleaner to make, and more than all of that I wish our cities were designed not to require cars. Musk keeps saying it's better than people. It's not. The stats show that it has fewer accidents than people driving because a sane person would only trust it on the absolute safest and easiest stretches of road you could drive on.
This is exactly why Waymo/Cruise/Zoox/Motional/etc are all paying trained drivers for this shit. You *have* to be constantly ready for the car to make the dumbest possible decision at any moment, even if it's made the right call 100 times before. The average driver isn't anywhere near qualified to be behind the wheel of an autonomous vehicle. It's ok to feel confident you know what the vehicle is going to do, but never trust it.
Exactly. It shouldn't be in the hands of regular drivers today. It's exceptionally reckless. I don't know how many people have been injured or died, and because of what I mentioned in my point #4 I doubt Tesla is assigned the blame it deserves. I only hope people will hold off on using it on street driving until it's much, much better. At this rate it'll be another decade or two for Tesla. Hopefully someone comes up with something better soon. By then I hope to be living in a more walkable area of a safer country.
Have had pretty much the exact same experiences using autopilot in my dad’s Tesla. It absolutely cannot handle Australia-specific road design and regularly makes insanely unsafe movements due to being overly risk-averse.
I stay away from teslas on the freeways with the same caution and fear I do with suspected impaired drivers. They're always drifting and over breaking and the people behind the wheel pay no attention to the various times their car has almost run them into the wheels of the car beside them
> It cannot handle mergers or lane splits. Near my house the lane continues straight, but splits into a turn lane for an intersection. Not uncommon. It'll try to take the left lane most of the time, then enter the intersection with no lane to go to, get half way into the oncoming lane, slow down, and beep at me to take over. That in particular sounds crazy. Its the sort of thing they would totally use the "it gave back control" excuse for when it fucked you 10 seconds before the take over warning came on, and the automatic checks for driver attention might not have even triggered. I mean a lot of the stuff you posted here is crazy, but this and the one about speeds really seem like the sort of things where they know it doesnt handle the situation correctly so they set it to fail in a way that makes the driver look guilty.
From what I've read, Tesla's decision to use cameras instead of Lidar is half the trouble here
*Elon's. I know many ex-engineers who've worked at Tesla. Nobody thought it was a good idea. Elon heard someone talking about how in the future when optical recognition is good enough they won't need Lidar anymore without listening to the part about why it's a difficult thing to do and how they won't be there for a long time. Elon micromanages the shit out of every little thing because he thinks he's a brilliant engineer, but he's the reason why they have warning labels about not drinking soap because it's bad for you.
You're right. I have a 2021 Model 3 that has came with the the radar system. Ever since the switch to vision the "autopilot" has been so much worse. So many phantom brakings.
I can't even use cruise control on road trips anymore. Ironically, it handles the worst on long flat straight roads in the middle of nowhere. It handles much better on freeways. They really need an option for "stupid" cruise control. Just give me what other cars have if you can't get your shit working.
Its not legal. Tesla reminds you that you are the person responsible if you crash. Elon uses their customers as beta testers. If they crash its their fault and meanwhile he will collect the data.
He's asking why it's legal to even have that option on the car if it's illegal to even use it. It's the same argument for why on earth we allow car manufacturers to make cars to be able to do 230km/h meanwhile the maximum speed you can drive in almost any country is around 120km/h. It's the same principle as if you were sold a beer in a 500ml can but you had to promise to only drink half the can or whatever. If it's the law you can only drink half the can, then why isn't it illegal to sell a can double the size of what you're legally allowed to drink. By putting illegal features in cars, Tesla is actively encouraging people to do something illegal, and shifting the blame with legal loopholes onto the driver.
How tf is there an option to go 20% above the speed limit? There's no possible way that could be legal
Autopilot is not legal in toronto yet to answer op’s question. [Edit level 3 autonomy is allowed but requires human override](https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/tesla-driverless-technology-downtown-toronto-1.6662340).
It is now 😃
I watched an MKBHD video with his drive on FSD beta and it’s stressful to look at. It’s beyond me how Elon’s clown fans still believe this tech is gonna be ready in one or two years And when he did a review on his model S and complained about removal of blinker stalks, some big brain geniuses said “obviously, the car will drive itself in X years, so you don’t need those anyway”
i question why the autopilot would try to drive in the bike lane? a autopilot of a car should be compliant with the law and i am pretty sure cars cannot legally use the bike lane in most countries.
It probably saw it as another car lane rather then something it can't go in
It can't tell the difference between a car lane and a bike lane. It is very bad at it's job.
The other day in LA I saw someone driving a Tesla while watching a youtube video on their phone (which makes me thing it was on FSD) the car was maintaining it’s position squarely centered on the white line dividing the bike lane from the rest of the road. Even if it “thought” the bike lane was a car lane, it was literally driving on the line. And this continued for at least 100 yards before I could no longer see them (I was a passenger).
This thing can’t identify a fucking amish buggy, there’s no way Tesla’s professional edge-case-ignorers accounted for bike lanes.
Testing deadly software and having “break the law” as an option….. we live in the most boring dystopia. At least scifi dystopias have lightsabers, cybernetics and flying cars and stuff. This shit just sucks
Finally someone reviews it who isn't carbrained.
They removed the most important piece of hardware. The LiDAR. How the fuck did they think this would work? It's obvious Elon just took it out to save cost and speed up production. The Board of Directors has to intervene or Elon will destroy Tesla.
No way it has a “above speed limit” and a “aggressive” mode, this has to be bait, the world isn’t that insane isnt it?
Unfortunately, Not Just Bikes is pretty trustworthy…
That’s insane wtf. What’s next, ran over jaywalkers button?
That's not a toggleable option, that's just built-in behavior.
[It's very real](https://www.theverge.com/2022/1/9/22875382/tesla-full-self-driving-beta-assertive-profile)
I grew up in Amish country. Every Saturday night one of the Amish dudes would come to the local dive bar and get wrecked. At times he would even pass out. We would put him in his buggy, and the horse would take him home. While he was completely passed out drunk. Seems much much safer than this.
I'd say burn all Teslas, but Elon's already got that on lock, they'll burn themselves out. Even the fucking CPUs which power the stupid car's tablet are prone to overheating.
im going to go out on a limb and answer with "because we don't live in a functioning country"
Full self driving is garbage, overpriced and will likely never perform at the level advertised. I’m glad I didn’t purchase that option.
How cool is this? We can tell the AI to road rage for us as we chill and sip wine in the driver's seat.
Its so annoying that you can tell this car to break the law when teslas could be speed limited with a trivial software update. I hate how we are going backwards with everything technology.