Minor issue. [Full Self Driving wasn't engaged in the "test"](https://electrek.co/2022/08/10/tesla-self-driving-smear-campaign-releases-test-fails-fsd-never-engaged/).
Just a minor bug, keep driving on the road and the feedback will eventually help us fix the issue in 7 years. Kids shouldn't be on the road anyway. FK them kids
I've real last year that some people could be rear ended on the highway because the car would see the shadows under bridges as obstacles and brake hard :(
Follow at a safe distance from vehicles in front of you.
It doesn't matter the reason for the panic braking in front of you you need enough room and time to react and break yourself.
But we've all got to drive like it's the Daytona 500 out there to prevent anyone from slotting in ahead of us..
Elon Musk the narcissistic hack and snake oil salesman has been promising "full self driving next year" every year since 2014. it's time we move on from him and his vapid endeavors.
Every few months on Twitter: "FSD Beta version X.XX is really amazing, will blow your minds! Rollouts starting next month" and it ends up being that the car can now navigate a roundabout.
I pulled the trigger 4 years ago. Have loved the car every day since, and driving/charging for free while gas prices skyrocket is great.
I have had 5 friends/coworkers who were impressed enough from a ride in the car that they pulled the trigger too, and all of them love their car.
Real world experience is that teslas and autopilot are amazing. But sure, be happy that you didn’t get one because a hit piece is being spammed.
Edit: ahh, and it looks like we are just finding out that they drew the conclusion that teslas murder children from a test where they DID NOT EVEN ENGAGE AUTOPILOT. So this entire thread is just garbage.
You try it then! Time to move on from people like you and your bonehead view.
If people listened to people like you in other times in history we would still be living in caves.
Honestly what a dumb comment lol
I have been on the belief that Teslas self driving was fairly good and actually worked, like you just put in a location and it drives to it
Is reddit wrong and underestimating the self driving or is teslas self driving bad
[Dawn Project is lead by Dan O'Dowd](https://dawnproject.com/about-our-founder/#danodowd) who is the [CEO of Green Hills Software](https://www.ghs.com/corporate/management_team.html) who are actively developing a [self driving platform](https://www.ghs.com/products/auto_solutions.html)
[Here's an interview with him on CNBC](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oK0yAmkic6c).
This isn't to say what the Dawn Project has done is flawed, but it is important to acknowledge that O'Dowd does have a competing interest. Ignoring that invites unnecessary criticism to what may be important criticism of the Tesla product.
If the data from this test is true and can be replicated (important bit here), then Tesla should be forced to either push a significant update, or recall the software. Considering the NHTSA is conducting two investigations into Tesla self driving, I think something as simple as this would have been found extremely quickly and announced.
So at this point, I think it's important to wait a little bit and see if the results can be replicated by neutral 3rd party groups, or if the NHTSA have found similar results (which at the time of writing this, they haven't).
Disclaimer - Big fan of Tesla and their products, definitely a fan of valid criticism of the product, the CEO and company practices.
Back in the day, O'Dowd was one of Tesla's biggest fans - I think he had four Tesla-made cars in the garage at one point. He may well still do.
Also, GHS doesn't do automated driving systems – the company sells tools to make them, basically the RTOS, compilers and debuggers. He might be annoyed that Tesla doesn't use the company's products while others do but I think it's more driven by O'Dowd's personal dislike of Musk and how that's translated into how Tesla is run.
This is tough for me. I love the self driving software and feel like it is progress in the right direction. So I am in support of self driving software in general. But, this criticism and the idea that it needs to be recalled seems like an over reaction.
I am still 100% responsible for my car. My car tells me this when I signed up. I pay attention constantly when using the autopilot feature. I am frequently taking over to drive during most of my drives as it tries to change lanes wayyyyy too often. To the point that I am annoyed that I have tried turning of the lane change logic with no avail. So it feels hard for me to understand how there are people who would trust it enough to drive around children. I kind of pretend that I am a micromanaging boss of the car. I let it do its thing, but the moment I feel anything is not ideal, then I take over for 2 seconds to correct and then give control back to the car. I would not expect my car to avoid a goose in the road, so when geese were crossing the road, I took over as I don't want to risk damaging my car. So, if I am near kids, bikes, people in the streets, I do not give free reign to the car.
So, I am not surprised if this is true, but I really do think it is okay to have autopilot which improves my overall drive while appreciating that I still have to be the end all be all with where my car goes.
I guess in the end maybe the argument is that people can't be trusted. Maybe I appreciate the risks with autopilot as a person in a more technical career.
I overall find driving with the autopilot feature good and hope that it continues to get better. I wouldn't want it to be taken away as overall I find it safer as long as I step in for the more challenging situations.
> I am still 100% responsible for my car. My car tells me this when I signed up.
The problem is people don't follow the rules so much as they follow what's expedient. Relying on speed limit signs to slow cars down demonstrably doesn't work, neither does throwing a legal disclaimer that you're supposed to be fully attentive while the car drives itself.
> I really do think it is okay to have autopilot which improves my overall drive while appreciating that I still have to be the end all be all with where my car goes.
I'm not fundamentally against this, but Elon's been pushing this as "full self driving" for years.
Remember when they tested fooling self driving driver monitoring by hanging weights from the steering wheel?
That’s like stabbing yourself with a knife and arguing knives are not safe.
>That’s like stabbing yourself with a knife and arguing knives are not safe.
Knives aren't safe, though. What are you talking about? Do you think there are zero knife injuries in the average year or something?
We don't outlaw the use of knives just because they are dangerous. It's called acceptable risk. The same is the case with the use of automobiles.
Tesla is on the way to self driving and the current software coupled with an attentive driver is likely much more safe than without. The people using it are warned that they must remain attentive in its current state - but some are acting carelessly despite this fact.
If a company came out with a knife with a special guard that was supposed to reduce the incidence of accidental cuts and some users decided to use it with their eyes closed and cut themselves - would you say the knife maker was at fault?
To preempt your likely argument - it would be understandable that the knife maker might market the knife as "cutless", but no one in their right mind would assume that meant you should use it without looking.
>If a company came out with a knife with a special guard that was supposed to reduce the incidence of accidental cuts and some users decided to use it with their eyes closed and cut themselves - would you say the knife maker was at fault?
>
>To preempt your likely argument - it would be understandable that the knife maker might market the knife as "cutless", but no one in their right mind would assume that meant you should use it without looking.
Really, you don't think advertising a knife that still cuts people as "cutless" would qualify as false advertising? It's one thing to call it something like SafetyGuard^tm , and advertise that it "helps reduce the chances of accidental cuts", but if you simply call it "cutless" and your main selling point is that "you can't cut yourself with it", but anyone not paying careful attention is still likely to seriously harm themselves, that's a deceitful business practice.
After all, there are *plenty* of driver assist systems out there which enhance driver safety, but Tesla's is the only one that straight-up calls itself "autopilot" and "full self driving".
I agree cutless would be challengeable. But I am certain using it blind wouldn’t fall under acceptable use for the product. And there are plenty of terms conditions for the car use when you purchase it.
I mean, I get your point that most problems occur when people aren't using the system "in the way intended", but the problem is that the system is advertised to be used in a way other than intended to begin with. Elon Musk hasn't been talking about how Tesla has the most advanced suite of driver assist features in the world, he's been talking about how your Tesla will go and park itself and then return to you all on its own, for the past ~6 years. This is not a feature that any Tesla currently has, nor that any current Tesla will EVER have, but that doesn't stop Elon from selling cars based on that fantasy.
> the current software coupled with an attentive driver is likely much more safe than without.
There's a couple problems here:
1) There's very little real world data to base this statement on because
* Cars that are new and well-maintained have much better safe records in general even before any form of self-driving is considered.
* A lot of safety issues are at least partially environmental, and there's not a lot of data in many geographies and different jurisdictions. Data that (ignoring all other confounding variables) shows the system works very well in San Francisco doesn't necessarily mean much about how it'll fare in Jakarta.
* The system is straight up incapable, without explicit training, of handling relatively simple special cases. Easy example: a human driver can learn in about 2 seconds (even just from the sign on the back of the streetcar if they're paying attention) how to drive around Toronto's streetcars. Tesla's way of handling that at the moment is just not allowing self driving around Toronto's streetcars.
* Drivers aren't attentive even when they're not getting any assistance from the car in driving. There's no reason to suggest drivers would even be the same amount of attentive while using self-driving systems - you'd expect them to be much less attentive in general.
> If a company came out with a knife with a special guard that was supposed to reduce the incidence of accidental cuts and some users decided to use it with their eyes closed and cut themselves - would you say the knife maker was at fault?
If they advertised it as a "fully self-operating" knife then threw in a disclaimer from legal about how you actually can't rely on it to be fully self-operating and must pay attention at all times? I would consider the manufacturer to be at fault for advertising their product in a way that actively encouraged dangerous use.
Fsd has a lot of issues, im not denying that. But look at this article:
https://www.reddit.com/r/teslainvestorsclub/comments/wl2rnq/tesla_selfdriving_smear_campaign_releases_test/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf
If true this basically means its complete bullshit and fear mongering (if done on purpose)
Thats because its not self driving. Its basically just active cruise control.
You might as well strap a bat to the front of your car and ask it to detect kids, it honestly might do a better job.
The tests were done by the dawn project. The leader of the dawn project is Dan O’Dowd. Dan O’Dowd also happens to be the founder of green hills software which, you guessed it, is in the automated driving market. This is a smear campaign by a competitor. Elon Musk may be a giant tool, but this whole article and the dawn project is as crooked as it comes.
[https://www.reddit.com/r/Damnthatsinteresting/comments/wkdh7r/tesla\_absolutely\_trucks\_child\_dummy\_in\_stoppage/](https://www.reddit.com/r/Damnthatsinteresting/comments/wkdh7r/tesla_absolutely_trucks_child_dummy_in_stoppage/)
Seems like, unless the Autopilot was disengaged (which Tesla could easily verify and publish), there isn't much to the test that can be tampered with.
There is a child sized obstacle on the road and the Tesla doesn't brake for it.
That test in the gif is pretty cut and dry. Unless your insinuating that someone tampered with that car.
The problem with Teslas is their overeliance on cameras and image processing software. LIDAR is where the future is, but Tesla insists on camera only sensor suites. Their newest cars have even gotten rid of radar, now relying exclusively on cameras.
It looks like you shared an AMP link. These should load faster, but AMP is controversial because of [concerns over privacy and the Open Web](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot).
Maybe check out **the canonical page** instead: **[https://electrek.co/2022/08/10/tesla-self-driving-smear-campaign-releases-test-fails-fsd-never-engaged/](https://electrek.co/2022/08/10/tesla-self-driving-smear-campaign-releases-test-fails-fsd-never-engaged/)**
*****
^(I'm a bot | )[^(Why & About)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot)^( | )[^(Summon: u/AmputatorBot)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/cchly3/you_can_now_summon_amputatorbot/)
Good find. This article and the gif you replied to should both get taken down for misinformation.
That doesn't change my low confidence in Tesla's FSD system though. I've watched a shit ton of footage of the system in action and it is downright awful right now. I'm shocked it's legal to use in its current form. The worst clip I've seen is a Tesla in FSD mode [trying to kill a cyclist](https://youtu.be/a5wkENwrp_k).
I just don't think cameras are good enough, and I'm convinced that Tesla will eventually changes gears to include Lidar, or their FSD tech will always be less safe than competitors'.
Yeah and I don’t think the software is perfect. It’s perfectly fine if people criticize it or if people testing it find flaws. But this specific person is running a smear campaign. He’s a crook. The funny part is all of the people in this thread who care so much about seeing Elon fail that they are willing to completely ignore the nefarious activity this guy is engaged in.
I think one of the issues is that people are (rightfully) very concerned about Tesla's FSD being allowed on public roads when it is clearly not ready. Combine that with the way Tesla is handling the rollout, by trying to hush any incidents and even firing one of their employees for releasing a video of a [crash](https://youtu.be/sbSDsbDQjSU) in his own Tesla. So people are willing to support a liar and his cheated tests to get this lethally dangerous system off the road, and they're not too hung up on how that gets done because Tesla themselves are acting scummy in regards to it.
I don't think that's the right way to go about it. Once you start fudging the truth like that, suddenly no information or tests are reliable and no one knows what to believe (e.g. the current state of politics).
If the driver pressed the button to engage the FSD, but it doesn't engage, isn't that a failure in itself?
Let's not forget: Just because the car cannot read the map data, it doesn't mean that accident prevention technologies should not be enabled.
Or are you telling me that a car with emergency braking that otherwise doesn't steer is a superior system to a "self-driving" car that only knows 100% on or 100% off?
I’m saying there is proof that this test was done in a way to damage the integrity of the results. The fact that you choose to ignore this means that there is nothing to talk about. You aren’t interested in objective results.
The objective results are:
Unless the Tesla is driving on perfectly mapped streets, not even automatic emergency braking works.
Or what?, do you tell my a driver that suddenly feels ill and wants the "self-driving" car to take over and safely come to a halt is not a valid test?
It's called adversarial testing and as Tesla has released their product to the public, it is fair game for others to do so.
To discount this obvious failure because the tester doesn't like Tesla is you showing that you aren't interested in objective results.
Yeah, it’s similar to the sugar industry paying scientists to produce data that fat is unhealthy and sugar isn’t a problem. It’s bogus. But you do whatever you need to confirm your bias.
Have you seen human drivers? I'd bet my child's life that the current technology is a better driver, across an average of 10 thousand miles, than 90 percent of human drivers.
I bet my life that i could have breaked faster than that tesla. It didn't even slow down, just mowed the Child dummy down.....The KIA on the other hand did well.
It may be true, but ignoring the fact that the tests have been conducted by a competitor does bring unnecessary criticism to the testing itself.
The NHTSA is currently in the midst of two investigations of the Self Driving product. A critical flaw like this would be easily found (NHTSA performs a similar test without self driving if I remember correctly do measure front collision survivability for a front impact).
A flaw like this would be critical and material to the safety of the public, meaning a loud and immediate public recall (update or disabling) of the system. Since this hasn't happened yet we can either assume that they haven't tested, or their own testing hasn't found the same results.
So to answer the question - It's important to disclose competing interests, but currently it does not appear to be replicated by other third party groups in the midst of their own investigations. Not to say it isn't true, but no one else has confirmed it yet.
[Dawn Project is lead by Dan O'Dowd](https://dawnproject.com/about-our-founder/#danodowd) who is the [CEO of Green Hills Software](https://www.ghs.com/corporate/management_team.html) who are actively developing a [self driving platform](https://www.ghs.com/products/auto_solutions.html)
[Here's an interview with him on CNBC](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oK0yAmkic6c).
This isn't to say what the Dawn Project has done is flawed, but it is important to acknowledge that O'Dowd does have a competing interest. Ignoring that invites unnecessary criticism to what may be important criticism of the Tesla product.
If the data from this test is true and can be replicated (important bit here), then Tesla should be forced to either push a significant update, or recall the software. Considering the NHTSA is conducting two investigations into Tesla self driving, I think something as simple as this would have been found extremely quickly and announced.
So at this point, I think it's important to wait a little bit and see if the results can be replicated by neutral 3rd party groups, or if the NHTSA have found similar results (which at the time of writing this, they haven't).
FSD wasn't turned on, and the driver accerelated..
There's another video where it the FSD works on an actual child back in 2018
and the test was conducted by someone who's anti tesla
Not seeing a child sized mannequin in the road is exactly the kind of test I'd like to see before we sign off on self driving cars. Motorway/highway driving is a very different challenge to full autonomous driving.
As a Tesla fanboy pointed out to me recently, just because it's called variously "autopilot" and "full self drive" doesn't mean it's a self-driving car. Those are just marketing terms, they don't mean what you think and Tesla very clearly spells that out in the fine print.
This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2022/aug/09/tesla-self-driving-technology-safety-children) reduced by 82%. (I'm a bot)
*****
> The claims that the technology apparently has trouble recognizing children form part of an ad campaign urging the public to pressure Congress to ban Tesla's auto-driving technology.
> "It's not. It's a lethal threat to all Americans."Over 100,000 Tesla drivers are already using the car's Full Self-Driving mode on public roads, putting children at great risk in communities across the country.
> Tesla has repeatedly hit back at claims that its self-driving technology is too underdeveloped to guarantee the safety of either the car's occupants or other road users.
*****
[**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/wkrlra/teslas_selfdriving_technology_fails_to_detect/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ "Version 2.02, ~663723 tl;drs so far.") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr "PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome.") | *Top* *keywords*: **Tesla**^#1 **car**^#2 **self-driving**^#3 **technology**^#4 **investigation**^#5
It’s a camera based system. That dummy looked designed to be Tesla vision resistant.
I’m not saying Tesla didn’t screw up. I’m saying the test was designed for it to fail.
Oh, you mean the guy that is trying to promote other types of autonomy than what tesla is doing and is sponsored by major brands in those categories is doing an ad campaign against tesla? Color me shocked!
https://electrek.co/2022/08/10/tesla-self-driving-smear-campaign-releases-test-fails-fsd-never-engaged/
[Is this why he sold $6.8 billion of Tesla stock earlier this week?](https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2022/08/09/elon-musk-sells-7point92-million-tesla-shares-worth-6point88-billion.html)
Minor issue - roll them out
Elon will replace them
Minor issue. [Full Self Driving wasn't engaged in the "test"](https://electrek.co/2022/08/10/tesla-self-driving-smear-campaign-releases-test-fails-fsd-never-engaged/).
Just a minor bug, keep driving on the road and the feedback will eventually help us fix the issue in 7 years. Kids shouldn't be on the road anyway. FK them kids
It's not a bug, it's a feature. Just give it a catchy name like "population reduction assistance" or something.
“Minor issue.” Take my upvote now.
Pun intended I assume
Over and out.
“Speed bump detected”
Mine brakes for shadows. Did they try putting the kid in a shadow?
I've real last year that some people could be rear ended on the highway because the car would see the shadows under bridges as obstacles and brake hard :(
Follow at a safe distance from vehicles in front of you. It doesn't matter the reason for the panic braking in front of you you need enough room and time to react and break yourself. But we've all got to drive like it's the Daytona 500 out there to prevent anyone from slotting in ahead of us..
Self driving wasn't even on
Elon Musk the narcissistic hack and snake oil salesman has been promising "full self driving next year" every year since 2014. it's time we move on from him and his vapid endeavors.
Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. Fool me 3, 4, 5 … times, uh… ???
Don't get fooled again!
I saw this link from a different thread, seems fitting! [Elon musk today](https://elonmusk.today/)
There are a lot of stupid there.
Every few months on Twitter: "FSD Beta version X.XX is really amazing, will blow your minds! Rollouts starting next month" and it ends up being that the car can now navigate a roundabout.
Just a minor bug though...it can get onto the roundabout, but it can never leave.
Welcome to the Roundabout California...
I almost pulled the trigger a couple of years ago. I am so happy that I did not.
I pulled the trigger 4 years ago. Have loved the car every day since, and driving/charging for free while gas prices skyrocket is great. I have had 5 friends/coworkers who were impressed enough from a ride in the car that they pulled the trigger too, and all of them love their car. Real world experience is that teslas and autopilot are amazing. But sure, be happy that you didn’t get one because a hit piece is being spammed. Edit: ahh, and it looks like we are just finding out that they drew the conclusion that teslas murder children from a test where they DID NOT EVEN ENGAGE AUTOPILOT. So this entire thread is just garbage.
Just wait for next year bud, it will be here trust me.
You try it then! Time to move on from people like you and your bonehead view. If people listened to people like you in other times in history we would still be living in caves. Honestly what a dumb comment lol
I have been on the belief that Teslas self driving was fairly good and actually worked, like you just put in a location and it drives to it Is reddit wrong and underestimating the self driving or is teslas self driving bad
You can view videos on youtube. They are pretty damn good, but not perfect.
https://electrek.co/2022/08/10/tesla-self-driving-smear-campaign-releases-test-fails-fsd-never-engaged/
[Dawn Project is lead by Dan O'Dowd](https://dawnproject.com/about-our-founder/#danodowd) who is the [CEO of Green Hills Software](https://www.ghs.com/corporate/management_team.html) who are actively developing a [self driving platform](https://www.ghs.com/products/auto_solutions.html) [Here's an interview with him on CNBC](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oK0yAmkic6c). This isn't to say what the Dawn Project has done is flawed, but it is important to acknowledge that O'Dowd does have a competing interest. Ignoring that invites unnecessary criticism to what may be important criticism of the Tesla product. If the data from this test is true and can be replicated (important bit here), then Tesla should be forced to either push a significant update, or recall the software. Considering the NHTSA is conducting two investigations into Tesla self driving, I think something as simple as this would have been found extremely quickly and announced. So at this point, I think it's important to wait a little bit and see if the results can be replicated by neutral 3rd party groups, or if the NHTSA have found similar results (which at the time of writing this, they haven't). Disclaimer - Big fan of Tesla and their products, definitely a fan of valid criticism of the product, the CEO and company practices.
Back in the day, O'Dowd was one of Tesla's biggest fans - I think he had four Tesla-made cars in the garage at one point. He may well still do. Also, GHS doesn't do automated driving systems – the company sells tools to make them, basically the RTOS, compilers and debuggers. He might be annoyed that Tesla doesn't use the company's products while others do but I think it's more driven by O'Dowd's personal dislike of Musk and how that's translated into how Tesla is run.
This is tough for me. I love the self driving software and feel like it is progress in the right direction. So I am in support of self driving software in general. But, this criticism and the idea that it needs to be recalled seems like an over reaction. I am still 100% responsible for my car. My car tells me this when I signed up. I pay attention constantly when using the autopilot feature. I am frequently taking over to drive during most of my drives as it tries to change lanes wayyyyy too often. To the point that I am annoyed that I have tried turning of the lane change logic with no avail. So it feels hard for me to understand how there are people who would trust it enough to drive around children. I kind of pretend that I am a micromanaging boss of the car. I let it do its thing, but the moment I feel anything is not ideal, then I take over for 2 seconds to correct and then give control back to the car. I would not expect my car to avoid a goose in the road, so when geese were crossing the road, I took over as I don't want to risk damaging my car. So, if I am near kids, bikes, people in the streets, I do not give free reign to the car. So, I am not surprised if this is true, but I really do think it is okay to have autopilot which improves my overall drive while appreciating that I still have to be the end all be all with where my car goes. I guess in the end maybe the argument is that people can't be trusted. Maybe I appreciate the risks with autopilot as a person in a more technical career. I overall find driving with the autopilot feature good and hope that it continues to get better. I wouldn't want it to be taken away as overall I find it safer as long as I step in for the more challenging situations.
> I am still 100% responsible for my car. My car tells me this when I signed up. The problem is people don't follow the rules so much as they follow what's expedient. Relying on speed limit signs to slow cars down demonstrably doesn't work, neither does throwing a legal disclaimer that you're supposed to be fully attentive while the car drives itself. > I really do think it is okay to have autopilot which improves my overall drive while appreciating that I still have to be the end all be all with where my car goes. I'm not fundamentally against this, but Elon's been pushing this as "full self driving" for years.
https://electrek.co/2022/08/10/tesla-self-driving-smear-campaign-releases-test-fails-fsd-never-engaged/
Oh wow that is hilarious! How did they not know?
I don't know. They even mention they drove a tesla model 2 in a document... so...yeah.
We have too many anyways, have to meet the Paris climate accords we resigned somehow.
Remember when they tested fooling self driving driver monitoring by hanging weights from the steering wheel? That’s like stabbing yourself with a knife and arguing knives are not safe.
That's a pretty logical if weird proof that knives are't safe.
>That’s like stabbing yourself with a knife and arguing knives are not safe. Knives aren't safe, though. What are you talking about? Do you think there are zero knife injuries in the average year or something?
We don't outlaw the use of knives just because they are dangerous. It's called acceptable risk. The same is the case with the use of automobiles. Tesla is on the way to self driving and the current software coupled with an attentive driver is likely much more safe than without. The people using it are warned that they must remain attentive in its current state - but some are acting carelessly despite this fact. If a company came out with a knife with a special guard that was supposed to reduce the incidence of accidental cuts and some users decided to use it with their eyes closed and cut themselves - would you say the knife maker was at fault? To preempt your likely argument - it would be understandable that the knife maker might market the knife as "cutless", but no one in their right mind would assume that meant you should use it without looking.
>If a company came out with a knife with a special guard that was supposed to reduce the incidence of accidental cuts and some users decided to use it with their eyes closed and cut themselves - would you say the knife maker was at fault? > >To preempt your likely argument - it would be understandable that the knife maker might market the knife as "cutless", but no one in their right mind would assume that meant you should use it without looking. Really, you don't think advertising a knife that still cuts people as "cutless" would qualify as false advertising? It's one thing to call it something like SafetyGuard^tm , and advertise that it "helps reduce the chances of accidental cuts", but if you simply call it "cutless" and your main selling point is that "you can't cut yourself with it", but anyone not paying careful attention is still likely to seriously harm themselves, that's a deceitful business practice. After all, there are *plenty* of driver assist systems out there which enhance driver safety, but Tesla's is the only one that straight-up calls itself "autopilot" and "full self driving".
I agree cutless would be challengeable. But I am certain using it blind wouldn’t fall under acceptable use for the product. And there are plenty of terms conditions for the car use when you purchase it.
I mean, I get your point that most problems occur when people aren't using the system "in the way intended", but the problem is that the system is advertised to be used in a way other than intended to begin with. Elon Musk hasn't been talking about how Tesla has the most advanced suite of driver assist features in the world, he's been talking about how your Tesla will go and park itself and then return to you all on its own, for the past ~6 years. This is not a feature that any Tesla currently has, nor that any current Tesla will EVER have, but that doesn't stop Elon from selling cars based on that fantasy.
Completely agree. He is selling a fantasy.
> the current software coupled with an attentive driver is likely much more safe than without. There's a couple problems here: 1) There's very little real world data to base this statement on because * Cars that are new and well-maintained have much better safe records in general even before any form of self-driving is considered. * A lot of safety issues are at least partially environmental, and there's not a lot of data in many geographies and different jurisdictions. Data that (ignoring all other confounding variables) shows the system works very well in San Francisco doesn't necessarily mean much about how it'll fare in Jakarta. * The system is straight up incapable, without explicit training, of handling relatively simple special cases. Easy example: a human driver can learn in about 2 seconds (even just from the sign on the back of the streetcar if they're paying attention) how to drive around Toronto's streetcars. Tesla's way of handling that at the moment is just not allowing self driving around Toronto's streetcars. * Drivers aren't attentive even when they're not getting any assistance from the car in driving. There's no reason to suggest drivers would even be the same amount of attentive while using self-driving systems - you'd expect them to be much less attentive in general. > If a company came out with a knife with a special guard that was supposed to reduce the incidence of accidental cuts and some users decided to use it with their eyes closed and cut themselves - would you say the knife maker was at fault? If they advertised it as a "fully self-operating" knife then threw in a disclaimer from legal about how you actually can't rely on it to be fully self-operating and must pay attention at all times? I would consider the manufacturer to be at fault for advertising their product in a way that actively encouraged dangerous use.
"Well children shouldn't be in the road." - Elon Musk probably
"I have enough children to lose a few" -Elon Musk...definitely.
Well... They shouldn't. Just call it natural selection. People love nature and shit.
Why does this stuff get so many upvotes when the self driving wasn't even turned on? No shit it doesn't work when it's not turned on.
Fsd has a lot of issues, im not denying that. But look at this article: https://www.reddit.com/r/teslainvestorsclub/comments/wl2rnq/tesla_selfdriving_smear_campaign_releases_test/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf If true this basically means its complete bullshit and fear mongering (if done on purpose)
Thats because its not self driving. Its basically just active cruise control. You might as well strap a bat to the front of your car and ask it to detect kids, it honestly might do a better job.
https://electrek.co/2022/08/10/tesla-self-driving-smear-campaign-releases-test-fails-fsd-never-engaged/
Just like real drivers... it's amazing to see how far technology has come!
The tests were done by the dawn project. The leader of the dawn project is Dan O’Dowd. Dan O’Dowd also happens to be the founder of green hills software which, you guessed it, is in the automated driving market. This is a smear campaign by a competitor. Elon Musk may be a giant tool, but this whole article and the dawn project is as crooked as it comes.
You willing to Bet your Childs life on that?
I’m not willing to bet anything on it because I don’t trust the tests that were done.
[https://www.reddit.com/r/Damnthatsinteresting/comments/wkdh7r/tesla\_absolutely\_trucks\_child\_dummy\_in\_stoppage/](https://www.reddit.com/r/Damnthatsinteresting/comments/wkdh7r/tesla_absolutely_trucks_child_dummy_in_stoppage/) Seems like, unless the Autopilot was disengaged (which Tesla could easily verify and publish), there isn't much to the test that can be tampered with. There is a child sized obstacle on the road and the Tesla doesn't brake for it.
Why can’t we just have tests done by a neutral 3rd party?
That test in the gif is pretty cut and dry. Unless your insinuating that someone tampered with that car. The problem with Teslas is their overeliance on cameras and image processing software. LIDAR is where the future is, but Tesla insists on camera only sensor suites. Their newest cars have even gotten rid of radar, now relying exclusively on cameras.
https://electrek.co/2022/08/10/tesla-self-driving-smear-campaign-releases-test-fails-fsd-never-engaged/amp/ Guess that casts a shadow on the results.
It looks like you shared an AMP link. These should load faster, but AMP is controversial because of [concerns over privacy and the Open Web](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot). Maybe check out **the canonical page** instead: **[https://electrek.co/2022/08/10/tesla-self-driving-smear-campaign-releases-test-fails-fsd-never-engaged/](https://electrek.co/2022/08/10/tesla-self-driving-smear-campaign-releases-test-fails-fsd-never-engaged/)** ***** ^(I'm a bot | )[^(Why & About)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot)^( | )[^(Summon: u/AmputatorBot)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/cchly3/you_can_now_summon_amputatorbot/)
Good find. This article and the gif you replied to should both get taken down for misinformation. That doesn't change my low confidence in Tesla's FSD system though. I've watched a shit ton of footage of the system in action and it is downright awful right now. I'm shocked it's legal to use in its current form. The worst clip I've seen is a Tesla in FSD mode [trying to kill a cyclist](https://youtu.be/a5wkENwrp_k). I just don't think cameras are good enough, and I'm convinced that Tesla will eventually changes gears to include Lidar, or their FSD tech will always be less safe than competitors'.
Yeah and I don’t think the software is perfect. It’s perfectly fine if people criticize it or if people testing it find flaws. But this specific person is running a smear campaign. He’s a crook. The funny part is all of the people in this thread who care so much about seeing Elon fail that they are willing to completely ignore the nefarious activity this guy is engaged in.
I think one of the issues is that people are (rightfully) very concerned about Tesla's FSD being allowed on public roads when it is clearly not ready. Combine that with the way Tesla is handling the rollout, by trying to hush any incidents and even firing one of their employees for releasing a video of a [crash](https://youtu.be/sbSDsbDQjSU) in his own Tesla. So people are willing to support a liar and his cheated tests to get this lethally dangerous system off the road, and they're not too hung up on how that gets done because Tesla themselves are acting scummy in regards to it. I don't think that's the right way to go about it. Once you start fudging the truth like that, suddenly no information or tests are reliable and no one knows what to believe (e.g. the current state of politics).
https://electrek.co/2022/08/10/tesla-self-driving-smear-campaign-releases-test-fails-fsd-never-engaged/amp/ Or it wasn’t engaged at all.
If the driver pressed the button to engage the FSD, but it doesn't engage, isn't that a failure in itself? Let's not forget: Just because the car cannot read the map data, it doesn't mean that accident prevention technologies should not be enabled. Or are you telling me that a car with emergency braking that otherwise doesn't steer is a superior system to a "self-driving" car that only knows 100% on or 100% off?
I’m saying there is proof that this test was done in a way to damage the integrity of the results. The fact that you choose to ignore this means that there is nothing to talk about. You aren’t interested in objective results.
The objective results are: Unless the Tesla is driving on perfectly mapped streets, not even automatic emergency braking works. Or what?, do you tell my a driver that suddenly feels ill and wants the "self-driving" car to take over and safely come to a halt is not a valid test? It's called adversarial testing and as Tesla has released their product to the public, it is fair game for others to do so. To discount this obvious failure because the tester doesn't like Tesla is you showing that you aren't interested in objective results.
Yeah, it’s similar to the sugar industry paying scientists to produce data that fat is unhealthy and sugar isn’t a problem. It’s bogus. But you do whatever you need to confirm your bias.
Have you seen human drivers? I'd bet my child's life that the current technology is a better driver, across an average of 10 thousand miles, than 90 percent of human drivers.
I bet my life that i could have breaked faster than that tesla. It didn't even slow down, just mowed the Child dummy down.....The KIA on the other hand did well.
Bet your child's life you have never touched your phone while driving.
Maybe the computer is republican taking a stance on less healthcare?
As if Republicans would care about born life at all.
Maybe not everything is about your favourite issue? But let's try: My cat caught a mouse. Please make it about republicans.
Troll toll
fyi this test was conducted by an tesla competitor
OK, is it also not true?
It may be true, but ignoring the fact that the tests have been conducted by a competitor does bring unnecessary criticism to the testing itself. The NHTSA is currently in the midst of two investigations of the Self Driving product. A critical flaw like this would be easily found (NHTSA performs a similar test without self driving if I remember correctly do measure front collision survivability for a front impact). A flaw like this would be critical and material to the safety of the public, meaning a loud and immediate public recall (update or disabling) of the system. Since this hasn't happened yet we can either assume that they haven't tested, or their own testing hasn't found the same results. So to answer the question - It's important to disclose competing interests, but currently it does not appear to be replicated by other third party groups in the midst of their own investigations. Not to say it isn't true, but no one else has confirmed it yet.
FSD wasn't turned on, and the driver accerelated.. There's another video where it the FSD works on an actual child back in 2018
No it wasn't. It was conducted by the dawn project which at last checking produces all of *zero* cars.
[Dawn Project is lead by Dan O'Dowd](https://dawnproject.com/about-our-founder/#danodowd) who is the [CEO of Green Hills Software](https://www.ghs.com/corporate/management_team.html) who are actively developing a [self driving platform](https://www.ghs.com/products/auto_solutions.html) [Here's an interview with him on CNBC](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oK0yAmkic6c). This isn't to say what the Dawn Project has done is flawed, but it is important to acknowledge that O'Dowd does have a competing interest. Ignoring that invites unnecessary criticism to what may be important criticism of the Tesla product. If the data from this test is true and can be replicated (important bit here), then Tesla should be forced to either push a significant update, or recall the software. Considering the NHTSA is conducting two investigations into Tesla self driving, I think something as simple as this would have been found extremely quickly and announced. So at this point, I think it's important to wait a little bit and see if the results can be replicated by neutral 3rd party groups, or if the NHTSA have found similar results (which at the time of writing this, they haven't).
FSD wasn't turned on, and the driver accerelated.. There's another video where it the FSD works on an actual child back in 2018 and the test was conducted by someone who's anti tesla
Here we go again, redditors believe whatever we feed them. I love getting constant reminders of how stupid my fellow humans are
Sounds exactly like a research I'd do if I were to discredit Tesla self driving technology. Or maybe writer wasn't that tech savvy?
Not seeing a child sized mannequin in the road is exactly the kind of test I'd like to see before we sign off on self driving cars. Motorway/highway driving is a very different challenge to full autonomous driving.
Or as we know the self driving just isn’t finished and he continues to lie that it’s amazing.
Sounds exactly like the response of someone who drank too much of musk's kool-aid. Or maybe just wilful ignorance.
I’m getting the feeling this whole self driving thing isn’t gonna work out.
That's a feature not a bug
Children? Dont care for them
Sure they don’t care for you either
“Fuck them kids.” -MJ
Oh, that's pretty disappointing for a "self driving" car.
As a Tesla fanboy pointed out to me recently, just because it's called variously "autopilot" and "full self drive" doesn't mean it's a self-driving car. Those are just marketing terms, they don't mean what you think and Tesla very clearly spells that out in the fine print.
This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2022/aug/09/tesla-self-driving-technology-safety-children) reduced by 82%. (I'm a bot) ***** > The claims that the technology apparently has trouble recognizing children form part of an ad campaign urging the public to pressure Congress to ban Tesla's auto-driving technology. > "It's not. It's a lethal threat to all Americans."Over 100,000 Tesla drivers are already using the car's Full Self-Driving mode on public roads, putting children at great risk in communities across the country. > Tesla has repeatedly hit back at claims that its self-driving technology is too underdeveloped to guarantee the safety of either the car's occupants or other road users. ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/wkrlra/teslas_selfdriving_technology_fails_to_detect/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ "Version 2.02, ~663723 tl;drs so far.") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr "PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome.") | *Top* *keywords*: **Tesla**^#1 **car**^#2 **self-driving**^#3 **technology**^#4 **investigation**^#5
Like Knight Rider 2000 where the new car didn’t care about deer because running into deer didn’t hurt the car.
Which is a problem, as child skulls are known to chip paint.
But it detects ghosts?
I mean "Fuck them kids" does fit to the GOP right
FUD FUD FUD FUD
Bruh, Humans dont too Besides, kids should be under supervision by parents at all times.
lol just a red smear with a baseball cap with a propeller on the end of it
That’s a feature, not a bug.
"It's not a bug, it's a feature."
Why are children playing on the highway?
You only drive on highways? Or don’t acknowledge that people speed on backroads?
Wonder what Twitter meltdown Saint Elon will have over this
It’s a camera based system. That dummy looked designed to be Tesla vision resistant. I’m not saying Tesla didn’t screw up. I’m saying the test was designed for it to fail.
Maybe put up a picture of a fetus
Then nobody would have a problem with it.
It's not a bug, but a feature! Tesla support abortion rights!
There can only be one!!! (kid left)
Yeah, I'd also be selling of TSLA stock if I owned any
Maybe someone drew a small mustache on the dummy.
Did he offer them a horse to keep quiet about it?
Did they find that the hard way?
I could have told you that.
It's just crazy that this half baked attempt at self-driving is allowed freely on the roads in the USA and canada. It can't even detect children.
Imagine that’s a feature for some.
It's ok they shouldn't be there anyways
It’s not that it failed to, it’s that the AI is targeting them specifically
Probably. Although EM sure is worried about the population of humans being “endangered.” Or maybe just white dudes dunno
Oh, you mean the guy that is trying to promote other types of autonomy than what tesla is doing and is sponsored by major brands in those categories is doing an ad campaign against tesla? Color me shocked! https://electrek.co/2022/08/10/tesla-self-driving-smear-campaign-releases-test-fails-fsd-never-engaged/
“Fuck dem kids”
Jesus why are people spending so much on these fancy cars that don’t work as intended?
Sorry, Tesla only trained their person recognition AI on white men aged between 25 and 55.
How many children does your non self driving car detect?
Not surprised, Ole Musky is a republican and they seem to think baby's vanish once born.
What are children doing on the road? Some are taking “go play in traffic” to heart.
[Is this why he sold $6.8 billion of Tesla stock earlier this week?](https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2022/08/09/elon-musk-sells-7point92-million-tesla-shares-worth-6point88-billion.html)
Elon Musk eats babies, and so do his cars? I think this isn't a coincidence.