I really want to trust you’re throwing a dark joke up but the sheer concept of suicide booths is a very harsh critique at a failed society. A very failed society. For it to become a joke…Call me square but that is a joke haimed to who laughs on it.

Carmaggedon

The packet says to fight a Honda. (I know, Street Fighter, but still.)

https://piped.video/watch?v=3vPtn1StzA4&t=1

The main issue is that they market it like a fully autonomous system, and made it just good enough that it lulls people into a false sense of security that they don’t need to pay attention, while also having no way to verify they are, unlike other systems from BMW, GM, or Ford.

Other systems have their capabilities intentionally hampered to insure that you’re not going to feel it’s okay to hop in the passenger seat and let your dog drive.

They are hands-on driver assists, and so they are generally calibrated in a way that they’ll guide you in the lane, but will drift/sway just a bit if you completely take your hands off the wheel, which is intended to keep you, y’know, actually driving.

Tesla didn’t want to do that. They wanted to be the “best” system, with zero safety considerations at any step other than what was basically forced upon them by the supplier so they wouldn’t completely back out. The company is so insanely reckless that I feel shame for ever wanting to work for them at one point, until I saw and heard many stories about just how bad they were.

I got to experience it firsthand too working at a supplier, where production numbers were prioritized over key safety equipment, and while everyone else was willing to suck it up for a couple of bad quarters, they pushed it and I’m sure it’s indirectly resulted in further injuries and potentially deaths because of it.

It is just a shit load of if then else statements. If the inputs don’t have a corresponding if then it just defaults to doing nothing.

Former NHTSA senior safety adviser Missy Cummings, a professor at George Mason University’s College of Engineering and Computing, said the surge in Tesla crashes is troubling.

“Tesla is having more severe — and fatal — crashes than people in a normal data set,” she said in response to the figures analyzed by The Post.

This would indicate that FSD is more dangerous than a human driver, would it not?

You can’t just put something on the streets without first verifying it’s safe and working as intended. This is missing for Autopilot. And the data that’s piling up is showing that Autopilot is deadly.

Humans my friend. We can hold humans accountable. We can’t hold hunks of semi-sentient sand and nebulous transient configurations of electrons liable of anything. So, it has to be better than humans, which is not. If it isn’t better than humans, then we’ll rather just have a human in control. Because we can argue with and hold the human accountable for their actions and decisions.

No, we would (rightfully so) blame the driver for merging into a semi truck that from my understanding was clearly visible.

but they’ve also saved numerous lives by preventing accidents from occurring in the first place.

There is no data to make this claim. You’re just making this up.

Self driving is not a defined standard, it is a buzz word like increase your vitality. The SAE standards for autonomous vehicles do not have a self driving category

I think you’re referring to FSD beta and not Autopilot. One is supposed to be the self driving feature at some point while the other is simply lane keeping/cruise control. FSD wasn’t even available when this crash happened.

Tesla’s Autopilot is driving assistance. I don’t know where you saw Musk marketing it as a self driving feature. Hell, even for the misnomer “full self driving” they note:

The currently enabled features require a fully attentive driver, who has their hands on the wheel and is prepared to take over at any moment.

It sends shivers down my spine to think that airlines want to eliminate the co-piloting requirement in order to reduce costs. It would be increasingly stressful for the pilots, increasing turn-over, burnout and the risk of errors during flights. I would never fly with an airline that makes a single pilot take the brunt of a flight longer than 1 hour. Hell, even quality long-distance bus travel and truck hauling companies have drivers work in tandem, switching every so many hours.

I actually think that the less a driver has to do, the worse they’ll be at reacting when a situation does come up.

If I’m actually driving and someone, say, runs out in front of me, I’ll slam on the brakes. I’ve had this happen, actually - it was scary as hell because my brain froze up, but…fortunately for us and the guy, my foot still knew what to do, and we stopped in time.

But if I’m sitting in the seat, just monitoring, not actively doing something, my attention is much more likely to wander, and when that incident happens, my reaction time is likely going to be a LOT slower, because I have to “mode shift” back into operating a car, whereas I was already in that mode in the incident above. I don’t think the manufacturers are adequately considering this factor.

(I recognize this might not be a perfect example with automatic brakes, but I think the point is clear.)

deleted by creator

It’s a difficult comparison to make because planes are maintaining level flight or making smooth wide-arcing turns or gradual changes in altitude, not quickly responding to imminent obstacles and traffic. Even in an autoland situation, it’s supposed to follow a gentle descent slope that’s planned long in advance. This type of operation isn’t really possible with cars, so they require a whole other set of considerations and techniques.

And it requires way more training and attention from the operator because that way they can react quickly. Not so much for cars, especially on “autopilot”.

There’s less stuff to hit in the air.

And even private aviation requires hundreds of hours of experience and deep understanding of physics and extensive training before even being allowed in the air on your own. Let alone to fly others that’s a different training and license. Using those fancy “it flights itself” autopilots require several extra thousand hours of experience and specialized training, a commercial license and to be under the supervision and employment of an airline. Otherwise you are barely allowed to use the plane version of cruise control. Even after all that, you are still required to maintain your training with regular recertifications every few years, and a set of several hours of practice flight every year. Miss either condition and you lose your license.

No it’s not at all, there’s still a ton of work for the pilot and first officer despite autopilot

I think it’s been reported that the FSD statistics they put out are worthless because it tends to disable itself right before collisions.

What’s the motivation to cherrypick though?

Human drivers are bad enough that I don’t think there’s any doubt that autopilot puts them to shame with regards to safety, so they can either look way better and not be suspicious, or look way better and be suspicious… Sounds like an obvious choice to me

They’re probably the only ones who even has access to such statistics. If you’re simply just going to refute the stats because of the source then atleast provide some credible counter evidence.

It actually would be really hard to get an unbiased estimate of safety given the current systems, because the data is inherently cherry picked by drivers who can switch the feature on/off depending on how complex the driving task is. What a simple number like crashes per mile really measures is really how likely FSD drivers are to overestimate the system’s ability plus some unknown base rate of unavoidable accidents.

Probably the only way to control for this is looking at cars that are fully autonomous door to door and aren’t limited to pre-selected roads/areas. I don’t know that anyone is even doing that sort of testing.

Doesn’t auto pilot kinda work on normal roads now? Not saying I trust the stat either.

Hmm you’re right about autopilot mainly being used on highways and those roads are a lot safer. I’ll edit my main comment

According to this report, the average Tesla equipped with FSD Beta, driven on predominantly non-highway sections of road, crashes 0.31 times per million miles, a dramatic decrease from the average American, who crashes 1.53 times every million miles.

Source

It’s an interesting question. But I would be disappointed if the self-driving was basically killed by the legal questions, since it has a huge potential to save lives.

The driver is always responsible for using the tools within the car correctly and maintaining control of the vehicle at all times.

Either way the driver would be at fault. However, the driver might be able to make a (completely separate) case that the car’s defects made control impossible, but since the driver always had the option to disable self-driving, I doubt that would go anywhere.

Just like you don’t get off the hook if your cruise control causes an accident… and it doesn’t matter how much Tesla lied about what it may or may not be capable of, because at the end of the day it’s always the driver’s responsibility to know the limitations of the vehicle and disable the feature and take control when necessary.