No it doesn’t. Every life stolen matters and if it could be found that if tesla could have replicated industry best practice and saved more lives so that they could sell more cars then that is on them
Comment on Tesla’s Autopilot and Full Self-Driving linked to hundreds of crashes, dozens of deaths
TypicalHog@lemm.ee 2 months ago
It only matters if the autopilot does more kills than an average human driver on the same distance traveled.
Geobloke@lemm.ee 2 months ago
PresidentCamacho@lemm.ee 2 months ago
This is the actual logical way to think about self driving cars. Stop down voting him because “Tesla bad” you fuckin goons.
gallopingsnail@lemmy.sdf.org 2 months ago
Tesla’s self driving appears to be less safe and causes more accidents than their competitors.
“NHTSA’s Office of Defects Investigation said in documents released Friday that it completed “an extensive body of work” which turned up evidence that “Tesla’s weak driver engagement system was not appropriate for Autopilot’s permissive operating capabilities.”
TypicalHog@lemm.ee 2 months ago
Can you link me the data that says Tesla’s competitors self-driving is more safe and causes less accidents and WHICH ONES? I would really like to know who else has this level of self-driving while also having less accidents.
gallopingsnail@lemmy.sdf.org 2 months ago
The data doesn’t exist, no other company has a level of “autonomy” that will let your car plow through shit without you paying attention.
nxdefiant@startrek.website 2 months ago
No one else has the same capability in as wide a geographic range. Waymo, Cruise, Blue Cruise, Mercedes, etc are all geolocked to certain areas or certain stretches of road.
GiveMemes@jlai.lu 2 months ago
Ok? Nobody else is being as wildly irresponsible, therefore tesla should be… rewarded?
Socsa@sh.itjust.works 2 months ago
I don’t quite understand what they mean by this. It tracks drivers with a camera and the steering wheel sensor and literally turns itself off if you stop paying attention. What more can they do?
nxdefiant@startrek.website 2 months ago
The NHSTA hasn’t issued rules for these things either.
the U.S. gov has issued general guidelines for the technology as a while here:
They have an article on it discussing levels of automation here:
www.nhtsa.gov/…/automated-vehicles-safety
By all definitions layed out in that article:
BlueCruise, Super Cruise, Mercedes’ thing is a geolocked lvl3 system
Tesla’s FSD is a lvl 3 system
Waymo and Cruise are a lvl 4 system,
Lvl 5 systems don’t exist.
What we don’t have is any kind of federal laws:
www.ncsl.org/transportation/autonomous-vehicles
Separated into two sections – voluntary guidance and technical assistance to states – the new guidance focuses on SAE international levels of automation 3-5, clarifies that entities do not need to wait to test or deploy their ADS, revises design elements from the safety self-assessment, aligns federal guidance with the latest developments and terminology, and clarifies the role of federal and state governments. **The guidance reinforces the voluntary nature of the guidelines and does not come with a compliance requirement or enforcement mechanism. **
The U.S. has operated on a “states are laboratories for laws” principal since its founding. The current situation is in line with that principle.
These are not my opinions, these are all facts.
iamtrashman1312@lemmy.world 2 months ago
So your stance is literally “human lives are a worthy sacrifice for this endeavor”
PresidentCamacho@lemm.ee 2 months ago
The argument is that self driving car fatalities have to be compared against human driven car fatalities. If the self driving cars kill 500 people a year, but humans kill 1000 people a year, which one is better. Logic clearly isn’t your strong suit, maybe sit this one out…
MenigPyle@feddit.dk 2 months ago
Username checks out.
fuckingkangaroos@lemm.ee 2 months ago
They’re saying if this endeavor is overall saving lives then leave it alone…
TypicalHog@lemm.ee 2 months ago
I SAID: “IT ONLY MATTERS IF AUTOPILOT CAUSES MORE NET DEATHS PER MILE TRAVELED RATHER THAN LESS, WHEN COMPARED TO HUMAN DRIVERS!”
doubtingtammy@lemmy.ml 2 months ago
It’s not logical, it’s ideological. It’s the ideology that allows corporations to run a dangerous experiment on the public without their consent.
And where’s the LIDAR again?
Tja@programming.dev 2 months ago
But… Panel gaps!
mortemtyrannis@lemmy.ml 2 months ago
Knock knock
“Who is it?”
“Goons”
“Hired Goons”
TypicalHog@lemm.ee 2 months ago
Let them, people are dumb!
mojofrododojo@lemmy.world 2 months ago
this is bullshit.
A human can be held accountable for their failure, bet you a fucking emerald mine Musk won’t be held accountable for these and all the other fool self drive fuckups.
sabin@lemmy.world 2 months ago
So you’d rather live in a world where people die more often, just so you can punish the people who do the killing?
mojofrododojo@lemmy.world 2 months ago
That’s a terrifically misguided interpretation of what I said, wow.
LISTEN UP BRIGHT LIGHTS, ACCOUNTABILITY ISN’T A LUXURY. It’s not some ‘nice to have add-on’.
Musk’s gonna find out. Gonna break all his fanboys’ hearts too.
sabin@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Nothing was misguided and if anything your tone deaf attempt to double down only proves the point I’m making.
This stopped being about human deaths for you a long time ago.
Let’s not even bother to ask the question of whether or not this guy could ultimately be saving lives. All that matters to you is that you have a target to take your anger out on the event that a loved one dies in an accident or something.
You are shallow beyond belief.
TypicalHog@lemm.ee 2 months ago
Where did I say that a human shouldn’t be held accountable for what their car does?
SirEDCaLot@lemmy.today 2 months ago
This is 100% correct. Look at the average rate of crashes per mile driven with autopilot versus a human. If the autopilot number is lower, they’re doing it right and should be rewarded and NHTSA should leave them be. If the autopilot number is higher, then yes by all means bring in the regulation or whatever.
flerp@lemm.ee 2 months ago
Humans are extremely flawed beings and if your standard for leaving companies alone to make as much money as possible is that they are at least minimally better than extremely flawed, I don’t want to live in the same world as you want to live in.
AdrianTheFrog@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Having anything that can save lives over an alternative is an improvement. In general. Yes, we should be pushing for safer self driving, and regulating that. But if we can start saving lives now, then sooner is better than later.
flerp@lemm.ee 2 months ago
I’m not sure if that was supposed to be in agreement or countering what I said.
Over the past few decades, some people have noticed and commented on the enormous death toll that our reliance on driving and the vast amount of driving hours spent on our roads and said that that amount of death is unacceptable. Nothing has ever been able to come of it because of that aforementioned reliance on driving that our society has. Human nature cannot be the thing that changes, we can’t expect humans to behave differently all of a sudden nor change their ability to focus and drive safely.
But this moment in time, when the shift from human to machine drivers is happening, the time when we shift from beings incapable of performing better on a global scale, to machines able to avoid the current death tolls due to their ability to be vastly more precise than humans, this is the time to reduce that death toll.
If we allow companies to get away with removing sensors from their cars which results in lower safety just so that said company can increase their bottom line, I consider that unacceptable even if the death toll is slightly lower than human driven cars if it could be greatly lower than human driven cars.
SirEDCaLot@lemmy.today 2 months ago
It is not my place or yours or the governments to tell people how to spend their money or not. It IS our place to ensure that companies aren’t producing products that kill people.
Thus money doesn’t matter here. What matters is whether or not FSD is more dangerous than a human. If it is, it should be prohibited or only used under very monitored conditions. If it is equal or better than a human, IE same or fewer accident / fatalities per mile driven, then Tesla should be allowed to sell it, even if it is imperfect.
In the US we have a free market. Nobody is obligated to pay for FSD or use it. People can vote with their wallet whether they think it’s worth the money or not, THAT is what determines if Tesla makes more money or not. It’s up to each individual customer to decide if it’s worth it. That’s their choice not mine or yours.
As I see it, in a free market what Tesla has to prove is that their system doesn’t make things worse. If they can, if they can prove they’re not making roads more dangerous IE no need to ban it, then it’s a matter between them and their customer.
NIB@lemmy.world 2 months ago
If the cars run over people while going 30kmh because they use cameras and a bug crashed into the camera and that caused the car to go crazy, that is not acceptable, even if the cars crash “less than humans”.
Self driving needs to be highly regulated by law and demand to have some bare minimum sensors, including radars, lidars, etc. Camera only self driving is beyond stupid. Cameras cant see in snow or dark or whatever. Anyone who has a phone knows how fucky the camera can get under specific light exposures, etc.
Noone but tesla is doing camera only “self driving” and they are only doing it in order to cut down the cost. Their older cars had more sensors than their newer cars. But Musk is living in his Bioshock uber capitalistic dream. Who cares if a few people die in the process of developing visual based self driving.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gm2x6CVIXiE
TypicalHog@lemm.ee 2 months ago
What are you? Some kind of lidar shill? Camera only should obviously be the endgame goal for all robots. Also, this article is not even about camera only.
piecat@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Obviously?
Why wouldn’t we want other types of sensors…?
TypicalHog@lemm.ee 2 months ago
Because that’s expensive and can be done with a camera. And once you figure the camera stuff out - you gucci. Now you can do all kinds of shit without needing a lidar on every single robot.
MedicPigBabySaver@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Idiot
mojofrododojo@lemmy.world 2 months ago
I can’t tell if you’re a moron or attempting sarcasm but this is the least informed opinion I’ve seen in ages.
TypicalHog@lemm.ee 2 months ago
I wasn’t attempting sarcasm, so maybe I’m a moron idk. Fair, it likely I’m uninformed. I just know my daddy Elon said something about how solving shit with camera only is probably the best path and will pay off.
howrar@lemmy.ca 2 months ago
I’ve heard Elon Musk (or was it Karpathy?) talking about how camera should be sufficient for all scenarios because humans can do it on vision alone, but that’s poor reasoning IMO. Cars are not humans, so there’s no reason to confine them to the same limitations. If we want them to be safer and more capable than human drivers, one way to do that is by providing them with more information.
KingThrillgore@lemmy.ml 2 months ago
We built things like Lidars and ultrasound because we want better than our eyes at depth and sight.