this post was submitted on 12 Feb 2024
191 points (93.6% liked)
Technology
58061 readers
31 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Def conflict of interest, but they aren't necessarily lying, I've personally lost all trust in Teslas autopilot the day Musk stated (paraphrasing) that "aLl wE NeED arE CAmEraS" like no thanks, a safety critical system should have a fall back system. Cameras fuck up a lot and LiDAR came down a lot in cost since then, but anybody who actually even halfway knows what they're doing could have predicted that.
And then all the things Musk's done since just solidified that lol
I am so ready to get a fully autonomous car, but not a fucking Tesla that's for damn sure, I'll wait for some other manufacturer.
It works surprisingly well. You should try it before belting out under-educated (trying to say this as kindly as I can here!) comments.
When it’s rainy and such, it’ll warn you, tell you it’s a dumb idea, then limit its speed. And really, with any driver assist program, the driver should still be paying attention.
I have used both. Even under ideal conditions the cameras only is noticeably worse.
I recall parking in a parking lot and the camera systems showed that I was hitting a car while I was about a foot away from it. Lidar did not have any issues like that. And it was a perfectly sunny day.
So Tesla hasn't used lidar, and have disabled the front-radar for a while now. Though lately they decided to drop ultrasonic sensors and I think it's crap for parking right now. I suspect the cameras were not laid out to handle this use.
If you have a hard requirement on tight parking, I'd strongly recommend looking elsewhere or trying it with a trial first...
If I still have to pay attention, what my Hyundai has is fine. I think that's the biggest issue with any FSD. Theres a sharp diminishing returns past a point. If I can't take a nap, I don't care. And I'll trust any of them the day there are laws on the books imposing a $7.5MM fine per casualty.
Those cars make the manufacturer money while hoisting the risk onto the public. People talk about stats compared to human drivers, it's not about stats, it's about accountability.
That's fair and is a reasonable line of "usefulness". Of driver assist tech, good lane centering + adaptive cruise control are the biggest, most useful features that I think everyone would see big benefits from, and there's been a lot of improvement in this area over the years.
Tesla's AP+FSD has been incredibly rock solid on that front, to the point where most roads feel like you're on a rail track.
They aren't wrong. Camera systems do have a lot of issues. Calling someone stupid for pointing that out is absurd.
Cameras can mess up when they're dirty, when it's raining, when it's dark, when there's glare.
Image processing and recognition is also a hell of a lot slower and more computationally expensive than numbers from a LIDAR system.
Didn't intend to call them stupid. My intent was to say they should try out a product that uses the tech before passing judgement on the effectiveness of it. I was hoping the use of "under" would be taken a lot lighter.
Though, self-driving doesn't have to be a 100% scenario item either. It doesn't have to have the ability to activate all the time. It's cloudy/sunny 90%+ of the days where I'm at.
We would get nowhere if the criteria was "must be 100% useful in 100% of scenarios 100% of the time".
Everybody is aware it's not going to be flawless out of the gate, or perhaps ever. That's not the point.
They're saying using cameras and only cameras is a bad idea and makes "Autopilot" inherently subpar in situations where cameras don't work so well.
Sure, but having actually driven one instead of commenting on the internet, the issues that have come up with AP/FSD have seem to be more data related (speed limits causing slowdowns).
When there are vision issues the car complains and it's up to you as the driver to take control. I don't care how many sensors are on/not on the car, if it tells you it can't handle the situation safely, that's now on you as the driver.
Plus, vision-only drivers assist isn’t new and Tesla isn’t the first on the road with it. I’ll let you figure out which particularly popular Japanese brand known for their crossovers 😉
Never go full fanboy... try actually understanding what people are telling you, why fail safes are good idea, why redundancy systems are implemented, etc.
Your anecdotal experience of "I drive in fog and rain and its been good" means nothing...
Hey, I recognize the system has its faults but a number of people simply base opinions on bad faith arguments and articles soliciting clicks.
Radar/lidar isn’t the magic end-all-be-all that internet automotive commenter-engineers claim.
I’m sorry you disagree with what I’m presenting.
Except for when it doesn't and the car plows straight into the back of a lorry. Or runs over a teenager getting off a school bus. Etc.
Which is already abusing the feature. These are driver assist features, not driver replacement.
No, as per Tesla's marketing, they are driver replacements
Source?
Are you serious?
Autopilot
Full Self Driving
"Our cars will travel from the east coast to west coast of the US without any human intervention by 2017"
"Your model 3 will be like an automated taxi earning money for you while you're not using it!"
Etc.
Tesla is always making out like their cars can drive themselves and it's just the law that's preventing cars from driving themselves about unaided.
Where are you getting that from?
Here. I'll show you mine:
https://www.tesla.com/model3/design#overview
Scroll down to the feature add-ons.
Maybe I'm a bit out-there but the bolded section seems to indicate to me that this is something I need to pay attention to the road while using, and am told this before I add the feature to the car before checkout.
A small print disclaimer doesn't undo years of marketing your cars as fully self driving
First of all, Mr. Fanboy, Musk has been touting it as a Full Self Driving program for a long time, they've somewhat stopped that recently after regulators started looking into it and you cite their website like they wouldn't change it lmao.
You're even commenting in a thread about an article on their deceptive practices with it.
Second, it's quite clear from my comment that I'm not interested in a "Driver Assist Program" I'm interested in a Fully Autonomous vehicle. "Driver Assist" is a nice feature, but not one I'm going to buy a whole new car for. When Tesla eventually (if ever) comes out with their Full Full Self Driving, however, I won't get it because they've lost my trust in it from all these shenanigans they're pulling now.
Third, there's absolutely a need in a life and death safety critical autonomous system to have another "sight" system. There's not even a cost excuse anymore and disabling the existing systems is asinine and potentially dangerous. Musk is just incapable of admitting when he's wrong and revising his plan like an adult.
Camera only systems get things wrong all the time, they have gaps and scenarios where they just don't work all that well. LiDAR does too, but in different situations, so their strength comes when melded together to complement each other.
Stop licking Elons boot and get a mind for yourself.
I take it that writing a thought-out civil comment was out of the question.
I’d be open to a conversation should this be rephrased to something more productive.
Just read it again except for the last sentence.