• melfie@lemmings.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    edit-2
    4 hours ago

    Self-driving in general has been overhyped by grifter tech bros like Elon and really shows the current limits of ML. Today, ML models are basically fuzzy, probabilistic functions that map inputs to outputs and are not capable of actual reasoning. There is a long tail of scenarios where a self-driving car will not generalize properly (i.e., will kill people). Throwing increasingly more data and compute at it won’t suddenly make it capable of reasoning like a human. Like other ML use cases, self-driving is a cool concept that can be put to good use under the right conditions, and can even operate mostly without human supervision. However, anyone claiming it’s safe to let today’s “self-driving” cars shuttle humans around at high speeds with no additional safeguards in place either has an unrealistic understanding of the tech or is a sociopath.

  • Lukeazade@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    6 hours ago

    Coming here because I saw how downvoted this post was on Reddit lol. I love that it’s triggering the Elon fanboys.

    • imvii@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      6 hours ago

      Maybe it was downvoted because of Mormon weirdo Mark Rober and not the content itself?

      • Lukeazade@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 hours ago

        Yeah don’t get me wrong I’m not a Mark Rober fan and I don’t think he’s making this video because he’s anti Elon even, he’s just making it because it’s popular to hate Elon and Tesla at the moment. It happens to be a good thing, but unfortunately, I think Mark isn’t doing it out of virtue.

  • Sceptiksky
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 hours ago

    Ahah Tesla is like a 2000s knock-off of good existing technology

  • slaacaa@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 hours ago

    Thank god it doesn’t have LIDAR sensors, much cheaper to repair the front this way

    Tap for spoiler

    /s

  • GaMEChld@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    4 hours ago

    I’m bearish on TSLA, but still saw there’s some controversy surrounding his testing methodology and shortcomings in that video. Was talked about a bit on Philip DeFranco.

    • Ghostalmedia@lemmy.worldOPM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      2 hours ago

      IMHO, at the end of the day, all of those vehicles have emergency braking systems. It doesn’t matter if he was in FSD, Autopilot, or manual control, AED (Automatic Emergency Braking) should’ve stopped or slowed the vehicle.

      • chetradley@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        18 hours ago

        Getting into a legal battle with an immensely popular YouTuber would probably cost them a lot more in bad publicity than they would reasonably make from a lawsuit. I guarantee someone at Disney is doing or already has done the calculations.

          • chetradley@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 minutes ago

            Oh I’m not disagreeing with you there. In this case, they were being brought in as a defendant for a wrongful death case. The probably realized there was some potential PR damage from considering invoking the Disney+ terms (rightfully so, fuck them), but I’m sure they weighed that against the liability of the wrongful death suit.

            In the case of the video, I’d be surprised if they went after Robert, because I don’t see them gaining more from this case than they would lose in publicity. I could be wrong though, perhaps we’ll see!

  • Fizz@lemmy.nz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    23 hours ago

    Insane that the telsa drives into spaces its unsure of. So dangerous

  • harryprayiv@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    17 hours ago

    I’ve been shit-talking Elon’s (absolutely boneheaded) decision to intentionally eschew system-redundancy in systems that are critically responsible for human life for years now. Since he never missed an opportunity to show off his swastikar in MANY of his previous videos, I had assumed Mark Rober was a sponsored member of the alt-right intellectual dark web. But I’m pleasantly surprised to see that this video is a solid (WELL-justified) smear. 👌

    • imvii@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      6 hours ago

      I had assumed Mark Rober was a sponsored member of the alt-right intellectual dark web.

      He is.

  • RickC137@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    14
    ·
    9 hours ago

    I am not a fan of Tesla/Elon but are you sure that no human driver would fall for this?

    • TheSealStartedIt@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 hour ago

      That is a completely legitimate question. That you are downvoted says a lot about the current state of Lemmy. Don’t get me wrong, I’m all for the Musk hate, but it looks like a nuanced discussion on topics where Nazi-Elon is involved is currently not possibe.

    • ThePunnyMan@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 hours ago

      Part of the problem is the question of who is at fault if an autonomous car crashes. If a human falls for this and crashes, it’s their fault. They are responsible for their damages and the damages caused by their negligence. We expect a human driver to be able to handle any road hazards. If a self driving car crashes who’s fault is it? Tesla? They say their self driving is a beta test so drivers must remain attentive at all times. The human passenger? Most people would expect a self driving car would drive itself. If it crashes, I would expect the people that made the faulty software to be at fault, but they are doing everything they can to shift the blame off of themselves. If a self driving car crashes, they expect the owner to eat the cost.

      • RickC137@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 hour ago

        As soon as we have hard data from real world use and FSD is safer than the average human, it would be unethical to not solve the regulatory and legal issues and apply it on a larger scale to save human lives.

        If a human driver causes a crash, the insurance pays. Why shouldn’t they if a computer caused the crash, which drives safer overall, if only by let’s say 10%.

    • jj4211@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      3 hours ago

      Lets assume that a human driver would fall for it, for sake of argument.

      Would that make it a good idea to potentially run over a kid just because a human would have as well, when we have a decent option to do better than human senses?

      • RickC137@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        11
        ·
        5 hours ago

        What makes you assume that a vision based system performs worse than the average human? Or that it can’t be 20 times safer?

        I think the main reason to go vision-only is the software complexity of merging mixed sensor data. Radar or Lidar alone also have their limitations.

        I wish it was a different company or that Musk would sell Tesla. But I think they are the closest to reaching full autonomy. Let’s see how it goes when FSD launches this year.

        • jj4211@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          3 hours ago

          Somehow other car companies are managing to merge data from multiple sources fine. Tesla even used to do it, but stopped to shave a few dollars in their costs.

          In terms of assuming there would be safety concerns, well this video clearly demonstrates that adding lidar avoids three scenarios, at least two of them realistic. As I said my standard is not “human driver” but safest options as demonstrated.

          • RickC137@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            18 minutes ago

            Which other system can drive autonomous in potentially any environment without relying on map data?

            If merging data from different sensors increases complexity by factor 5, it’s just not worth it.

            • jj4211@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 minutes ago

              One, I don’t know if ‘autonomous no matter what’ is an important enough goal versus ADAS, but for another, the gold standard in the industry except Tesla is vehicle mounted LIDAR, with investments to bring down the tech price.

              Merging data from different sources was never claimed by anyone to be too hard a problem, again, even Tesla used to and decided to downgrade their capabilities for cost. “It’s just not worth it” is a strange take on a video demonstrating quite clearly the better data from LIDAR than you can possibly get from cameras and the benefit of avoiding collisions, collisions that kill thousands a year. Even the relatively “won’t turn on unless things are perfect” autopilot has killed quite a few people, and incurred hundreds of accidents beyond that.

    • undeffeined@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      7 hours ago

      The road runner thing seems a bit far fetched yeah. But there were also tests with heavy rain and fog which were not passed by Tesla.

      • Ghostalmedia@lemmy.worldOPM
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 hours ago

        The road runner thing isn’t far fetched. Teslas have a track record of t-boning semi trucks in overcast conditions, where the sky matches the color of the truck’s container.

      • RickC137@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 hours ago

        Should be fine if the car reduces speed to account for the conditions. Just like a human driver does.

      • oplkill@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        7 hours ago

        Isnt there a rule if weather very heavy and you cant see you must stop driving immediately

        • undeffeined@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 hours ago

          You mean a traffic rule? I can’t comment about the US but in Portugal I don’t recall such a rule when learning to drive. Also in Finland I have not experienced that since traffic keeps going even in heavy blizzards.

  • sir_pronoun@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    22 hours ago

    What about the claims that he only used Autopilot, and not Tesla’s Full Self Driving?

    (Context: I hate Tesla, just curious for the sake of an honest argument)

    • ayyy@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 hours ago

      All the other cars he tested stopped just fine. Who cares about fiddling with modes and shit.

    • Snapz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 hours ago

      “Full shelf driving” still needs to be in quotes. It’s a feature’s brand name for a product that doesn’t actually have full self driving capabilities.

      Try not to carry water for their attempted, repeated lie.

    • Manalith@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 hours ago

      Philip DeFranco had him on Yesterday and he said the reason he didn’t use FSD was that it required you to input an address, but that there isn’t any difference in terms of the sensors being used.

      Given that the other car didn’t appear to have a version of FSD either, I’m unclear as to why Autopilot wasn’t the correct move for the most accurate comparison.

    • Ulrich@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      21 hours ago

      Not any tangible difference in this scenario. Both use vision only. And both use the same computers.

      • sir_pronoun@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        6 hours ago

        But do they use a different software? Maybe FSD is more advanced than autopilot and could have reacted better?

        Just playing devil’s advocate here.

        • Ulrich@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          57 minutes ago

          Yes, completely different software, but both are limited by machine vision.

        • undefinedValue@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          4 hours ago

          The software may change but these tests show it’s the hardware that’s limiting them. If the Tesla can’t see a kid through fog, it doesn’t matter what software you pick, that kid gunna die.

    • pelespirit@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      22 hours ago

      He was helping out Tesla by doing that. He was helping them get the wins they got instead of just Tesla massacring the kid every time. Note to self: As a pedestrian and you see a tesla, don’t cross the street.