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.
deleted by creator
IMHO, this was really a video about camera-only automatic emergency braking, not autonomous driving.
Lots of cars have AEB now since a lot of regulators are requiring it, but most use a combination of cameras and ultrasonic sonic. The top-of-the-line systems have LiDAR, cameras, and ultrasonic.
Tesla’s sensors lack redundancy. If the cameras are obstructed or can’t distinguish shapes, the vehicle can’t fall back to another system.
Bonus deep dive about using LiDAR to map out space mountain
I wouldn’t exactly call that a deep dive.
The channel is for 5-year-olds, they would drown in a real deep dive
💯
Im shocked Disney isnt thowing a fit over that. Their legal team must be busy this week.
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.
https://www.theguardian.com/film/article/2024/aug/15/disney-wrongful-death-lawsuit-dismissal
Disney is not scared of lawyering up.
Insane that the telsa drives into spaces its unsure of. So dangerous
What makes you think it’s unsure?
True its not unsure but it should be. If it doesn’t have good viability it should have slowed down or disengaged auto pilot.
In fog it doesn’t know it doesn’t have good visibility.
Then it shouldnt work in fog and force the driver to drive.
If it had lidar then it would
That’s the thing that got me. I would have issues spotting that child through the fog as well, but I wouldn’t have sped through it.
A Tesla stopped for me at a crosswalk and I insisted, you go on ahead, I ain’t trusting Musk Tech with my life.
Sure, but their sensors will detect if you aren’t paying enough attention and report back to Tesla headquarters to get the lawyers ready before you can even get out of your car.
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)
All the other cars he tested stopped just fine. Who cares about fiddling with modes and shit.
Not any tangible difference in this scenario. Both use vision only. And both use the same computers.
Human drivers use vision only
Human drivers generally use sound as well.
Fortunately humans have much better hardware and software to accompany that vision.
“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.
The other car only used emergency breaking, so there’s that.
Props to Benn Jordan for doing this a year ago on a slightly lower budget.
I never trust self driving/autonomous car no matter how advance their tech are
Having clocked in a lot of hours in San Francisco cabs, Ubers, Lyfts, and Waymos, IMHO, the Waymos are the least terrifying - by far.
My opinion might change if they’re ever allowed to travel at high speeds on a highway, but in a congested city where you can rarely get above 35mph, they feel really good.
No aggressive or distracted driving, no tipping, no stinky ass air freshers, and generally no double parking to pick people up.
I’m a convert.
Thank god it doesn’t have LIDAR sensors, much cheaper to repair the front this way
Tap for spoiler
/s
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. 👌
I had assumed Mark Rober was a sponsored member of the alt-right intellectual dark web.
He is.
Coming here because I saw how downvoted this post was on Reddit lol. I love that it’s triggering the Elon fanboys.
Maybe it was downvoted because of Mormon weirdo Mark Rober and not the content itself?
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.
I don’t think anything Rober does is out of virtue.
I stopped watching his vids when it felt like literally every single one was a promotion for his kid box thing. I also feel I may have aged out of his target demo which feels weird because I’m still watching most of the other science chanels I followed at the time.
Mark Rober sold out.
He’s watered down the actual interesting science in exchange for a more hype style. A Mr. Beast wanna-be.
Good lecturers exude a passion and elegance of the subject matter. Simplicity in complexity.
Mark Rober is a shell of the educator he once was. I would kill to have his inspirational pull. And yet, he placed such a talent on the altar of vacant consumerism
Who cares about virtue? I just want to be entertained by Tesla cheaping out and then telling drivers it’s a premium car brand that will pay for itself with robo taxi services.
Is he a weirdo for being Mormon, or something else?
Based on comments it’s the Tesla stans.
Seems like most of the downvotes are in the Telsa communities. The other communities upvoted it heavily.
Ahah Tesla is like a 2000s knock-off of good existing technology
I am not a fan of Tesla/Elon but are you sure that no human driver would fall for this?
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.
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.
Should be fine if the car reduces speed to account for the conditions. Just like a human driver does.
And the Tesla doesn’t, that’s the problem. A human would slow down if they can’t see, the Tesla just barrels through blindly.
FSD is still in development
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.
Lets assume that a human driver would fall for it, for sale of argument.
Would that make it a good idea to potentially run over a kid just because a human would have to, when we have a decent option to do better than human senses?
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.
The main problem in my mind with purely vision based FSD is that it just isn’t as smart as a real human. A real human can reason about what they see, detect inconsistencies that are too abstract for current ML algorithms to see, and act appropriately in never before seen circumstances. A real human wouldn’t drive full speed through very low visibility areas. They can use context to reason about a situation. Current ML algorithms can’t do any of that, they can’t reason. As such they are inherently incapable of using the same sensors (cameras/eyes) to the same effect. Lidar is extremely useful because it helps get a bit better of a picture that cameras can’t reliably provide. I’m still not sure that even with lidar you can make a fully safe FSD car, but it definitely will help.
The assumption that ML lacks reasoning is outdated. While it doesn’t “think” like a human, it learns from more scenarios than any human ever could. A vision-based system can, in principle, surpass human performance, as it has in other domains (e.g., AlphaGo, GPT, computer vision in medical imaging).
The real question isn’t whether vision-based ML can replace humans—it’s when it will reach the level where it’s unequivocally safer.
FSD is launching this year??! Where have I heard that before?
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.
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.
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.
Autopilot is not FSD and I bet many of the deaths were caused by inattentive drivers.
Which other system has a similar architecture and similar potential?
