OK, its just a deer, but the future is clear. These things are going to start kill people left and right.

How many kids is Elon going to kill before we shut him down? Whats the number of children we’re going to allow Elon to murder every year?

  • bluGill@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 hours ago

    Driving is full of edge cases. Humans are also bad drivers who get edge cases wrong all the time.

    The real question isn’t is Tesla better/worse in anyone in particular, but overall how does Tesla compare. If a Tesla is better in some situations and worse in others and so overall just as bad as a human I can accept it. Is Tesla is overall worse then they shouldn’t be driving at all (If they can identify those situations they can stop and make a human take over). If a Tesla is overall better then I’ll accept a few edge cases where they are worse.

    Tesla claims overall they are better, but they may not be telling the truth. One would think regulators have data for the above - but they are not talking about it.

    • AA5B@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 hour ago

      Given that they market it as “supervised”, the question only has to be “are humans safer when using this tool than when not using it?”

      One of the cool things I’ve noticed since recent updates, is the car giving a nudge to help me keep centered, even when I’m not using autopilot

    • Semi-Hemi-Lemmygod@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 hours ago

      Humans are also bad drivers who get edge cases wrong all the time.

      It would be so awesome if humans only got the edge cases wrong.

    • snooggums@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 hours ago

      Tesla claims overall they are better, but they may not be telling the truth. One would think regulators have data for the above - but they are not talking about it.

      https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/nhtsa-opens-probe-into-24-mln-tesla-vehicles-over-full-self-driving-collisions-2024-10-18/

      The agency is asking if other similar FSD crashes have occurred in reduced roadway visibility conditions, and if Tesla has updated or modified the FSD system in a way that may affect it in such conditions.

      It sure seems like they aren’t being very forthcoming with their data between this and being threatened with fines last year for not providing the data. That makes me suspect they still aren’t telling the truth.

      • Billiam@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        5 hours ago

        It sure seems like they aren’t being very forthcoming with their data between this and being threatened with fines last year for not providing the data. That makes me suspect they still aren’t telling the truth.

        I think their silence is very telling, just like their alleged crash test data on Cybertrucks. If your vehicles are that safe, why wouldn’t you be shoving that into every single selling point you have? Why wouldn’t that fact be plastered across every Gigafactory and blaring from every Tesla that drives past on the road? If Tesla’s FSD is that good, and Cybertrucks are that safe, why are they hiding those facts?

        • snooggums@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 hours ago

          If the cybertruck is so safe in crashes they would be begging third parties to test it so they could smugly lord their 3rd party verified crash test data over everyone else.

          Bu they don’t because they know it would be a repeat of smashing the bulletproof window on stage.