this post was submitted on 22 Nov 2023
399 points (98.1% liked)

Technology

58135 readers
5330 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
L3s
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
enu
[email protected]
L4s
399
Judge finds ‘reasonable evidence’ Tesla knew self-driving tech was defective (www.theguardian.com)
submitted 10 months ago by L4s to c/technology
31 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Judge finds ‘reasonable evidence’ Tesla knew self-driving tech was defective::Ruling clears way for lawsuit brought against company over fatal crash in 2019 in which Stephen Banner was killed near Miami

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 54 points 10 months ago (4 children)

It’s asinine that Tesla is trying to do full self driving without actually using some sort of LiDAR. Using video/photos to judge distance is just unreliable and stupid.

[–] xanu 33 points 10 months ago (1 children)

but it's MUCH cheaper, so keeping with every other shitty idea he's ever had, Musk was REALLY banking on Tesla engineers to make a crazy breakthrough so he could reap billions in reward.

It worked at SpaceX because of a perfect concoction of all the best rocket scientists and engineers wanting to work at SpaceX, since it was one of the only space programs not owned by a government and could push the boundaries, the technology being possible and wildly practical to implement, and massive government subsidies.

Tesla is in the car market, which is notoriously competitive and, while they do have massive government subsidies, they don't have the best engineers and musk's insistence that they "figure out" how to shove autonomous driving into a medium that simply doesn't provide enough information drives even the better engineers away.

I really wish my government would stop funding his ego and let his fantasy projects die already.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 10 months ago (2 children)

The tech has gotten so cheap now that there is no reason to skimp out on it.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Oh there definitely is, marginally higher profits at the cost of public safety

A tale as old as capitalism: short term profit first, who gives a shit about later

[–] topinambour_rex 1 points 10 months ago

And tesla is the car company who has the highest benefits by car sold.

[–] topinambour_rex 7 points 10 months ago

We talk about a company who got rid of ultrasound sensors for make the car reverse parks.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 10 months ago

Sitting in a Tesla and watching it try to understand anything other than highway driving is so unnerving. It gets so much wrong about other cars' direction of travel that it's not too shocking one occasionally is plowed into or plows into someone else

[–] [email protected] 7 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (2 children)

With two offset cameras, depth is reliable, especially using a wide angle and narrow angle lens offset. This is what OpenPilot does with the Comma 3 (FOSS self driving).

Radar is better, but some automotive radar seems to only be great at short ranges (from my experience with my fork of OP in combination with radar built into a vehicle).

[–] MeanEYE 6 points 10 months ago (1 children)

depth is reliable

No it's not. World is filled with optical illusions that even our powerful brains can't process and yet you expect two web cams to do. And depth is not the only thing that's needed when it comes autonomous driving. Distance is an absolute factor. Case in point, two killed (if not more) bikers because they had 2 tail lights instead of one and Tesla thought it's a car far away instead of motorcycle close by. Ran them over as if they were not there. Us as humans would see this rider and realize it's a motorcyle... first because of sound second because our brain is better at reasoning. And we'd avoid the situation. This is why cars MUST have more sensors, because processing is lacking so much.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago

Here is an alternative Piped link(s):

Case in point

Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.

I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.

[–] topinambour_rex 0 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Using video/photos to judge distance is just unreliable and stupid.

All depend how powerful is the computer managing the datas. A human brain does the job by example.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

I thought the whole point was to overcome human shortcomings, not just make a worse version of a human driver. Humans don't even rely purely on visual cues.