• froh42@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    “If you’ve got, at scale, a statistically significant amount of data that shows conclusively that the autonomous car has, let’s say, half the accident rate of a human-driven car, I think that’s difficult to ignore,” Musk said.

    That’s a very problematic claim - and it might only be true if you compare completely unassited vehicles to L2 Teslas.

    Other brands also have a plethora of L2 features, but they are marketed and designed in a different way. The L2 features are activate but designed in a way to keep the driver engaged in driving.

    So L2 features are for better safety, not for a “wow we live in the future” show effect.

    For example lane keeping in my car - you don’t notice it when driving, it is just below your level of attention. But when I’m unconcentrated for a moment the car just stays on the lane, even on curving roads. It’s just designed to steer a bit later than I would do. (Also, even before, the wheel turns minimally lighter into the direction to keep the car center of lane, than turning it to the other direction - it’s just below what you notice, however if you don’t concentrate on that effect)

    Adaptive speed control is just sold as adaptive speed control - it did notice it uses radar AND the cameras once, as it considers. my lane free as soon the car in front me clears the lane markings with its wheels (when changing lanes)

    It feels like the software in my car could do a lot more, but its features are undersold.

    The combination of a human driver and the driver assist systems in combination makes driving a lot safer than relying on the human or the machine alone.

    In fact the braking assistant has once stopped my car in tight traffic before I could even react, as the guy in front of me suddenly slammed their brakes. If the system had failed and not detected the situation then it would have been my job to react in time. (I did react, but can’t say if I might have been fast enough with reaction times)

    What Tesla does with technology is impressive, but I feel the system could be so. much better if they didn’t compromise saftey in the name of marketing and hyperbole.

    If Tesla’s Autopilot was designed frim ground up to keep the driver engaged, I believe it would really be the safest car on the road.

    I feel they are rather designed to be able to show off “cool stuff”.

    • ForgotAboutDre@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      Tesla’s autopilot isn’t the best around. It’s just the most deployed and advertised. People creating autopilot responsibly don’t beta test them with the kind of idiots that think Tesla autopilot is the best approach.

      • Thorny_Insight@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        16
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        If Tesla’s self-driving isn’t the best one around then which one is? I’m not aware of any other system capable of doing what FSD does. Manufacturers like Mercedes may have more trust in their system because it only works on a limited number of hand-picked roads and under ideal conditions. I still wouldn’t say that what essentially is a train is better system for getting around than a car with full freedom to take you anywhere.

        • machinin@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          23
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          All throughout these comments, you seem deeply, deeply confused. Let’s go over this sloooowly.

          Mercedes has two autonomous systems. Let’s call them MB FSD and MB Autodrive.

          MB FSD has similar features to Tesla’s. It isn’t geo-restricted. You have to pay attention, just like Tesla. It isn’t true autonomous driving, just like Tesla. If you have an accident, you are responsible, just like Tesla.

          MB Autodrive is another feature set. It is L3 autonomy, which means it is limited geographically and the driver should be available to take over when prompted. It also means that the driving is completely autonomous. The driver can be reading, playing on their phone, or simply laying there with their eyes closed. Mercedes will even take legal and financial responsibility for any accidents that happen on their system.

          So, to summarize:

          FSD -type systems: Mercedes and Tesla (and many other car makers)

          Level 3: not Tesla, Mercedes

          True autonomous driving is when the manufacturer takes responsibility for the car’s actions. Anything else is assisted driving. Until Tesla takes responsibility for accidents, you can’t consider them to have certified autonomous driving.

          Is that any clearer to you? After seeing some of your other shilling for Tesla in other posts, maybe there is a reason you don’t want to recognize the advantages of other systems?

          • suction@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            8 months ago

            Absolutely correct. It’s so disheartening how many guys like him out there are hurting us all with their admiration for con-men like Trump and Musk and absolute inability to fact check

        • suction@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          It’s level 2 automation, a lot of other makers have that. You need to look past the juicy marketing language, there’s standards and norms which Tesla cannot go beyond because then it’ll be illegal to drive the cars on public roads.