this post was submitted on 19 Mar 2025
823 points (98.2% liked)

Not The Onion

15130 readers
2565 users here now

Welcome

We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!

The Rules

Posts must be:

  1. Links to news stories from...
  2. ...credible sources, with...
  3. ...their original headlines, that...
  4. ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”

Please also avoid duplicates.

Comments and post content must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.

And that’s basically it!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

In the piece — titled "Can You Fool a Self Driving Car?" — Rober found that a Tesla car on Autopilot was fooled by a Wile E. Coyote-style wall painted to look like the road ahead of it, with the electric vehicle plowing right through it instead of stopping.

The footage was damning enough, with slow-motion clips showing the car not only crashing through the styrofoam wall but also a mannequin of a child. The Tesla was also fooled by simulated rain and fog.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] mrodri89@lemmy.zip 14 points 1 hour ago

If you get any strong emotions on material shit when someone makes a video...you have 0 of my respect. Period.

[–] eugenevdebs@lemmy.dbzer0.com 68 points 7 hours ago

"Dipshit Nazis mad at facts bursting their bubble is unreality" is another way of reading this headline.

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 146 points 9 hours ago (3 children)

As Electrek points out, Autopilot has a well-documented tendency to disengage right before a crash. Regulators have previously found that the advanced driver assistance software shuts off a fraction of a second before making impact.

This has been known.

They do it so they can evade liability for the crash.

[–] fibojoly@sh.itjust.works 3 points 20 minutes ago* (last edited 19 minutes ago)

That makes so little sense... It detects it's about to crash then gives up and lets you sort it?
That's like the opposite of my Audi who does detect I'm about to hit something and gives me either a warning or just actively hits the brakes if I don't have time to handle it.
If this is true, this is so fucking evil it's kinda amazing it could have reached anywhere near prod.

[–] Simulation6@sopuli.xyz 12 points 4 hours ago

If the disengage to avoid legal consequences feature does exist, then you would think there would be some false positive incidences where it turns off for no apparent reason. I found some with a search, which are attributed to bad software. Owners are discussing new patches fixing some problems and introducing new ones. None of the incidences caused an accident, so maybe the owners never hit the malicious code.

[–] bazzzzzzz@lemm.ee 31 points 7 hours ago (3 children)

Not sure how that helps in evading liability.

Every Tesla driver would need super human reaction speeds to respond in 17 frames, 680ms(I didn't check the recording framerate, but 25fps is the slowest reasonable), less than a second.

[–] orcrist@lemm.ee 26 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

They're talking about avoiding legal liability, not about actually doing the right thing. And of course you can see how it would help them avoid legal liability. The lawyers will walk into court and honestly say that at the time of the accident the human driver was in control of the vehicle.

And then that creates a discussion about how much time the human driver has to have in order to actually solve the problem, or gray areas about who exactly controls what when, and it complicates the situation enough where maybe Tesla can pay less money for the deaths that they are obviously responsible for.

[–] jimbolauski@lemm.ee 4 points 1 hour ago

They’re talking about avoiding legal liability, not about actually doing the right thing. And of course you can see how it would help them avoid legal liability. The lawyers will walk into court and honestly say that at the time of the accident the human driver was in control of the vehicle.

The plaintiff's lawyers would say, the autopilot was engaged, made the decision to run into the wall, and turned off 0.1 seconds before impact. Liability is not going disappear when there were 4.9 seconds of making dangerous decisions and peacing out in the last 0.1.

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 41 points 7 hours ago

It’s not likely to work, but them swapping to human control after it determined a crash is going to happen isn’t accidental.

Anything they can do to mire the proceedings they will do. It’s like how corporations file stupid junk motions to force plaintiffs to give up.

[–] wabafee@lemmy.world 43 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago) (2 children)

I bet the reason why he does not want the LiDAR in the car really cause it looks ugly aestheticly.

It's also very expensive.

[–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 74 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago) (7 children)

It costs too much. It's also why you have to worry about panels falling off the swastitruck if you park next to them. They also apparently lack any sort of rollover frame.

He doesn't want to pay for anything, including NHTSB crash tests.

It's literally what Drumpf would have created if he owned a car company. Cut all costs, disregard all regulations, and make the public the alpha testers.

[–] bstix@feddit.dk 4 points 17 minutes ago

The panels are glued on. The glue fails when the temperature changes.

I can't believe that this car is legal to drive in public.

[–] Ledericas@lemm.ee 25 points 6 hours ago

it did cost too much at the time, but currently he doesnt want to do it because he would have to admit hes wrong.

[–] werefreeatlast@lemmy.world 20 points 9 hours ago (3 children)

The guy bankrupted a casino, not by playing against it and being super lucky, but by owning it. Virtually everything he has ever touched in business has turned to shit. How do you ever in the living fuck screwup stakes at Costco? My cousin with my be good eye and a working elbow could do it.

And now its the country's second try. This time unhinged, with all the training wheels off. The guy is stepping on the pedal while stripping the car for parts and giving away the fuel. The guy doesn't even drive, he just fired the chauffeur and is dismantling the car from the inside with a shot gun...full steam ahead on to a nice brick wall and an infinity cliff ready to take us all with him. And Canada and Mexico and Gina. Three and three quarters of a year more of daily atrocities and law breakage. At least Hitler boy brought back the astronauts.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk 93 points 11 hours ago (24 children)

Why would a car that expensive not have a LiDAR sensor?

[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 4 points 1 hour ago

Hell, they don't even have radar anymore, despite even a lot of low end cars having that.

Technically cost savings, but it seems mostly about stubborn insistence on cameras being enough.

[–] Valmond@lemmy.world 12 points 5 hours ago

They cost hundreds of dollars!!

/$

[–] O_R_I_O_N@lemm.ee 48 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

Cameras are cheaper..that's it

[–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk 4 points 6 hours ago

It's a car that's at least £10k

[–] drmoose@lemmy.world 35 points 10 hours ago

Cost cutting. Lidar is cheaper now but was relative expensive and increased tech debt and maintenance. Also he legit thought that "human see good - then car see good too". Tesla is being led by a literal idiot.

load more comments (20 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›