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?
- Vehicle needed lidar
- Vehicle should have a collision detection indicator for anomalous collisions and random mechanical problems
Elon’s Death
For a brief moment, I was so excited… Rip deer.
We can only hope soon 🙏
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.
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.
I’ve been able to get demos of autopilot in one of my friend’s cars, and I’ll always remember autopilot correctly stopping at a red light, followed by someone in the next lane over blowing right through it several seconds later at full speed.
Unfortunately “better than the worst human driver” is a bar we passed a long time ago. From recent demos I’d say we’re getting close to the “average driver”, at least for clear visibility conditions, but I don’t think even that’s enough to have actually driverless cars driving around.
There were over 9M car crashes with almost 40k deaths in the US in 2020, and that would be insane to just decide that’s acceptable for self driving cars as well. No company is going to want that blood on their hands.
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.
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.
One trick used is to disengage auto pilot when it senses and imminent crash. This would vastly lower the crash count shifting all blame to the human driver.
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?
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.
Yes. The question is if the Tesla is better than a anyone in particular. People are given the benefit of the doubt once they pass the drivers test. Companies and AI should not get that. The AI needs to be as good or better than a GOOD human driver. There is no valid justification to allow a poorly driving AI because it’s better than the average human. If we are going to allow these on the road they need to be good.
The video above is HORRID. The weather was clear, there was no opposing traffic , the deer was standing still. The auto drive absolutely failed.
If a human was driving in these conditions plowed through a deer at 60 mph and didn’t even attempt to swerve or stop they shouldn’t be driving.
Yeah there are edge cases in all directions.
When people want to say that someone is very rare they should say “corner case,” but this doesn’t seem to have made it out of QA lingo and into the popular lexicon.
Being safer than humans is a decent starting point, but safety should be maximized to the best of a machine’s capability, even if it means adding a sensor or two. Keeping screws loose on a Boeing airplane still makes the plane safer than driving, so Boeing should not be made to take responsibility.
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
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.
This idea has a serious problem: THE BUG.
We hear this idea very often, but you are disregarding the problem of a programmed solution: it makes it’s mistakes all the time. Infinitely.
Humans are also bad drivers who get edge cases wrong all the time.
So this is not exactly true.
Humans can learn, and humans can tell when they made an error, and try to do it differently next time. And all humans are different. They make different mistakes. This tiny fact is very important. It secures our survival.
The car does not know when it made a mistake, for example, when it killed a deer, or a person, and crashed it’s windshield and bent lot’s of it’s metal. It does not learn from it.
It would do it again and again.
And all the others would do exactly the same, because they run the same software with the same bug.
Now imagine 250 million people having 250 million Teslas, and then comes the day when each one of them decides to kill a person…
Tesla can detect a crash and send the last minute of data back so all cars learn from is. I don’t know if they do but they can.
I don’t know if they do but they can.
"Today on Oct 30 I ran into a deer but I was too dumb to see it, not even see any obstacle at all. I just did nothing. My driver had to do it all.
Grrrrrr.
Everybody please learn from that, wise up and get yourself some LIDAR!"
Just a small clarification… Teslas only kill forward or backwards. Hardly ever has a car killed left or right 😂.
AI: %1 chance human, keep going like nothing happened
its just a deer
Deer are people too…
Honestly, I’m surprised the car was still in one piece. I’ve seen semi-trucks disintegrate after hitting a dear.
In what way? If it’s the bumpers and the crumple zone, then that’s a feature. Do you have a picture about what you are talking about? I’m curious.
If the deer is above certain height, its body comes up and enters your precious room through the windshield. You are lucky if you survive then.
In a semi truck?
You are thinking of moose.
Moose are technically deer (taxonomic family Cervidae, which also contains reindeer, red deer, roe deer, etc). And a big bull can weigh almost a (US conventional) ton. I don’t know whether that’s enough to trash a modern semi (based on an old memory of an apparently undamaged semi and a dead moose on the shoulder of an Ontario highway in the 1990s, I’d guess probably not, or at least not always), but I wouldn’t want to be the driver of the semi, either. Hitting them in an ordinary passenger vehicle—like any Tesla product—is something you really don’t want to do.
Moose are worse because they are heavier and the impact means most of the body mass goes ibtonthe windshield, but deer go right over hoods and into the windsheild on most cars too.
No they aren’t. Deer are often struck mid-bound which will absolutely send them flying into your windshield. Also, depending on what part of the world you are in, deer can get pretty huge.
deleted by creator
I don’t keep pictures like that on me, and I don’t feel like doing a google search for you. Travel blue ridge parkway or skyline drive, or any back road in the Appalachians and you will see what happens when a ten point meets metal.
I’ve seen semi-trucks disintegrate after hitting a dear.
I’d like to see that, I’ve seen modern regular full size trucks annihilate a deer without disintegrating. Semis wouldn’t be bothered much unless you’re talking about something larger like a moose. Deer are about the same weight as humans, whatever is good at killing humans is usually good for deer.
The average weight of an adult male is 203 lb (maximum, 405 lb). The average weight of a female is about 155 lb (maximum, 218 lb).
Granted the semi I saw had a guard on the front of it, but I witnessed one smoke a fully grown cow at 70mph. Sent the cow and pieces of it flying about 100 feet, with no visible damage to the truck at all. There was a tremendous amount of blood and spatter everywhere and my own car got a ton of blood on it from the cloud of guts and blood made by the truck. Mostly there was just shit everywhere leading up to the remnants of the carcass, but the truck gave no fucks whatsoever. I asked the driver if he was ok and he didn’t even seem to have any agitation whatsoever, more like “oh, another one”.
A truck will not disintegrate, there might be damage if it didn’t have a guard, but against a deer, that must’ve been a paper mache piece of shit truck if it disintegrated on a deer.
For the 1000th time Tesla: don’t call it “autopilot” when it’s nothing more than a cruise control that needs constant attention.
Real Autopilot also needs constant attention, the term comes from aviation and it’s not fully autonomous. It maintains heading, altitude, and can do minor course correction.
It’s the “full self driving” wording they use that needs shit on.
Real Autopilot also needs constant attention
Newer “real” autopilot systems absolutely do not need constant attention. Many of them can do full landing sequences now. The definition would match what people commonly use it for, not what it was “originally”. Most people believe autopilot to be that it pilots itself automatically. There is 0 intuition about what a pilot actually does in the cockpit for most normal people. And technology bares out that thought process as autopilot in it’s modern form can actually do 99% of flying, where take-off and landing isn’t exempted anymore.
Looked it up some, In ideal conditions, and with supervision. The pilot can’t just take a nap and forget about it. Which, two Tesla’s credit when you activate the feature for the first time it does make you read a large unskippable warning that you need to be paying attention at all times. I still don’t mind the name autopilot I just hate that they are marketing it as fully autonomous self-driving because that’s the part that implies you don’t need to be watching over it (to me)
It is autopilot (a poor one but still one) that legally calls itself cruise control so Tesla wouldn’t have to take responsibility when it inevitably breaks the law.
I roll my eyes at the dishonest bad faith takes people have in the comments about how people do the same thing behind the wheel. Like that’s going to make autopiloting self-driving cars an exception. Least a person can react, can slow down or do anything that an unthinking, going-by-the-pixels computer can’t do at a whim.
How come human drivers have more fatalities and injuries per mile driven?
Musk can die in a fire, but self driving car tech seems to be vastly safer than human drivers when you do apples to apples comparisons. It’s like wearing a seatbelt, you certainly don’t need to have one to go from point A to point B, but you’re definitely safer with it - even if you are giving up a little control. Like a seatbelt, you can always take it off.
I honestly think it shouldn’t be called “self driving” or “autopilot” but should work more like the safety systems in Airbusses by simply not allowing the human to make a decision that would create a dangerous situation.
The real companies doing this as a serious endeavor yes. With all the added sensors, processing and tech are safer. Elons cars are years behind the competition . It’s not Tesla gathering the safe driving data it’s companies like Waymo.
If you want to motivate people to action, frame it in terms of the property damage they’ll experience to their car when it hits a child. We’ve already seen how far the American public is willing to go for children’s lives, and it’s not very far at all.
To err is human; To really foul things up you need a computer.
*fawn things up
You just need to buy the North America Animal Recognition AI subscription and this wouldn’t be an issue plebs, it will stop for 28 out of 139 mammals!
Is there a longer video anywhere? Looking closely I have to wonder where the hell did that deer come from? There’s a car up ahead of the Tesla in the same lane, I presume quickly moved back in once it passed the deer? The deer didn’t spook or anything from that car?
This would have been hard for a human driver to avoid hitting, but I know the issue is the right equipment would have been better than human vision, which should be the goal. And it didn’t detect the impact either since it didn’t stop.
But I just think it’s peculiar that that deer just literally popped there without any sign of motion.
Ever hear the phrase “like a deer caught in headlights”? That’s what they do. They see oncoming headlights and just freeze.
It depends. If it’s on the side of the road it may do the opposite and jump in front of you. This one actually looked like it was going to start moving, but not a chance.
It’s the gap between where the deer is in the dark and the car in front that’s odd. Only thing I can figure is the person was in the other lane and darted over just after passing the deer.
The front car is probably further ahead than you think, and a deer can move onto the road quickly and freeze when looking at headlights or slow down if confused. I think in this case the deer was facing away and may not have even heard the vehicle approaching so it wasn’t trying to avoid danger.
I avoided a deer in a similar situation while driving last week, and the car ahead of us was closer than this clip. Just had to brake and change lanes.
Sure and living in Wyoming I’ve seen that happen often enough right in front of me but the more I watch this video the more I want to know how that deer GOT there.
I can see a small shrub in the dark off the (right) side of the road but somehow you can’t see the deer enter the lane from either the right or left. The car in front of the Tesla is maybe 40 feet past the deer at the start of the video (watch the reflector posts) but somehow that car had no reaction to the deer standing in the middle of the lane?!
The road is paved with squirrels who couldn’t make up their minds.
That’s why you flash your lights on and off at them, to get them to unfreeze before you get too close.
Deer will do that. They have absolutely no sense of self-preservation around cars.
That is because at a distance they freeze in case a predator hasn’t noticed them yet. Theey don’t bolt until they think an attack is imminent, and cars move to fast for them to react.
Is there a longer video anywhere? Looking closely I have to wonder where the hell did that deer come from?
I have the same question. If you watch the video closely the deer is located a few feet before the 2nd reflector post you see at the start of the video. At that point in time the car in front is maybe 20’ beyond the post which means they should have encountered the deer within the last 30-40 feet but there was no reaction visible.
You can also see both the left and right sides of the road at the reflector well before the deer is visible, you can even make out a small shrub off the road on the right, and but somehow can’t see the deer enter the road from either side?!
It’s like the thing just teleported into the middle of the lane.
The more I watch this the more suspicious I am that the video was edited.
don’t most cars have proximity and collision detectors now?
Not Tesla though, it relies on cameras only.
leave it to elon to take existing technology and make it worse to sell it as innovative high tech. fucking moron
I hate Tesla as much as the next guy in here.
But I learned at my driving lessons that you shouldn’t hit the breaks for animals running into your lane, because it can result in a car crash that’s way worse. (think truck behind you with a much longer break length.)
Don’t know if there’s different rules.
You learned wrong if you think that is a universal rule for all animals.
You might have been told that for small animals like squirrels, but that is more about not overreacting. You should absolutely brake for a deer, whether or not you are being tailgated, just like you would brake for any large object on the road.
Hitting a deer at speed is going to cause far more problems for you AND the people behind you than trying to not hit the deer.
You’re probably right. I encountered maybe 2 or 3 deers running out in front of my car so far, and I hit the breaks every time in pure reflex anyway.
Dodged them so far, but damn I’m scared I might hit one at some point.
If you watch the video, the deer was standing on a strip of off coloured pavement, and also had about the same length as the dotted line. Not sure how much colour information comes through at night on those cameras.
The point here isn’t actually “should it have stopped for the deer” , it’s “if the system can’t even see the deer, how could it be expected to distinguish between a deer and a child?”
The calculus changes incredibly between a deer and a child.
Agree, it didn’t do anything to avoid the obstacle. A human could probably see it as an obstacle and try to swerve to the side, albeit not knowing what it is. Not saying it’s possible to avoid, but some reaction would be made.
A human could probably see it as an obstacle and try to swerve to the side, albeit not knowing what it is.
Attempting to swerve aside at that speed results in over correction, followed by loss of control and then a rollover crash. Happens all the time to people who aren’t aware / don’t remember that you’re supposed to hit deer head on.
Hit the deer head on, but swerve for moose and elk.
Happens all the time to people who aren’t aware / don’t remember that you’re supposed to hit deer head on.
This isn’t true. You shouldn’t jerk the wheel and swerve to avoid an animal, but if you can do it safely you absolutely should. Not only to avoid damage, but to prevent it coming through the windshield. I’ve seen this same idea in a few different comments here, but growing up in deer infested upstate NY, “hit it head on” is something I’ve never heard. Not from parents/relatives, not from driver’s ed, not from the internet until today. Keep it out of the ditch but absolutely avoid hitting the deer if you can. You don’t need to jerk the wheel to move 4-6 feet to the right, into the shoulder.
I’d imagine there’s a few reasons for the variation in driver training between upstate NY and Wyoming.
- Road Speed. Here in Wyoming our highways are 65-70MPH (posted) and most of the Interstate is posted at 80MPH. You can generally figure that everyone is doing at least 5MPH over that. The higher the speed the less time you have to react and the harder it is to lightly twitch a vehicle to one side or the other.
- Road layout. You commented about swerving into the shoulder but most of our highways have a shoulder width of 48" or less and on the other side of the shoulder there’s commonly a ditch. It has to do with the wind and snow we get here but if you twitch onto the shoulder here you are likely to encounter a very unwelcome surprise.
- Animal differences. In upstate New York you’re dodging Whitetail deer, here you’re trying to dodge Antelope (which are nearly as fast your car) Mule deer, Elk, Black bear, Brown Bear, and the occasional Moose. The bigger the animal the harder it is to dodge.
The way you describe upstate NY is how it was taught to me when I grew up in Nebraska but it’s not what they advise in Wyoming. Here you stay in your lane and slow down as much as you can before impact.
You commented about swerving into the shoulder
I specifically said to not swerve or jerk the wheel. I’m talking about a controlled movement a few feet to the side, safety permitting, to strike a glancing blow on the animal. Especially with a larger animal that is more likely to come through the windshield, this is important. You don’t need to hit any animal head on if you can safely avoid it. I’m talking about a slow, controlled movement while emergency braking, not a “twitch onto the shoulder” There’s nothing wrong with this, and I’d argue a glancing blow is better than hitting animals head on. A multitude of factors will play into “can you move over safely” such as available space, weather, hazards, etc. I don’t feel the instruction that you’re “supposed to hit them head on” is wise advice regardless. Maybe this was true before ABS, but steering while braking hard is something modern vehicles have little issue with.
The idea of don’t swerve for deer is very common and is taught in driving schools. If you’ve never heard it until today, well you were let down and today you learn. You don’t know dismiss it because you haven’t heard it.
Swerving is dangerous and even if you think you can do it safely, having a deer appear while travelling at high speeds is risky, even more so at night.
You’re supposed to slow down but stay in lane.
The reason you’re supposed to swerve for things like Moose is because moose are big as fuck and tall, and if you hit one head on, you will cut the legs out from under it, and it’s massive body will roll through the windshield and crush you, killing you or causing massive bodily harm.
This is from the Virginia DMV for example (emphasis mine). Them not having something about moose is actually bad as well.
https://www.dmv.virginia.gov/sites/default/files/forms/dmv39d.pdf
Deer/Large Animal Hazards Tens of thousands of crashes with deer, elk, and bears take place in Virginia each year, resulting in fatalities, injuries and costly vehicle damage. To avoid hitting a deer or other large animal:
- Be alert at dusk and dawn especially in the fall.
- Slow down if you see a large animal near or crossing the road. Large animals frequently travel in groups; there are likely others nearby.
- Use the horn to scare the animal away.
- If a collision with a deer or other animal is unavoidable, do not swerve. Brake firmly, stay in your lane, and come to a controlled stop.
Wait, are you saying that Virginia not mentioning what to do if a moose is in the road is “bad”?
Considering that the northern-most part of Virginia is still about 350 mi south of the closest range of moose, it would be pointless if not absurd for them to include it.
Do people from Virginia never travel 350miles north?
The guidance on that page is incorrect and if that’s what they teach it might kill someone.
I dunno where that map is from but it’s wrong. Moose range extends as far south as Wyoming and I know they have them in Colorado as well. Not just the occasional sighting either, they have hunting seasons for Moose.
Did you read the second sentence I wrote? Of course don’t swerve. That doesn’t mean you have to hit them head on all the time. It’s okay to hit deer head on, but you’re not “supposed to” as the comment I was replying to says. If you can safely move over a few feet and make it a glancing blow, or miss altogether, that’s better and safer than head on. We have antilock brakes ubiquitously now, you can steer and brake simultaneously. If you’ve got shoulder to use, use it.
If you can safely change lanes then of course change lanes as your normally would do to avoid anything in your lane.
Beyond that it’s now dangerous. Stay in lane, hit the deer.
If you wouldn’t normally change lanes like that, then don’t do it for the deer.
At the same time, it would have located it if it was using radar, but Musk decided that cameras are the future (contrary to all other brands)
Yeah. I mean, I understand the premise, I just think it’s flawed. Like, you and I as vehicle operators use two cameras when we drive (our two eyes). It’s hypothetically sufficient in terms of raw data input.
Where it falls apart is that we also have brains which have evolved in ways we don’t even understand to consume those inputs effectively.
But most importantly, why aim for parity at all? Why NOT give our cars the tools to “see” better than a human? I want that!
No human could have avoided that deer without swerving their car.
A lidar provides superhuman vision which works in the dark and through fog. Elon is making a human car and ignores all the limits we have that can be solved in other ways.
A human is a general purpose organism. We are not designed as specialized driving machines.
I completely agree that if there are tools that can allow a vehicle to “see” better than a human it’s absurd not to implement them. Even if musk could make a car exactly as good as a human, that’s a low bar. It isn’t good enough.
As for humans: if you are operating a vehicle such that you could not avoid killing an unexpected person on the road, you are not safely operating the vehicle. In this case, it’s known as “over driving your headlights”, you are driving at a speed that precludes you from reacting appropriately by the time you can perceive an issue.
Imagine if it wasn’t a deer but a chunk of concrete that would kill you if struck at speed. Perhaps a bolder on a mountain pass. A vehicle that has broken down.
Does Musk’s system operate safely? No. The fact that it was a deer is completely irrelevant.
You absolutely need to hit the brakes, but don’t swerve. A deer weighs over 200lbs and will likely crash into your windshield if you hit it head on. You need to safely loose as much speed as you can because even a side hit on the deer is likely to wreck your axel and prevent you from driving.
Exactly. I know somebody who died when a deer came through the windshield…
Yeah, I heard about people dying in crashes with deers also. I just remembered we were taught this, and I just thought it might be programmed to ignore animals because of this.
But it’s probably wrong, and as someone pointed out, it seems like it didn’t even see the deer.
That’s why humans have brains, for situational awareness.
And it’s less about not breaking for an animal, as it is about not wildly swerving.
Also, you should probably revise your thinking on this before you visit any states that have large animals like Moose on the roads. Because if you plow into one with a car, it can easily kill you when it crushes you after impact.
Also on motorbikes you are more stable at high speed so better to hit a dog at speed than slow down which could lead to person behind you hitting you or you crashing.Ok seems I was wrong.Absolutely not true. No amount of speed is going to keep you safe if you strike an animal on a bike. You’re better off slowing down so that you have less momentum when you wreck. Drivers should be giving you enough space (even though they rarely do). A deer weighs more than a grown man and will kill you if you hit it at highway speed. A dog will take out your front wheel and cause you to wreck whether you hit it at 15mph or 80mph.
A deer will shatter your nose fairing and snap handlebars at speed. The next object to catch the deer is your head and torso. No, the burly batwing fairings on a full dresser cruiser are not any stronger than the nose cone on a sport bike when it comes to a 200lb meat bag approaching at 70mph.
So many myths perpetuated by people who bucked classes and PRACTICE in favor of their uncle’s advice.
