• Oddbin@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    76
    arrow-down
    15
    ·
    11 months ago

    So, when are we changing this forums name from Technology to it’s actual purpose of late “every click and rage bait post about Tesla and Musk so people can circlejerk worse than reddit”?

    • Altima NEO@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      11 months ago

      It’s literally nothing but bullshit about Tesla and Twitter. All day long. No one cares!

      I want to know about some actual tech, not the drama.

      • RegularGoose@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        You don’t care. If no one cared, there wouldn’t be so many posts and extremely active discussions about them. If you want different content, post it.

    • phoenixz@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      Elon Musk is a scammer. He’s good at that and it’s the only thing he’s good at

      Can we go now and talk about technology,?

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      Unfortunately, all the current tech news is either people running naked scams or people debunking them.

      The tragedy of our modern era is how much money we’ve invested in selling people a box labeled “Newest Life Changing Gadget” that’s just full of rocks.

      Check out the podcast TrashFuture. They do a bit about a shitty tech enterprise every episode, sometimes twice a week. From Juicero to Neom, the list of awful tech bullshit is limitless.

    • tony@lemmy.hoyle.me.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      11 months ago

      It seems like a new anti Tesla article hits lemmy every day. It’s boring at this point.

    • Dr. Dabbles@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      Hopefully soon after the garbage copy/paste press release “articles” about “AI”, fake superconductors, and other nonsense stops being posted.

  • MisterMoo@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    37
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    Imagine naming a feature “Full Self-Driving,” and yet you can’t take your attention away from the road and must be ready to take over at a moment’s notice.

    • Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      This is on par for Elon’s entire career. He loves claiming success and taking credit for things he either didn’t accomplish himself, or things he hasn’t accomplished yet.

        • Thorny_Thicket@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          15
          ·
          11 months ago

          Like popularize electric vehicles, create a reusable rocket or put global internet around the earth? Never gonna happen right?

          • RegularGoose@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            13
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            He didn’t do any of those things. He hired people with functioning brains to do it while impeding them by constantly violating labor laws and creating organizational chaos.

          • bitsplease@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            The only thing on that list I think his companies can really inarguably take credit for is the reusable rockets, the rest were already being done by other companies. He got ahead of the competition (mostly by ignoring regulations, labor laws, etc), but electric cars and satellite internet constellations were very far from novel concepts when he entered the space.

          • Square Singer@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            11 months ago

            Nah, more like the replicator, teleportation and faster than light vehicles.

            Listing random non-related things isn’t hard.

    • Chriskmee@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      11 months ago

      It’s ok, it’s in beta, so some features may not be complete just yet, but hey, let’s just release this to the public anyways.

    • athos77@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      I remember reading a post that claimed that Tesla’s safety rating was given to them because a bunch of their crashes were determined to be human error - because the self-driving feature would automatically disconnect if it faced a crash it couldn’t avoid.

    • booze_fan1778@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      11 months ago

      You’re absolutely right, it can be quite misleading to name a feature “Full Self-Driving” when it still requires constant attention and intervention from the driver. The expectations set by such a name may not align with the reality of the technology’s current limitations.

    • jacked_off_at_astana@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      11 months ago

      You’re absolutely right, it can be quite misleading to name a feature “Full Self-Driving” when it still requires the driver’s constant attention and readiness to take control. The expectation that the vehicle can handle all driving tasks autonomously is not aligned with the current reality. It’s important for automakers to be transparent and accurate in their naming conventions to avoid any false expectations.

    • Thorny_Thicket@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      11 months ago

      Let’s be fair. It could be called Driver Assistant Plus and you people would still be complaining because this isn’t about Tesla

      • Dr. Dabbles@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        I complained because it absolutely sucked. Only Tesla would release this garbage in such a fraudulent manner, no other company would risk the lawsuits. Tesla’s been killing people with autopilot since 2016, and FSD since it was released to the public. That should make you think, but that seems to be hard for some people when it comes to a Musking,

        • Thorny_Thicket@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          Autopilot or FSD Beta has never been something you’re supposed to rely on and every Tesla owner knows this. If they drive over someone it’s the fault of the driver, not the vehicle. Accidents will always happen and if you focus on individual incidents you’re missing the big picture. You’re never going to reach 100% safety and 99.99% safety means 33000 accidents a year in the US alone. Also the little statistics we have about this indicate that drivers with FSD or Autopilot engaged already crash less than the average.

          According to this report, the average Tesla equipped with FSD Beta, driven on predominantly non-highway sections of road, crashes 0.31 times per million miles, a dramatic decrease from the average American, who crashes 1.53 times every million miles.

          Source

          • Dr. Dabbles@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            Too bad there’s so many owners relying on it.

            if you focus on individual incidents you’re missing the big picture

            Not at all. In fact, the point is to focus on classes of crashes. Which Tesla fails miserably at.

            Also the little statistics we have about this indicate that drivers with FSD or Autopilot engaged already crash less than the average.

            This is an outright lie. Period. Having owned a Tesla since 2018, I’m quite familiar with the garbage software and the user community that loves to say no one should trust it on one side, and on the other side of their face says that it’s better than a human.

            • Thorny_Thicket@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              10 months ago

              Literally can’t debate with you guys because you straight out refuse to believe any evidence presented to you and just base your opinions on anecdotal evidence and individual incidents. If those stats are made up then provide a better source that backs you up.

              • Dr. Dabbles@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                10 months ago

                You seem to be confusing evidence with marketing. That’s your problem. If you actually owned one, you’d know I was right.

      • JdW@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        11 months ago

        Let’s be fair. Elon could be killing a man, on camera, and shout a confession afterwards and you would still find excuses for his behaviour and tell us we’re just misinterpreting facts…

        • Thorny_Thicket@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          There’s plenty to criticize Musk for. Your apparent assumption that anyone not violently agains him must be a fan is just further evidence for the lack of ability to think rationally about the subject.

          • Honytawk@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            11 months ago

            Nah, more the assumption that anyone not violently against him doesn’t know him or his actions.

            • Thorny_Thicket@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              11 months ago

              If you violently oppose Musk then how do you feel about people like Putin, Xi Jinping, Ali Khamenei or Bashar al-Assad? Those are the people I focus my opposition to. Someone like Musk, Bezos, Tate etc. I simply have no time nor interest for. That’s recreational outrage.

    • Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      I wish this was talked about every single time the subject came up.

      Responsible, technologically progressive companies have been developing excellent, safe, self-driving car technology for decades now.

      Elon Musk is eviscerating the reputation of automated vehicles with his idiocy and arrogance. They don’t all suck, but Tesla sure sucks.

    • Eager Eagle@lemmy.world
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      11 months ago

      I don’t know why people are so quick to defend the need of LIDAR when it’s clear the challenges in self driving are not with data acquisition.

      Sure, there are a few corner cases that it would perform better than visual cameras, but a new array of sensors won’t solve self driving. Similarly, the lack of LIDAR does not forbid self driving, otherwise we wouldn’t be able to drive either.

      • ShadowRam@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        challenges in self driving are not with data acquisition.

        What?!?! Of course it is.

        We can already run all this shit through a simulator and it works great, but that’s because the computer knows the exact position, orientation, velocity of every object in a scene.

        In the real world, the underlying problem is the computer doesn’t know what’s around it, and what those things around doing or going to do.

        It’s 100% a data acquisition problem.

        Source? I do autonomous vehicle control for a living. In environments much more complicated than a paved road with accepted set rules.

        • Eager Eagle@lemmy.world
          cake
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          11 months ago

          You’re confusing data acquisition with interpretation. A LIDAR won’t label the data for your AD system and won’t add much to an existing array of visible spectrum cameras.

          You say the underlying problem is that the computer doesn’t know what’s around it. But its surroundings are reliably captured by functional sensors. Therefore it’s not a matter of acquisition, but processing of the data.

          • ShadowRam@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            won’t add much to an existing array of visible spectrum cameras.

            You do realize LIDAR is just a camera, but has an accurate distance per pixel right?

            It absolutely adds everything.

            But its surroundings are reliably captured by functional sensors

            No it’s not. That’s the point. LIDAR is the functional sensor required.

            You can not rely on stereoscopic camera’s.
            The resolution of distance is not there.
            It’s not there for humans.
            It’s not there for the simple reason of physics.

            Unless you spread those camera’s out to a width that’s impractical, and even then it STILL wouldn’t be as accurate as LIDAR.

            You are more then welcome to try it yourself.
            You can be even as stupid as Elon and dump money and rep into thinking that it’s easier or cheaper without LIDAR.

            It doesn’t work, and it’ll never work as good as a LIDAR system.
            Stereoscopic Camera’s will always be more expensive than LIDAR from a computational standpoint.

            AI will do a hell of a lot better recognizing things via a LIDAR Camera than a Stereoscopic Camera.

            • Eager Eagle@lemmy.world
              cake
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              11 months ago

              This assumes depth information is required for self driving, I think this is where we disagree. Tesla is able to reconstruct its surroundings from visual data only. In biology, most animals don’t have explicit depth information and are still able to navigate in their environments. Requiring LIDAR is a crutch.

              • Geek_King@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                11 months ago

                I disagree with you, I don’t think visual camera’s alone are up to the task. There was an instance of a Tesla in auto pilot mode driving at night with the driver being drunk. This took place in Texas on the high way, the car’s camera footage was released and it showed the autopilot not identify the police car in the lane with it’s red/blue lights flashing as a stationary obstacle. Instead it didn’t realize there was a car in the way around 1 second before the 55 mph impact, and it turned of autopilot that 1 second before.

                Having multiple layers of sensors, some being good at actually sensing a stationary obstacle, plus accurate range finding, plus visual analysis to pick out people and animal, thats the way to go.

                Visual range only cameras were just reported to have a harder time recognizing people of color and children.

                • Eager Eagle@lemmy.world
                  cake
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  the car’s camera footage was released and it showed the autopilot not identify the police car in the lane with it’s red/blue lights flashing

                  If the obstacle was visible in the footage, the incident could have been avoided with visible spectrum cameras alone. Once again, a problem with the data processing, not acquisition.

      • Dr. Dabbles@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Yes, self driving is not computationally solved at all. But the reason people defend LIDAR is that visible light cameras are very bad at depth estimation. Even with paralax, a lot of software has a very hard time accurately calculating distance and motion.

    • radau@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      11 months ago

      Dont let them know about that I don’t want my radar detector flipping out for laser lol

        • radau@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          K and KA band are used for blind spot monitoring and would make radar detectors go nuts until filtering got worked out, cars that use Lidar will set them off as well though they’re more rare still

          • ShadowRam@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            What?

            What does Radar have anything to do with Lidar?

            They are completely in different EM spectrums.

            Also modern LIDAR is keyed in a way that LIDAR systems can’t interfere with other LIDAR systems.

            • radau@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              11 months ago

              Maybe because I dunno, it’s a detector? I’d love to try to explain it further but it seems like you’re being intentionally oblivious so why bother lol

    • dirtbiker509@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      14
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      Do you have lidar on your head? No, yet you’re able to drive with just two cameras on your face. So no lidar isn’t required. Not that driving in a very dynamic world isn’t very difficult for computers to do, it’s not a matter of if, it’s just a matter of time.

      Would lidar allow “super human” driving abilities? Like seeing through fog and in every direction in the dark, sure. But it’s not required for the job at hand.

      • Chriskmee@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        You have eyes that are way more amazing than any cameras that are used in self driving, with stereoscopic vision, on a movable platform, and most importantly, controlled via a biological brain with millions of years of evolution behind it.

        I’m sorry, you can’t attach a couple cameras to a processor, add some neural nets, and think it’s anything close to your brain and eyes.

        • droans@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          11 months ago

          And also, cameras don’t work that great at night. Lidar would provide better data.

      • ShadowRam@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        Do you have lidar on your head?

        Nope,

        And that’s exactly why humans crash. Constantly.

        Even when paying attention.

        They don’t have resolution in depth perception, nor the FOV.

        • Eager Eagle@lemmy.world
          cake
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          10 months ago

          And that’s exactly why humans crash. Constantly.

          No it isn’t. Anywhere in the world the vast majority of crashes are caused by negligence, speeding, distraction, all factors that can be avoided without increasing our depth perception accuracy.

      • Dr. Dabbles@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Do you have CCDs in your head? No? This argument is always so broken it’s insane to see it still typed out as anything but sarcasm.

          • JdW@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            Senses to support your sight when driving? Hearing and Balance come to mind, in that order of importance as supporting senses.

            • Thorny_Thicket@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              I have no idea what sense of balance has to do with driving a car and even deaf people can get a driver’s license but okay. How’s this an argument for LIDAR again? It does not have anything to do with either of those things.

          • hark@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            One obvious sense is hearing, as in hearing things like sirens to move out of the way.

          • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            11 months ago

            That’s like asking what the human equivalent of a GPU is. There isn’t one nor would there be because humans and computers are fundamentally different things.

      • Eager Eagle@lemmy.world
        cake
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        A lot of LIDAR fans here for some reason, but you’re absolutely right.

        There’s just not a good amount of evidence pointing that accurate depth perception only obtained through LIDAR is required for self driving, and it also won’t solve the complex navigation of a real world scenario. A set of visible spectrum cameras over time can reconstruct a 3D environment well enough for navigation and it’s quite literally what Tesla’s FSD does.

        I don’t know why someone would still say it’s not possible when we already have an example running in production.

        “But Tesla FSD has a high disengagement rate” - for now, yes. But these scenarios are more often possible to be solved by high definition maps than by LIDAR. For anyone that disagrees, go to youtube, choose a recent video of Tesla’s FSD and try to find a scenario where a disengagement would have been avoided by LIDAR only.

        There are many parts missing for a complete autonomous driving experience. LIDAR is not one of them.

    • QuantumEyetanglement@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      I wonder how this statistically compares to non-Tesla crashes?

      Edit: quick Google/math shows average rate of lethal automobile crashes at 12 per 100,000 drivers. Tesla has supposedly sold 4.5million cars. 4.5million divided by 17 deaths from the article = 1 death per 200,000 Tesla drivers.

      This isn’t exactly apples-to-apples and would love for some to “do the math” more accurately, but it seems like Tesla is much safer than a standard driver.

      The other confounding factor is we don’t know how many of these drivers were abusing autopilot by cheating the rules (it requires hands on the wheel and full attention on the road)

      • Heresy_generator@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        11 months ago

        Your statistical analysis is so bad that it’s not even wrong. It’s just a pile of disparate data strung together with false assumptions.

        So all of those Teslas were sold in America? And all 4.5 million of those Teslas have Autopilot? And they’re in Autopilot mode 100% of the time?

        • KevonLooney@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          You forgot the most important issue: Tesla drivers are not representative of the average driver. They have more money and more education. They live in places with nicer weather. These all contribute to lower crash rates without self driving. I bet high end Mercedes have lower crash rates too, because people don’t defer maintenance and then drive them crazily in the snow.

          Compare apples to apples and I bet Teslas have average crash rates for luxury cars.

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    11 months ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    Back in 2016, Tesla CEO Elon Musk stunned the automotive world by announcing that, henceforth, all of his company’s vehicles would be shipped with the hardware necessary for “full self-driving.” You will be able to nap in your car while it drives you to work, he promised.

    But while Musk would eventually ship an advanced driver-assist system that he called Full Self-Driving (FSD) beta, the idea that any Tesla owner could catch some z’s while their car whisks them along is, at best, laughable — and at worst, a profoundly fatal error.

    Since that 2016 announcement, hundreds of fully driverless cars have rolled out in multiple US cities, and none of them bear the Tesla logo.

    His supporters point to the success of Autopilot, and then FSD, as evidence that while his promises may not exactly line up with reality, he is still at the forefront of a societal shift from human-powered vehicles to ones piloted by AI.

    You’ll also hear from a former Tesla employee who was fired after posting videos of FSD errors, experts who compare the company’s self-driving efforts to its competitors, and even from the competitors themselves — like Kyle Vogt, CEO of the General Motors-backed Cruise, who is unconvinced that Musk can fulfill his promises without rethinking his entire hardware strategy.

    Listen to the latest episode of Land of the Giants: The Tesla Shock Wave, a co-production between The Verge and the Vox Media Podcast Network.


    The original article contains 497 words, the summary contains 236 words. Saved 53%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!

    • Peanut@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      I’ve been ranting about this since 2016.

      Having consumer trust in developing AI vehicles is hard enough without this asshole’s ego and lies muddying the water.