... as previous versions of Tesla autopilot have done.
Talking about any one of these systems via their branding as if they are a singular fixed thing (and not a network of software versions and models under continual update) leads to bad mental models.
But that is the stupidest way of temporarily? (I hope) relaning a highway ever. What were they thinking?
One of those situations where Musks insistence on not using LIDAR is clearly wrong.
I own a TM3 and I do not have the "FSD beta" that is in limited testing. I will say that the car display portion of the UI really does not impress me in what it shows and does not show.
As in it is damn happy to show cones and garbage cans but I have instances where it showed me cones front and back of a vehicle but did not draw the vehicle in between. Same with a floating garbage can where sometimes the loader was visible but the truck itself would wink in and out.
I really wish people would quit ascribing super natural abilities to LIDAR let alone superiority. Plus I really want to see studies done which show the impact having hundreds of LIDAR equipped vehicles would have on people, animals, and even insect, life. (then again how many vehicles in traffic does it take to cause an issue for them)
I fully agree with you that that spot on the road is pretty horrible, which is why I mentioned it. But dealing with crappy roads is the inherent problem any self driving car has. It’s the car’s job to not hit things.
I own a Model Y and I feel like Tesla’s autopilot gets a worse rap than it deserves. But there is an inherent disconnect between what the car is capable of and what some people presume it is capable of. Tesla doesn’t help this with their branding.
Why did the driver just let his car plow into the pillar instead of taking control? Were they even looking up at the time? Would you have let your car drive into a pillar like that? I’d like to think I would have, but perhaps not.
Seems like when the Street View pic was taken this was not a lane. I'm shocked it was converted into one. Seems very dangerous, for human or AI.
Here is another doing a burnout and crashing into a store, a month ago: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=tJu5TZ6rwXg
Human-driven truck runs straight into a 100-car pile up, 1 month ago: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=VqNy7v5YekM
Beat that, Tesla!
Teslas per-mile incident rate is currently about 1/10th that of human drivers.
It's only 1.4 million ever sold worldwide.
> Teslas per-mile incident rate is currently about 1/10th that of human drivers.
But the reason for that is obvious, isn't it? It is strongly encouraged to activate autopilot in trivial situations (e.g. lane assist on interstates), whereas most dangerous conditions (rain, freezing, bad roads, road works and so on) and their higher incident share is almost completely in the human driver column.
No idea about the US, but in Denmark the deaths per billion mile of highway roads driven is 0.7. In other words: On a European freeway equivalent you are over 6x more likely to die from Teslas autopilot than if you would drive yourself.