Mark Rober just set up one of the most interesting self-driving tests of 2025, and he did it by imitating Looney Tunes. The former NASA engineer and current YouTube mad scientist recreated the classic gag where Wile E. Coyote paints a tunnel onto a wall to fool the Road Runner.

Only this time, the test subject wasn’t a cartoon bird… it was a self-driving Tesla Model Y.

The result? A full-speed, 40 MPH impact straight into the wall. Watch the video and tell us what you think!

  • ikidd@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    To be fair, I’d be surprised if half the humans driving didn’t do the same.

    • osugi_sakae@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      this. watching the video, I had some trouble telling the difference. sure, from some angles it is obvious, but from others it is not.

      That said, other cars, with more types of sensors, would probably have “seen” the obstruction on the road.

      • Possibly linux@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 day ago

        I think the human brain hasthe edge in processing visuals since out brains are so much better at adapting than any computer system. We can improvise much better since we have our whole life experience to draw on.

      • Mic_Check_One_Two@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        That said, other cars, with more types of sensors, would probably have “seen” the obstruction on the road.

        Well yeah, that’s sort of the entire point of the video. He ran the test with a lidar-equipped vehicle, and it saw the wall right away. Hell, a radar-equipped car (like early teslas) probably would have seen the “kid” behind the wall as well. But since Musk has decided that cars should be able to self-drive with only cameras, the newer teslas will just plow straight into the wall without braking.

      • hardcoreufo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 day ago

        I would have liked to see how a more typical car with automatic cruise control /braking functioned. I think they use ultra sonic sensors and would have done better than the Tesla.

    • LeninOnAPrayer@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      19 hours ago

      I mean you’re watching from a recorded video. I really doubt that it wouldn’t be anything but obvious to actual humans eyes. i mean our depth perception alone would tell us something is wrong. You’re just not watching this in 3D.

      Maybe at 55 or 65 mph on a foggy day. But I doubt any person paying attention isn’t seeing the obvious anchors holding the wall up and the incorrect perspective at 40 mph.

        • LeninOnAPrayer@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          16 hours ago

          You’re right. I miss the days when it was just “these damn kids” on their cellphones. Now, more often than not, its a boomer on their cellphone. At the end of the day fuckcars.

  • King3d@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    46
    ·
    1 day ago

    This is like the crash on a San Francisco bridge that happened because of a Tesla that went into a tunnel and it wasn’t sure what to do since it went from bright daylight to darkness. In this case the Tesla just suddenly merged lanes and then immediately stopped and caused a multi car pile up.

    • fallingcats@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      28
      ·
      1 day ago

      You’d think they have cameras with higher dynamic range and faster auto exposure in their cars by now. Nope, still penny pinching.

        • Mic_Check_One_Two@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          Yeah, pulling radar from the cars was the beginning of the end. Early teslas had radar, and that was what led to all of the “car sees something three vehicles ahead and brakes to avoid a pileup that hasn’t even started yet” type of collision avoidance videos. First, pulling radar was a cost cutting thing. Then Elon demanded that they pull out the lidar too, and that’s when their crash numbers skyrocketed.

          • Wispy2891@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            16 hours ago

            They never had lidar, in addition to radar they removed the ultrasound sensors for parking, which is stupid because they cost like $2 and for parking they’re much better than cameras. Same for the rain sensor. Why use a $1 rain sensor that always works reliably all the time in any visibility when you can do that with cameras and complex algorithms?..

            • Tja@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              14 hours ago

              It’s been about 7 years of model 3 on the market, maybe 8, and the rain detection still doesn’t work reliably. Or the traffic sign recognition (in Europe). My car fortunately still has the ultrasound sensors. Phantom braking is still an issue, too. Thank God for stocks for blinkers and drive/reverse.

              I like the car in general, but it has the dumbest fails, things everyone else seems to have figured out.

              Other cars also have dumb mistakes, like electric cars with no frunk. Literally bolted down hoods. Looking at you, German auto industry…

              • Wispy2891@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                16 hours ago

                The lidar car in the video is a modified Lexus prototype (came with radar from factory, modified by a third party, with Lexus branding blacked out and replaced with the third party name)

                Afaik at the moment there are no cars in the market that have lidar (waymo is adding lidar to cars that have only radar as stock)

                • Retropunk64@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  9 hours ago

                  Ah, gotcha, I was only half watching so I misunderstood. Thanks for the clarification.

  • Armok_the_bunny@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    111
    ·
    2 days ago

    I saw the video pop up in my Youtube recommended, but didn’t bother watching because I just assumed that any cars tested would be using LIDAR and thus would ignore the fake road just fine. I had no idea Tesla a) was still using basic cameras for this and b) actually had sophisticated enough “self driving” capabilities that this could be tested on them safely.

    • Lukas@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      156
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      They are not still using cameras but removed LIDAR and radar from their cars during the chip shortage 2020/21. The story they were telling was “humans don’t have LIDAR but can drive cars as well, so the cars also only need ‘eyes’ like humans”.

      • SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        100
        ·
        2 days ago

        Humans cannot, in fact, drive cars well. Humans kill tens of thousands of other humans with cars every year in the US alone.

        • ChaoticNeutralCzech@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          86
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          2 days ago

          Yup, cameras and humans share various exploits. Self-driving is going to work better than humans once every car has it and communicates with each other, allowing for minimal gaps even at high speeds, once roads are all very standardized and in a database, and-

          Wait, that’s trains

          Fucking build more electrified high-speed rail and forget tech bros’ shitty promises

          • frank@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            35
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            I was getting mildly outraged and ready to comment how you were re-deriving the train at first. Well played.

          • Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            13
            arrow-down
            9
            ·
            2 days ago

            Trains don’t go from my driveway to my destination exactly when I feel like going there, while carrying all my luggage.

            I get that it’s fun to be smug on the Internet, but private vehicles aren’t going away any time soon.

            • ChaoticNeutralCzech@feddit.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              28
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              2 days ago

              It’s not a binary decision between all cars and no cars. If trains and public transit have enough capacity and convenience to make most trips feasible by them, car infrastructure will no longer have to be added (in fact can be converted into bus and bike lanes) while shortening trip duration (less cars = less jams) and improving safety.

              Also, you barely have luggage for most trips. 99% of my trips are made with luggage I can carry to the nearest stop and board the bus with.

              • Kaboom@reddthat.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                1 day ago

                Yeah it’s not a binary decision, but trains are almost never the answer for a lot of people. If I’m going less than a couple hours, then I’m driving that distance. If I’m going much further than that, I’m flying. If I need to move a ton of stuff, I’m either taking my car or renting a uhaul. If I’m taking a lot of people, I’m taking my car. Trains never enter the picture unless I’m looking for variety in my mode of transport.

                And trains do not shorten the trip duratiion, not without absolutely kneecapping the roads. And over long distances, they’re absolutely slow compared to planes. In the short distance, they’re slow compared to cars.

                • ChaoticNeutralCzech@feddit.org
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  10
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 day ago

                  Depends on where you live. In most of Europe, trains are frequent and direct between city centers.

                  My parents tend to prefer the car for the 3-hour trip (also 3 hours by train and bus) to Grandma’s when at least 3 people go because it’s cheaper. A higher toll on the highway could change the threshold, and we’d go more comfortably. Politicians can smoothly adjust the number of people for which public transport wins out with taxes and investments. You’re more likely to cling to the car and they’ve accounted for that in their models, maybe making you switch for a specific kind of trip is not worth the investment. There are lots of factors, such as political alignment, culture, wealth distribution, existing infrastructure etc. that make some jurisdictions able to move the threshold faster than others. Still, the majority of people using cars is unsustainable for lots of reasons:

                  • noise, smoke, particulate matter pollution
                  • high energy use per unit of distance per person regardless of drivetrain and resulting climate change
                  • cost of road maintenance
                  • waste of space for parking, resulting in poor land use and sprawl
                  • accident fatalities
                  • unwalkable areas ruin business opportunities, resulting in towns that simply go broke

                  so there is an obligation to eventually push the threshold in favor of public transit for most trips.

                • ChaoticNeutralCzech@feddit.org
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  16
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  2 days ago

                  So you’ll keep using it. And enjoy narrow but way less jammed streets. Maybe you’ll be incentivized/required to join the self-driving network, but in decades, not years, after positioning markers have been added to every road in the last repaving, while infrastructure funds have been directed towards making the city traversible for non-drivers.

        • gnutrino@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          And the really dumb thing is that lots of modern non-selfdriving cars now have lidar sensors to help the humans not crash into things. Musk apparently wants the AI to be working at a disadvantage.

          • SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 day ago

            He just wants people to buy his junk, and doesn’t care how many people would have to die as collateral damage.

      • Undaunted@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        22
        ·
        2 days ago

        That statement of him is not entirely wrong. But we humans have a very powerful bio computer that is perfectly tuned to process those visual inputs in realtime. Until a comparable performance is possible, removing LIDAR is very stupid.

        • jj4211@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          16
          ·
          1 day ago

          Besides that, in the fog and rain tests a human likely would have killed a kid anyway, and why settle for human limitations when you could be safer?

          We absolutely should also have lidar or analogous tech as part of a solution here, even if cameras did manage to get to human level safety.

          • SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 day ago

            The child dummy was clearly visible through the water in the rain test. Tesla’s systems just suck.

            • vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              1 day ago

              Also competent drivers generally know to slow down during rain. Hell I was literally taught to drive some roads like its a speedway and even I drop below the speed limit during the rain if visuals are bad enough, especially first rain pulls oils out of the road makes it slippery and may cause hydroplaning.

      • RobotToaster@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        41
        ·
        2 days ago

        I’ll add that every other self driving car company has a pretty good safety record, specifically because they do use LIDAR and RADAR so they can see better than humans.

      • heavydust@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        20
        ·
        2 days ago

        IIRC Musk said it would rely on AI using the footage from all the Teslas and it’s better than LiDAR. That idiot was proven wrong once again.

      • baggachipz@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        30
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 day ago

        Small correction here: they never had LIDAR. Cars with LIDAR have big racks on top with a spinny thing measuring the surroundings. Teslas had radar but removed during the chip shortage (and disabled it on existing cars) and acted like it was an improvement. The radar was used for distance keeping on cars and could actually detect the car in front of the car by bouncing signals off the ground, it was really slick.

        • Korhaka@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          1 day ago

          Spinny thing is just when you mount one ontop. It doesn’t have to be. The example in the video appears to use a forward facing cone LIDAR. Presumably in addition to other sensors.

          • Gawdsausage@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 day ago

            It’s still a spinny thing with a laser in it. That’s fundamentally how lidar works. The outside shell can look however they want it to look.

    • KayLeadfoot@fedia.ioOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      64
      ·
      2 days ago

      They tested a LiDAR rigged car, and it stopped just like you predicted. As of 2021, Tesla uses only cameras for FSD, and not even radar (which my stupid fine Toyota truck has).

      They tested the idea safely by building the wall out of styrofoam, or at least that’s what it looks like when it blows apart :)

      • ArchAengelus@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 day ago

        Front-facing radar is the bare minimum needed to pass the test given (fake-road wall). Many vehicles use it for adaptive cruise control, and radar is even faster than either cameras or lidar for figuring out the range to an object. 1000 Hz measuring distance to an object is enough to find both the relative velocity and the acceleration of another object. This provides enough time to apply the brakes safely when approaching a vehicle or obstacle

        LIDAR is even better, and also more compute intensive and expensive to install.

        I think Tesla was very short-sighted in removing radar sensors, certainly. If they hadn’t, they could’ve spent more of their energy on making the FSD cars better instead of just making them sufficiently safe with insufficient sensors

    • vin@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      Forget lidar, they don’t even have mature tech like radar for emergency braking. Edit: +even

      • blady_blah@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        Why do you think lidar is not mature? It is radar, except it uses light and can get much more resolution than an RF radar. Or was that a joke… That was probably a joke… if it was then nm.

        • vin@lemmynsfw.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 day ago

          Lidar is mature but its automotive application is not. Radar is basic by now in comparison.

        • davidgro@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          18
          ·
          2 days ago

          That comment just missed the word ‘even’ - as in they don’t even have radar, and that’s on regular non-self-driving cars, and lidar would be a step above that.

          • jj4211@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            1 day ago

            As far as I’ve seen, any system would be additive. If it has lidar, it would also have cameras and radar. So that you get the best of all the technologies (e.g cameras are the only only of the three that can follow lane markings)

  • cmhe@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    2 days ago

    I am a bit disappointed to not see the Tesla crash into a real wall. I feel a bit click baited here.

    Also, they prepared the polystyrene wall to break this cartoonishly, but still played on being surprised.

    • tiramichu@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      67
      ·
      2 days ago

      The purpose of the video is to test a hypothesis, not to total a car.

      Mark Rober is a youtuber sure, and some of the stuff he does is to feed the algorithm. But he’s also an engineer, and that involves experimentation and a good dose of science.

      Engineers won’t set up tests that intentionally destroy their expensive test equipment if they can conduct an equivalent test non-destructively.

    • Evil_Shrubbery@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 day ago

      Yeah, do YTers not have the money to kill one Tesla?
      That seemed like an expensive production, sadly one totaled car couldn’t make it.

    • AA5B@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 day ago

      I’m a bit disappointed they painted identical to the actual road. Probably a lot of humans will get fooled by that one. We should send a challenge back: how looney toons can you get? Will something more cartoonish fool it? Will a different landscape fool it? How about drawing an oncoming train?

  • regrub@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    35
    ·
    2 days ago

    I would say that it’s a good idea to paint more tunnels on walls, but then I remember how dumb human drivers are too

    • Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      2 days ago

      You’d be horrified how many people drive off a bridge that has collapsed, it’s happened multiple times in multiple different incidents.

      • atzanteol@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        I’d be horrified that physical barriers with bright reflectors weren’t put up before the bridge that was out.

        • Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 day ago

          This has typically been seconds after the bridge collapsed, before emergency services could reach the site.

          Did you really think someone just demolished a bridge without putting up a sign?

  • happydoors@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    51
    ·
    1 day ago

    I love that one of the largest YouTubers is the one that did this. Surely, somebody near our federal government will throw a hissy fit if he hears about this but Mark’s audience is ginormous

    • buddascrayon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      33
      ·
      1 day ago

      Honestly I think Mark should be more scared of Disney coming after him for mapping out their space mountain ride.

      • PraiseTheSoup@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        20 hours ago

        He probably just made Disney admissions and security even more annoying for everyone else.

        • TheYang@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          15 hours ago

          Judging by the fact that he has an imagineer-video out (effectively) at the same time as the space-mountain mapping, I’d expect that Disney was fully aware of what he was doing, and the whole sneaky-thing was just to make it more appealing to viewers.

  • pjwestin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    38
    ·
    1 day ago

    To be fair, the roadrunner it was following somehow successfully ran into the painting.

  • MidsizedSedan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    44
    ·
    19 hours ago

    All these years, I always thought all self driving cars used LiDAR or something to see in 3D/through fog. How was this allowed on the roads for so long?

    • Breadhax0r@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      19 hours ago

      I remember reading that tesla only uses cameras for it’s self driving. My 2018 Honda uses radar for the adaptive cruise so the technology exists, musk is just an idiot.

      • jimbolauski@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 hours ago

        Radar would not detect a Styrofoam wall either the return from Styrofoam is extremely low. Radar also can not distinguish elevation differences very well so an overhead road sign can be mistaken for a stopped vehicle or a stopped vehicle mistaken for an overhead road sign.

      • SkyezOpen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        18 hours ago

        Does it? My 2023 model throws a shit fit if it’s cold and I assume the camera covers are iced over.

        • Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          17 hours ago

          It probably has cameras as well, for lane guidance etc.

          My Mazda complains if the windscreen is dirty for the same reason.

      • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        18 hours ago

        Radar doesn’t detect stopped objects at high speed. It’d hit the wall too on radar alone.

        This has to be solved by vision and or lidar.

        • Breadhax0r@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          14 hours ago

          Unless your car is traveling faster than the speed of light, radar will detect objects in front of it. But yeah, I was trying to imply that for a complex system like self driving musk is a buffoon for relying on a single system instead of creating a more robust package of sensors.

          • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            7 hours ago

            They get filtered out and the car will not act on it because there is so much noise from stationary objects all around you. The car essentially wouldn’t drive at all if it didn’t filter them out.

            At high speeds, the radar in all cars is used to detect moving objects and the change in velocity of those objects.

            Radar will not prevent running into this wall at 40mph.

            People can downvote me all they want, but that doesn’t change anything.

            Only vison and / or lidar would stop for that wall at 40mph.

            Edit: aside from clarity on the above this is the expected outcomes

            Radar in cars today: hit the wall

            Vision: probably all hit the wall but could be sufficiently programmed to not if they trained on it.

            Lidar: would not hit the wall.

            • jimbolauski@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              5 hours ago

              You’re partially right, stationary objects on the side of the road will have a different Doppler shift than a stationary object in front of the vehicle, items on the side of the road can be filtered. Cheap radars with low sampling rates will not be able to distinguish as their Doppler bins are fairly large.

    • TheYang@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      15 hours ago

      They do.

      But “all self driving cars” are practically only from waymo.
      Level 4 Autonomy is the point at which it’s not required that a human can intercede at any moment, and as such has to be actively paying attention and be sober.
      Tesla is not there yet.

      On the other hand, this is an active attack against the technology.
      Mirrors or any super-absorber (possibly vantablack or similar) would fuck up LIDAR. Which is a good reason for diversifying the Sensors.

      On the other hand I can understand Tesla going “Humans use visible light only, in principle that has to be sufficient for a self driving car as well”, because, in principle I agree. In practice… well, while this seems much more click-bait than an actual issue for a self-driving taxi, diversifying your Input chain makes a lot of sense in my book. On the other hand, if it would cost me 20k more down the road, and Cameras would reach the same safety, I’d be a bit pissed.

    • Feersummendjinn@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      48
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      16 hours ago

      They originally the model S had front facing radar and ultrasonic sensors all round, the car combined the information to corroborate it’s visual interpretation.
      According to reports years ago the radar saved Tesla’s from multiple pileups when it detected crashes multiple cars ahead (that the driver couldn’t see).
      Elmo in his infinite ego demanded both the radar and ultrasonics be removed, since he could drive with out that input so the car should be able to… also it is cheaper.

      • cley_faye@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        8 hours ago

        I’d be very curious to know how much cheaper it is. Sure, there’s R&D to integrate that with everything, but that cost is split across all units sold. It feels like the actual sensors, at this scale, can’t add a significant amount to the final price.

      • Ronno@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        20
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        15 hours ago

        Exactly, my previous car (BMW) once saved me in the fog by emergency braking for something I wasn’t able to see yet. My current car (Tesla) shuts down almost all safety features when the camera’s can’t see anything, so I doubt it will help me in such situations. The only time my Tesla works well is in perfect conditions, but I don’t live in California.

        • raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          8 hours ago

          Exactly, my previous car (BMW) once saved me in the fog by emergency braking for something I wasn’t able to see yet.

          If you were driving at a speed at which the low visibility would have gotten you into into an accident due to some obstable you weren’t able to see yet, you were driving too fast. Simple, isn’t it?

          • jj4211@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            8 hours ago

            While true, it’s still nice that super-human senses are looking out for the driver on their behalf. Also it’s nice if super-human senses allow for braking earlier and closer to graceful rather than standing hard on the brakes because of late notice.

            Fog is one example, but sudden blinding glare could be another situation that could be mitigated by things like radar and lidar. Human driver may unexpectedly be blinded and operating at unsafe speed without any way of knowing that glare was coming in advance.

            • DempstersBox@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              7 hours ago

              These things will make people more complacent and lazy, and will absolutely lead to worse drivers and more collisions

      • dan@upvote.au
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        17 hours ago

        Most non Tesla brands that have some sort of self-driving functionality use lidar and/or radar. I’ve got a BMW iX and as far as I know it uses cameras, radar, lidar, and ultrasonic sensors.

        • Natanox@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          10 hours ago

          It’s the only sensible approach. Not just is the notion that “humans use just their eyes too” completely wrong (otherwise how would be able to tell that something is off with the car “with our butt”?), computers are not even remotely close to our understanding and rapid interpretation of the world around us or cooperation beyond of what’s pre-programmed, which is necessary to deal with unforeseen circumstances. Cars must offset this somehow, and the simplest way to do so is with vast sensor suites that give them as much information as possible. Of course many humans also utterly fail at cooperation and defensive driving, but that’s another problem.

  • blady_blah@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    44
    ·
    22 hours ago

    Honestly all the fails with the kid dummy were a way bigger deal than the wall test. The kid ones will happen a hundred times more than the wall scenario.

    Some sort of radar or lidar should 100% be required on autonomous cars.

    • Sauerkraut@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      edit-2
      21 hours ago

      I fully agree, but sadly, investors likely care more about their cars hitting walls than hitting kids. Killing a kid or pedestrian in the US is often a very cheap fine. When my uncle was run over on a sidewalk next to his son, the police ruled it an accident and the city refused to do anything. Same thing happened when my friend was ran over in a bike lane… So killing humans is probably cheaper than hitting a wall.

      • shawn1122@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        19 hours ago

        Interesting that in the most consumerist nation on earth, objects have more value than people.

  • Sorgan71@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    15 hours ago

    They should just program it to drive through the painted tunnel but when another driver comes behind you they crash into it.

    • KayLeadfoot@fedia.ioOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      84
      ·
      2 days ago

      The scientists in Ireland calling their data set to prevent this exact fucking thing “Coyote” sent me over the moon.