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

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

  • buddascrayon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    43
    ·
    19 hours ago

    It’s a highly questionable approach that has raised concerns over Tesla trying to evade guilt by automatically turning off any possibly incriminating driver assistance features before a crash.

    So, who’s the YouTuber that’s gonna test this out? Since Elmo has pushed his way into the government in order to quash any investigation into it.

    • thistleboy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      22 hours ago

      I believe the outrage is that the video showed that autopilot was off when they crashed into the wall. That’s what the red circle in the thumbnail is highlighting. The whole thing apparently being a setup for views like Top Gear faking the Model S breaking down.

      • PraiseTheSoup@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        20
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        22 hours ago

        Autopilot shuts itself off just before a crash so Tesla can deny liability. It’s been observed in many real-world accidents before this. Others have said much the same, with sources, in this very thread.

        • melpomenesclevage@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          22 hours ago

          well yes but as long as there’s deniability built into my toy, then YOU’RE JUST A BIG DUMB MEANIE-PANTS WHO HATES MY COOL TOYS BECAUSE YOU DON’T HAVE ONE because there’s no other possible reason to hate a toy this cool.

      • octopus_ink@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        3 hours ago

        I am not going to click a link to X, but this article covers that, and links this raw footage video on X which supposedly proves this claim to be false.

        In addition to the folks pointing out it likes to shut itself off (which I can neither confirm nor deny)

        https://www.pcmag.com/news/tesla-on-autopilot-runs-over-mannequin-hits-wall-in-viral-video-but-is

        Some skeptical viewers claim Autopilot was not engaged when the vehicle ran into the wall. These allegations prompted Rober to release the “raw footage” in a X post, which shows the characteristic signs of Autopilot being engaged, such as a rainbow road appearing on the dash.

        https://twitter.com/MarkRober/status/1901449395327094898

  • riodoro1@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    38
    ·
    1 day ago

    What would definitely help with the discussion is if Mark Rober the scientist left a fucking crumb of scientific approach in his video. He didn’t really explain how he was testing it just slam car into things for views. This and a collaboration with a company that makes lidar made the video open to every possible criticism and it’s a shame.

    Discovery channel level of dumbed down „science”.

    • Polderviking@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      Okay, but what would you like him to elaborate on, other than showing you that the Tesla is fooled by a road runner type mural, fog and dense rain?

      How much more info other than just “car didn’t stop” (where other car did stop) do you need to be convinced this is a problem?

      • riodoro1@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        1 day ago

        Did he enable the autopilot? When? What his inputs to the car were? Is if fsd? What car is that?

        You can make every car hit a wall, that is the obvious part, but by claiming (truthfully, I have no doubt) that the car hit it on its own I would like to know what made it do it.

        • Little8Lost@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 day ago

          He said after the first of the 5 tests that every tesla test has autopilot on because some features are only enabled then

        • Ashenlux@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 day ago

          You didn’t watch the video did you? He address that after the first test and said all further test will be done with self driving on.

      • Crampon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        I have no doubt the car will crash.

        But I do feel there is something strange about the car disengaging the auto pilot (cruise control) just before the crash. How can the car know it’s crashing while simultaneously not knowing it’s crashing?

        I drive a model 3 myself, and there is so much bad shit about the auto pilot and rain sensors. But I have never experienced, or heard anyone else experiencing a false positive were the car disengage the auto pilot under any conditions the way shown in the video with o sound or visual cue. Considering how bad the sensors on the car is, its strange they’re state of the art every time an accident happens. There is dissonance between the claims.

        Mark shouldn’t have made so many cuts in the upload. He locks the car on 39mph on the video, but crashes at 42mph. He should have kept it clean and honest.

        I want to see more of these experiments in the future. But Marks video is pretty much a commercial for the Lidar manufacturer. And commercials shouldn’t be trusted.

        • riodoro1@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          1 day ago

          I want to see more of these experiments in the future. But Marks video is pretty much a commercial for the Lidar manufacturer. And commercials shouldn’t be trusted.

          This. If the video presented more facts and wasn’t paid for by competition it would be trustworthy. Otherwise it’s just clickbait (very effective judging by the fact we’re discussing it).

    • Clevererhans@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      22 hours ago

      Actually, his methodology was very clearly explained. Did you watch the whole video? He might have gushed a bit less about LiDAR but otoh the laymen don’t know about it so it stands to reason he had to explain the basics in detail.

      • Crampon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        11
        ·
        1 day ago

        So Tesla owners have a monopoly on caring about the process of an experiment?

        A logic conclusion by that is anyone not a Tesla owner is incapable of critical thought?

        How is this a win?

          • Crampon@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            edit-2
            1 day ago

            I have no doubt the car will crash.

            But I do feel there is something strange about the car disengaging the auto pilot (cruise control) just before the crash. How can the car know it’s crashing while simultaneously not knowing it’s crashing?

            I drive a model 3 myself, and there is so much bad shit about the auto pilot and rain sensors. But I have never experienced, or heard anyone else experiencing a false positive were the car disengage the auto pilot under any conditions the way shown in the video with o sound or visual cue. Considering how bad the sensors on the car is, its strange they’re state of the art every time an accident happens. There is dissonance between the claims.

            Mark shouldn’t have made so many cuts in the upload. He locks the car on 39mph on the video, but crashes at 42mph. He should have kept it clean and honest.

            I want to see more of these experiments in the future. But Marks video is pretty much a commercial for the Lidar manufacturer. And commercials shouldn’t be trusted.

      • riodoro1@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        13
        ·
        1 day ago

        I fucking hate tesla and elon musk. Also I fucking hate people calling unverifiable shit science

        • nyctre@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          ·
          1 day ago

          You’re upset that made up people in your head called this video a research project or something? Because the closest thing I could find to what you’re complaining about is his YouTube channel’s description where it says “friend of science”.

          He never claimed to be a scientist, doesn’t claim to be doing scientific research. In his own words, he’s just doing some tests on his own car. That’s it.

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

          Well, it was published, up to you to do a peer review I guess!

          Also, this isn’t needing science, it blatantly shows that things does infact not function as intended.

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

            Just fyi, they used AEB in one car and cruise control in another. Far from even. I think it was a fail from the start considering they couldn’t get AEB to even fire on the Tesla driving without cruise control. Insane

          • riodoro1@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            11
            ·
            edit-2
            1 day ago

            Were is a robust description of the experiment? Or am I supposed to look frame by frame at the screen in the car to deduce the testing conditions?

            All he had to do was tell us clearly what is enabled on each car and what his inputs are. That would solve all the tesla fanbois comments about him cheating. Maybe he didn’t for „engagement”.

              • riodoro1@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                7
                ·
                edit-2
                1 day ago

                He made an elaborate test track specifically to make interesting observations.

                He set up dozens of cameras to record interesting observations from multiple angles.

                He collected footage of interesting phenomena he observed as they were happening in his elaborate test environment.

                He then cut the footage up so much it’s impossible for us to say exactly what really happened.

                If he went to all this trouble, and then made claims based on his experiment would it really hurt the video to explain the testing process a little bit more?

  • u/lukmly013 💾 (lemmy.sdf.org)@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    186
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    I wondered how the hell it managed to fool LIDAR, well…

    The stunt was meant to demonstrate the shortcomings of relying entirely on cameras — rather than the LIDAR and radar systems used by brands and autonomous vehicle makers other than Tesla.

    • Joeffect@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      33
      ·
      2 days ago

      It didn’t fool lidar… The car equipped with lidar stopped before hitting the wall because it saw the obstacle not what was on the obstacle

      • Shdwdrgn@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        You didn’t see the quote in the above comment that specifically states Teslas don’t have lidar but other brands using it weren’t fooled?

    • thesohoriots@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      131
      ·
      2 days ago

      The tl;dr here is that Elon said that humans have eyes and they work, and eyes are like cameras, so use cameras instead of expensive LIDAR. Dick fully inside car door for the slam.

      • grue@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        2 days ago

        In theory he’s not wrong, except for that part where neither the optics nor (especially) the software come anywhere close to matching the performance of human eyes and brains and won’t for the foreseeable future.

        • davidgro@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 day ago

          And human eyes/brains aren’t good enough anyway. The whole hype about self-driving cars was that they were supposed to be better than humans.

      • BetaBlake@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        2 days ago

        This is the same energy as blizzard saying “you’ve got phones don’t you?”

        Teslas are cheap crap, for a premium price, this has always been the case

      • mic_check_one_two@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        19 hours ago

        The worst part is that LiDAR isn’t even expensive anymore. Hell, my phone has LiDAR. He originally said that to justify the fact that they were dealing with a component shortage and he needed to keep shipping vehicles. So he simply shipped them without the LiDAR systems that he couldn’t get ahold of, and claimed it was because he didn’t need LiDAR.

        But now LiDAR is much more advanced and cheaper. But since he refused to admit it was because of a component shortage, adding LiDAR now would require Musk to publicly admit he was wrong. And we all know that will never happen.

      • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 day ago

        The entire premise of the joke is that we could mistake a sufficiently detailed image of a road for an actual road. That humans are susceptible to such a failure does not mean it is reasonable for a robot to share the same flaw.

    • deegeese@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      75
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      They used to have it but Elmo removed it years ago as a cost cutting move.

      Now they’re the only self driving car that drives into immovable objects.

      You might remember a few years ago a guy got decapitated when his Model S drove straight into the side of a semi trailer.

      • Armok_the_bunny@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        52
        ·
        2 days ago

        To be clear, Elon Musk removed radar from Tesla vehicles and not Lidar, but a) he had it removed even from vehicles that had the hardware for radar and b) radar would have been enough to pass all the tests in the video anyway.

    • Weirdfish@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      159
      ·
      2 days ago

      If I could pass one law, requiring multiple redundant scanning tech on anything autonomous large enough to hurt me might be it.

      I occasionally go to our warehouses which have robotic arms, autonomous fork lifts, etc. All of those have far more saftey features than a self driving Tesla, and they aren’t in public.

      • hovercat@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 day ago

        They removed radar in 2021 for cost-cutting reasons and have never had LiDAR, which Elon called “a fool’s errand”.

        Source: I worked on their ADAS systems.

    • can@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 days ago

      I see you didn’t catch just how dumb teslas are. If it wouldn’t result in actual human harm I would have liked to paint one of these.

    • FrChazzz@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      32
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      Read about this somewhere. Iirc, Elon felt cameras were better than LiDAR at a time when that was kinda true, but the technology improved considerably in the interim and he pridefully refuses to admit he needs to adapt. [Edit: I had hastily read the referenced article and am incorrect here; link to accurate statements is linked in a reply below.]

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

        He didn’t think they were better. He thought Tesla could get away without the more expensive lidar. Basically “humans can drive with just vision, that should be enough for an autonomous vehicle also.” Basically he did it because lidar is more expensive.

        • ChapulinColorado@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          1 day ago

          Even if humans can drive with just vision:

          1. Human vision has superb dynamic range, auto focus and other features that cameras thousands of dollars could only dream of (for most).
          2. I don’t want self driving cars to drive like humans. Humans make too many mistakes and are prone to bad decisions (see the need for safety systems in the first place).
          3. Train and bus transport is better for most people. Driving is a luxury, we’ve forced people that should not be driving to do so in order to keep a job and barely survive.
          • blady_blah@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            22 hours ago

            Human vision is great, human attention is not and neither is their reaction time. Computers are 100x better at both of those. If you throw lidar into the mix, then a car’s vision is now much better than a humans.

            IMHO self driving cars have to be statistically 10x better than humans to be widely implemented. If it passes that threshold them I’m fine with them.

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

          I didn’t think it was about the cost. I think he just likes to be contrarian because he thinks it makes him seem smart. He then needs to stick by his stupid decisions.

          • blady_blah@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            22 hours ago

            I’m assuming it’s a cost because it makes sense to me. His goal was to build full-self-driving (FSD) into ever car and sell the service as a subscription.

            If you add another $500 in components then that’s a lot of cost (probably a lot cheaper today but this was 10 years ago). Cameras are cheap and can be spread around the car with additional non-FSD benefits where as lidar has much fewer uses when the cost is not covered. I think he used his “first-principles” argument as a justification to the engineers as another way for him to say “I don’t want to pay for lidar, make it work with the cheap cameras.”

            Why else would management take off the table an obviously extremely useful safety tool?

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

              Why else would management take off the table an obviously extremely useful safety tool?

              What makes you think people make rational decisions? Especially sociopaths like Musk?

      • SkyezOpen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        49
        ·
        2 days ago

        I don’t even understand that logic. Use both. Even if one is significantly better than the other, they each have different weaknesses and can mitigate for each other.

          • Flax@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            1 day ago

            A LiDAR sensor couldn’t add more than a few hundred to a car, surely

            • jj4211@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 day ago

              They ditched radar at a time when radar only added probably about $50 a car according to some estimates.

              It may technically get a smidge more profitable, but it almost seems like it’s more about hubris around tech shouldn’t need more than a human to do as well. Which even if it were true, is a stupid stance to take when in that scenario you could have better than human senses.

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

        That was the story but it was supply chain issues that lead him to that conclusion. Same reason why lumbar controls were removed from passenger seats.

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

          Found the article! I had breezed through the thing. I was incorrect about the LiDAR/camera thing. Instead it was: ‘Elon even admitted that “very high-resolution radars would be better than pure vision”, but he claimed that “such a radar does not exist”’

          He, of course was incorrect and proven incorrect, but ‘the problem is that Musk has taken such a strong stance against [LiDARs] for so long that now that they have improved immensely and reduced in prices, he still can’t admit that he was wrong and use them.’

          • ChickenLadyLovesLife@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            11
            ·
            1 day ago

            he claimed that “such a radar does not exist”

            Lol just like his Nazi forefathers in WWII who refused to believe (more than once!) the British had the advanced radar that they actually did have.

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

          He could. In fact Waymos, for instance, do and are fully autonomous commercial taxis while Tesla are still 2 years out from full self driving for the tenth year in a row

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

          Every LiDAR system must use at least both. LiDAR can’t tell you about lane markings, what’s on signs, and state of traffic lights.

          But absolutely, you could have multiple sensing technologies and have access to the best of all worlds.

        • FrChazzz@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          1 day ago

          I added a correction in another reply. Basically he stubbornly refuses to believe a powerful enough LiDAR exists. So I suppose he is all-in on “LieDAR” technology instead (yes, I kinda feel bad about this pun too)

    • Rob1992@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      20 hours ago

      Because commonly they use radar instead, the modern sensors that are also used for adaptive cruise control even have heaters to defrost the sensor housing in winter

    • jj4211@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 day ago

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

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

    • NιƙƙιDιɱҽʂ@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      22 hours ago

      You can get a Tesla for $42,000… They aren’t that expensive.

      With that said, they’ve really cheaped out and even removed the cheaper radar sensors they used to have because Elon wanted to save a buck and really thinks all you need is cameras because he’s an idiot.

    • Dr. Moose@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      43
      ·
      1 day ago

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

    • 50MYT@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      1 day ago

      The supplier he was using couldn’t supply lidar fast enough, and it was at risk of slowing his manufacturing.

      So he worked in a way to not need it, and tell everyone this solution was superior.

    • Zanz@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      22 hours ago

      Light aren’t radar systems don’t work internationally because they’re functionally band in many asian and european countries. Instead of making one system that was almost complete finished, they went all camera and now none of it works right.

      • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        19 hours ago

        That’s not really true.

        He use lidar in SpaceX because he knows it’s the right tool for their specific job.

        His stance is it’s not that cameras are better, but that cameras have to be so good for a truly AV that putting effort into both means you’re not going to make your cameras good enough to do it and rely on lidar instead. That and cost.

        If the car can’t process and understand the world via cameras, it’s doomed to fail at a mass scale anyway.

        It might be a wrong stance, but it’s not that lidar is flawed.

        Tesla even uses lidar to ground truth their cameras

        Edit: just adding a late example - Waymo, Cruise, and probably everyone out there still use humans to tell the car what to do if it gets stuck. I even bet Tesla will if they ever launch a robotaxi as they need a way to somehow help the car if it gets stuck. When we see these failures with Waymo and Cruise, it’s less “is something there” and more “I don’t understand this situation”. The understanding comes from vision. Lidar just gives the something is there, but it isn’t solving their problem.

        • AugustWest@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          23 hours ago

          I think the bigger issue is that he is saying redundancy is not important. He thinks cameras could be good enough, well fine, but the failure results in loss of life so build in redundancy: lidar, radar, anything to failover. The fact that cutting costs OR having a belief that one system is good enough is despicable.

  • comfy@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    99
    ·
    14 hours ago

    I hope some of you actually skimmed the article and got to the “disengaging” part.

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

    It’s a highly questionable approach that has raised concerns over Tesla trying to evade guilt by automatically turning off any possibly incriminating driver assistance features before a crash.

  • /home/pineapplelover@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    30
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    18 hours ago

    To be fair, if you were to construct a wall and paint it exactly like the road, people will run into it as well. That being said, tesla shouldn’t rely on cameras

  • Catoblepas@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    51
    ·
    2 days ago

    Tesla cars are stupid tech. As the cars that use lidar demonstrated, this is a solved problem. There don’t have to be self driving cars that run over kids. They just refuse to integrate the solution for no discernible reason, which I’m assuming is really just “Elon said so.”

    • Mishmash2000@lemmy.nz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      2 days ago

      Yeah, it’s infuriating! Elon said something along the lines of Humans drive all the time just using their eyes, so we can replicate that with just cameras. Leaving out the fact that one of the benefits of a self driving system should surely be that it’s in many ways BETTER than humans which are often terrible at driving in fog, torrential rain, low light/night time etc!? It was almost a point of pride that his cars would be every bit as shitty as a human driver to a fault!

      I guess his robots are going to be just as weak and frail as humans and need sick days and simulate getting tired and dropping things too?? I can just imagine one of his robots entering a room and saying What did I come in here for again?? I think I need a nap!?

    • dual_sport_dork 🐧🗡️@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      50
      ·
      2 days ago

      It’s even worse than that. Not only is it a solved problem, but Tesla had it solved (or closer to solved, anyway) and then intentionally regressed on the technology as a cost cutting measure. All the while making a limp-wristed attempt to spin the removal of key sensor hardware – first the radar and later the ultrasonic proximity sensors – as a “safety” initiative.

      There isn’t a shovel anywhere in the world big enough for that pile of bullshit.

      • rocket_dragon@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        23
        ·
        2 days ago

        “human eyes are like cameras so cameras are sufficient” is definitely a thought that came out of Elon’s brain while deep in a k-hole.