The U.S. government’s road safety agency is again investigating Tesla’s “Full Self-Driving” system, this time after getting reports of crashes in low-visibility conditions, including one that killed a pedestrian.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration says in documents that it opened the probe on Thursday with the company reporting four crashes after Teslas entered areas of low visibility, including sun glare, fog and airborne dust.

In addition to the pedestrian’s death, another crash involved an injury, the agency said.

Investigators will look into the ability of “Full Self-Driving” to “detect and respond appropriately to reduced roadway visibility conditions, and if so, the contributing circumstances for these crashes.”

  • breadsmasher@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    86
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    Eyes can’t see in low visibility.

    musk “we drive with our eyes, cameras are eyes. we dont need LiDAR”

    FSD kills someone because of low visibility just like with eyes

    musk reaction -

    • conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      50
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      It’s worse than that, though. Our eyes are significantly better than cameras (with some exceptions at the high end) at adapting to varied lighting conditions than cameras are. Especially rapid changes.

      • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        Not only that, when we have trouble seeing things, we can adjust our speed to compensate (though tbf, not all human drivers do, but I don’t think FSD should be modelled after the worst of human drivers). Does Tesla’s FSD go into a “drive slower” mode when it gets less certain about what it sees? Or does its algorithms always treat its best guess with high confidence?

      • III@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        6 months ago

        Correction - Older Teslas had lidar, Musk demanded they be removed because they cut into his profits. Not a huge difference but it does show how much of a shitbag he is.

    • Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      He really is a fucking idiot. But so few people can actually call him out… So he just never gets put in his place.

      Imagine your life with unlimited redos. That’s how he lives.

    • flames5123@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      6 months ago

      The cars used to have RADAR. But they got rid of that and even disabled it on older models when updating because they “only need cameras.”

      Cameras and RADAR would have been good enough for most all conditions…

  • fluxion@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    67
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is now definitely on Musk’s list of departments to cut if Trump makes him a high-ranking swamp monster

    • lurker8008@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      49
      ·
      6 months ago

      Why do you think musk dumping so much cash to boost Trump? The plan all along is to get kickbacks like stopping investigation, lawsuits, and regulations against him. Plus subsidies.

      Rich assholes don’t spend money without expectation of ROI

      He knows Democrats will crack down on shady practices so Trump is his best bet.

      • vxx@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        He’s not hoping for a kickback, he is offered a position as secretary of cost-cutting.

        He will be able to directly shut down everything he doesn’t like under the pretense of saving money.

        Trump is literally campaigning on the fact that government positions are up for sale under his admin.

        “I’m going to have Elon Musk — he is dying to do this… We’ll have a new position: secretary of cost-cutting, OK? Elon wants to do that,” the former president said"

    • skyspydude1@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      6 months ago

      This is legitimately one of the real reasons Musk is pushing for Trump so hard. NHTSA (and all the other regulatory agencies) were effectively gutted completely by the Trump admin and it’s basically the entire reason Elon could grift his way to where he is today. The moment Biden got into office, basically every single agency in existence began investigating him and pushing blocks out of the proverbial Jenga tower of the various Musk companies. He’s praying that Trump will get elected and allow him to keep grifting, because otherwise he’s almost definitely going to jail, or at a minimum losing the vast majority of his empire.

    • SkyeStarfall@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      28
      ·
      6 months ago

      Also, on a final note…

      Why the fuck would you limit yourself to only human senses when you have the capability to add more of any sense you want??

      If you have the option to add something that humans don’t have, why wouldn’t you? As an example, humans don’t have gps either, but it’s very useful to have in a car

    • blady_blah@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      6 months ago

      This is directly a result of Elon’s edict that Tesla cars don’t use lidar. If you aren’t aware Elon set that as a requirement at the beginning of Tesla’s self driving project because he didn’t want to spend the money on lidar for all Tesla cars.

      His “first principles” logic is that humans don’t use lidar therefore self driving should be able to be accomplished without (expensive) enhanced vision tools. While this statement has some modicum of truth, it’s obviously going to trade off safely in situations where vision is compromised. Think fog or sunlight shining in your cameras / eyes or a person running across the street at night wearing all black. There are obvious scenarios where lidar is a massive safety advantage, but Elon made a decision for $$ to not have that. This sounds like a direct and obvious outcome of that edict.

      • WoodScientist@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        His “first principles” logic is that humans don’t use lidar therefore self driving should be able to be accomplished without (expensive) enhanced vision tools.

        This kind of idiocy is why people tried to build airplanes with flapping wings. Way too many people thought that the best way to create a plane was to just copy what nature did with birds. Nature showed it was possible, so just copy nature.

  • billwashere@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    6 months ago

    Makes you wonder if removing the lidar and using fucking cameras isn’t part of the problem… cheap bastards.

  • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    6 months ago

    Really fucking stupid that we as a society intentionally choose to fuck around and find out rather than find out before we fuck around.

      • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        By refusing to vote in competent regulatory bodies, the ones finding out are a part of the problem with the societal ails. I don’t want specific people punished with prejudice, I want a rule of law that holds all people accountable as equals and averts all harm before it can happen.

  • raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    6 months ago

    Charge the stupid fuck Tesla chain of decision making with murder. This bullshit “self driving” advertising is premeditated, that’s no longer manslaughter.

    And charge the driver(s) with manslaughter under aggravating circumstances.

    But oh no, muh profts, hurr-durrr…

  • Buffalox@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    I thought it was illegal to call it full self driving? So I thought Tesla had something new.
    Apprently it’s the moronic ASSISTED full self driving the article is about. So nothing new.
    Tesla does not have a legal full self driving system, so why do articles keep pushing the false narrative, even after it’s deemed illegal?

    • FigMcLargeHuge@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      so why do articles keep pushing the false narrative, even after it’s deemed illegal?

      The same reason that simple quadcopters have been deemed by the press to be called “drones”. You can’t manufacture panic and outrage with a innocuous name.

      • Buffalox@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        Calling it a drone has nothing to do with how many propellers it has, some drones are Jet driven. some are boats and some are vehicles.
        A Drone is simply an unmanned craft, controlled remotely or by automation.

        https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/drone

        an uncrewed aircraft or vessel guided by remote control or onboard computers:

        • FigMcLargeHuge@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          It sure doesn’t say when that was updated, but for a long period of time the use of drone when discussing unmanned aircraft was reserved for military craft that were usually armed and used to kill people. In the attempt to demonize hobby rc use, the press started calling simple quadcopters (and other propeller configurations if we are being pedantic) drones and not what they were normally called by the people using and making them in the hobby. My point still stands, the press likes to change the wording of things, and will perpetuate their narrative in order to garner views. Manufacturing fear is part of their tactic, and is why I replied what I replied to the question of why the press continues to push the false narrative of these cars being “self driving”.

  • Konala Koala@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    6 months ago

    Every time I hear something about pedestrian being killed by something self-driving, it begins to irk me as to why are we pushing for such and such technology.

    • PeroBasta@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      6 months ago

      Because it is generally proven to save lifes. You’ll never hear of “thanks for the auto-brake system no one got injured and everything was boring as usual” but it happened a lot (also to me in first person).

      I don’t like Musk but in general its a good thing to push self driving cars IMO. I drive 2 hours per day and the amount of time where I see retarded people doing retarded stuff at the wheel is crazy.

      • DillyDaily@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        This is the thing. Musk and everything his company does in terms of labour and marketing, and just their whole ethos is unethical as fuck, and I can’t stand that as a society we are celebrating Tesla.

        But self driving cars are not inherently bad or dangerous to persue as a technological advancement.

        Self driving cars will kill people, they’ll will hit pedestrians and crash into things.

        So do cars driven by humans.

        Human driven cars kill a lot of people.

        Self driving cars need to be safer than human driven cars to even consider letting them on the the road, but we can’t truly expect a 0% accident rate on self driving cars in the early days of the technology when we don’t expect that of the humanity driven cars.

      • Konala Koala@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        No, it is not generally proven to save lives, you are listening to lies somewhere. Its not a good thing to push self-driving cars and Musk is the one being retarded. Plus he supports Trump and not Harris.

        • PeroBasta@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          The technology behind it is proven to save lifes. The reaction time of a full brake to stop a car crash i had the “luck” of experiencing on a Volkswagen was outstanding.

          Same thing for the lane assist function if you are sleepy

          • Konala Koala@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            Same thing for the lane assist function if you are sleepy

            If you are sleepy behind the wheel, you need to pull over, get off the road, and take a rest.

            • PeroBasta@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              6 months ago

              Thanks mom. I brought cases to prove my point I’m not saying you should go on a road trip while sleepy.

    • Psythik@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      Because self-driving cars are safer than human drivers, when implemented properly. A proper one is absolutely loaded with sensors, radar, laser, sonar; not just some cameras like Tesla’s system.

      If you ever get the chance to, hop in a Waymo and you’ll become a believer too (currently available only in Cali and AZ). These little robotaxis see everything at all times, not just what’s in front of them like humans. I trust them more than I’d trust any human driver. They can avoid accidents that you and I would never see coming. Witnessed this first-hand.

        • Psythik@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          Again, ride in one yourself when you get the chance and I promise you you’ll change your mind immediately.

          • Konala Koala@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            Again, not only no valid proof they are safe, but they are being used to put people out of work like Taxi and Uber drivers.

            • Psythik@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              5 months ago

              It’s for the better. They will find other jobs. You sound like the people crying about coal mines being closed down.

  • demizerone@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    6 months ago

    I purchased FSD when it was 8k. What a crock of shit. When I sold the car, that was this only gave the car value after 110k miles and it was only $1500 at most.

  • jordanlund@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    6 months ago

    Maybe have a safety feature that refuses to engage self drive if it’s too foggy/rainy/snowy.

    • bcgm3@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      6 months ago

      Inb4 someone on TikTok shows how to bypass that sensor by jamming an orange in it -__-

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

      Preventing engaging something in bad conditions is a lot easier than what do you do if the conditions suddenly happen.

      If it’s suddenly foggy it needs to be able to handle the situation well.

      Cameras/Lidar don’t work well in fog. Radar does, but it isn’t a primary sensor and can’t be driven on safely alone in any circumstance.

      So now you need to slow down (which humans will do) but also since the sensors are failing or insufficient, safely get out of the way of what might be other incoming vehicles behind you, or slow/stopped vehicles ahead of you.

      You could restrict hours the system can be engaged which will reduce the likely hood of certain events (e.g morning fog, or sunrise/sunset head on sun) but there’s still unpredictability.