A 2025 Tesla Model 3 in Full-Self Driving mode drives off of a rural road, clips a tree, loses a tire, flips over, and comes to rest on its roof. Luckily, the driver is alive and well, able to post about it on social media.

I just don’t see how this technology could possibly be ready to power an autonomous taxi service by the end of next week.

  • Buffalox@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    46
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    The car made a fatal decision faster than any human could possibly correct it. Tesla’s idea that drivers can “supervise” these systems is, at this point, nothing more than a legal loophole.

    What I don’t get is how this false advertising for years hasn’t caused Tesla bankruptcy already?

    • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      Because the US is an insane country where you can straight up just break the law and as long as you’re rich enough you don’t even get a slap on the wrist. If some small startup had done the same thing they’d have been shut down.

      What I don’t get is why teslas aren’t banned all over the world for being so fundamentally unsafe.

      • Buffalox@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        What I don’t get is why teslas aren’t banned all over the world for being so fundamentally unsafe.

        I’ve argued this point the past year, there are obvious safety problems with Tesla, even without considering FSD.
        Like blinker on the steering wheel, manual door handles that are hard to find in emergencies, and distractions from common operations being behind menus on the screen, instead of having directly accessible buttons. With auto pilot they also tend to break for no reason, even on autobahn with clear road ahead! Which can also create dangerous situations.

      • ayyy@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        To put your number into perspective, if it only failed 1 time in every hundred miles, it would kill you multiple times a week with the average commute distance.

        • KayLeadfoot@fedia.ioOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          Someone who doesn’t understand math downvoted you. This is the right framework to understand autonomy, the failure rate needs to be astonishingly low for the product to have any non-negative value. So far, Tesla has not demonstrated non-negative value in a credible way.

          • bluewing@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            1 day ago

            You are trying to judge the self driving feature in a vacuum. And you can’t do that. You need to compare it to any alternatives. And for automotive travel, the alternative to FSD is to continue to have everyone drive manually. Turns out, most clowns doing that are statistically worse at it than even FSD, (as bad as it is). So, FSD doesn’t need to be perfect-- it just needs to be a bit better than what the average driver can do driving manually. And the last time I saw anything about that, FSD was that “bit better” than you statistically.

            FSD isn’t perfect. No such system will ever be perfect. But, the goal isn’t perfect, it just needs to be better than you.

            • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              1 day ago

              FSD isn’t perfect. No such system will ever be perfect. But, the goal isn’t perfect, it just needs to be better than you.

              Yeah people keep bringing that up as a counter arguement but I’m pretty certain humans don’t swerve off a perfectly straight road into a tree all that often.

              So unless you have numbers to suggest that humans are less safe than FSD then you’re being equally obtuse.

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

                A simple google search, (which YOU could have done yourself), shows it’s abut 1 in 1.5 million miles driven per accident with FSD vs 1 in 700,000 miles driven for mechanical cars. I’m no Teslastan, (I think they are over priced and deliberately for rich people only), but that’s an improvement, a noticeable improvement.

                And as a an old retired medic who has done his share of car accidents over nearly 20 years-- Yes, yes humans swerve off of perfectly straight roads and hit trees and anything else in the way also. And do so at a higher rate.

        • NιƙƙιDιɱҽʂ@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          …It absolutely fails miserably fairly often and would likely crash that frequently without human intervention, though. Not to the extent here, where there isn’t even time for human intervention, but I frequently had to take over when I used to use it (post v13)

        • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          Even with the distances I drive and I barely drive my car anywhere since covid, I’d probably only last about a month before the damn thing killed me.

          Even ignoring fatalities and injuries, I would still have to deal with the fact that my car randomly wrecked itself, which has to be a financial headache.

      • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        That’s probably not the failure rate odds but a 1% failure rate is several thousand times higher than what NASA would consider an abort risk condition.

        Let’s say that it’s only 0.01% risk, that’s still several thousand crashes per year. Even if we could guarantee that all of them would be non-fatal and would not involve any bystanders such as pedestrians the cost of replacing all of those vehicles every time they crashed plus fixing damage of things they crashed into, lamp posts, shop Windows etc would be so high as it would exceed any benefit to the technology.

        It wouldn’t be as bad if this was prototype technology that was constantly improving, but Tesla has made it very clear they’re never going to add lidar scanners so is literally never going to get any better it’s always going to be this bad.

        • KayLeadfoot@fedia.ioOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          …is literally never going to get any better it’s always going to be this bad.

          Hey now! That’s unfair. It is constantly changing. Software updates introduce new reversions all the time. So it will be this bad, or significantly worse, and you won’t know which until it tries to kill you in new and unexpected ways :j

        • FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          2 days ago

          Saying it’s never going to get better is ridiculous and demonstrably wrong. It has improved in leaps and bounds over generations. It doesn’t need LiDAR.

          The biggest thing you’re missing if that with FSD **the driver is still supposed to be paying attention at all times, ready to take over like a driving instructor does when a learner is doing something dangerous. Just because it’s in FSD Supervised mode it slant mean you should just sit back and watch it drive you off the road into a lake.

          • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 day ago

            Your saying this on a video where it drove into a tree and flipped over. There isn’t time for a human to react, that’s like saying we don’t need emergency stops on chainsaws, the operator needs to just not drop it.

      • Buffalox@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        For many years the “supervised” was not included, AFAIK Tesla was forced to do that.
        And in this case “supervised” isn’t even enough, because the car made an abrupt unexpected maneuver, instead of asking the driver to take over in time to react.

        • FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 day ago

          The driver isn’t supposed to wait for the car to tell them to take over lol. The driver is supposed to take over when necessary.

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

            The attention required to prevent these types of sudden crashes negates the purpose of FSD entirely.

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

            No if you look at Waymo as an example, they are actually autonomous, and stop to ask for assistance in situations they are “unsure” how to handle.

            But even if you claim was true, in what way was this a situation where the driver could deem it necessary to take over? It was clear road ahead, and nothing in view to indicate any kind of problem, when the car made a sudden abrupt left causing it to roll upside down.

            • FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              18 hours ago

              They can’t stop and ask for assistance at 100km/h on a highway.

              I hope Tesla/Musk address this accident and get the telemetry from the car, cause there’s no evidence that FSD was even on.

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

                According to the driver it was on FSD, and it was using the latest software update available.

                https://www.reddit.com/user/SynNightmare/

                They can’t stop and ask for assistance at 100km/h on a highway.

                Maybe the point is then, that Tesla FSD shouldn’t be legally used on a highway.
                But it probably shouldn’t be used anywhere, because it’s faulty as shit.
                And why can’t is slow down to let the driver take over in a timely manner, when it can break for no reason.
                It was tested in Germany on Autobahn where it did that 8 times within 6 hours!!!

                • FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  13 hours ago

                  According to the driver, with zero evidence backing up the claim. With how much of a hard on everyone has for blaming Elon musk for everything, and trying to drag teslas stock down, his accident is a sure fire way to thousands of Internet karma and e-fame on sites like Reddit and Lemmy. Why doesn’t he just show us the interior camera?

                  Looking at his profile he’s milking this for all it’s worth - he’s posted the same thread to like 8 different subs lol. He’s karma whoring. He probably wasn’t even the one involved in the crash.

                  Looked at his twitter which he promoted on there too, and of course he tags mark rober and is retweeting everything about this crash. He’s loving the attention and doing everything he can to get more.

                  Also he had the car for less than 2 weeks and said he used FSD “all the time”……in a brand new car he’d basically never driven……and then it does this catastrophic failure? Yeh nah lol. Also as others in some of the threads have pointed out, the version of FSD he claims it was on wasn’t out at the time of his accident.

                  Dudes lying through his teeth.

                  • Buffalox@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    13 hours ago

                    There have been other similar cases lately, which clearly indicate problems with the car.
                    The driver has put up the footage from all the cameras of the car, so he has done what he can to provide evidence.

                    https://www.reddit.com/r/TeslaFSD/comments/1ksa79y/1328_fsd_accident/

                    It’s very clear from the comments, that some have personally experienced similar things, and others have seen reporting of it.
                    This is not an isolated incident. It’s just has better footage than most.