Self-driving cars don’t work.

[breakingbacon]

I hear these things called trains are making waves in other countries.

[FoxyGekkerson]

Remember kids, electric vehicles were not designed to save the environment, they were designed to save the auto industry.

[DrReplaySC]

I was in my brother's Tesla in a McDonalds drive thru. The A.I. thought the McDonald's was a semi truck repeatedly slamming into us. That A.I. was jumpy AF. It thought everything was jittering and sliding all around it. If that computer had any control, it would take about 10 seconds to dump your ass in a lake trying to save you from a bug.

[goroakechi]

Autopilot is code word for “guys, if it wasn’t me driving the car, I can’t be charged for homicide!”

[bjorknasty]

Dang, this doesn't sound biased by personal opinion at all.

[JimP]

Does anybody care that self-driving cars average 1, 000, 000 miles (1, 600, 000km) between collisions? Where as normally it's 40, 000 miles? Even if the results are off by 50% it's still more than 10 times safer to have self-driving cars. Sure there are some ridiculous accidents with self drive. But I've personally seen some horribly ridiculous collisions driven by people that will outcompete any self driven collision. I think we can all agree to that.

[illitero]

I'll never not be flabbergasted at how Tesla and any other company pushing "self driving" were SOMEHOW not only allowed to just unleash a brand new tech on public roads, but sell it to consumers in problematic, buggy beta. Before you're even allowed to sell a road-going car, it has to meet minimum regulations to be safe for both the driver and, in cases of stuff like bumper height and even how a headlight disperses light, how that car interacts with other drivers and cars. In terms of consumer protection, a product simply cannot be advertised or sold in any way that exaggerates product capability or imply capabilities it simply doesn't provide. In Tesla's case, it somehow managed to supercede regulatory scrutiny for both vehicle safety and false advertising the better part of a decade. Bonkers. Simply FUCKING bonkers it was ever allowed to touch public roads. Like, you don't even need legislation addressing this specific technology to be able to condemn it for the danger it hands out for the privilege of a subscription fee.

And speaking of legislation of tech, our country is in DESPERATE need of updated regulation concerning blatant anti-consumer practices being employed by companies selling software/hardware products that not only limit user ability, but intentionally disrupt usability by requiring subscriptions, forcing upgrades, or requiring remote check-in to servers that end up arbitrarily shutting down. That last part is a MASSIVE issue with videogames as, even if it's a single-player game, publishers shut down servers when a game is no longer profitable; and there's nothing requiring them to at least patch out remote validation when a game goes EOL to allow people to keep playing something they paid for. Since, you know, customers certainly aren't going to get any refunds when the company decides they'll no longer uphold _their_ end of the transaction. This all applies for internet-connected stuff since it's the same principal. Phones, tablets, car infotainment, "smart" TV's, home assistants, even dipshit digital photo frames. Once a company decides to move on, the hardware you paid for is rendered useless. Companies LOVE abandoning little expensive trinkets within a year or three of introduction, just ask Google or Microsoft or Spotify or, like, ANY phone company. If they want to EOL something, fine, that's *their* right to do so; but it shouldn't be entirely on THEIR terms to be able to pull the plug AND keep the money while consumers are left with nothing. At the very least, any software or hardware a company wants to abandon must be patched to function independently, and hardware must be made "unlockable" so that consumers can continue using what they paid for as they see fit - as is or open for development by enthusiasts.

[jeffsstuff]

Funny but you got it wrong. The tech is improving and rapidly. FSD was always advertised as a bets and the system insists you keep your hands on the wheel. I drove from my L.A. home to Vegas and back having autopilot doing all the work. It made the drive far more enjoyable and arguably safer. Is it as good a driver as I am? Not yet BUT it always pays attention and is never distracted. Thus, it’s like having a copilot keeping you safer (the stats show that you are many times less likely to be in an accident on autopilot than off it per million miles driven).

[hngldr]

I'm with Roz from WTYP Podcast that software engineers should have a licensing system similar to Civil Engineers anytime they are working on or making claims about something that involves lives at stake like this.

If a Civil Engineer pulled shit as bad as this even once (never mind repeatedly like this), they'd not only lose their license but get put in jail.

[atlasreign]

- Since 2013 (10 years ago) there have been 373 fatal accidents involving a Tesla, 19 of which had autopilot enabled.
- There were 10, 845 fatal crashes involving the Ford F-Series during a 5 year study that was released in 2020.
- The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) reports that a human driver crashes every 484, 000 miles driven.
Tesla's analytics show that with autopilot & steer assist active a driver only crashes every 4.31 million miles (1.59 million miles in a Tesla with the features turned off).

This video is bordering on liable 😅 and it's not the first.
What's Adam got against self-driving cars?
Normally he's so numbers oriented, but obviously the numbers speak for themselves in this case...so he throws out some anecdotal bullshit about a specific highway accident?

[mrdrchad]

As someone who has reciently been told that I am going blind I hope that self driving cars become a reality soon. Self driving vehicles could be a helpful tool that will increase the quality of life for many people.

[DumpsterJedi]

Touch screens never improved after the 90's, radio is the pinnacle of wireless (and always will be), and Apple's Retina Display is made of eyeballs because naming in tech is literal.

[DarkSyster]

There are 5 classes of self-driving cars with 0 being no self-driving features, 3 being fully assistive features, and 5 being fully self-driving.
For class 3, the car detects if you're slipping out of your lane and warns you, it guides you to a perfect parallel park, it tells you what you need to know to make you a better driver. It basically makes you and the car into a cyborg, you the final decision maker, but the car doing everything it can to augment your ability to make those decisions for the most optimum outcome.
Class 4 is a car that can drive itself under controlled conditions, like say the interstate through Nevada or the 401 in Ontario between cities where there are few on and off ramps and traffic is regular. But it still requires a driver should it encounter something unusual. So you're on the interstate, or the 401, you put it into autopilot mode and it can drive for hours. There should be no pedestrians, no animals, nothing but boredom for hours on end. But if it detects flashing or blinking lights, or construction signs, or whatever, you get a wake-up. The insurance industry has already determined that this level of self-driving has the greatest benefits. Human brains do not handle boredom well and this kind of boring driving is the cause of many accidents. But boring is something computers do well. What they don't do well, what humans are better at, is dealing with the unexpected. So this level is like the autopilot in an airplane, it handles the boring parts of the flight, but you still have a pilot to handle things when the situation is not boring.
Finally there's class 5 where the human is not required at all. The slope from 0 to class 4 is a gentle one, but the slope from 4 to 5 is a steep one. We are a long way from a car that doesn't need a driver. To get there, we need an AI that can deal well with the unexpected. As I mentioned above, computers are not good at that but human brains are. Computers like boring. So Tesla and Alphabet are a long way away from any vehicle that doesn't need a human on all but an access-controlled highway.

[ryanstewart]

I'm an EV enthusiast that has always been excited about Tesla making EVs more main stream but I'm also not a fan of autonomous driving nor am I a fan of cars in general (and I'm literally a mechanic). Public transit FTW.

[somedooby]

They should rename autopilot to
"'autopilot'" (with quotes)

[devoidoverlord]

In order to have self driving vehicles you need to completely remove the human element in all other vehicles to greatly simplify the process needed rather than radar tracking humans driving vehicles

[TiminatorP]

I mean, Waymo seems to be unironically doing pretty good...

[MontyRoyal]

Elon understands people will buy anything ... Reference PayPal. 😂😂😂

[sergiv]

I don't think this guy knows what a simp is.

[davidtitanium]

"driving" is not just a function of managing speed and distance to other things in the road, it's also about understanding the context of the environment you're driving on, and it's still a very difficult problem for AI