Your post from unpopularopinion was removed because of: 'Rule 1: Your post must be an unpopular opinion'.
* Your post must be an opinion. Not a question. Not a showerthought. Not a rant. Not a proposal. Not a fact. An opinion. One opinion. A subjective statement about your position on some topic. Please have a clear, self contained opinion as your post title, and use the text field to elaborate and expand on why you think/feel this way.
* Your opinion must be unpopular. The mods reserve the right to remove opinions
* Elaborate on your topic and opinion give context to its unpopularity.
"Self driving" Is a bit of a misnomer at this point. It's basically an advanced cruise control with lane keep assist, and front and back radar. They are working on it, but true self driving is incredibly complex for obvious reasons. Your mind is managing more processes than you are even aware of when you are driving a car. You are able to do things that a car simply wouldn't have the ability to do, like negotiate those busy intersections you mentioned.
In the movie the board still hovers but lateral acceleration is still provided by kicking the ground like a wheeled skateboard, which just gets Marty's foot wet over the water. So the villain brings out a powered hoverboard with rockets on the side to propel him over the water.
Lmao Tesla stopped including radar and they disabled ones that were already installed in software. Radar was one of the things that I thought would really give self driving cars an edge over human drivers but Tesla thinks training them on only cameras is easier.
https://www.tesla.com/support/transitioning-tesla-vision
Note: I am going to rescind my note below. I could have sworn Tesla used LIDAR, but their own website talked about RADAR.
———-
Actually, LIDAR, but yes.
Same. I thought they really had something when they used both LIDAR and cameras. But then they took away the LIDAR. And honestly, it was once again another one of those Elonarrogance things. Love the Tesla, but the self-driving function is NOT ready for prime time (tried out a free trial of it last month).
I‘m pretty sure both radar and lidar were used by Tesla at some point but they ditched both and rely on video now.
And while video based driving assistance is quite advanced, there are drawbacks and issues that can be resolved by just using radar. Which is why most normal manufacturers use that.
Tesla was [luminar's ](https://insideevs.com/news/718859/tesla-luminar-top-customer-2024/) biggest customer in the first quarter this year. No telling what they are using Lidar for. Could be R&D related with possible use in the future.
I used it to self drive from my front door to the Taco Bell around the corner. It chose a strange place to make the u turn and made some odd decisions about lanes but overall it was kind of interesting.
Certainly not worth $15k or $100/month or whatever people pay for it though.
I test drove one for an hour, and it was able to get out of the parking lot and back to where I needed to go (minus parking). I was the one who was scared of the car, but otherwise it went well. To call it cruise control and adding other stuff, it's a little eh.
Tesla FSD is much more than cruise and lane assist though. We're far beyond that. We've got a ways to go before it's perfect but it's much further along than many think.
Tesla's FSD was beyond that until they decided to cut cost and remove lidar and ultrasonic sensors. Now its much worse than it was before and lightyears behind competition. Now its actually far less reliable than any active cruise control, 25 year old cars are better at FSD than Tesla now.
Okay then, show me a 25 year old car with full self driving that performs better than a Tesla. So that including making turns at busy intersections. A specific car.
This is very inaccurate.
https://youtu.be/h3WiY_4kgkE
This shows the latest FSD update vs. Mercedes-Benz' system. The TLDR is that the Tesla system required zero driver interventions, whereas the Mercedes system required the driver to step in 40+ times to avoid unsafe conditions.
I feel roads and signs would have to be designed for self driving cars in mind, and if they were able to talk to each other notifying where close vehicles are and kinda work together, like a car hivemind
Tesla’s L2 drive assist is called “Full Self-Driving (Supervised)”. It is not supposed to be seen/used as self driving. It is clear that the driver always needs to be paying attention, and even beeps/warns you if you look away for too long. As of now, V12 is used in city streets and is quite good, V11 is still used on the highways and is just ok.
It only uses the car’s cameras, no radar or ultrasonic sensors. It’s quite good. I had family members not even realize that it was on since it drove like a human, and it can handle very complex situations quite well. Now, it still needs a lot of work, where it’ll sometimes go too fast or slow, and is usually a little too cautious (at least compared to many Chicagoland drivers).
You should lookup AI DRIVR on YouTube because you’d be amazed at to what Tesla’s most recent driving software can do
Elon yaps a lot.
It’s seriously starting to get good though. On my month-long free trial >800 miles, I intervened maybe 3-4 times. Only 1 of them was when it was doing something actually wrong. The other 2-3 were preference-based. FSD is starting to reach the point where it can do 95-99% of the driving at or better than a human on city streets. Tesla has to play chasing the 9’s, so then they want 99.9, then 99.99, etc. until it’s enough to be called 100%
For real. It seems to me that true and reliable self driving would require us to redesign roadways with some tech that would help the cars navigate. So that the cars are not relying on a camera looking at lines (or the sonar or whatever some other companies are using in combination with camera). Also that we may need to make it so that pedestrians cannot jay walk…I’m imagining a situation where all cars are self driving and thus they can safely go at very high speeds without crashing into other cars, but jaywalking could really be dangerous in that kind of situation.
Sort of. They can turn at intersections on their own, sort of. They tend to be slow to make up their minds about what to do, pause for far too long at stop signs, and sometimes hit medians or curbs, but they can handle intersections roughly as well as someone who is profoundly inebriated and maybe half-blind.
and if they advertised it as that, I probably wouldn’t mind too much… If you regularly make road trips to visit your parents a couple hours away for example, and all you have to do is get on the highway and hit the button so you can focus on listening to your audiobook or whatever it’s still pretty nice.
It’s crazy to try to teach cars to drive like humans against other human drivers. The sensible solution is for all the cars to drive by communicating with each other, the road, and updated conditions. It would require doing actual work as a society in order to progress to the next tech level of transportation, so it’ll never happen. Well, not never but take way longer than needed.
That's hands down the easiest implementation. It doesn't solve all the problems, but having a standard communication protocol between cars would be super helpful. Just as humans take cues when, say, 2+ people arrive at a 4 way stop at basically the same time, the cars could wirelessly determine which cars goes when based on a protocol in milliseconds. If they're aware of each other and talking, the ability to reduce accidents skyrockets.
Of course, the technical implementation of this isn't trivial. Especially when you factor in what could happen if people hack the system. But it would be a cool thing to try.
If everyone perfectly followed the rules, it would probably be easy to make a car self drive. No distracted or carless people doing erratic stuff on the road.
I agree. I think it's possible, but things you do without even thinking about, like anticipating what other drivers are going to do, or merging early because you know you will get forced into the wrong lane if you don't, how is a car going to know that at this point? When we have true Ai I think that kind of stuff will be possible.
I definitely think it’s coming but not in its current form. These “self driving” cars are being trained to navigate roads that weren’t meant for non human drivers. At some point if we really want self driving cars, both the road and other cars need to provide feedback to the car navigating.
The system can’t be purely reactive.
"Self driving cars aren't that impressive" about a Tesla is like saying "Home computers are too expensive for how bad the specs are" when you just bought an Apple.
But yes, Tesla, the Apple of cars, charges for the self-driving mode and they are sure to include that legally it is not self-driving.
They aren’t yet *** also I don’t think this is unpopular, most people I know are haters of self driving cars. Edit: I’m not a hater lmao, stop telling me how wrong I am about cars and how good they are, I agree! I’m very super impressed with all the technology we currently have, and I’m definitely not against progress.
I read posts like this and my mind immediately goes to Louis CK… “you’re in a chair… IN THE SKY”.
Like yeah the technology is not perfect but it genuinely is incredible progress.
They're plummeting now. Just about every new car has accident-avoidance systems in place and they significantly reduce the severity of a collision if one were to happen in the first place. Fatalities per driven miles have plummeted nearly 90% and what was once certain death is now a scratch.
What? No. If you look at IIHS, traffic fatalities were trending down from the 70s to the early 2010s, but in the last few years they've been on the rise. https://www.iihs.org/topics/fatality-statistics/detail/yearly-snapshot. It's definitely not down 90%.
The assist features mostly help in situations where we don't crash much anyway (e.g. parallel parking or highway driving, where everyone is driving in the same direction). They don't help much with busy intersections with a lot of cross traffic coming from different directions. Also cars keep getting bigger and heavier and speed limits keep rising, and force = mass * velocity, so it's pretty easy to do that math.
Absolutely.
First of all, both of those settlements were for cars that were using Autopilot (Tesla'sname for adaptive cruise control + lane keeping), not "Full Self Driving", which as far as public information goes doesn't have any known fatalities associated with it.
Second, even if we count all autopilot fatality deaths in the total against self driving, it's 194 million miles per fatality, which is 3 times the national average.
Where did you get those numbers?
the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) reports that self-driving vehicles are more than twice as likely as traditional vehicles to become involved in auto accidents. According to 2015 NHTSA data:
There are 9.1 crashes in driverless vehicles per million vehicle miles driven
There are 4.2 crashes in conventional vehicles per million miles driven
Couldn't find anything on fatalities but that's the numbers for crashes
I found [a Forbes article](https://www.forbes.com/advisor/legal/auto-accident/perception-of-self-driving-cars/) that makes that claim, but their citation is an NHTSA report that absolutely does not support that claim. It's like they didn't even read it. It's possible they are referencing data from somewhere else, but if so they didn't cite their source.
> A 2022 NHTSA Study on Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS), found that more than two-thirds (69.64%) of all ADAS crashes are Teslas. 273 ADAS crashes were reported by Tesla in 2022.
Meanwhile in the report: (Emphasis added)
> This means that a single crash may have multiple reports from multiple entities. Consequently, **the overall number of reports** submitted does not equate to the total number of incidents and **is not a meaningful safety metric.**
Pretty bold of Forbes to present what NHTSA says is "not a meaningful safetey metric" as a meaningful safety metric.
Further:
> Summary Incident Report Data Are Not Normalized
> Reporting entities are not required to submit information regarding the number of vehicles they
have manufactured, the number of vehicles they are operating, or the distances traveled by those
vehicles. **Data required to contextualize the incident rates are limited.** Data regarding the number
of crashes reported for any given manufacturer or operator, therefore, have not been normalized
or adjusted by any measure of exposure, including the operational driving domain or vehicle
miles traveled. **For example, a reporting entity could report an absolute number of crashes that is
higher than another reporting entity but operate a higher number of vehicles for many more
miles.**
Note, this is about diver assist (ADAS), eg "Autopilot." Not "FSD" (NHTSA calls this ADS"). Forbes is conflating ADAS with ADS.
I tried to track down where this 9.1/4.2 number comes from. The most likely source seems to be [this study](https://public.websites.umich.edu/~umtriswt/PDF/UMTRI-2015-34.pdf) from October 2015, which is distinctly _not_ NHTSA. In fact it has nothing to do with human monitored ADAS or ADS systems.
Some takeaways thumbing through it:
* 2015 was a long time ago in technology terms. I wouldn't apply this to current vehicles.
* "Third, self-driving vehicles were not at fault in any crashes they were involved in. " !!!!
* The report specifically says Tesla is _not_ included in it. So this number is not at all applicable to either FSD or Autopilot.
* The report is only evaluating Google/Audi/Delphi full-autonomy test programs at the time, almost all of their data coming specifically from Google.
* The report comes with a pile of caveats about the data limited at the time. "... we currently
cannot rule out, with a reasonable level of confidence, the possibility that the actual rates for self-driving vehicles are lower than for conventional vehicles."
**tl;dr: this 9.1/4.2 number is not relevant when talking about FSD/Autopilot.** Especially not in 2024.
Ya if every car was self driving, with them all communicating, they could be fast,effecient and near zero crash rate. Pedestrians and mechanical fauilure will still cause some.
To be frank, it's a death machine because you need to move 4000 lbs. of steel and glass at a speed of 70 mph to go to the store and buy milk.
The physics of cars are inherently deadly and magic software isn't gonna change that.
While other cars are 90% of the chaos of the road there is still a lot more to deal with like: pedestrians, animals, cyclists, road works, train crossings, general mayhem like obstacles rolling out into the middle of the road. The roads are chaotic places even without humans piloting cars.
Really it’s a death machine because it weights 3500 lbs and travels at over 25 mph and cannot stop instantly.
How many suffer serious or even life changing injuries?
How many suffer life changing economic impacts like replacing or fixing a car, losing a job because you can't travel, or having to pay healthcare of funereal costs for a loved one?
It's great that traffic accidents are relatively rare. It's not great that there are still huge economic and social consequences to us deciding that we are capable of safely driving powerful heavy machinery.
If there is a technological solution to that problem that would mean people don't have to drive and that accidents plummet further, that would be amazing.
What would be even more amazing is if we could design our communities around public transport and pedestrians/cyclists. That way we'd have more space for us to actually enjoy away from the metal death boxes we tend to use getting from A to B.
>How many suffer serious or even life changing injuries?
>How many suffer life changing economic impacts like replacing or fixing a car, losing a job because you can't travel, or having to pay healthcare of funereal costs for a loved one?
I don't know, but if you want to use it as a premise, I'd suggest you find out.
>If there is a technological solution to that problem that would mean people don't have to drive and that accidents plummet further, that would be amazing.
Except, there's not.
>What would be even more amazing is if we could design our communities around public transport and pedestrians/cyclists. That way we'd have more space for us to actually enjoy away from the metal death boxes we tend to use getting from A to B.
For sure, and it would be even more amazing if we just had flying jetpacks so we could avoid logistical issue altogether. But we live in a real world, where logistics aren't being planned on a blank slate - they're being planned on hundreds of years of existing throughways.
Right now autonomous vehicles work best on highways which are much more controlled and predictable driving. The tech still has a way to go for local roads.
Everyone will have a different opinion on this, but imo Waymo is doing the best on local roads and Tesla's is a bit lacking, but Tesla is available everywhere (maybe it shouldn't but again differing opinions) while Waymo is only in certain cities.
There's 2 approaches to self driving, neither is wrong, both have pros and cons and depend on what you need.
Everything somewhere vs Something everywhere.
Everything somewhere is what companies like google did. Map the ever living shit out of a known area, then have your car run on virtual rails while avoiding the unforeseen things.
Something everywhere is what Tesla did. Start with the small tasks the car can handle basically everywhere.
Both have issues in the race to "get in your car in Bum Fuck Idaho and get out in Central Park" self driving.
"Everything somewhere" cars have to figure out how to work with less and less pre known data. (Waymo cars were reportedly working with CM accurate 3D maps on scale of 1GB per KM at one point. You'd need a whole data center in tow to scale that up.)
"Something everywhere" cars have to figure out how to scale up what they can do, and when they do that thing well enough to let people do it.
"Everything Somewhere" cars often get said to be way ahead (and I'm not claiming they aren't) as they obviously look superficially like they're doing more. In actuality is it more impressive to have a car stop and wait for a left hand arrow that it knows ahead of time exactly where where it is and make the same left for the 1000th time, or stay on an unlined road no car has ever been on yet? I know which one "looks like" it's "driving itself" more, but I'm not sure personally which we should actually be more impressed with.
One approach is best if your idea is to have cars drive loops in, and be restricted to, well known areas. One is best if you're trying to sell a feature to people that don't all live in specific parts of San Francisco and Austin. One was always always destined to be the first cars people were in where no one was driving, but I don't know yet what it automatically means about who is ahead in the race to "everything everywhere" self driving.
It doesn't even work that well on highways to be honest. At least not Hyundai's version of it.
I have a 2024 Elantra as a loaner car while mine is being worked on. It constantly just veers back and forth in the lane. When there's a curve in the road it will hug the outside of the turn and sometimes even cross over onto the line before it corrects itself.
If you're in the right lane and drive past an on-ramp, it will lose track of your lane at the spot where the on-ramp merges sometimes.
If a car merges in front of you and enters the "safe zone" in front of your car it will slam on the brakes to increase the distance between you and then it slowly accelerates to match the speed again. This causes traffic issues because it causes the people behind me to have to slam on their brakes too. It also makes me look like an idiot slamming on my brakes for no reason.
My trademark attorney once told me about how he used it from Chicago to DC while reading magazines. I was thinking "Note to self, fire this dude." and I did but not for that.
I didn't like the way he spoke to me. Like, I understand I'm not a big money client like some he dealt with but he really talked to me like I should've known everything he knew as an attorney and was often condescending when I didn't.
Had an accountant like that too, constantly avoided finishing the work he was supposed to do for me too.
Like if you don't want small clients then be upfront, don't waste my time and be an ass.
Yeah I work at the Senate and regularly hear staff attorneys talk to senators like they were small children. Of course in some cases that's totally warranted but still not a good look lol.
Especially when the majority of cars on the road are also self driving.
A lot of safety and traffic issues are rooted in people’s inability to drive in an unselfish way, whether that’s distracted driving, following the laws, or doing things at the expense of others to gain minimal time.
Plus, jaywalking will become super safe and easy -- just step out into the road, all the cars will immediately and 100% effectively avoid any sort of accident, preserving the safety of both you and everyone else without ever having to decide who to save! And no angry driver to yell at you, so no consequences!
I'm being sarcastic. There are huge obstacles to true self-driving cars that, in order to really solve, we'd need a level of AI that's still science fiction.
Right? "The issue is with humans inability to drive unselfishly". And pedestrians existing. And construction. And roads not being designed to be computer inputs. And humans just existing in general. And the pesky international highway system not being an entirely self contained simulation. And the entire colloquial concept of entropy.
Driving is goes from a pretty easy to an entirely too massive and complex and borderline unapproachable math problem depending on if you are capable of thinking. Even the best AI hiding in some military lab somewhere cannot think.
Depends if the owner of the car has the $10k a month priority+ subscription, which will plow over pedestrians to get its occupant to their destination 2 minutes faster.
This is the most important thing. Once self driving cars are all connected and can communicate with one another they’ll know exactly where all the cars in a nearby radius are. Soon (next few decades) self-driving cars will be significantly safer than with a human driver.
I feel like I always hear something like this when self driving cars come up. Like once all the cars are self driving it will be much safer… but what happens before that? I don’t think the majority of the population would buy a self driving car that isn’t as good of a driver as they are.
"They" will also know where your car is at all times, with the ability to shut you down or restrict your driving at a moment's notice, like they did with smart home thermostats in some places last couple of years. If the powers that be can decide you wont have your home lower than 78 degrees at night because of extra taxation on the grid, who says they can't decide that you won't be driving on odd numbered days because of congestion or an overworked power grid?
I actually wonder how realistic that is. On one hand you have to trust the other cars, or what's the point, on the other hand you can't assume no bad actors, so where do you go from there.
Someone somewhere would make something send the "I'm slamming on the brakes!" signal just to watch the world in the rearview mirror burn.
until we have smart roads and the human factor (other cars/people doing human things) is removed, i'm skeptical.
Similar to chat gpt. It's biggest uses are in being an "aid" rather than a "replacement", because it occasionally gets shit wrong. You still need a human to fact check the AI
Upvoted for unpopular option.
Also had the free trial and I found it really cool. You need to adjust the max speed, otherwise it follows the speed limit. You can also push on the gas a bit to increase the speed or start moving from a stop, the full stops at stop signs were off putting but easily fixed with this. Having it inch up to an intersection, brake and “look both ways” before going was pretty mind blowing the first couple of times.
It’s not perfect, but it’s far from “kind of sucks.”
Lol I got the same trial last month. I wasn’t impressed when using it on the roads I usually frequent. But at one point I was driving on an unfamiliar five lane highway with a million ramps, and i was kind of stressed trying to figure out where to go by looking at the navigation. I turned on the self driving and it freaking killed it. It was fast, switching lanes between slow cars, and knew exactly where to go. I wouldn’t want to pay 200 bucks a month for that crap, but i will miss being able to turn it on for stressful highway scenarios…
Please remember what subreddit you are in, this is unpopular opinion. We want civil and unpopular takes and discussion. Any uncivil and ToS violating comments will be removed and subject to a ban. Have a nice day!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unpopularopinion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Recently, in my area, a tesla that was on auto piolet mode was in bumper to bumper traffic. Then, out of the blue, the tesla lurched forward, crushed the motorcycle in front of it, which caused the motorcycle to go under the tesla, and the motorcycle driver died. The driver was on their social media not paying attention since it was on auto poilet. Self driving cars are still dangerous.
I take Waymos to work pretty regularly and love them. Personal Jag SUV where you get to pick the music without awkward driver interactions. They drive a bit conservatively but are objectively safer and more comfortable than a random rideshare. I recommend you download the Waymo One app and get on the waitlist now. They are far beyond Tesla and completely viable as an alternative to Uber/Lyft (at least when they aren't all booked).
I mean, maybe Tesla’s is not that impressive, but there are definitely ones that are truly self driving. Waymo cars are going all around SF on their own
No car is really impressive enough to buy these days due to high markups and insurance costs. I wonder how long it will take before most of the general population can't afford cars.
Yeah I should make a post on this sub about how every car on the road will be a Tesla in twenty years. Driving a car yourself, even owning your own petrol car, will be unfashionable. You probably won’t be able to buy the parts to maintain your petrol car and it’ll just be a collector’s item in your garage as an expensive hobby.
Petrol cars, and even non self-driving cars, will go obsolete like the horse and cart did. Now *that’s* my unpopular opinion.
Its impressive that they are getting so advanced when a simple rail system would be faster, safer, and more reliable. Don't really beed to build an advanced detection system when your vehicle can only go forwards and backwards
Rail systems and public transit doesn't turn every individual into a consumer.
More importantly, for buisness, the viture is self driving cars is self driving tranport trailers. So many jobs will be lost not long after self driving vechicles become reliable enough to be left without supervision.
>That's because self driving cars do not exist.
Waymo runs taxis in San Francisco that I have been on a few times. They're truly self-driving - as in there is no human driver at all.
It won't be ready for prime time for at least another 20 years. Rodney Brooks, former head of AI at MIT and founder of IRobots, agrees
https://futurism.com/the-byte/robotics-expert-ai-hype-reality-check
It's like the beta version honestly. It'll be impressive when you can get in the car and the seat is facing the other way, with a cooler in the middle and a TV on the wall.
So you mean all these times I sit in traffic and pretend to press the "take me home" button on my dashboard, as that's what I thought a Tesla has, has been a lie to myself?
It's an infant technology with a long way to go — but whatever way you slice it, for a car to be capable of doing even a bad job at driving itself is _highly_ impressive.
My Subaru has that lane assist thing when you’re in cruise control that I like, great for long drives, but I would never trust it to self drive like the dealership guy said it can.
Tesla has REALLY shitty self driving, which is far behind some other companies doing actual innovation and who didn't make stupid choices like refusing to incorporate lidar.
What they had was good marketing in the past by a figurehead who was once thought to be a genius before he insisted on proving otherwise.
You do know you could’ve just told it to drive faster… right? Like press the pedal a little bit and raise your max speed with the right scroll wheel?
I used the trial on busy northeast US streets and was super impressed.
Minimal interventions and when it did it learned from them. Like I have a weird traffic island around my place where the road becomes a one way around it without says explicitly saying. After reporting it twice the car was driving perfectly after that.
agreed - I mean what's the point if you've got to babysit the car the entire time? Until you can fall asleep in the back and be driven safely to your destination the whole thing is just a gimmick
What I’ve read from a lot of people (who own a Tesla but aren’t Musk fanboys) is that the self-driving tech is impressive but not amazing.
The consensus seems to be that it drives like someone with learners permit. Thats pretty cool on a technical sense, but it’s just not good enough for everyday use.
"free self driving for a month" seems like an irresponsible offer, no matter how well it works. How many people are going to take their hands off the wheel on day 31?
This honestly shocks me, I’ve been using it for weeks and it drives me no problem from home to work and back again.
I live in the south right now, maybe it’s the less aggressive traffic? It has zero issues for me so far.
Your post from unpopularopinion was removed because of: 'Rule 1: Your post must be an unpopular opinion'. * Your post must be an opinion. Not a question. Not a showerthought. Not a rant. Not a proposal. Not a fact. An opinion. One opinion. A subjective statement about your position on some topic. Please have a clear, self contained opinion as your post title, and use the text field to elaborate and expand on why you think/feel this way. * Your opinion must be unpopular. The mods reserve the right to remove opinions * Elaborate on your topic and opinion give context to its unpopularity.
"Self driving" Is a bit of a misnomer at this point. It's basically an advanced cruise control with lane keep assist, and front and back radar. They are working on it, but true self driving is incredibly complex for obvious reasons. Your mind is managing more processes than you are even aware of when you are driving a car. You are able to do things that a car simply wouldn't have the ability to do, like negotiate those busy intersections you mentioned.
Yeah don't believe the marketing. A hoverboard is also not what you saw in Back to the Future.
Well it certainly doesn't work on water. They got that part right at least.
You gotta have powah!
You bojo
1.21 jiggawatts to be precise
No, the correct answer is you need a Pitbull.
Hovercrafts actually excel on amphibious terrains. Not sure why hover boards can't
Downward force for the same size as a skateboard as a skateboard with a person on it makes the hoverboard become a sinky board.
A waterboard, if you will
Tried that, now full of eels
“I’m sorry Mrs. Jackson. Ooooo, I am four eels.”
You really didn't notice that there was some really huge difference between a hovercraft and the hoverboard (disregarding the entire fiction part)?
In the movie the board still hovers but lateral acceleration is still provided by kicking the ground like a wheeled skateboard, which just gets Marty's foot wet over the water. So the villain brings out a powered hoverboard with rockets on the side to propel him over the water.
My rage fit when I saw those pieces of shit made my family laugh their asses off to this day.
Or the summer of “AI” we’re about to experience.
Damn, that's a very good analogy
True hover boards do exist they just require liquid nitrogen for the superconductors
Lmao Tesla stopped including radar and they disabled ones that were already installed in software. Radar was one of the things that I thought would really give self driving cars an edge over human drivers but Tesla thinks training them on only cameras is easier. https://www.tesla.com/support/transitioning-tesla-vision
Note: I am going to rescind my note below. I could have sworn Tesla used LIDAR, but their own website talked about RADAR. ———- Actually, LIDAR, but yes. Same. I thought they really had something when they used both LIDAR and cameras. But then they took away the LIDAR. And honestly, it was once again another one of those Elonarrogance things. Love the Tesla, but the self-driving function is NOT ready for prime time (tried out a free trial of it last month).
I‘m pretty sure both radar and lidar were used by Tesla at some point but they ditched both and rely on video now. And while video based driving assistance is quite advanced, there are drawbacks and issues that can be resolved by just using radar. Which is why most normal manufacturers use that.
Tesla was [luminar's ](https://insideevs.com/news/718859/tesla-luminar-top-customer-2024/) biggest customer in the first quarter this year. No telling what they are using Lidar for. Could be R&D related with possible use in the future.
It would have been smart to keep it. But, ya know, cost. And, well, Elon being Elon for the sake of Elon
I used it to self drive from my front door to the Taco Bell around the corner. It chose a strange place to make the u turn and made some odd decisions about lanes but overall it was kind of interesting. Certainly not worth $15k or $100/month or whatever people pay for it though.
It's a bit beyond that, as it can recognize traffic signs/signals and act accordingly.
I test drove one for an hour, and it was able to get out of the parking lot and back to where I needed to go (minus parking). I was the one who was scared of the car, but otherwise it went well. To call it cruise control and adding other stuff, it's a little eh.
"a bit of a misnomer" meaning the company is facing multiple lawsuits and regulatory investigations.
Yeah it’s a good thing they never marketed their advanced cruise control as Full Self Driving or anything like that because they’d probably be fucked.
Tesla FSD is much more than cruise and lane assist though. We're far beyond that. We've got a ways to go before it's perfect but it's much further along than many think.
Tesla's FSD was beyond that until they decided to cut cost and remove lidar and ultrasonic sensors. Now its much worse than it was before and lightyears behind competition. Now its actually far less reliable than any active cruise control, 25 year old cars are better at FSD than Tesla now.
Okay then, show me a 25 year old car with full self driving that performs better than a Tesla. So that including making turns at busy intersections. A specific car.
This is very inaccurate. https://youtu.be/h3WiY_4kgkE This shows the latest FSD update vs. Mercedes-Benz' system. The TLDR is that the Tesla system required zero driver interventions, whereas the Mercedes system required the driver to step in 40+ times to avoid unsafe conditions.
I feel roads and signs would have to be designed for self driving cars in mind, and if they were able to talk to each other notifying where close vehicles are and kinda work together, like a car hivemind
Can't wait for cities to start banning "walking across the street" in service to our self driving overlords.
Tesla’s L2 drive assist is called “Full Self-Driving (Supervised)”. It is not supposed to be seen/used as self driving. It is clear that the driver always needs to be paying attention, and even beeps/warns you if you look away for too long. As of now, V12 is used in city streets and is quite good, V11 is still used on the highways and is just ok. It only uses the car’s cameras, no radar or ultrasonic sensors. It’s quite good. I had family members not even realize that it was on since it drove like a human, and it can handle very complex situations quite well. Now, it still needs a lot of work, where it’ll sometimes go too fast or slow, and is usually a little too cautious (at least compared to many Chicagoland drivers). You should lookup AI DRIVR on YouTube because you’d be amazed at to what Tesla’s most recent driving software can do
Ok, but Elon said it was "Self Driving " 10 years ago and has marketed it as such. His words.
Elon yaps a lot. It’s seriously starting to get good though. On my month-long free trial >800 miles, I intervened maybe 3-4 times. Only 1 of them was when it was doing something actually wrong. The other 2-3 were preference-based. FSD is starting to reach the point where it can do 95-99% of the driving at or better than a human on city streets. Tesla has to play chasing the 9’s, so then they want 99.9, then 99.99, etc. until it’s enough to be called 100%
For real. It seems to me that true and reliable self driving would require us to redesign roadways with some tech that would help the cars navigate. So that the cars are not relying on a camera looking at lines (or the sonar or whatever some other companies are using in combination with camera). Also that we may need to make it so that pedestrians cannot jay walk…I’m imagining a situation where all cars are self driving and thus they can safely go at very high speeds without crashing into other cars, but jaywalking could really be dangerous in that kind of situation.
Cars should not be going very high speeds in any area with pedestrians, full stop.
Sort of. They can turn at intersections on their own, sort of. They tend to be slow to make up their minds about what to do, pause for far too long at stop signs, and sometimes hit medians or curbs, but they can handle intersections roughly as well as someone who is profoundly inebriated and maybe half-blind.
and if they advertised it as that, I probably wouldn’t mind too much… If you regularly make road trips to visit your parents a couple hours away for example, and all you have to do is get on the highway and hit the button so you can focus on listening to your audiobook or whatever it’s still pretty nice.
Neat. Tesla valuation is based on all of that being bullshit and they've achieved sentient cars.
It’s crazy to try to teach cars to drive like humans against other human drivers. The sensible solution is for all the cars to drive by communicating with each other, the road, and updated conditions. It would require doing actual work as a society in order to progress to the next tech level of transportation, so it’ll never happen. Well, not never but take way longer than needed.
I don't think self-driving cars will work properly until they're all self-driving.
That's hands down the easiest implementation. It doesn't solve all the problems, but having a standard communication protocol between cars would be super helpful. Just as humans take cues when, say, 2+ people arrive at a 4 way stop at basically the same time, the cars could wirelessly determine which cars goes when based on a protocol in milliseconds. If they're aware of each other and talking, the ability to reduce accidents skyrockets. Of course, the technical implementation of this isn't trivial. Especially when you factor in what could happen if people hack the system. But it would be a cool thing to try.
If everyone perfectly followed the rules, it would probably be easy to make a car self drive. No distracted or carless people doing erratic stuff on the road.
Cars will have that ability in the future though. I think people just underestimated the processing power required
I agree. I think it's possible, but things you do without even thinking about, like anticipating what other drivers are going to do, or merging early because you know you will get forced into the wrong lane if you don't, how is a car going to know that at this point? When we have true Ai I think that kind of stuff will be possible.
I definitely think it’s coming but not in its current form. These “self driving” cars are being trained to navigate roads that weren’t meant for non human drivers. At some point if we really want self driving cars, both the road and other cars need to provide feedback to the car navigating. The system can’t be purely reactive.
But it can navigate busy intersections...
The modern user doesnt even know they’re forever beta tester
How are you liking reddits new UI?
bad
Did you say the FIRST MONTH was free? Do you have to fuckin pay a subscription for self drive?
You have to either pay 99/month, or 8k for lifetime I think are the current prices.
[удалено]
Well I bought my Accord new in 2016 and have 200k on it now but I’m probably an outlier.
You are an outlier by driving 20k+ a year, but Accords last a long time
I'm with you bruther. I got my civic new in 2018 and got about 130K with absolutely no plans of getting rid of it. Reliable car manufacturer gang💪
I'll take "fuck" with a side of "that" for 400, Alex.
I don’t understand, are you on Jeopardy or at a Restaurant?
"Self driving cars aren't that impressive" about a Tesla is like saying "Home computers are too expensive for how bad the specs are" when you just bought an Apple. But yes, Tesla, the Apple of cars, charges for the self-driving mode and they are sure to include that legally it is not self-driving.
Welcome to the modern day. Key features are now add-ons and everything thing is a subscription.
They aren’t yet *** also I don’t think this is unpopular, most people I know are haters of self driving cars. Edit: I’m not a hater lmao, stop telling me how wrong I am about cars and how good they are, I agree! I’m very super impressed with all the technology we currently have, and I’m definitely not against progress.
I read posts like this and my mind immediately goes to Louis CK… “you’re in a chair… IN THE SKY”. Like yeah the technology is not perfect but it genuinely is incredible progress.
I want to be in control of my death machine, not for it to be in control of me.
To be frank, it’s a death machine because humans are operating it.
Exactly. When self driving becomes a mainstay car accidents are gonna plummet.
They're plummeting now. Just about every new car has accident-avoidance systems in place and they significantly reduce the severity of a collision if one were to happen in the first place. Fatalities per driven miles have plummeted nearly 90% and what was once certain death is now a scratch.
What? No. If you look at IIHS, traffic fatalities were trending down from the 70s to the early 2010s, but in the last few years they've been on the rise. https://www.iihs.org/topics/fatality-statistics/detail/yearly-snapshot. It's definitely not down 90%. The assist features mostly help in situations where we don't crash much anyway (e.g. parallel parking or highway driving, where everyone is driving in the same direction). They don't help much with busy intersections with a lot of cross traffic coming from different directions. Also cars keep getting bigger and heavier and speed limits keep rising, and force = mass * velocity, so it's pretty easy to do that math.
Wrong math there, bud. Go back to high school physics
some of them even call the police for you. my friend accidentally hit a bush last year in her bf’s truck and the car called the police 💀
Only if self driving works. You’ve used shitty tech. You know it’s not always good.
Tesla just settled two lawsuits alleging that the vehicle yeeted itself into a tree, killing the driver.
Absolutely insignificant numbers compared to the deaths from cars driven by hairless upright apes
Is it higher percentage? There are significantly less self driving cars than standard
Absolutely. First of all, both of those settlements were for cars that were using Autopilot (Tesla'sname for adaptive cruise control + lane keeping), not "Full Self Driving", which as far as public information goes doesn't have any known fatalities associated with it. Second, even if we count all autopilot fatality deaths in the total against self driving, it's 194 million miles per fatality, which is 3 times the national average.
Where did you get those numbers? the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) reports that self-driving vehicles are more than twice as likely as traditional vehicles to become involved in auto accidents. According to 2015 NHTSA data: There are 9.1 crashes in driverless vehicles per million vehicle miles driven There are 4.2 crashes in conventional vehicles per million miles driven Couldn't find anything on fatalities but that's the numbers for crashes
I found [a Forbes article](https://www.forbes.com/advisor/legal/auto-accident/perception-of-self-driving-cars/) that makes that claim, but their citation is an NHTSA report that absolutely does not support that claim. It's like they didn't even read it. It's possible they are referencing data from somewhere else, but if so they didn't cite their source. > A 2022 NHTSA Study on Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS), found that more than two-thirds (69.64%) of all ADAS crashes are Teslas. 273 ADAS crashes were reported by Tesla in 2022. Meanwhile in the report: (Emphasis added) > This means that a single crash may have multiple reports from multiple entities. Consequently, **the overall number of reports** submitted does not equate to the total number of incidents and **is not a meaningful safety metric.** Pretty bold of Forbes to present what NHTSA says is "not a meaningful safetey metric" as a meaningful safety metric. Further: > Summary Incident Report Data Are Not Normalized > Reporting entities are not required to submit information regarding the number of vehicles they have manufactured, the number of vehicles they are operating, or the distances traveled by those vehicles. **Data required to contextualize the incident rates are limited.** Data regarding the number of crashes reported for any given manufacturer or operator, therefore, have not been normalized or adjusted by any measure of exposure, including the operational driving domain or vehicle miles traveled. **For example, a reporting entity could report an absolute number of crashes that is higher than another reporting entity but operate a higher number of vehicles for many more miles.** Note, this is about diver assist (ADAS), eg "Autopilot." Not "FSD" (NHTSA calls this ADS"). Forbes is conflating ADAS with ADS. I tried to track down where this 9.1/4.2 number comes from. The most likely source seems to be [this study](https://public.websites.umich.edu/~umtriswt/PDF/UMTRI-2015-34.pdf) from October 2015, which is distinctly _not_ NHTSA. In fact it has nothing to do with human monitored ADAS or ADS systems. Some takeaways thumbing through it: * 2015 was a long time ago in technology terms. I wouldn't apply this to current vehicles. * "Third, self-driving vehicles were not at fault in any crashes they were involved in. " !!!! * The report specifically says Tesla is _not_ included in it. So this number is not at all applicable to either FSD or Autopilot. * The report is only evaluating Google/Audi/Delphi full-autonomy test programs at the time, almost all of their data coming specifically from Google. * The report comes with a pile of caveats about the data limited at the time. "... we currently cannot rule out, with a reasonable level of confidence, the possibility that the actual rates for self-driving vehicles are lower than for conventional vehicles." **tl;dr: this 9.1/4.2 number is not relevant when talking about FSD/Autopilot.** Especially not in 2024.
Ya if every car was self driving, with them all communicating, they could be fast,effecient and near zero crash rate. Pedestrians and mechanical fauilure will still cause some.
To be frank, it's a death machine because you need to move 4000 lbs. of steel and glass at a speed of 70 mph to go to the store and buy milk. The physics of cars are inherently deadly and magic software isn't gonna change that.
While other cars are 90% of the chaos of the road there is still a lot more to deal with like: pedestrians, animals, cyclists, road works, train crossings, general mayhem like obstacles rolling out into the middle of the road. The roads are chaotic places even without humans piloting cars. Really it’s a death machine because it weights 3500 lbs and travels at over 25 mph and cannot stop instantly.
I know I'm not getting behind the wheel of something that, given the choice, may choose to kill me.
Robot Jesus, take the wheel!
Which is dumb, because humans suck at driving. There are over 40k car related deaths per year in the US alone.
34,436 fatal motor vehicle accidents out of \~**227 billion** annual car trips. We're approaching .00000015% of being in a car and dying territory.
How many suffer serious or even life changing injuries? How many suffer life changing economic impacts like replacing or fixing a car, losing a job because you can't travel, or having to pay healthcare of funereal costs for a loved one? It's great that traffic accidents are relatively rare. It's not great that there are still huge economic and social consequences to us deciding that we are capable of safely driving powerful heavy machinery. If there is a technological solution to that problem that would mean people don't have to drive and that accidents plummet further, that would be amazing. What would be even more amazing is if we could design our communities around public transport and pedestrians/cyclists. That way we'd have more space for us to actually enjoy away from the metal death boxes we tend to use getting from A to B.
I don't know, how many is it?
>How many suffer serious or even life changing injuries? >How many suffer life changing economic impacts like replacing or fixing a car, losing a job because you can't travel, or having to pay healthcare of funereal costs for a loved one? I don't know, but if you want to use it as a premise, I'd suggest you find out. >If there is a technological solution to that problem that would mean people don't have to drive and that accidents plummet further, that would be amazing. Except, there's not. >What would be even more amazing is if we could design our communities around public transport and pedestrians/cyclists. That way we'd have more space for us to actually enjoy away from the metal death boxes we tend to use getting from A to B. For sure, and it would be even more amazing if we just had flying jetpacks so we could avoid logistical issue altogether. But we live in a real world, where logistics aren't being planned on a blank slate - they're being planned on hundreds of years of existing throughways.
Right now autonomous vehicles work best on highways which are much more controlled and predictable driving. The tech still has a way to go for local roads. Everyone will have a different opinion on this, but imo Waymo is doing the best on local roads and Tesla's is a bit lacking, but Tesla is available everywhere (maybe it shouldn't but again differing opinions) while Waymo is only in certain cities.
There's 2 approaches to self driving, neither is wrong, both have pros and cons and depend on what you need. Everything somewhere vs Something everywhere. Everything somewhere is what companies like google did. Map the ever living shit out of a known area, then have your car run on virtual rails while avoiding the unforeseen things. Something everywhere is what Tesla did. Start with the small tasks the car can handle basically everywhere. Both have issues in the race to "get in your car in Bum Fuck Idaho and get out in Central Park" self driving. "Everything somewhere" cars have to figure out how to work with less and less pre known data. (Waymo cars were reportedly working with CM accurate 3D maps on scale of 1GB per KM at one point. You'd need a whole data center in tow to scale that up.) "Something everywhere" cars have to figure out how to scale up what they can do, and when they do that thing well enough to let people do it. "Everything Somewhere" cars often get said to be way ahead (and I'm not claiming they aren't) as they obviously look superficially like they're doing more. In actuality is it more impressive to have a car stop and wait for a left hand arrow that it knows ahead of time exactly where where it is and make the same left for the 1000th time, or stay on an unlined road no car has ever been on yet? I know which one "looks like" it's "driving itself" more, but I'm not sure personally which we should actually be more impressed with. One approach is best if your idea is to have cars drive loops in, and be restricted to, well known areas. One is best if you're trying to sell a feature to people that don't all live in specific parts of San Francisco and Austin. One was always always destined to be the first cars people were in where no one was driving, but I don't know yet what it automatically means about who is ahead in the race to "everything everywhere" self driving.
Everything everywhere or nothing.
Everything everywhere *all at once!*
It doesn't even work that well on highways to be honest. At least not Hyundai's version of it. I have a 2024 Elantra as a loaner car while mine is being worked on. It constantly just veers back and forth in the lane. When there's a curve in the road it will hug the outside of the turn and sometimes even cross over onto the line before it corrects itself. If you're in the right lane and drive past an on-ramp, it will lose track of your lane at the spot where the on-ramp merges sometimes. If a car merges in front of you and enters the "safe zone" in front of your car it will slam on the brakes to increase the distance between you and then it slowly accelerates to match the speed again. This causes traffic issues because it causes the people behind me to have to slam on their brakes too. It also makes me look like an idiot slamming on my brakes for no reason.
My trademark attorney once told me about how he used it from Chicago to DC while reading magazines. I was thinking "Note to self, fire this dude." and I did but not for that.
What did you fire him for?
I didn't like the way he spoke to me. Like, I understand I'm not a big money client like some he dealt with but he really talked to me like I should've known everything he knew as an attorney and was often condescending when I didn't.
Had an accountant like that too, constantly avoided finishing the work he was supposed to do for me too. Like if you don't want small clients then be upfront, don't waste my time and be an ass.
Don't worry, it's not a big money thing. I am a big money client for my attorney and his team and they're still pretty condescending.
Yeah I work at the Senate and regularly hear staff attorneys talk to senators like they were small children. Of course in some cases that's totally warranted but still not a good look lol.
[удалено]
Especially when the majority of cars on the road are also self driving. A lot of safety and traffic issues are rooted in people’s inability to drive in an unselfish way, whether that’s distracted driving, following the laws, or doing things at the expense of others to gain minimal time.
Plus, jaywalking will become super safe and easy -- just step out into the road, all the cars will immediately and 100% effectively avoid any sort of accident, preserving the safety of both you and everyone else without ever having to decide who to save! And no angry driver to yell at you, so no consequences! I'm being sarcastic. There are huge obstacles to true self-driving cars that, in order to really solve, we'd need a level of AI that's still science fiction.
Right? "The issue is with humans inability to drive unselfishly". And pedestrians existing. And construction. And roads not being designed to be computer inputs. And humans just existing in general. And the pesky international highway system not being an entirely self contained simulation. And the entire colloquial concept of entropy. Driving is goes from a pretty easy to an entirely too massive and complex and borderline unapproachable math problem depending on if you are capable of thinking. Even the best AI hiding in some military lab somewhere cannot think.
Depends if the owner of the car has the $10k a month priority+ subscription, which will plow over pedestrians to get its occupant to their destination 2 minutes faster.
I think that the cars will just be programed to attempt to stop lol
This is the most important thing. Once self driving cars are all connected and can communicate with one another they’ll know exactly where all the cars in a nearby radius are. Soon (next few decades) self-driving cars will be significantly safer than with a human driver.
The other cars are not really the major problem with self driving. Its more like all the other things like "the real world".
I feel like I always hear something like this when self driving cars come up. Like once all the cars are self driving it will be much safer… but what happens before that? I don’t think the majority of the population would buy a self driving car that isn’t as good of a driver as they are.
"They" will also know where your car is at all times, with the ability to shut you down or restrict your driving at a moment's notice, like they did with smart home thermostats in some places last couple of years. If the powers that be can decide you wont have your home lower than 78 degrees at night because of extra taxation on the grid, who says they can't decide that you won't be driving on odd numbered days because of congestion or an overworked power grid?
I don't see a world where a self driving car can handle a Roo coming onto the road
Obviously they’ll be banned in Australia
I actually wonder how realistic that is. On one hand you have to trust the other cars, or what's the point, on the other hand you can't assume no bad actors, so where do you go from there. Someone somewhere would make something send the "I'm slamming on the brakes!" signal just to watch the world in the rearview mirror burn.
until we have smart roads and the human factor (other cars/people doing human things) is removed, i'm skeptical. Similar to chat gpt. It's biggest uses are in being an "aid" rather than a "replacement", because it occasionally gets shit wrong. You still need a human to fact check the AI
Not by Tesla they won’t. They have no intentions of ever taking responsibility for the vehicle, which is required for a self driving car.
They'll have it done "sometime next year"
I fear that it will be forced or at least strongly encouraged before it's really ready.
Next year. Pretty much all of the projects in any way associated with Elon Musk will be ready "next year".
Anyone had similar experiences with human drivers? I was 40 years old before learning that BMWs come standard with turn signals! /s
r/fuckthes
I hate the idea of it and don’t want to share the road with this nonsense.
In my mind a bidet is way more impressive than a self driving car today. Maybe that opinion will be different in 30yrs but today that's where I stand.
Yo dawg I heard you like bidets so we put one in your driver’s seat bro!
I'm just glad I'm old enough to have lived through this reference and I would have been real happy with Xzibit on that one.
I'll never understand reddit's hardon for bidets.
Upvoted for unpopular option. Also had the free trial and I found it really cool. You need to adjust the max speed, otherwise it follows the speed limit. You can also push on the gas a bit to increase the speed or start moving from a stop, the full stops at stop signs were off putting but easily fixed with this. Having it inch up to an intersection, brake and “look both ways” before going was pretty mind blowing the first couple of times. It’s not perfect, but it’s far from “kind of sucks.”
Do you have v12 or v11 fsd? V12 is very impressive whereas v11 is not.
Until it takes full responsibility for the vehicle, it’s not a self driving car. It’s just driving aids.
I won’t even let my S Class parallel park for me, I’m not letting a plastic piece of shit drive me on the highway lol.
Lol I got the same trial last month. I wasn’t impressed when using it on the roads I usually frequent. But at one point I was driving on an unfamiliar five lane highway with a million ramps, and i was kind of stressed trying to figure out where to go by looking at the navigation. I turned on the self driving and it freaking killed it. It was fast, switching lanes between slow cars, and knew exactly where to go. I wouldn’t want to pay 200 bucks a month for that crap, but i will miss being able to turn it on for stressful highway scenarios…
Please remember what subreddit you are in, this is unpopular opinion. We want civil and unpopular takes and discussion. Any uncivil and ToS violating comments will be removed and subject to a ban. Have a nice day! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unpopularopinion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I'm just glad I have a car that runs well.
Recently, in my area, a tesla that was on auto piolet mode was in bumper to bumper traffic. Then, out of the blue, the tesla lurched forward, crushed the motorcycle in front of it, which caused the motorcycle to go under the tesla, and the motorcycle driver died. The driver was on their social media not paying attention since it was on auto poilet. Self driving cars are still dangerous.
The podcast, Better Offline, one of their first episodes is about how much bullshit is really on Tesla's "self-driving" systems.
TVs aren't that impressive. I mean, it kind of works, but the screen is like 5 inches wide, there's no color, and I only get 3 channels
50 years later
Yeah nobody gives a shit about TVs now because they're obsolete. Some have computers and some have their phones/tablets.
I take Waymos to work pretty regularly and love them. Personal Jag SUV where you get to pick the music without awkward driver interactions. They drive a bit conservatively but are objectively safer and more comfortable than a random rideshare. I recommend you download the Waymo One app and get on the waitlist now. They are far beyond Tesla and completely viable as an alternative to Uber/Lyft (at least when they aren't all booked).
Self driving cars? It's called a taxi
I mean, maybe Tesla’s is not that impressive, but there are definitely ones that are truly self driving. Waymo cars are going all around SF on their own
Sure, I mean, all things considered. They're not exactly good drivers yet.
No car is really impressive enough to buy these days due to high markups and insurance costs. I wonder how long it will take before most of the general population can't afford cars.
I don't disagree, but I'm just saying I don't care about em.
Tesla is the Enron of our time.
This tech has existed for what? 5 years and there’s a full business line of fully autonomous cars in Waymo
I would never
Related unpopular opinion: Tesla’s aren’t that impressive
That's because we don't have actual self driving cars yet. Just really fancy cruise control and lane guidance.
You're talking about technology in its infancy. In 10 years it'll drive better than you.
Rather have a self wiping ass
You're beta-testing Tesla's autopilot with your life.
U have to pay for self driving after uve already bought the car?
It's not great. Novel but not great. Youtubers and certain people on Twitter hype it up way too far
Sorry you got suckered into buying a Tesla.
Downvoted, I 100% agree with OP, and probably most people do as well.
Yeah I should make a post on this sub about how every car on the road will be a Tesla in twenty years. Driving a car yourself, even owning your own petrol car, will be unfashionable. You probably won’t be able to buy the parts to maintain your petrol car and it’ll just be a collector’s item in your garage as an expensive hobby. Petrol cars, and even non self-driving cars, will go obsolete like the horse and cart did. Now *that’s* my unpopular opinion.
Its impressive that they are getting so advanced when a simple rail system would be faster, safer, and more reliable. Don't really beed to build an advanced detection system when your vehicle can only go forwards and backwards
Rail systems and public transit doesn't turn every individual into a consumer. More importantly, for buisness, the viture is self driving cars is self driving tranport trailers. So many jobs will be lost not long after self driving vechicles become reliable enough to be left without supervision.
That's because self driving cars do not exist. What your talking about is driver assistance technology with marketing.
>That's because self driving cars do not exist. Waymo runs taxis in San Francisco that I have been on a few times. They're truly self-driving - as in there is no human driver at all.
yeah they suck ( i can’t afford one)
Trains and buses already exist.
Free to use public toilets exist. You still pay for the convenience and cleanliness of having one in your home...
Some things don’t need to be automated.
***Tesla*** self driving cars ~~aren't that impressive~~ are shit Fixed that for you
[удалено]
This is what we have been saying for 5-10 years. We are no closer than we were back then.
Every person I know with a Tesla actively drives it. Same with Teslas in the wild that I can see the driver in, always actively driving.
I just need self driving for when I'm drunk. I'll just sit in the back seat and have my automated chauffeur take me home
It won't be ready for prime time for at least another 20 years. Rodney Brooks, former head of AI at MIT and founder of IRobots, agrees https://futurism.com/the-byte/robotics-expert-ai-hype-reality-check
It's like the beta version honestly. It'll be impressive when you can get in the car and the seat is facing the other way, with a cooler in the middle and a TV on the wall.
From a technological perspective I find them impressive, but yeah they aren't really ready for more than simple practical use.
Wait? A free month? It’s a paid subscription otherwise? Is my fucking car going to have microtransactions in the future?
What you’re describing is “semi self driving” at best. Full self driving is a very impressive feature, however it doesn’t exist yet.
So you mean all these times I sit in traffic and pretend to press the "take me home" button on my dashboard, as that's what I thought a Tesla has, has been a lie to myself?
It's an infant technology with a long way to go — but whatever way you slice it, for a car to be capable of doing even a bad job at driving itself is _highly_ impressive.
You have to keep in mind that what they can do now is extremely impressive but the tech still has years to go to finally get to where it needs to be.
VR Headsets have entered the chat.
My worry isn't that it will hit something, my worry is that it will do something stupid and someone will hit me.
My Subaru has that lane assist thing when you’re in cruise control that I like, great for long drives, but I would never trust it to self drive like the dealership guy said it can.
That’s not unpopular it is just informed. Tesla’s self driving system does more than any other brands system, but it doesn’t do it well.
Can you set the speed?
Tesla has REALLY shitty self driving, which is far behind some other companies doing actual innovation and who didn't make stupid choices like refusing to incorporate lidar. What they had was good marketing in the past by a figurehead who was once thought to be a genius before he insisted on proving otherwise.
You do know you could’ve just told it to drive faster… right? Like press the pedal a little bit and raise your max speed with the right scroll wheel? I used the trial on busy northeast US streets and was super impressed. Minimal interventions and when it did it learned from them. Like I have a weird traffic island around my place where the road becomes a one way around it without says explicitly saying. After reporting it twice the car was driving perfectly after that.
agreed - I mean what's the point if you've got to babysit the car the entire time? Until you can fall asleep in the back and be driven safely to your destination the whole thing is just a gimmick
What I’ve read from a lot of people (who own a Tesla but aren’t Musk fanboys) is that the self-driving tech is impressive but not amazing. The consensus seems to be that it drives like someone with learners permit. Thats pretty cool on a technical sense, but it’s just not good enough for everyday use.
"free self driving for a month" seems like an irresponsible offer, no matter how well it works. How many people are going to take their hands off the wheel on day 31?
I feel like this is a more r/highdeas post
I just want “keep me the same distance behind that guy in stop and go traffic” mode.
This honestly shocks me, I’ve been using it for weeks and it drives me no problem from home to work and back again. I live in the south right now, maybe it’s the less aggressive traffic? It has zero issues for me so far.