Mark Rober just set up one of the most interesting self-driving tests of 2025, and he did it by imitating Looney Tunes. The former NASA engineer and current YouTube mad scientist recreated the classic gag where Wile E. Coyote paints a tunnel onto a wall to fool the Road Runner.

Only this time, the test subject wasn’t a cartoon bird… it was a self-driving Tesla Model Y.

The result? A full-speed, 40 MPH impact straight into the wall. Watch the video and tell us what you think!

  • RambaZamba@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    50
    ·
    4 days ago

    Things that happen when you rely exclusively on optical sensors, i.e. cameras. But that’s just cheaper, more money for Nazi Elon.

      • Tzig@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        3 days ago

        The hardware is, which is the important part at scale: even if the code is 10x more expensive when you sell millions of the car it becomes pennies/car

  • Magnus@lemmy.brandyapple.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    67
    ·
    4 days ago

    I remember Elon foolishly saying his cars don’t need radar or lidar. Even software-disabling radar in cars that already had the hardware.

    • gmtom@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      4 days ago

      Not even just his cars, he thinks the MILITARY, doesn’t need radar and can just use cameras to spot and track stealth fighters.

      He’s a fucking lunatic.

      • towerful@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        4 days ago

        As an augmentation, the ability to spot and track objects visually would be amazing.
        But then planes just have to fly above 10k ft, and pretty much guaranteed cloud cover.

    • KayLeadfoot@fedia.ioOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      33
      ·
      4 days ago

      It’s dirt cheap, too. If this was a cost-cutting measure, it was a thoroughly idiotic one. Which feels like the mark… of a certain someone I can think of

  • Polderviking@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    3 days ago

    I remember elon saying something along the lines of his camera system being just as good and they thusly don’t need to employ things like LIDAR.

    • bier@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      ·
      4 days ago

      In short because Elon (wrongly) believes you only need cameras, he made the claim people also drive with just 2 eyes.

      The thing is, we recognize a truck with stickers of a stopsign, while AI vision gets confused.

      Waymo (Googles self driving side hussle) was build on lidar and other sensors and has been using robot taxis for many years now in geofenced specific areas.

      • Yoga@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        4 days ago

        The thing is, we recognize a truck with stickers of a stopsign, while AI vision gets confused.

        Lmao would it be illegal to put a stop sign on the back of your car?

        • CmdrShepard42@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          4 days ago

          I was thinking the same thing. What would happen if you popped one out of the back of your car while driving in front of a self driving car on the freeway?

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

          Some school buses have a sticker / sign on the back that says “I stop for railroad crossings” and can have a stop sign on said sticker.

      • ferret@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        The funny thing is, apparently our depth perception, a product of our two eyes, is a feature beyond the reach of tesla. And it would have allowed to to complete this test.

  • EaterOfLentils@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    ·
    4 days ago

    Apparently they keep getting tickets in China because they didn’t bother to adjust the settings to accommodate Chinese roads and traffic laws. Result is Tesla is getting utterly crushed by BYD in their one major market that doesn’t care about Elon’s antics.

    • accideath@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      4 days ago

      Huh, now I’m mildly interested in the differences in traffic laws in China vs US vs Europe that lead to Teslas getting more tickets in China than elsewhere.

      • elephantium@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        4 days ago

        I found this article. My takeaways were:

        1. No driving in bus lanes during certain times of day.
        2. No using the shoulder as a turn lane.
        3. No using a bike lane as a turn lane.
            • conditional_soup@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              edit-2
              4 days ago

              I think their regs, while seemingly very basic rules of the road, are based because I live in the US and we have bike lanes here that just whole ass turn into turn lanes with almost no warning. I wish we could get basic decency for everyone on the road, too.

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

                Ah, gotcha, yeah, that makes sense.

                My own city has pretty good bike lane coverage, but it’s similar – cars have to cross over the bike lane to get into the turn lane.

                Basic decency…gah. Yeah, I wish. :(

  • Ghyste@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    55
    ·
    5 days ago

    I seem to recall that fElon prevented the self driving team from utilizing LIDAR for any part of the system, instead demanding that everything run off of optical input. Does anyone else remember the same?

    • scarabic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      Yes. He took too much inspiration from Stanford University’s “Stanley” winning the DARPA Grand Challenge in 2005. This was an early completion to build viable autonomous vehicles. Most of them looked like tanks covered in radar dishes but Stanford wound up taking home the gold with just an SUV with cameras on it.

      It was an impressive achievement in computer vision, and the LiDAR-encrusted vehicles wound up looking like over-complex dinosaurs. There’s a great documentary about it narrated by John Lithgow (who, throughout it, pronounces the word robot as “ro-butt”). Elon watched it, made up his mind, and like a moron, hasn’t changed it in 20 years. I’m almost Musk’s age so I know how the years speed up as we go on. He probably thinks about the Stanford win as something that happened relatively recently. Especially with his mind on - ahem - other things, he’s not keeping up with recent developments out in the real world.

      Rober just made Musk look like the absolute tool he is. And I’m a little worried that we may see people out there staging real world versions of this somehow with actual dangerous obstacles, not a cartoonish foam wall.

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

        I did low-key get the squiggles before writing the article. I thought, from an ethical hacking disclosure-type perspective, that this info might cause folks to… well, ya know, paint tunnels on walls.

        Then I looked, the cat was already out of the bag, the video had something like 5 million views on it in the 4 hours it took me to draft the article. So I shared it, but I definitely did have that thought cross my mind. I am also a little worried on that score.

    • NιƙƙιDιɱҽʂ@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      edit-2
      5 days ago

      What’s cool is that Teslas used to have radar sensors, at least, but Elon removed them from production to save money. Even if you have a car from back then, the software no longer uses them and they’ll just physically unplug them the next time you have the car serviced, as it’s just a drain on the battery at this point 🙃

        • fulg@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          4 days ago

          I didn’t realize EyeSight had different versions, on the Solterra it looks like it is indeed LIDAR.

          My Crosstrek has the older dual camera setup for depth perception, it would not be fooled by a picture of a road on a wall… I’m surprised the Teslas are.

    • Arbiter@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      5 days ago

      Iirc they were using a combination of lidar and radar, but Elmo wanted to cut costs.

      • cyd@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        5 days ago

        Funny thing is, the price of lidar is dropping like a stone; they are projected to be sub-$200 per unit soon. The technical consensus seems to be settling in on 2 or 3 lidars per car plus optical sensors, and Chinese EV brands are starting to provide self driving in baseline models, with lidars as part of the standard package.

      • ieatpwns@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 days ago

        Did he want to cut costs or did he want a network of cameras at his control all over the world?

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

      Yes, I recall at the time experts saying it was a terrible mistake and Elon saying Machine learning will bridge the gap.

      The real reason was to increase margins.

    • Ulrich@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 days ago

      Tesla never had LIDAR. That’s the little spinny thing you see on Waymo cars. They had RADAR, and yes it was removed in 2021 due to supply shortages and just…never reinstalled.

      • JcbAzPx@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 days ago

        It was removed due to supply chain, but Musk did seem to legitimately think optical only was better.

    • Kokesh@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      5 days ago

      Came here to actually write this. Everyone remembers that. He made Tesler the hated shit it is today.

      • Ghyste@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 days ago

        As a space nut I seriously hope that he never gets a chance to do anything similar with SpaceX. Thankfully he’s mostly been kept away from important things thus far.

        Don’t get me wrong, I know SpaceX’s closet is overflowing with skeletons. But since Congress has been so kind as to continuously cut NASA’s budget for the last few decades, I have to rely on SpaceX and other private companies to keep our space endeavors going.

        • Kokesh@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 days ago

          I’m (was) huge SpaceX nerd, but last year or so I’m less and less. He always was dumb narcissist asshole, but now I can’t take it anymore. Also the idea that we’ve fucked up this planet and need to move somewhere else, by doing thousands of launches finishing this planet always made me sick. If someone would take him out, I probably would come back to liking the company.

    • paraphrand@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      5 days ago

      I remember there being claims from him or his team about lidar being a dead end that would not scale as well as computer vision.

      • IphtashuFitz@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        5 days ago

        I believe he claimed that since humans use their vision to drive that computer vision was more than enough.

        I don’t know about you, but I also rely on sounds & feel when I drive. I also know that the human eye has evolved to detect motion, filter out extraneous information, and send just the important bits to the brain so that it doesn’t get overloaded with everything the eye sees. Computer vision is the exact opposite from that, having to process every bit of every image the camera sees.

        • Terrasque@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          4 days ago

          since humans use their vision to drive that computer vision was more than enough

          Surprised he didn’t swap out the wheels with legs while he was at it

        • JimVanDeventer@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 days ago

          I don’t know about you, but I also rely on sounds & feel when I drive.

          Of course. When I feel myself driving into a wall, I stop immediately.

          • brsrklf@jlai.lu
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 days ago

            You must connect with the road, every km or so stop and hug the asphalt.

  • Yoga@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    4 days ago

    Insurance fraud is going to bankrupt Tesla robotaxis faster than an incompetent CEO ever could.

    There will be too many ways to defeat the cameras and not having LiDAR unlike the rest of the industry may prove to be found to be a failure of duty of care.

  • Naevermix@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 days ago

    Make Elon test ride the first Tesla robotaxi and there’s a chance the funniest thing of all time will happen.

  • kameecoding@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    30
    ·
    4 days ago

    This is why it’s fucking stupid Tesla removed Lidar sensors and relies on cameras only.

    But also who would want a tesla, fuck em

    • AreaKode@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      4 days ago

      I was horrified when I learned that the autopilot relies entirely on cameras. Nope, nope, nope.

      • aesthelete@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        edit-2
        4 days ago

        Leon said other sensors were unnecessary because human driving is all done through the sense of sight…proving that he has no idea how humans work either (despite purportedly being a human).

    • bitchkat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      4 days ago

      They never had lidarr. They used to have radar and uss but they decided “vision” was good enough. This conveniently occurred when they had supply chain issues during covid.

    • Mic_Check_One_Two@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 days ago

      They also removed radar, which is what allowed them to make all of those “it saw something three vehicles ahead and braked to avoid a pileup that hadn’t even started yet” videos. Removing radar was the single most impactful change Tesla made in regards to FSD, and it’s all because Musk basically decided “people drive fine with just their eyes, so cars should too.”

  • Jeffool @lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    4 days ago

    This would be hilarious if it weren’t for shitty cars causing deaths.

    That said, I always wondered why we don’t find a system like RFID that could penetrate concrete and asphalt, and plant passive receivers in roads? We re-pave roads so damn often in this country (the U.S.) it seems like we could’ve knocked it out in the past couple of decades, minus our most rural areas.

    I know RFID itself isn’t strong enough, but I imagine that would’ve been an easier problem than figuring our complete self driving. Not to mention making GPS a secondary system for U.S. road travel in most cases.

    Maybe it’s just a dumb shower thought?

      • towerful@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        4 days ago

        Echolocation is specifically audio based.
        Lidar is a similar technique, but much more accurate and precise.
        Project a grid of laser beam, read when the laser bounces back, you know the distance to that part of the grid.

      • Jeffool @lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        4 days ago

        I don’t know the value of echolocation in this case, as I’m generally ignorant here, but it’s straight wild to me that they went purely on visuals.

        • dan@upvote.au
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          edit-2
          4 days ago

          Tesla used to also have radar (and maybe lidar?) but they removed it as a cost cutting measure. If you ever see older videos of a Tesla slowing down or stopping due to a potential collision a few cars ahead, that’s from before they switched to only relying on cameras. The collision avoidance was significantly better back then.

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

      What you’re describing is just a higher level of autonomy. If I remember correctly, you’re describing level 3 whereas Tesla’s are level 2. I believe VW made a level 3 proof of concept mini bus back around 2020 but the legislation doesn’t allow for the sensors in the road yet because… Oh that’s right. A level 2 car manufacturer owns like half the world right now which means nobody is allowed to innovate or do better than him. Huh, that sucks.

  • FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    4 days ago

    I am very glad that Elon and Trump have overreached and now Tesla is suffering. I hope Starlink is the next domino to fall.

      • Gonzako@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        5 days ago

        still, this should be something the car ought to take into account. What if there’s a glass in the way?

            • snooggums@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              4 days ago

              Glass is far more likely to cause injuries to the driver or the people around the set, just from being heavier material than styrofoam.

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

          Yes, I think a human driver who isn’t half asleep would notice that something is weird, and would at least slow down.

      • bstix@feddit.dk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 days ago

        A camera will show it as being more convincing than it is. It would be way more obvious in real life when seen with two eyes. These kinds of murals are only convincing from one specific point.

        • ParadoxSeahorse@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 days ago

          …and clearly this photo wasn’t the point. In fact, it looks like a straight road from one of the camera angles he chooses later, not afaict from the pov of the car

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

          That’s true, but it’s still way more understandable that a car without lidar would be fooled by it. And there is no way you would ever come into such a situation, whereas the image in the thumbnail, could actually happen. That’s why it’s so misleading, can people not see that?
          I absolutely hate Elon Musk and support boycott of Tesla and Starlink, but this is a bit too misleading even with that in mind.

      • Mr_Dr_Oink@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        5 days ago

        As much as i want to hate on tesla, seeing this, it hardly seems like a fair test.

        From the perspective of the car, it’s almost perfectly lined up with the background. it’s a very realistic painting, and any AI that is trained on image data would obviously struggle with this. AI doesn’t have that human component that allows us to infer information based on context. We can see the boarders and know that they dont fit. They shouldn’t be there, so even if the painting is perfectly lines up and looks photo realistic, we can know something is up because its got edges and a frame holding it up.

        This test, in the context of the title of this article, relies on a fairly dumb pretense that:

        1. Computers think like humans
        2. This is a realistic situation that a human driver would find themselves in (or that realistic paintings of very specific roads exist in nature)
        3. There is no chance this could be trained out of them. (If it mattered enough to do so)

        This doesnt just affect teslas. This affects any car that uses AI assistance for driving.

        Having said all that… fuck elon musk and fuck his stupid cars.

        • teuniac_@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          5 days ago

          This doesnt just affect teslas. This affects any car that uses AI assistance for driving.

          Except for, you know… cars that don’t solely rely on optical input and have LiDAR for example

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

            Fair point. But it doesn’t address the other things i said, really.

            But i suppose,based on already getting downvoted, that I’ve got a bad take, either that or people who are downvoting me dont understand i can hate tesla and elon, think their cars are shit and still see that tests like this can be nuanced. The attitude that paints with a broad brush is the type of attitude that got trump elected…

            • Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              5 days ago

              No, it’s just a bad take. Every other manufacturer of self driving vehicles (even partial self driving, like automatic braking) uses LiDAR because it solves a whole host of problems like this. Only Tesla doesn’t, because Elon thinks he’s a big brain genius. There have been plenty of real world accidents with less cartoonish circumstances involving Teslas that also would have been avoided if they just had LiDAR sensors. Mark just chose an especially flashy way to illustrate the problem. Sometimes flashy is the best way to get a point across.

            • Reyali@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              4 days ago

              I agree the wall is convincing and that it’s not surprising that the Tesla didn’t detect it, but I think where your comment rubs the wrong way is that you seem to be letting Tesla off the hook for making a choice to use the wrong technology.

              I think you and the article/video agree on the point that any car based only on images will struggle with this but the conclusion you drew is that it’s an unfair test while the conclusion should be that NO car should rely only on images.

              Is this situation likely to happen in the real world? No. But that doesn’t make the test unfair to Tesla. This was an intentional choice they made and it’s absolutely fair to call them on dangers of that choice.

              • Mr_Dr_Oink@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                4 days ago

                That’s fair.

                I didn’t intend to give tesla a pass. I hoped that qualifying what i said with a “fuck tesla and fuck elon” would show that.

                But i didn’t think about it that way.

                In my defense my point was more about saying “what did you expect” the car to do in a test designed to show how a system that is not designed to perform a specific function cant perform that specific function.

                We know that self driving is bullshit, especially the tesla brand of it. So what is Mark’s test and video really doing?

                But on reflection, i guess there are still a lot of people out there that dont know this stuff, so at the very least, a popular channel like his will go a longway to raising awareness of this sort of flaw.

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

              based on already getting downvoted

              In this case, yes, but in general, downvotes just mean your take is unpopular. The downvotes could be from people who don’t like Tesla and see any defense of Tesla as worthy of downvotes.

              So good on you for making the point that you believe in. It’s good to try to understand why something you wrote was downvoted instead of just knee-jerk assuming that it’s because it’s a “bad take.”

        • KayLeadfoot@fedia.ioOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 days ago

          I am fairly dumb. Like, I am both dumb and I am fair-handed.

          But, I am not pretentious!

          So, let’s talk about your points and the title. You said I had fairly dumb pretenses, let’s talk through those.

          1. The title of the article… there is no obvious reason to think that I think computers think like humans, certainly not from that headline. Why do you think that?
          2. There are absolutely realistic situations exactly like this, not a pretense. Don’t think Loony Tunes. Think 18 wheeler with a realistic photo of a highway depicted on the side, or a billboard with the same. The academic article where 3 PhD holding engineering types discuss the issue at length, which is linked in my article. This is accepted by peer-reviewed science and has been for years.
          3. Yes, I agree. That’s not a pretense, that’s just… a factually correct observation. You can’t train an AI to avoid optical illusions if its only sensor input is optical. That’s why the Tesla choice to skip LiDAR and remove radar is a terminal case of the stupids. They’ve invested in a dead-end sensor suite, as evidenced by their earning the title of Most Lethal Car Brand on the Road.

          This does just impact Teslas, because they do not use LiDAR. To my knowledge, they are the only popular ADAS in the American market that would be fooled by a test like this.

          Near as I can tell, you’re basically wrong point by point here.

          • Mr_Dr_Oink@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            4 days ago

            Excuse me.

            1. Did you write the article? I genuinely wasn’t aiming my comment at you. It was merely commentary on the context that is inferred by the title. I just watched a clip of the car hitting the board. I didn’t read the article, so i specified that i was referring to the article title. Not the author, not the article itself. Because it’s the title that i was commenting on.

            2. That wasn’t an 18 wheeler, it was a ground level board with a photorealistic picture that matched the background it was set up against. It wasnt a mural on a wall, or some other illusion with completely different properties. So no, i think this extremely specific set up for this test is unrealistic and is not comparable to actual scientific research, which i dont dispute. I dont dispute the fact that the lack of LiDAR is why teslas have this issue and that an autonomous driving system with only one type of sensor is a bad one. Again. I said i hate elon and tesla. Always have.

            All i was saying is that this test, which is designed in a very specific way and produces a very specific result, is pointless. Its like me getting a bucket with a hole in and hypothesising that if i pour in waterz it will leak out of the hole, and then proving that and saying look! A bucket with a hole in leaks water…

            • KayLeadfoot@fedia.ioOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              4 days ago

              Y’all excused, don’t sweat it! I sure did write the article you did not read. No worries, reading bores me sometimes, too.

              Your take is one of the sillier opinions that I’ve come across in a minute. I won’t waste any more time explaining it to you than that. The test does not strike informed individuals as pointless.

              • Mr_Dr_Oink@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                4 days ago

                I dodnt not read it because “reading bores me.” i didn’t read it because i was busy. I have people round digging up my driveway, i have a 7 week old baby and a 5 year old son destroying the house :p i have prep for work and i just did a bit of browsing and saw the post. Felt compelled to comment for a brief break.

                Im not sure what you mean by “silly opinion.” Everyone who has been arguing with me has been stating that everyone knows that teslas dont use LiDAR, and thats why this test failed. If everyone knows this, then why did it need proving. It was a pointless test. Did you know: fire is hot and water is wet? Did you know we need to breathe air to live?

                No?

                Better make an elaborate test, film it, edit the video, make it last long enough to monetise, post it to youtube, and let people write articles about it to post to other websites. All to prove what everyone already knows about a dangerous self driving car that’s been around for 11 years…

                I am sorry, i just dont get it. I felt like I was pointing out the obvious in saying that a test that’s tailored to give a specific result, which we already know the result of, is a farcical test. It’s pointless.

        • Daefsdeda@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 days ago

          I agree that this just isn’t a realistic problem, and that there are way more problems with Tesla’s that are much more realistic.