it seemed fine at the start, then it suddenly pulled to the hard right.
this post was submitted on 22 Sep 2025
372 points (98.7% liked)
Not The Onion
18172 readers
2804 users here now
Welcome
We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!
The Rules
Posts must be:
- Links to news stories from...
- ...credible sources, with...
- ...their original headlines, that...
- ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”
Please also avoid duplicates.
Comments and post content must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.
And that’s basically it!
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
"FSD" should always be in quotes. What a joke from a company run by a mentally ill self proclaimed Nazi.
Full Sorta Drives
Fucking Shit at Driving
shareholder-influencers
I did not know my body could feel this revolted
I don't care what shareholders do behind closed doors, but they shouldn't be allowed to shove it down our throats in public where children can see it!
(Obviously sarcasm, they shouldn't be allowed to exist behind closed doors either)
Have you heard that they call themselves "rebellionaires"?
Rebellends
Well, there core of every Tech-related mania since at least the Net boom in the late 90s has been people invested into the mania passing themselves as just people giving friendly advice online to try and convince others to jump into the bandwagon in order for their own stakes to go up in value.
This kind of shit has been more than normalized for decades.
The only unusual thing thing here is that they're open about having an investment in TSLA.
I can't hear you over me holding my tulips so tightly my knuckles are cracking.
The internet and social media have given everyone worldwide voices, and that's both good and bad.
And there is so much pessimism for the future that lots of people are willing to sell their souls to cash out while they're still here.
They made it about 2.5% of the planned trip on Tesla FSD v13.9 before crashing the vehicle.
A ha ha ha ha
and how much of the $2T promised did Edolf Twitler cut from government spending?
They point out in this incident and an incident from the author where, when you’re relying on Autopilot, even when you see something well in advance, you hesitate to react because you expect the car to do it for you.
I’ve always felt the myriad of safety features that protect the driver through corrective input/output are more harm than good. If you rely on your lane assist, adaptive cruise control, and proximity sensors, you aren’t prepared to react when they fail.
You shouldn’t be under the impression that a car will save your life. You should always have the mindset that you are responsible for the vehicle. If someone hit my small car because a sensor failed on theirs, I don’t give a shit if your system failed. You’re the responsible driver.
If you rely on your lane assist, adaptive cruise control, and proximity sensors, you aren’t prepared to react when they fail.
Yes! They're making people lazy and inattentive behind the wheel.
Anything but proper training, testing, and enforcement.
The safety systems would work perfectly if the cars could communicate, or more robustly if they could be mechanically linked together for the "easy" (highway) portion of the drive. Imagine a lane with nose to tail cars all doing exactly the same thing. At exits (predefined stops) you could get off to change or stay on the same one. Put a little station there with bathrooms and food.
Maybe we could even replace that highway lane with steel tracks and the tires with steel wheels for lower friction.
Damn you just always re-derive the train
Simply linking the cars wouldn’t be enough to address an issue like this though. They still need to individually recognize something like the debris this car ran over and deal with it appropriately.
If cars are linked to share data like this then I can easily see a scenario where one model of car with really good sensors sends a warning saying “hey, there’s road debris here”. But subsequent cars still need to be able to see it and avoid it as well. If the sensors in a following car aren’t as good as the sensors in the first car then that second car could still strike it.
Debris doesn’t remain stationary. Each vehicle that hits it will move it, possibly break it into multiple pieces, etc. And eventually, either through that process or by a person moving it, it will cease being a hazard.
I was just jokingly rederiving a train instead. I think automated cars is mostly really silly
Its basically LLM brain rot but for driving.
This is the massive gulf between level 3 and 4 systems, and why level 3 is potentially dangerous.
We have an interesting highway near me where the HOV reverses direction for morning /evening commutes. When I come home from my son's and it's going the opposite direction, the stupid car would happily plough the multiple striped lift arms with red ribbons and flashing red lights at the entrance.
You are an idiot to have driven with AP/FSD and waited as long as they did.
I'm a very firm believer in the fact that safety features should be annoying and uncomfortable. Your lane assist needs to beep loudly every time it moves you back, thereby not only keeping you safe, but indirectly conditioning you to keep between the lanes to avoid the annoying beep.
I have a particular gripe against lane keep assist. When it was active on cars I've rented... on the mountain passes just outside of the Vancouver Area, it went off way too often, since the lines would get blurry, or you have to stay clear of oncoming trucks around a curve meaning you have to go to the shoulder a bit. Also giving space when passing bicycle riders on the shoulder you (after checking of course), move to the centre just a tad.
Making these features more annoying would lead to alarm fatigue more than better behaviour.
I had to turn off the lane assist in our Mazda for that reason. It was constantly steering me back toward obstacles I was trying to avoid. I cursed it many times.
Other false alarms are frequent enough that I'm starting to ignore the alarm, so when it actually catches me in a mistake, I'll probably ignore it then, too, and be in a crash.
My dad's Mercedes indeed beeps incredibly loudly (anyone sleeping immediately wakes up in a panic) if the blind spot sensor goes off... which it does as soon as you put your blinker on.
Guess what that wonderful bit of tech taught my dad to do? That's right, don't use the blinker to change lanes if you don't want your eardrums blown out.
The fundamental problem is that car manufacturers aren't being held liable for the accidents caused directly or indirectly by these "safety" systems. There is zero oversight and no mandate to investigate false positives of these systems, even when they cause an accident. The end result is that for the manufacturers the point is not to improve safety but to do obnoxious safety theater so regulators look away from rising pedestrian deaths. "Sure our cars are one ton heavier, but they have automatic braking soooo we're good right?"
Who knows if these gadgets actually do anything or even if they don't decrease overall safety. The manufacturer gets positive marketing, throws the regulator off their scent, and isn't held liable for shit when the "safety" system fails or encourages bad habits. Win-win-win. Except the general public loses. But who ever cared about these schmucks?
load more comments
(3 replies)
Fast, artistic, high-definition, simply stunning
However, after returning it to the Turo owner and having the suspension damage evaluated by Tesla, the repair job was estimated to be roughly $10,000. I wouldn’t be surprised if there’s a similar situation with this accident.
Hmm. That makes me wonder.
Like, it's hard for me or for Joe Blow to evaluate how effective a car company's self-driving functionality is. Requires expertise, and it's constantly changing. And ideally, I shouldn't be the one to bear cost, if I can't evaluate risk, because then I'm taking on some unknown cost when purchasing the car.
And the car manufacturer isn't in a position to be objective.
But an insurer can do that.
Like, I wonder if it'd be possible to have insurers offer packages that cover cost of accidents that occur while the car is in self-driving mode. That'd make it possible to put a price tag on accidents from self-driving systems.
Yes, if and only if the car manufacturer is the one paying for it. Otherwise the buyer is still taking on an unknown cost when buying the car in the form of an unknown number of insurance premiums.
The odds of this happening are of course zero.
load more comments
(6 replies)
Lol. But indeed nice of the Youtubers to put it to the test and also be honest with the results.
load more comments
(6 replies)
You have to be a certain kind of stupid to allow this to happen. The dude in the driver seat is a paint chip eater for sure
view more: next ›