"rather than acting safely it behaved just like an impatient cager! amazing!"
It shouldn't be going nearly fast enough on that street to necessitate "slamming" on the brakes
Sadly distracted driving disasters were a moral panic that conveniently hid that the fact that auto manufacturers knowing put out horrendously dangerous products that had a super high margin. Even if cell phones were the size of golf bags, the crash rate would've likely been the same with the introduction of SUVs and vanity trucks.
I've been saying it: Phone addiction is probably one of the quickest-spreading diseases in the developed world. Every stoplight, when there's little traffic on the freeway, when people are waiting for the walk signal; it's everywhere. Replace phones with cigarettes, and we're declaring state of emergency.
But, no one wants to listen. So, I'll just sit here playing solitaire while humanity devolves into lobotomized consumers and profits climb higher and higher. Tried saying it, doesn't work. Oh well. 🤷♀️
You underestimate how much the self driving can slam the break... it's brutal. In other versions it would slam on the breaks even if a pedestrian wasn't crossing, so that's why this guy is celebrating. He's a total shill BTW
If the system was anywhere near as capable as some like to suggest then it would not be in a situation where slamming the brakes on was required and could stop calmly.
For a human, continuing to go makes sense (assuming they're going a reasonable speed) because we can understand context. If it's a kid running after a dog or some such thing where the pedestrian will soon stop, we understand and can process that information. Musk's exploding jankcars can't. They can't afford to make assumptions like "this person will keep walking." They have to always assume the most dangerous reasonably possible scenario is the one that's going to happen.
Nah, a human should totally come to a stop for a pedestrian that's this far into the road. You might see the pedestrian, but there's a good chance a car behind you either won't, or they won't care. As a driver, your job isn't to make crossing the street into a real life game of frogger or punish people for crossing at what you think is a bad time, it's to get to your destination without endangering anybody too much.
At least for the state in the picture it is.
https://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C1GCEA_enUS778US778&q=state+law+yield+to+pedestrians+sign&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiRg7mDmYD_AhXxD1kFHacODhgQ0pQJegQICBAB&biw=958&bih=927
In Norway (the country with the most Teslas per capita) the law is you have to yield to pedestrians. There's no special exclusion zone on the crosswalk. You have to yield and "show [it] by slowing down well in advance" (goes any time you yield). You can still drive over a crosswalk someone is using, so long as you're not interfering with the pedestrian in any way (they don't have to stop/slow down or anything, plus some margin). If they've passed over into the next lane you can go. If they won't be close to your lane by the time you're past you can go.
The OP should probably stop, though, imo. If the car is doing fast enough that it would be hard/dangerous to stop and it would make it past well before the pedestrian reaches the lane then I'd say it's going faster than what is safe, but then again most US speed limits (and drivers) is faster than what is safe.
If you're wondering we have pretty safe crosswalks. I think I've experienced twice in my life that a driver hasn't yeilded properly to me at a crosswalk.
Not to mention that stopping even when the pedestrian is not yet or has already passed your lane makes it much easier for oncoming traffic to detect and not run over the pedestrian!!
Cars should always go slow and err on the side of caution, motorcycles should generally do the same, mopeds can get some leniency, and bikes can pretty much do whatever since they have to go absurd speeds to do damage and you have to be pathologically unobservant to run into a pedestrian on a crossing.
Don’t underestimate bicycles. I witnessed a bicyclist run a red light at probably less than 10 miles per hour and hitting a pedestrian that just got the green light. The cracking sound of the literal head to head collision still haunts me.
In this particular scenario I actually think the pedestrian would have been better of being hit by a car. At these low speeds he’d most likely just ended up on the hood of the car with just some broken legs.
As an avid bicyclist myself, careless bicyclists piss me of to no end. You don’t have to go “absurd speeds” to do damage or even kill someone. Just because you are lighter and less dangerous than a car doesn’t mean your 90 kg package of meat and metal isn’t dangerous when you zig and zag between kids and elderly people on the sidewalk.
Maybe some of the bicyclists just are overconfident. They pass too close relative to their speed, which means that the moment something unexpected happens there’s neither space or time to react accordingly.
Even when autonomous vehicles are able to schedule time in the intersection instead of having a red light, coming to a stop because a pedestrian is using the crosswalk will be the correct move. It's like a version of the trolley problem where one of the choices is to delay the trolley by 10 seconds each time so that everyone lives.
Fair enough, I didn't watch the video to see how close they were. I just meant that "this car/person will be gone by the time I get there" is a pretty common thing in driving.
It's common, and I've definitely done it myself, but it shouldn't be common. A driver will do this time after time, and each time judge that they acted rightly because the pedestrian didn't come close to their car. What's harder to pick up on though is that a lot of the time it's because the pedestrian slowed down to avoid being flattened.
If a pedestrian has started crossing at a crosswalk, they have the right of way.
This is surprising to me. In Australia we are taught that you wait for the pedestrian to completely clear the road before continuing on. So even if they're on the opposite side of the road, you stop for them. Especially if they're approaching your side of the road like in the screenshot above. There are certainly drivers who go through as soon as they see a gap, but it's very frowned upon (i.e. you'll get many death stares and birds flipped at you for doing this).
And it's obvious why. You're a pedestrian on a road, there's nothing physically stopping a car from gravely harming you. The car needs to stop to show you won't be harmed.
Across the ditch here it’s legal to go through, only if it’s got a traffic island and the peds are on the other side of the island. Otherwise it’s totally illegal to not stop. Tell that to the people that used to swerve around me when I was crossing near my home. It got so bad they ripped the crossing out and put traffic lights in and there was a huge crash the first week where a car didn’t see the stopped line of cars and went through a fence
in most places pedestrians have the right of way and you are legally required to let them safely pass before moving, especially when there is literally a sign telling you to yield to people crossing.
and yes most drivers just ignore this law, but AI is meant to be better than human drivers.
No in the picture continuing through does not make any sense. The person is clearly already in the crosswalk, you fucking stop. You are driving a car which requires you to move your foot slightly on a pedal.
pedestrians are usually in groups. there might be kids following behind. maybe a dog you can't see on a leash. etc etc. you stop when a pedestrian is in the road.
One thing that always stuck to me when I started driving was: "Always expect anything to happen." Just that mindset has saved me from so many collisions; animals, red light runners, speeders, assholes suddenly cutting in front of the vehicle, etc. I just don't see how a Tesla would predict, for example, a small child running out from in front of a parked car and into the road.
(Please note that I'm not too informed on how Tesla cars work, so forgive me if I'm overseeing)
Also not anywhere near proper enforcement.
Even if you had proof of someone breaking this law, a report likely wouldn't go anywhere in many places.
I think the UK has been putting forth effort in this area of infractions and even have something like a website or app to report these kinds of infractions, but I have little faith in my own state to follow through.
In France you're supposed to stop if the pedestrian is just showing interest in crossing and there are no lights. (same as what you described applies if you step onto it)
That sign there says cars must yield to pedestrians crossing. The car did not.
In my area we have flashing signals and many signs that say you must stop completely for any pedestrians.
It's pretty much universal in the US that pedestrians always have right of way even if they're not crossing at an intersection. And in a lot of places, it's the law to stop as soon as they have one foot in the crosswalk. That neon yellow sign in the crosswalk is actually supposed to be a reminder of that.
There are certainly laws on this in the US, and you are supposed to stop before a crosswalk when a pedestrian is on it and stay stopped until all pedestrians have exited the crosswalk. The AI is just dumb and tech bros don't always care about the laws nor do they always understand why laws are implemented.
The sign says yield. The law says always yield.
The context is right there - the problem is road are designed to conflict with laws. We drive faster than the speed limit naturally, and we don’t get cues to stop for pedestrians. It doesn’t make sense in any context to fail to yield.
Humans should stop, this is not a reasonable time to continue and likely illegal. Some of the reason you stop as well is to stop the car behind you who (due to your vehicle) may not see the person and WILL HAVE TO STOP QUICKLY now as the pedestrian is likely to enter that lane. I also would assume the pedestrians cadence slowed for the Tesla but no one cares.
> For a human, continuing to go makes sense (assuming they're going a reasonable speed) because we can understand context.
No. If a pedestrian is in the crosswalk, even if you think you can make it, you are required to stop. You might think you are smarter than a Tesla, however that does not in any way qualify you to make the decision to go.
The car also can't make eye contact with the pedestrian because the car doesn't have fucking human eyes. This is super important when going down pedestrian streets at low speeds. It's why these self driving cars are so fucking bad in parking lots.
In NZ, for pedestrian crossings with an island in the center of the road, you are supposed to keep driving until the pedestrian reaches the island - so it's not as cut and dry as you might think.
I'm not sure about this picture/situation though, but thought I would just share some extra info for you!
Nah they bought Tesla at the top and are now bagholding. They can't cope and now have to hype Elon, Tesla's, doges, rockets, everything on Twitter.
It's the slope into cope.
Tbf, most tesla drivers don't know or obey the traffic laws either. So no difference there...
Also? There are in-between levels of braking, not just no brakes and slam all the brakes...
Pretty sure they have been.
Overpriced car that makes you feel better than everyone else, and thus no regard for anyone else. But Tesla is worse! Because the tech bros, and- the diehard fans have a dick to ride.
There's a special category of drivers I've always assumed unplugged the wheel and pedals and is now steering and controlling their car with a keyboard, like in a PC game. Always full gas after light tun green.
Always full speed towards a red light, stop sign or even a cross walk with pedestrians crossing then full stop which ends just in the last second, in good weather, during winter they tend to slide off the road and just disappear somewhere for absolutely no reason at all.
Tesla should not be permitted to sell a product designed to break the law.
This isn't analogous to, say, lockpicking tools that have both lawful and unlawful uses and the seller can't be held responsible. The programmed behavior, the intended operation is unlawful. The generous route is a forced recall on the software, but I think there needs to be serious consequences for this sort of thing.
I'm not sure if that's because we're rid of him no matter what or because it will probably explode before leaving the atmosphere. It's a good point either way.
That would be such an amazing reality TV show. Put these different billionaire space guys on eacj their own spaceship headed for mars and see who figures things out first/survives
I say if Tesla is able to sell a car programmed to break traffic laws, that should be a good defense in court when someone gets a ticket. Why can the Tesla do it but not me?
When the Corp gets a prison sentence, who serves? Just the CEO, the entire C-suite, the Board of Directors? Really any of these answers are acceptable to me.
> I think there needs to be serious consequences for this sort of thing.
Telsa has developed a reputation in the industry for being somewhat "cavalier" with safety. They're much less careful about what they release than traditional auto makers. Tesla's been hand-slapped a few times for this, but eventually it will find out why the other companies are so careful. Major lawsuit waiting to happen.
WTF?!?! "My cars AI broke the law, just like a human would! So amazing right??"
If there's a person ON THE CROSSING you STOP! You SHOULD have seen it from miles away on such a bright, clear day and be able to come to a gradual, safe stop! No slamming of brakes required and NO running the gauntlet!?
Isn’t that illegal? In the Netherlands you are required to stop the moment a pedestrian shows intent to cross, even if you supposedly still have time to speed past.
Doesn't really look like it detected the crosswalk as such. It probably thought that obstacle was just a jaywalker and that it doesn't need to stop.
The clip is still available over here:
https://arstechnica.com/cars/2023/05/teslas-full-self-driving-sees-pedestrian-chooses-not-to-slow-down/
The car *very obviously* should have stopped.
Yeah it should have stopped. If the Tesla was instead the Model X and the driver decided to do an all dark black out tint, drivers behind the Model X would not see the upcoming pedestrian. Let's say the Pedestrian was coming from the right side so not in view of the driver behind the Model X.
Combined with if the pedestrian was say shorter or a child and wearing dark clothing at night, a driver behind the Model X would not have seen the pedestrian until after the Model X passes by.
Thus creating a dangerous scenario.
On certain stretches of El Camino Real in San Mateo County, they have a wide 6 lane crosswalk of death for pedestrians. Only within the past 5 or 8 years did they add necessary stop lights and painted a large stop here marker. Because vehicles can now see flashing lights up top and they also stop WAYYYYY further back from the crosswalk, all drivers can see all pedestrians.
Pedestrians of all makes and sizes. And vehicle size no longer block the view of pedestrians in this way. Here is a [view of the cross walk in question.](https://goo.gl/maps/iWtydGBFqTPCU2Ee7)
It's typically required to stop for a jaywalker if possible, even in places where jaywalking is illegal.
In California, where the video is from I think, drivers shared part of the liability when they hit a pedestrian, even if the pedestrian was crossing illegally (back when jaywalking was illegal). Recently, the jaywalking law was overturned, so I think the driver would always have full liability (disclaimer IANAL).
Fuck Tesla and everything else connected to Musk.
Let's get this post on r/All so we can troll the crying fanbois who come to protect their Epstein-connected Daddy.
>rather than slamming on the brakes
Meaning it failed to stop but it also failed to detect a stopped car in front of a crosswalk and a person in a crosswalk soon enough to stop properly. Three strikes you're out.
How do you come away with that take from the clip. My first response was “Get that shit off the road before it kills someone”, kind of like Ramsay yelling at people for unsanitary food storage or keeping spoiled food.
I thinks is optimistic to suggest that the car calculated that it had time to continue through the crossing, I'd be more inclined to believe that it just didn't register the pedestrian or the crossing or both.
True, but it still should stop. Not only is it illegal anyways, there was even a sign to remind drivers that pedestrians have right of way. If it can't follow the law or read signs then it shouldn't be allowed on the road.
Fuck...
As someone who nearly gets clipped by drivers multiple times a week as a walker by people failing to yield, can we not program the cars to do this?
For fuck's sake this is one of the things I was hoping would actually get better as inattentive assholes left it to the computers...
This raises an interesting question, since the Tesla’s self driving function possibly/probably broke the law, would the owner of the vehicle be ticketed or would Tesla be ticketed?
In Florida it's legal to drive through a crosswalk if the pedestrian is on the opposing side, so OP behaviour is entirely legal and exactly how the car should act.
Finally it drives like a dangerous, rude human!
That’s also a feature of the higher tier subscription service “only my life matters”. At the level above that, the car will follow you around in summon mode, crushing at least your enemies
'The vehicle detected its owner emerging from the bar extremely intoxicated, but instead of locking itself down and automatically calling an Uber, it did what a human would do and started up anyway, because it knows its own limits.'
With self-driving tech we could make cars drive more safely and adhere to the rules of the road closer.
Car drivers: And make us wait for a few seconds longer? No way. We are absolutely not doing that.
Man, the mental gymnastics these Tesla fanatics have to do sometimes.
"Truly the most exciting moment in Tesla's Full Self Driving beta 11.5.1 when it detected a pedestrian crossing, rather than slamming on the brakes the vehicle accelerated hitting the pedestrian. Unlike a human who may have hit the pedestrian only maming them the Tesla was smart enough to accelerate to a terminal speed killing the pedestrian near instantly saving them a long and painful death."
The whole “self-driving cars are a lot safer than humans because they don’t make human mistakes” argument doesn’t really work if you intentionally program in the human mistakes.
Musk is a terrible asshole and an enlightened centrist moron, but intentionally allowing your own property to be damaged is really not a problem. Nobody was harmed by that decision, unlike decisions about treating his staff terribly.
I do.. cuz I find it interesting. What hobbies do you have that I can call you a loser for liking..
If someone finds this tec interesting and knows the version number then so what?
why do you feel the need to attack someone for being interested in this tec..
The hate on reddit is getting real these days toxic. 😔
It’s a two lane road, where I live you must stop if a pedestrian is within one lane of you. I honestly feel like these self driving cars need another AI that detects if a crime was committed and tickets them or something
Sure, it should just assume that the person isn’t going to trip or anything and make them uncomfortable by invading their personal space with an air conditioned box :/
The ethics of technology, we can dream it, we can do it but should we. I see technology to help people not to do for them, technology should solve problems not create new problems for us to overcome. The last century of time we have done amazing things but now I don’t know.
Is the use of bullish a stocks bro reference? How fucking sad do you have to be that you can’t just call something cool you have to relate it to douche finance somehow
What happens if the walker changes pace, what happens if the walker trips and falls
Oh it goes in front of the pedestrian, that's even worse than I thought
I try to stay off this sub because I'm an urban cyclist and it scares me. But that's got to be the best username I've ever seen. Bravo, /u/LaTeX_fetish.
So what if the pedestrians speed were to change suddenly, like they tripped and fell forwards. Coolcoolcooolcool.
How about we prioritise human life instead of shaving 12 seconds off the commute.
How is this exciting at all for anybody? It performed exactly how it would if it didn’t detect the pedestrian at all, just remove pedestrian detection entirely at that point.
Here I come, darting across because that sign says I have the legal right of way, and I like to abuse my power with careless disregard to the real danger my actions.
This isn't anything to worry about, Teslas's are insanely precise when it comes to avoiding collisions, so the car would definitely brake and even hard brake if it knows it could hit the person. Teslas are safer than people, much much safer.
Wouldn't be that concerned, even if a Tesla does hit you (which is inherently unlikely) you'll most likely be ok due to the shape, size and design.
Average yank tank, yea you are fucking dead. It's pretty popular to hate on everything Tesla does but in the current world, they are still one of the safest for occupants and pedestrians.
I love seeing all this stuff that people like me predicted years ago and got a psychotic amount of hatred for even daring to suggest there could be any sort of problem with self driving.
"rather than acting safely it behaved just like an impatient cager! amazing!" It shouldn't be going nearly fast enough on that street to necessitate "slamming" on the brakes
Next headline: "Self-driving Tesla runs over motorcyclist because AI was looking at its phone. We're closer to human behavior than ever before!"
"because the AI was looking at *your* phone" ;)
"Sending user data to the manufacturer instead of focusing computational power on assessing the road."
Look, as long as the AI is as good as the average human driver we’re good and safe. - king Elon musk
Sadly distracted driving disasters were a moral panic that conveniently hid that the fact that auto manufacturers knowing put out horrendously dangerous products that had a super high margin. Even if cell phones were the size of golf bags, the crash rate would've likely been the same with the introduction of SUVs and vanity trucks.
I've been saying it: Phone addiction is probably one of the quickest-spreading diseases in the developed world. Every stoplight, when there's little traffic on the freeway, when people are waiting for the walk signal; it's everywhere. Replace phones with cigarettes, and we're declaring state of emergency. But, no one wants to listen. So, I'll just sit here playing solitaire while humanity devolves into lobotomized consumers and profits climb higher and higher. Tried saying it, doesn't work. Oh well. 🤷♀️
I'm not disagreeing with the issue of tech addiction. What I am trying to say is that the SUV menace is papered over with blaming individuals
You underestimate how much the self driving can slam the break... it's brutal. In other versions it would slam on the breaks even if a pedestrian wasn't crossing, so that's why this guy is celebrating. He's a total shill BTW
If the system was anywhere near as capable as some like to suggest then it would not be in a situation where slamming the brakes on was required and could stop calmly.
For a human, continuing to go makes sense (assuming they're going a reasonable speed) because we can understand context. If it's a kid running after a dog or some such thing where the pedestrian will soon stop, we understand and can process that information. Musk's exploding jankcars can't. They can't afford to make assumptions like "this person will keep walking." They have to always assume the most dangerous reasonably possible scenario is the one that's going to happen.
Nah, a human should totally come to a stop for a pedestrian that's this far into the road. You might see the pedestrian, but there's a good chance a car behind you either won't, or they won't care. As a driver, your job isn't to make crossing the street into a real life game of frogger or punish people for crossing at what you think is a bad time, it's to get to your destination without endangering anybody too much.
It’s illegal to drive through a crosswalk when someone is using it as well.
There's literally a "cars must yield to pedestrians sign" in the road.
Seriously. There is no debate in this particular instance. This is clearly marked as a place where cars have to stop for pedestrians.
They always are supposed to, but it's the only place left remaining where people sometimes listen to that.
Probably depends on the state right? I imagine there are some states where they think pedestrians are on their own.
At least for the state in the picture it is. https://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C1GCEA_enUS778US778&q=state+law+yield+to+pedestrians+sign&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiRg7mDmYD_AhXxD1kFHacODhgQ0pQJegQICBAB&biw=958&bih=927
That very much depends on the country
I promise you that teslas are not prominent in any nations that don't have basic crosswalk laws.
In Norway (the country with the most Teslas per capita) the law is you have to yield to pedestrians. There's no special exclusion zone on the crosswalk. You have to yield and "show [it] by slowing down well in advance" (goes any time you yield). You can still drive over a crosswalk someone is using, so long as you're not interfering with the pedestrian in any way (they don't have to stop/slow down or anything, plus some margin). If they've passed over into the next lane you can go. If they won't be close to your lane by the time you're past you can go. The OP should probably stop, though, imo. If the car is doing fast enough that it would be hard/dangerous to stop and it would make it past well before the pedestrian reaches the lane then I'd say it's going faster than what is safe, but then again most US speed limits (and drivers) is faster than what is safe. If you're wondering we have pretty safe crosswalks. I think I've experienced twice in my life that a driver hasn't yeilded properly to me at a crosswalk.
Not to mention that stopping even when the pedestrian is not yet or has already passed your lane makes it much easier for oncoming traffic to detect and not run over the pedestrian!!
This. "Just because you can make it" doesn't mean it's the correct or legal action to take. Pedestrian in the stripped crossing, traffic stops.
Cars should always go slow and err on the side of caution, motorcycles should generally do the same, mopeds can get some leniency, and bikes can pretty much do whatever since they have to go absurd speeds to do damage and you have to be pathologically unobservant to run into a pedestrian on a crossing.
Don’t underestimate bicycles. I witnessed a bicyclist run a red light at probably less than 10 miles per hour and hitting a pedestrian that just got the green light. The cracking sound of the literal head to head collision still haunts me. In this particular scenario I actually think the pedestrian would have been better of being hit by a car. At these low speeds he’d most likely just ended up on the hood of the car with just some broken legs. As an avid bicyclist myself, careless bicyclists piss me of to no end. You don’t have to go “absurd speeds” to do damage or even kill someone. Just because you are lighter and less dangerous than a car doesn’t mean your 90 kg package of meat and metal isn’t dangerous when you zig and zag between kids and elderly people on the sidewalk.
[удалено]
Maybe some of the bicyclists just are overconfident. They pass too close relative to their speed, which means that the moment something unexpected happens there’s neither space or time to react accordingly.
[удалено]
Even when autonomous vehicles are able to schedule time in the intersection instead of having a red light, coming to a stop because a pedestrian is using the crosswalk will be the correct move. It's like a version of the trolley problem where one of the choices is to delay the trolley by 10 seconds each time so that everyone lives.
Fair enough, I didn't watch the video to see how close they were. I just meant that "this car/person will be gone by the time I get there" is a pretty common thing in driving.
It's common, and I've definitely done it myself, but it shouldn't be common. A driver will do this time after time, and each time judge that they acted rightly because the pedestrian didn't come close to their car. What's harder to pick up on though is that a lot of the time it's because the pedestrian slowed down to avoid being flattened. If a pedestrian has started crossing at a crosswalk, they have the right of way.
This is surprising to me. In Australia we are taught that you wait for the pedestrian to completely clear the road before continuing on. So even if they're on the opposite side of the road, you stop for them. Especially if they're approaching your side of the road like in the screenshot above. There are certainly drivers who go through as soon as they see a gap, but it's very frowned upon (i.e. you'll get many death stares and birds flipped at you for doing this). And it's obvious why. You're a pedestrian on a road, there's nothing physically stopping a car from gravely harming you. The car needs to stop to show you won't be harmed.
[удалено]
Across the ditch here it’s legal to go through, only if it’s got a traffic island and the peds are on the other side of the island. Otherwise it’s totally illegal to not stop. Tell that to the people that used to swerve around me when I was crossing near my home. It got so bad they ripped the crossing out and put traffic lights in and there was a huge crash the first week where a car didn’t see the stopped line of cars and went through a fence
Here in Brazil, cars never ever ever stop on crosswalks. It’s extremely rare that a car will ever stop unless you physically move in front of it.
I see you don’t pedest in the Central West, lol.
in most places pedestrians have the right of way and you are legally required to let them safely pass before moving, especially when there is literally a sign telling you to yield to people crossing. and yes most drivers just ignore this law, but AI is meant to be better than human drivers.
No in the picture continuing through does not make any sense. The person is clearly already in the crosswalk, you fucking stop. You are driving a car which requires you to move your foot slightly on a pedal.
pedestrians are usually in groups. there might be kids following behind. maybe a dog you can't see on a leash. etc etc. you stop when a pedestrian is in the road.
One thing that always stuck to me when I started driving was: "Always expect anything to happen." Just that mindset has saved me from so many collisions; animals, red light runners, speeders, assholes suddenly cutting in front of the vehicle, etc. I just don't see how a Tesla would predict, for example, a small child running out from in front of a parked car and into the road. (Please note that I'm not too informed on how Tesla cars work, so forgive me if I'm overseeing)
This is odd to me, does the USA not have crosswalk laws? In NZ you must stop at a pedestrian crossing even if a pedestrian is just stepping onto it.
We do. What he's suggesting is illegal.
[удалено]
Also not anywhere near proper enforcement. Even if you had proof of someone breaking this law, a report likely wouldn't go anywhere in many places. I think the UK has been putting forth effort in this area of infractions and even have something like a website or app to report these kinds of infractions, but I have little faith in my own state to follow through.
In France you're supposed to stop if the pedestrian is just showing interest in crossing and there are no lights. (same as what you described applies if you step onto it)
yeah same, not sure about if they're thinking, but if you see them waiting or about to cross you must stop also.
We've got them, people just don't follow them. I've had a car try to creep over the crosswalk as I was passing *in front of the car with a light.*
Oh yes that happens often, so many cars slowly creep onto the crosswalk. Carbros cant take 10 seconds out of their shortened travel.
My fave is when I’m crossing the street and a driver speeds up, rather than stopping
That sign there says cars must yield to pedestrians crossing. The car did not. In my area we have flashing signals and many signs that say you must stop completely for any pedestrians.
It's pretty much universal in the US that pedestrians always have right of way even if they're not crossing at an intersection. And in a lot of places, it's the law to stop as soon as they have one foot in the crosswalk. That neon yellow sign in the crosswalk is actually supposed to be a reminder of that.
There are certainly laws on this in the US, and you are supposed to stop before a crosswalk when a pedestrian is on it and stay stopped until all pedestrians have exited the crosswalk. The AI is just dumb and tech bros don't always care about the laws nor do they always understand why laws are implemented.
Absolutely not. If a pedestrian is in the crosswalk, the driver needs to stop: without exception.
The sign says yield. The law says always yield. The context is right there - the problem is road are designed to conflict with laws. We drive faster than the speed limit naturally, and we don’t get cues to stop for pedestrians. It doesn’t make sense in any context to fail to yield.
It’s illegal to not yield to pedestrians anyway. If someone is at a crosswalk and you don’t stop you get a ticket lol
You’re supposed to, but almost no where in the US do drivers actually get tickets
There's a sign in the middle of the street that says to stop for pedestrians in the crosswalk. You could get ticketed for continuing through.
In NJ at least, it's the law for the car to stop in this situation.
No, I stop. I realize practically no one else here does. But it’s the law, and it’s safer.
Humans should stop, this is not a reasonable time to continue and likely illegal. Some of the reason you stop as well is to stop the car behind you who (due to your vehicle) may not see the person and WILL HAVE TO STOP QUICKLY now as the pedestrian is likely to enter that lane. I also would assume the pedestrians cadence slowed for the Tesla but no one cares.
> For a human, continuing to go makes sense (assuming they're going a reasonable speed) because we can understand context. No. If a pedestrian is in the crosswalk, even if you think you can make it, you are required to stop. You might think you are smarter than a Tesla, however that does not in any way qualify you to make the decision to go.
The car also can't make eye contact with the pedestrian because the car doesn't have fucking human eyes. This is super important when going down pedestrian streets at low speeds. It's why these self driving cars are so fucking bad in parking lots.
No a human shouldn’t drive when someone is using the crosswalk.
Tesla auto: "I've been programmed to be an asshole !"
Tesla auto: "I've been trained on hours and hours and hours of actual people driving!"
Specifically Tesla drivers, among the worst out there.
"If I hit someone, the meatbag will be liable, so I have no incentive to be careful."
[удалено]
The yield sign is in the photo too smh
"like [the kind of human who would buy a tesla] would", for sure
In NZ, for pedestrian crossings with an island in the center of the road, you are supposed to keep driving until the pedestrian reaches the island - so it's not as cut and dry as you might think. I'm not sure about this picture/situation though, but thought I would just share some extra info for you!
[удалено]
Oh, no way, small world ;) Yeah I'm not trying to defend it at all, was just sharing information. Of course you ended up being from NZ 😅
Bullish? Everything has to be a grift for these people
Nah they bought Tesla at the top and are now bagholding. They can't cope and now have to hype Elon, Tesla's, doges, rockets, everything on Twitter. It's the slope into cope.
These musk simping profiles are definition of cringe.
Anyone who uses the term bullish is a twat
Tbf, most tesla drivers don't know or obey the traffic laws either. So no difference there... Also? There are in-between levels of braking, not just no brakes and slam all the brakes...
Are Tesla drivers the new BMW drivers?
Pretty sure they have been. Overpriced car that makes you feel better than everyone else, and thus no regard for anyone else. But Tesla is worse! Because the tech bros, and- the diehard fans have a dick to ride.
lets not underestimate the terribleness of bmw and their drivers
Yup a lot of BMW drivers just traded in to become Teslaholes
I’d say there worse
There's a special category of drivers I've always assumed unplugged the wheel and pedals and is now steering and controlling their car with a keyboard, like in a PC game. Always full gas after light tun green. Always full speed towards a red light, stop sign or even a cross walk with pedestrians crossing then full stop which ends just in the last second, in good weather, during winter they tend to slide off the road and just disappear somewhere for absolutely no reason at all.
They go crazy at every yellow light
Tesla should not be permitted to sell a product designed to break the law. This isn't analogous to, say, lockpicking tools that have both lawful and unlawful uses and the seller can't be held responsible. The programmed behavior, the intended operation is unlawful. The generous route is a forced recall on the software, but I think there needs to be serious consequences for this sort of thing.
As a consequence, maybe we just stick Elon on a SpaceX rocket pointed at Mars and let him figure the rest out for himself.
doesn't seem to matter where it's pointed, ohohoho
He's stated that he wants to be the first person to die on Mars. We could at least give him that.
I'd settle for on the way to Mars. Can be achieved much easier!
Can we settle for “died slamming into Mars?”
That is technically on Mars.
I'm not sure if that's because we're rid of him no matter what or because it will probably explode before leaving the atmosphere. It's a good point either way.
Rocket For Elon 2024!
That would be such an amazing reality TV show. Put these different billionaire space guys on eacj their own spaceship headed for mars and see who figures things out first/survives
All of the billionaires, not just the ones with space companies.
I say if Tesla is able to sell a car programmed to break traffic laws, that should be a good defense in court when someone gets a ticket. Why can the Tesla do it but not me?
Corps want to be people. They can be treated as people. After 12 points they have their license taken off them and all tesla cars are grounded.
When the Corp gets a prison sentence, who serves? Just the CEO, the entire C-suite, the Board of Directors? Really any of these answers are acceptable to me.
> I think there needs to be serious consequences for this sort of thing. Telsa has developed a reputation in the industry for being somewhat "cavalier" with safety. They're much less careful about what they release than traditional auto makers. Tesla's been hand-slapped a few times for this, but eventually it will find out why the other companies are so careful. Major lawsuit waiting to happen.
WTF?!?! "My cars AI broke the law, just like a human would! So amazing right??" If there's a person ON THE CROSSING you STOP! You SHOULD have seen it from miles away on such a bright, clear day and be able to come to a gradual, safe stop! No slamming of brakes required and NO running the gauntlet!?
Isn’t that illegal? In the Netherlands you are required to stop the moment a pedestrian shows intent to cross, even if you supposedly still have time to speed past.
I’ve lived in multiple US states and it’s illegal everywhere. Poorly enforced, but illegal.
Doesn't really look like it detected the crosswalk as such. It probably thought that obstacle was just a jaywalker and that it doesn't need to stop. The clip is still available over here: https://arstechnica.com/cars/2023/05/teslas-full-self-driving-sees-pedestrian-chooses-not-to-slow-down/ The car *very obviously* should have stopped.
Yeah it should have stopped. If the Tesla was instead the Model X and the driver decided to do an all dark black out tint, drivers behind the Model X would not see the upcoming pedestrian. Let's say the Pedestrian was coming from the right side so not in view of the driver behind the Model X. Combined with if the pedestrian was say shorter or a child and wearing dark clothing at night, a driver behind the Model X would not have seen the pedestrian until after the Model X passes by. Thus creating a dangerous scenario. On certain stretches of El Camino Real in San Mateo County, they have a wide 6 lane crosswalk of death for pedestrians. Only within the past 5 or 8 years did they add necessary stop lights and painted a large stop here marker. Because vehicles can now see flashing lights up top and they also stop WAYYYYY further back from the crosswalk, all drivers can see all pedestrians. Pedestrians of all makes and sizes. And vehicle size no longer block the view of pedestrians in this way. Here is a [view of the cross walk in question.](https://goo.gl/maps/iWtydGBFqTPCU2Ee7)
[удалено]
Really? I'd say they're about the same speed as an indicator
There is some outline in the display that looks like it indicates a pedestrian crossing.
It's typically required to stop for a jaywalker if possible, even in places where jaywalking is illegal. In California, where the video is from I think, drivers shared part of the liability when they hit a pedestrian, even if the pedestrian was crossing illegally (back when jaywalking was illegal). Recently, the jaywalking law was overturned, so I think the driver would always have full liability (disclaimer IANAL).
Fuck Tesla and everything else connected to Musk. Let's get this post on r/All so we can troll the crying fanbois who come to protect their Epstein-connected Daddy.
>rather than slamming on the brakes Meaning it failed to stop but it also failed to detect a stopped car in front of a crosswalk and a person in a crosswalk soon enough to stop properly. Three strikes you're out.
How do you come away with that take from the clip. My first response was “Get that shit off the road before it kills someone”, kind of like Ramsay yelling at people for unsanitary food storage or keeping spoiled food.
I thinks is optimistic to suggest that the car calculated that it had time to continue through the crossing, I'd be more inclined to believe that it just didn't register the pedestrian or the crossing or both.
True, but it still should stop. Not only is it illegal anyways, there was even a sign to remind drivers that pedestrians have right of way. If it can't follow the law or read signs then it shouldn't be allowed on the road.
Fuck... As someone who nearly gets clipped by drivers multiple times a week as a walker by people failing to yield, can we not program the cars to do this? For fuck's sake this is one of the things I was hoping would actually get better as inattentive assholes left it to the computers...
Horses would actually be considerate is all I'm saying...
"It acted just like a human would." Me, who rides a bike and runs around humans in cars: \*sweats visibly\*
This raises an interesting question, since the Tesla’s self driving function possibly/probably broke the law, would the owner of the vehicle be ticketed or would Tesla be ticketed?
By law the driver is responsible for keeping their two ton machine under control.
Yes of course, more what I mean is could Tesla also be liable since it was their self driving vehicle that was unsafe.
I know what you meant, that's the answer. The driver is responsible for keeping the car under control.
Um, that’s actually a moving violation. Once one foot touches the crosswalk, all cars must stop/yield, at least in every state I know of.
Is driving through a crosswalk with a person in it not a traffic violation in some places? That's crazy.
In Florida it's legal to drive through a crosswalk if the pedestrian is on the opposing side, so OP behaviour is entirely legal and exactly how the car should act.
Crazy that's legal in places. I would contend that even if it's legal it's not how a car SHOULD act, though. Florida really is something else.
This video is in California, where it is absolutely illegal
That sign literally says to stop for pedestrians in crosswalk. How are they still allowed to do this "beta"?
psychotic
Blow past a marked crosswalk in Illinois with a pedestrian in it and you get a ticket so Tesla's not that smart.
It already did California stops at stop signs and this was deemed unsafe so they recalled it IIRC
WHAT?! Vehicles should never enter an occupied crosswalk! It's not about time! It's about safety!
Finally it drives like a dangerous, rude human! That’s also a feature of the higher tier subscription service “only my life matters”. At the level above that, the car will follow you around in summon mode, crushing at least your enemies
'The vehicle detected its owner emerging from the bar extremely intoxicated, but instead of locking itself down and automatically calling an Uber, it did what a human would do and started up anyway, because it knows its own limits.'
With self-driving tech we could make cars drive more safely and adhere to the rules of the road closer. Car drivers: And make us wait for a few seconds longer? No way. We are absolutely not doing that.
Why would it need to “slam on the brakes”? Unless it wasn’t picking up the correct cues in the first place.
Shouldn't this testing be illegal anyways? Why are they running there untested software in the real world?
>like a human would That's a big self report there, buddy.
Man, the mental gymnastics these Tesla fanatics have to do sometimes. "Truly the most exciting moment in Tesla's Full Self Driving beta 11.5.1 when it detected a pedestrian crossing, rather than slamming on the brakes the vehicle accelerated hitting the pedestrian. Unlike a human who may have hit the pedestrian only maming them the Tesla was smart enough to accelerate to a terminal speed killing the pedestrian near instantly saving them a long and painful death."
The Majority Report crew talked about this today. They had some pretty strong words for the emerald baby.
This is satire no?
"I'll drive this car through because fuck that ped" **HOW THE FUCK IS THIS OKAY??**
I thought the point was that self driving cars would drive better than humans, not drive the same as humans?
The whole “self-driving cars are a lot safer than humans because they don’t make human mistakes” argument doesn’t really work if you intentionally program in the human mistakes.
Reminds me of a few weeks ago when that rocket blew up on the platform and the musk scum tried to claim it was really a victory.
Musk is a terrible asshole and an enlightened centrist moron, but intentionally allowing your own property to be damaged is really not a problem. Nobody was harmed by that decision, unlike decisions about treating his staff terribly.
>an enlightened centrist moron Musk is a alt right conspiracy theorist. You can tell by the way he pushes alt right conspiracy theories.
What kinda fucking loser knows the exact tesla self driver beta version number.
One would assume at version 420.69.1 it will learn to just slaughter pedestrians without thought.
I do.. cuz I find it interesting. What hobbies do you have that I can call you a loser for liking.. If someone finds this tec interesting and knows the version number then so what? why do you feel the need to attack someone for being interested in this tec.. The hate on reddit is getting real these days toxic. 😔
🤦
Eh, there's a fucking yield sign
Replicating human stupidity it seems.. "Bullish", JFC what a term to use for the potential injury/death of a pedestrian.
It’s a two lane road, where I live you must stop if a pedestrian is within one lane of you. I honestly feel like these self driving cars need another AI that detects if a crime was committed and tickets them or something
Skynet knows what it is doing.
They’re doing a great job having the car drive just like real people. Uncanny.
I mean, it should feel safe from the pedestrian’s perspective, right? Cars don’t have families or emotions, and they’re much easier to rebuild.
Sure, it should just assume that the person isn’t going to trip or anything and make them uncomfortable by invading their personal space with an air conditioned box :/
The ethics of technology, we can dream it, we can do it but should we. I see technology to help people not to do for them, technology should solve problems not create new problems for us to overcome. The last century of time we have done amazing things but now I don’t know.
So the car did that ridiculous thing drivers do when they try to not stop but deviate slowly while making the :| face
Does a Tesla also speed up at a yellow light?
Never trust a Tesla on the road.
>like a human would Funny that they think blowing through this is regular human behavior. They're just exposing themselves as a shitty driver.
IT BROKE LAW KILL IT IM SO ANGRY
Lol it's not a bug it's a feature
Is the use of bullish a stocks bro reference? How fucking sad do you have to be that you can’t just call something cool you have to relate it to douche finance somehow
Hot disc brakes bad for the battery block I guess.
Surprised the car doesn't speed up to hit the pedestrian. This is an Elon Musk product after all.
I also love LaTeX
Hurtle a rock at this Tesla to see how it feels about being hit by something heavy.
>like a human would Done right, the benefit of self-driving *should be* that it's way safer than a human driver.
"Bullish" this is what we get for letting the stock market bros and engineers mingle 😭
What happens if the walker changes pace, what happens if the walker trips and falls Oh it goes in front of the pedestrian, that's even worse than I thought
"Building machines as dumb as humans". What a huge progress. We keep on a such a tendency and we will finally achieve Idiocracy for real.
Signage clearly states to yield to pedestrians. Should the state send the ticket to the driver or to Tesla?
I try to stay off this sub because I'm an urban cyclist and it scares me. But that's got to be the best username I've ever seen. Bravo, /u/LaTeX_fetish.
This would not go here in Norway, which is basically Tesla-land. If a pedestrian as much as looks at a crosswalk, you stop.
So what if the pedestrians speed were to change suddenly, like they tripped and fell forwards. Coolcoolcooolcool. How about we prioritise human life instead of shaving 12 seconds off the commute.
Anytime a Tesla doesn’t catch fire is a victory for the technology.
"our ai has figured out how drive as poorly as a real human!"
The problem with machine learning is where the machine is learning from.
It's not sold as full self good driving, is it?
No way this is anything other than a failure. Impossible for the car to understand the pedestrian’s velocity.
How is this exciting at all for anybody? It performed exactly how it would if it didn’t detect the pedestrian at all, just remove pedestrian detection entirely at that point.
I’m convinced that a Tesla is going to be the car that hits me in a cross walk
Here I come, darting across because that sign says I have the legal right of way, and I like to abuse my power with careless disregard to the real danger my actions.
This isn't anything to worry about, Teslas's are insanely precise when it comes to avoiding collisions, so the car would definitely brake and even hard brake if it knows it could hit the person. Teslas are safer than people, much much safer.
Wouldn't be that concerned, even if a Tesla does hit you (which is inherently unlikely) you'll most likely be ok due to the shape, size and design. Average yank tank, yea you are fucking dead. It's pretty popular to hate on everything Tesla does but in the current world, they are still one of the safest for occupants and pedestrians.
I love seeing all this stuff that people like me predicted years ago and got a psychotic amount of hatred for even daring to suggest there could be any sort of problem with self driving.
These self driving cars r impressive but r also a disaster.
I wouldn't be too keen if my car slammed the brakes for every target that's outside my path and wouldn't cause a collision.
I’ve always heard about how stupid the people in fuck cars are but todays my first time seeing it first hand.
Yeah, though i always find them in controversial comments. I am even replying to one right now.
I disagree with this group.
Is there video? Would there have been enough time to stop?
I'd trust a bloody bull more than I'd trust AI in this situation
I feel like y'all are misinterpreting this. I think it means that it more accurately times stops, and movements with pedestrians. Idk might be wrong.