this post was submitted on 18 Oct 2024
774 points (98.4% liked)

Technology

59562 readers
1742 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

The U.S. government’s road safety agency is again investigating Tesla’s “Full Self-Driving” system, this time after getting reports of crashes in low-visibility conditions, including one that killed a pedestrian.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration says in documents that it opened the probe on Thursday with the company reporting four crashes after Teslas entered areas of low visibility, including sun glare, fog and airborne dust.

In addition to the pedestrian’s death, another crash involved an injury, the agency said.

Investigators will look into the ability of “Full Self-Driving” to “detect and respond appropriately to reduced roadway visibility conditions, and if so, the contributing circumstances for these crashes.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com -1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (3 children)

Fuck Elon musk.

But self-driving is one of the most needed technologies to aim for in the near future. And it's a shame that as American space industry it has , apparently, let be in the hands of a lunatic.

The potential to reduce road mortality. And to give back to humans thousands of hours back of their time (you can do other things while not driving).

I don't really care about the philosophical question on who is to blame if a self driving car run over one person if road mortality got statistically reduced by a big value thanks to the technology.

The anti technology I see on some supposedly progressive people nowadays really scares me. Bad omen. It's like having a choice between rich conservatives and poor conservatives, but only conservatives nonetheless.

[–] ChapulinColorado@lemmy.world 20 points 1 month ago (1 children)

That’s just a train/bus with extra steps and far more risk. Cities with cars as the main mode of transport are still ugly places to live.

[–] daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com -4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

I live in what is supposedly taught as the better mobility solution. A dense european city.

It's true, I can go everywhere walking and by public transport.. and it sucks.

Such density to allow for good public transport means living in apartments like ants, instead of houses.

I like walking but in winter or summer it can be miserable. Buses you get really tired of very quickly, crowded, crazy people, smells, having to be on foot because no seats, dizziness, and in big cities pickpocketing. It's a lot of misery IMHO.

I've live like this many decades and I cannot see the time I can move out of the city, well knowing I'll need a car for everything because lower densities does not allow for walking/good public transport. But I find higher densities just miserable to live in.

As such I would love to have self driving cars. Seems such a life quality improvement.

[–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Be easier to automate various types of rail.

[–] daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

As stated in other comment of mine. Public transport/walkikg is good for high density cities.

Not everyone would be happy living in such environment. I fact I think most people won't. Low density environment have a need for cars. And I think if cars are needed, they'd better be electric and self driving.

[–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Then it's a difference of opinion, I think they would be happier with better public transport.

[–] daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

It could be measured I suppose.

Giving completely free will without economic pressure most people would chose one environment or the other.

I suppose there's enough statistical data on the world to make such analysis. Not that I'm going to do it. But I think it could be measurable what people chose when money is not a factor, as in I need to live X because I don't have money to live in Y.

Anyway it's almost a fact that there would be people that would love to live in one place and some people on the other. So best solution could probably be good public transport in the city and self driving cars in the countryside.

[–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago

I think a lack of availability is what is stopping the free market from choosing the better form of transportation.

[–] jjjalljs@ttrpg.network 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

best solution could probably be good public transport in the city and self driving cars in the countryside.

You don't even need self driving if it's mostly just the countryside. That's just not a lot of people and the resources required to get it working would be better spent on building mass transit and walkable areas in cities where people actually live (and thus where culture and economy actually happen)

[–] daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 month ago

My country already have mass transit and walkable areas really.

But people who chose to live far away from cities because cities give them anxiety also have rights and deserve nice things.

[–] drmoose@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago

Why is it the most needed though?

I'm not really sold on the importance of it anymore tbh. It was a cool scifi dream but driving is not even at the top 1000 issues we need solving right now.