1759
Self-Driving Tesla Crashes into Wall Painted to Look Like a Road… Just Months Before Planned Robotaxi Launch (fuelarc.com)
submitted 1 year ago by to c/nottheonion@lemmy.world
346 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

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!

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 115 points 1 year ago (3 children)

I saw the video pop up in my Youtube recommended, but didn't bother watching because I just assumed that any cars tested would be using LIDAR and thus would ignore the fake road just fine. I had no idea Tesla a) was still using basic cameras for this and b) actually had sophisticated enough "self driving" capabilities that this could be tested on them safely.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 157 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    They are not still using cameras but removed LIDAR and radar from their cars during the chip shortage 2020/21. The story they were telling was "humans don't have LIDAR but can drive cars as well, so the cars also only need 'eyes' like humans".

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
    •
  • [–] 106 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    And let me just add, Musk ordered the LIDAR removed against the engineers better judgement.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 101 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Humans cannot, in fact, drive cars well. Humans kill tens of thousands of other humans with cars every year in the US alone.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 84 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Yup, cameras and humans share various exploits. Self-driving is going to work better than humans once every car has it and communicates with each other, allowing for minimal gaps even at high speeds, once roads are all very standardized and in a database, and-

    Wait, that's trains

    Fucking build more electrified high-speed rail and forget tech bros' shitty promises

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Trains don't go from my driveway to my destination exactly when I feel like going there, while carrying all my luggage.

    I get that it's fun to be smug on the Internet, but private vehicles aren't going away any time soon.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 24 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    It's not a binary decision between all cars and no cars. If trains and public transit have enough capacity and convenience to make most trips feasible by them, car infrastructure will no longer have to be added (in fact can be converted into bus and bike lanes) while shortening trip duration (less cars = less jams) and improving safety.

    Also, you barely have luggage for most trips. 99% of my trips are made with luggage I can carry to the nearest stop and board the bus with.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

    I have a van load of tools to transport most of the trips I make.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 16 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    So you'll keep using it. And enjoy narrow but way less jammed streets. Maybe you'll be incentivized/required to join the self-driving network, but in decades, not years, after positioning markers have been added to every road in the last repaving, while infrastructure funds have been directed towards making the city traversible for non-drivers.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -3 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    See, the problem is, where I live already has great public transport, including electric commuter trains and buses, lots of cycle lanes etc.

    And, despite that, traffic is still shit, because there's a massive chunk of the population who need to be on the road for whatever reason.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Road tax
    ROAD TAX
    ROAD TAX!!!

    Many people expect public transport companies to be profitable while allowing an incredible portion of tax money for road maintainance. If you want people to take personal responsibility for the consequences of something that destroys cities when in large amounts, you add an appropriate tax.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    I strongly suggest you look at how roads are taxed here in NZ. Motorists already subsidise public transport, as well as being subsidised through rates, and it's still at cost parity with driving in most cases. Our biggest city is also bringing in a congestion charge.

    Public transport is incredibly expensive to run.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -6 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Yeah it's not a binary decision, but trains are almost never the answer for a lot of people. If I'm going less than a couple hours, then I'm driving that distance. If I'm going much further than that, I'm flying. If I need to move a ton of stuff, I'm either taking my car or renting a uhaul. If I'm taking a lot of people, I'm taking my car. Trains never enter the picture unless I'm looking for variety in my mode of transport.

    And trains do not shorten the trip duratiion, not without absolutely kneecapping the roads. And over long distances, they're absolutely slow compared to planes. In the short distance, they're slow compared to cars.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Depends on where you live. In most of Europe, trains are frequent and direct between city centers.

    My parents tend to prefer the car for the 3-hour trip (also 3 hours by train and bus) to Grandma's when at least 3 people go because it's cheaper. A higher toll on the highway could change the threshold, and we'd go more comfortably. Politicians can smoothly adjust the number of people for which public transport wins out with taxes and investments. You're more likely to cling to the car and they've accounted for that in their models, maybe making you switch for a specific kind of trip is not worth the investment. There are lots of factors, such as political alignment, culture, wealth distribution, existing infrastructure etc. that make some jurisdictions able to move the threshold faster than others. Still, the majority of people using cars is unsustainable for lots of reasons:

    • noise, smoke, particulate matter pollution
    • high energy use per unit of distance per person regardless of drivetrain and resulting climate change
    • cost of road maintenance
    • waste of space for parking, resulting in poor land use and sprawl
    • accident fatalities
    • unwalkable areas ruin business opportunities, resulting in towns that simply go broke

    so there is an obligation to eventually push the threshold in favor of public transit for most trips.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago* (1 child)

    It definitely makes sense in Europe. It really doesn’t in the sparse US west, but it might in the US east where it already exists due to population density.

    In the west, my neighborhood is larger than many European cities. That isn’t hyperbole either, it’s 30,000 acres/121km^2^. Not completely developed yet, but that is the full size of the area.

    I would love light rail or high speed between cities but it would take a century and Trillions to do and then I’d still have to drive to a station. There’s just no way I’d be able to walk like I did in Germany. I do wish, it was amazing.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Take a second to think about that though, why is your neighborhood bigger than entire cities? Spoiler, the answer is that it was built that way, with absolutely no thought given to how people might function if they don't want to have to drive to the grocery store or their job.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago* (1 child)

    And the really dumb thing is that lots of modern non-selfdriving cars now have lidar sensors to help the humans not crash into things. Musk apparently wants the AI to be working at a disadvantage.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    That should tell you just how vastly complicated driving is.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 29 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Small correction here: they never had LIDAR. Cars with LIDAR have big racks on top with a spinny thing measuring the surroundings. Teslas had radar but removed during the chip shortage (and disabled it on existing cars) and acted like it was an improvement. The radar was used for distance keeping on cars and could actually detect the car in front of the car by bouncing signals off the ground, it was really slick.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Spinny thing is just when you mount one ontop. It doesn't have to be. The example in the video appears to use a forward facing cone LIDAR. Presumably in addition to other sensors.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 23 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    That statement of him is not entirely wrong. But we humans have a very powerful bio computer that is perfectly tuned to process those visual inputs in realtime. Until a comparable performance is possible, removing LIDAR is very stupid.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 17 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Besides that, in the fog and rain tests a human likely would have killed a kid anyway, and why settle for human limitations when you could be safer?

    We absolutely should also have lidar or analogous tech as part of a solution here, even if cameras did manage to get to human level safety.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    The child dummy was clearly visible through the water in the rain test. Tesla's systems just suck.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago

    Also competent drivers generally know to slow down during rain. Hell I was literally taught to drive some roads like its a speedway and even I drop below the speed limit during the rain if visuals are bad enough, especially first rain pulls oils out of the road makes it slippery and may cause hydroplaning.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] [S] 65 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    They tested a LiDAR rigged car, and it stopped just like you predicted. As of 2021, Tesla uses only cameras for FSD, and not even radar (which my stupid fine Toyota truck has).

    They tested the idea safely by building the wall out of styrofoam, or at least that's what it looks like when it blows apart :)

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago

    Front-facing radar is the bare minimum needed to pass the test given (fake-road wall). Many vehicles use it for adaptive cruise control, and radar is even faster than either cameras or lidar for figuring out the range to an object. 1000 Hz measuring distance to an object is enough to find both the relative velocity and the acceleration of another object. This provides enough time to apply the brakes safely when approaching a vehicle or obstacle

    LIDAR is even better, and also more compute intensive and expensive to install.

    I think Tesla was very short-sighted in removing radar sensors, certainly. If they hadn’t, they could’ve spent more of their energy on making the FSD cars better instead of just making them sufficiently safe with insufficient sensors

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 25 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child)

    Forget lidar, they don't even have mature tech like radar for emergency braking. Edit: +even

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Why do you think lidar is not mature? It is radar, except it uses light and can get much more resolution than an RF radar. Or was that a joke.... That was probably a joke.. if it was then nm.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Not a joke, lidar struggles with fog/rain, which radar can handle much better.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago

    As far as I've seen, any system would be additive. If it has lidar, it would also have cameras and radar. So that you get the best of all the technologies (e.g cameras are the only only of the three that can follow lane markings)

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent