396
submitted 1 month ago by ooli3@sopuli.xyz to c/buyeuropean@feddit.uk

Over the past 18 months, Tesla has been working with the Dutch vehicle approval organization, RDW, to get approval for its Full Self-Driving (Supervised) semi-autonomous driving system.

After a long consultation period, which included covering almost one million miles with FSD (Supervised) active and offering ride-along trials with 13,000 people in numerous European countries, the RDW deemed the technology safe to be given the green light.

Tesla’s controversial CEO, Elon Musk, has long-promised to introduce the partially autonomous cruise control system to other markets outside of the US, where it has been on sale for years. But the company has regularly butted up against regulatory red tape.

According to a press statement put out by Tesla to promote its European debut, the company says that when FSD (Supervised) is engaged, collisions are up to "seven-times less likely per kilometer driven compared to manual driving alone".

However, safety campaigners, such as Dan O’Dowd of The Dawn Project, reiterates that “59 people have been killed in over 3,000 crashes involving Tesla’s self-driving software in the U.S. since 2021 alone”.

"The RDW's decision is deeply troubling given Tesla FSD's myriad of well-documented safety defects," O’Dowd adds.

What's more, the company’s Robotaxis, which use a similar hardware suite that relies on the vehicle’s external cameras and artificial intelligence to navigate the world, as opposed to a plethora of radar and Lidar sensors like rivals, have made the headlines because data suggests they crash four times more often than the average human driver, according to Fortune. Get daily insight, inspiration and deals in your inbox

Sign up for breaking news, reviews, opinion, top tech deals, and more. Contact me with news and offers from other Future brands Receive email from us on behalf of our trusted partners or sponsors By submitting your information you agree to the Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy and are aged 16 or over.

In a bid to bolster its safety credentials, Tesla has made a number of changes to its software for the version that will go on sale in the Netherlands.

Not a Tesla App reported that those customers that had first-hand ride-along experience with Euro-spec FSD (Supervised) noticed that it differed to the technology found in the US.

Dutch owners will have to pass a mandatory safety quiz before FSD activates, for example, while the 'Sloth' to 'Mad Max' speed profiles in the US version have been ditched in favor of more straightforward 'Max Speed' setting in the Netherlands.

Analysis: Europe will be watching closely

While it is easy to think that the recent ruling in the Netherlands will automatically open the door for FSD (Supervised) to be used in the rest of Europe, it is highly likely that many other markets will continue to exercise caution.

Even RDW, the organization that gave the green-light to FSD (Supervised|) in the Netherlands, says that the system is not "self-driving," adding that the "driver remains responsible and must always remain in control."

This confusion with messaging used to promote the technology’s capabilities has caused plenty of problems in the US, including the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration launching an investigation into the safety of the technology.

Recently, it escalated its probe to "Engineering Analysis", which it says will evaluate the system’s ability to operate in reduced roadway visibility.

All the while, Elon Musk continues to promote the fact that every iteration of the FSD software will “far exceed human levels of safety" and that users will soon be able to text and drive, when realistically, it’s simply a Level 2 semi-autonomous cruise control system that is also offered by the likes of Ford and BMW.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top new old
[-] axh@lemmy.world 82 points 1 month ago

I was baited by the mention of this famous country Europe, but was disappointed because "It is only legal in the Netherlands, but more regions could follow".

Multiple things are legal in the Netherlands, and most European regions did not follow.

[-] Airfried@piefed.social 32 points 1 month ago

And it almost makes sense for the Netherlands. Almost. They have amazing infrastructure. Their world class cycling lanes are pretty much disconnected from roads for the most part and even their highways are very decently lit at night. Then again, allowing Teslas to self drive isn't the kind of mindset that got them there in the first place and I won't be surprised when Teslas still fail under these stellar conditions.

[-] mrgoosmoos@lemmy.ca 20 points 1 month ago

Teslas should be banned on headlight output alone

[-] TassieTosser@aussie.zone 3 points 1 month ago

Teslas are the only car that have blinded me with their rear lights.

[-] mrgoosmoos@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 month ago

definitely those, but many other manufacturers blind me with brake lights now too. I have to stop excessively far back at red lights sometimes because the person in front is riding the brakes

[-] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

They have matrix headlights which are allowed in the EU, its probably not a problem there on the newer cars equipped with them.

[-] mrgoosmoos@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 month ago

matrix headlights still aren't good enough

[-] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Why not? They literally black out the area where another car is?

[-] anamethatisnt@sopuli.xyz 7 points 1 month ago

I look forward to when all cars with led lights have matrix headlights that work properly. I often feel as they blind you first before turning down, leaving my nightvision impacted.

[-] mrgoosmoos@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 month ago

bingo

and here's the thing - they will never be able to work "properly", it will always be reactive. and more dangerous road conditions (curves, hills, etc) only make it worse in a scenario where the effect greatly increases danger.

it's for highway driving and that's it

I nearly biked into a pothole once because of some asshole with LED headlights coming towards me. it was a big enough pothole I would likely have fallen and been run over by the suv right behind me.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] 123@programming.dev 4 points 1 month ago

That never works as advertised with a small curve on the road, or even when the teslas are 2 meters behind your sedan or coupe's bumper. It's not exclusive to teslas either, there are just too many variables.

[-] TassieTosser@aussie.zone 4 points 1 month ago

They also don't work for cross traffic or more importantly, crests.

[-] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

Dang. We don't have them here, so I just hear about how they should work. Sounds like they still have a ways to go in general.

[-] mrgoosmoos@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

It's reactive instead of the proactive

it will simply never be good enough to work for all cyclists and pedestrians

like sure use it on the highway whatever, but people already can't use auto high beam in appropriate settings (look at all the people using it in cities)

[-] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Even being reactive it should be able to eventually work at least for other cars.

You dont need to react right away if the car is a certain distance away, which gives it time to work and your car to see their lights. Someone else mentioned curves and crests, so they could somehow do it off of illuminated light before seeing it, or simply blacking out that immediate area in advance (becoming proactive)? Like as you get close enough to the crest, always keep the crest oncoming side blacked out.

But I do imagine cyclists and pedestrians will be harder to not initially light up due to no lights, or much lower power lights making them harder to see.

But ya, from all these replies, they apparently dont work as well in general as advertised.

[-] mrgoosmoos@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 month ago

to be fair, I have a super extra hate hard on for blinding headlights

I think it's entirely justified, but I definitely care more than the average person that I meet or talk to

I'm also pretty tired of nearly driving off the road into the 15 ft deep rocky ditch at 90 km/h on a windy hill, and I've nearly driven into pedestrians who were crossing mid-block because I couldn't see them because of LED headlights on the other side. and I've seen people nearly get hit crossing in the crosswalk at a four-way stop because the driver ahead of me couldn't see them because the car on the other side had LED headlights.

I recognize that some of those situations would be avoided with matrix headlights. but the key word is some - it's not all.

as a side point, the invention of headlights that are so goddamn bright that you have to actually point them farther downwards so that you don't blind oncoming traffic to avoid them driving head-on into you at a hundred kilometers an hour, rather than aiming them to illuminate farther ahead on the road, that whole thing is a concept is just so fucking stupid

[-] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

the invention of headlights that are so goddamn bright that you have to actually point them farther downwards so that you don’t blind oncoming traffic to avoid them driving head-on into you at a hundred kilometers an hour, rather than aiming them to illuminate farther ahead on the road, that whole thing is a concept is just so fucking stupid

I think this is the outcome of saftey guidelines paying more attention to the occupants, than surrounding environment.

Cars get rated on how well they light up the road, and it's a big part of their scoring. So the lights get brighter and brighter so we can see further, so we can see more and so we don't over-drive our headlights (dear god people are fucking idiots always over-driving their headlights), but we end up with this new problem because of it.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 month ago

It rains in Netherlands. That alone will kill some with Musk's bullshit tech.

[-] atro_city@fedia.io 8 points 1 month ago

Europe isn't a country yet - sadly.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] starlinguk@lemmy.world 33 points 1 month ago

Can we stop calling a single country in Europe "Europe"? Europe isn't like the US. It consists of different countries with different laws and regulations.

[-] IratePirate@feddit.org 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

The trouble is: if only one European country green-lights these systems, they can ~~kill people~~ drive anywhere within the Schengen area. You'll have then on the roads, even outside NL.

[-] zaphod@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 month ago

Would it even be legal to turn on the system outside the Netherlands?

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Stiggyman@ani.social 2 points 1 month ago

No otherwise the poor US has to learn where things are

[-] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 month ago

It's all Yurrup to Americans.

[-] supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz 26 points 1 month ago
[-] DupaCycki@lemmy.world 15 points 1 month ago

Full Self-Driving

(Supervised)

semi-autonomous

partially autonomous

Bake half a cake. Call it Full Whole Cake. Mention in the description that the cake is only semi-whole. There you go. You've just become a genius innovator.

I can't think of many more capitalist things than selling something and marketing it as something else entirely.

[-] bluGill@fedia.io 12 points 1 month ago

"reiterates that “59 people have been killed in over 3,000 crashes involving Tesla’s self-driving software in the U.S. since 2021 alone”

more than 42,000 people were killed on the road in just the US alone, almost all by human drivers!

The real need is not perfection, it is at least as good as humans. Better than humans would be nice. Don't be fooled by statistics, they can be manipulated to say whatever you want, and it isn't just Tesla doing it!

Sadly even though I'm sure data exists I've never seen anyone independent publish anything trust worthy on how self driving compares to humans. All I've seen is data from someone with obvious biases. (they might be right but they still have a bias and so need independent analysis)

[-] Zwiebel@feddit.org 18 points 1 month ago

It literally says the robotaxies crash four times as much as humans

[-] bluGill@fedia.io 4 points 1 month ago

That is a headline yes. However I have not been able to trace it down to anyone who is independent and has looked at what it really means. There are too many ways to cherry-pick numbers to make a point. I don't want headlines, I want someone who understands traffic safety and how to work with numbers to do an in-depth analysis. This is hard work, and so far it is missing (except as done by the self driving companies and thus biased)

[-] starlinguk@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago

There are very few self driving cars on the road. There are many normal cars on the road. How many people were killed for each car?

[-] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

It's easy to make numbers look scary yes, and it'd be better if we had more accurate numbers. The only way were going to get that though is better laws mandating their release. Even now, Tesla is allowed to redact information about crashes in their Robotaxis (which this isn't about) which is a problem.

But lets just go by what he used on his site, which today lists 3013 crashes and 59 fatalities since 2021, but keep in mind, the FSD software was very beta until early 2024 when it finally went wide. This guy HATES Tesla, so I'm sure if there were more he'd have updated it accordingly.

Today, just over 9 billion miles have been driven on FSD since 2021.

So, 3013 crashes, over 9 billion miles is 1 crash every 2,987,056 miles, or 1 crash every 4,779,289 km.

NHSTA says 1.06 fatalities happen every 100 million miles, and the year before it was 1.16

So, 9 billion miles / 100 million miles * 1.06 = ~95.4 fatalities, and the year before would be 104.4

So Tesla has had 59, and there would have been 95.4 And while sad that there were fatalities on earlier versions of software, that isn't the software on the road today, so they should hopefully be at a declining rate as well, but we'll need more data to track that.

Before people used to say but Tesla's numbers are all highway so it's not a good comparison against the NHSTA numbers which includes city driving, and you know what, they are right about that, and it is a problem, but Tesla has finally started sharing city miles, and they're up to 3.3 billion now, so these statistics are starting to include them and will start giving a better picture.

And I just want to stress, this is for SUPERVISED driving. Tesla's Robotaxi's are NOT this safe.

Human + Robot > Human OR Robot in our current state.

Edit: oh and it looks like Dan's numbers include Autopilot, not only FSD which this is about, which is far far inferior, but that probably increases the miles driven substantially as Tesla's reporting on FSD numbers is specifically about FSD, or would lower the crashes/fatalities in the numbers I was using. They've also stopped offering AP on new cars.

Edit: Updated expected fatalities to 95.4, I accidentally used 1.05 instead of 1.06 when i calculated it.

[-] NoxAstrum@lemmy.ca 10 points 1 month ago

This is a terrible fucking idea.

[-] Goldholz@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 points 1 month ago

Aaah! We are going to see so many of them in the tram ditches <3

[-] Hupf@feddit.org 7 points 1 month ago

Schwarze Schrift auf gelbem Grund - halte Abstand, bleib gesund.

[-] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 month ago

People will get killed, and brown envelopes full of crypto keys will be slid under tables to politicians.

[-] huppakee@piefed.social 6 points 1 month ago

The one good thing in this is that the car remains the responsibility of the person driving it. That won't keep everybody safe, but at least nobody will get away with saying they got a faulty/imperfect car.

[-] minorkeys@lemmy.world 10 points 1 month ago

It's completely and utterly unreasonable to expect full auto drivers to be capable of being responsible. How attention works makes it impossible and is exactly the opposite of the entire value of self driving cars.

[-] Photonic@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago

No if they say it’s full self driving it should be full self driving and Tesla should stand behind that by taking responsibility of any claims for accidents that occur while FSD is engaged.

[-] Goldholz@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 1 month ago

"Your Honor, my clients joysticks were drifting. Thats why he crashed into the Winter market"

[-] WolfmanEightySix@piefed.social 6 points 1 month ago

How can they sell it as “full self driving” if it’s supervised?

[-] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 month ago

It's FSD when they sell it to morons, it's supervised when the car kills someone and Tesla avoids liability.

[-] Railcar8095@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

It means it's your fault when it accelerates in a red light because there was a green balloon in the vicinity.

[-] quediuspayu@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

(Supervised) should become the new but not really

[-] Airfried@piefed.social 4 points 1 month ago

Even supervised driving should only be legal if the remote driver resides in the same country with a legit drivers license and a taxi license. It's outlandish how "self-driving" cars rely on drivers from a different continent with no proof of proficiency.

[-] quediuspayu@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

What I understood is that supervised means that the driver still have to be paying attention to the driving and take control in case of something happens.
That's so they can blame the driver when something goes wrong. It's not the Full Self Driving (supervised)'s fault, it's the supervisor's fault for not supervising correctly.

[-] Kazel@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 1 month ago

Disqusting move from my neighbors

[-] tankplanker@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago

Last time I checked you have to have car insurance in Holland, car insurers will quickly make this unaffordable for drivers if its as bad as we know it has been as the insurers simply will not want to keep paying out large settlements.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 13 Apr 2026
396 points (98.1% liked)

Buy European

10406 readers
71 users here now

Overview:

The community to discuss buying European goods and services.


Matrix Chat of this community


Rules:

  • Be kind to each other, and argue in good faith. No direct insults nor disrespectful and condescending comments.

  • Do not use this community to promote Nationalism/Euronationalism. This community is for discussing European products/services and news related to that. For other topics the following might be of interest:

  • Include a disclaimer at the bottom of the post if you're affiliated with the recommendation.

  • No russian suggestions.

Feddit.uk's instance rules apply:

  • No racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia or xenophobia.
  • No incitement of violence or promotion of violent ideologies.
  • No harassment, dogpiling or doxxing of other users.
  • Do not share intentionally false or misleading information.
  • Do not spam or abuse network features.
  • Alt accounts are permitted, but all accounts must list each other in their bios.
  • No generative AI content.

Useful Websites

Benefits of Buying Local:

local investment, job creation, innovation, increased competition, more redundancy.

European Instances

Lemmy:

Friendica:

Matrix:


Related Communities:

Buy Local:

Continents:

European:

Buying and Selling:

Boycott:

Countries:

Companies:

Stop Publisher Kill Switch in Games Practice:


Banner credits: BYTEAlliance


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS