Self-Driving Tesla Crashes into Wall Painted to Look Like a Road… Just Months Before Planned Robotaxi Launch
-
The link is in the comment you replied to.
How exactly were you not able to see that?Sorry, I mixed up 2 threads.
-
Mark Rober's video of the six tests (the remaining section is about mapping Space Mountain as Mark wanted to do since he was a kid)
Absolutely hilarious.
-
He did say lidar was "useless" though.
He also said the government doesn't use sql.
-
It was removed because it was giving false positives. They should have upgraded it with lidar but decided to just remove it.
Yeah, it might drive straight into a wall but at least it isn't returning false positives!
-
That's cool then, but probably not for me. And I still think it's misleading. If they made the analogy in the video it would be different. But as it is, it looks like clickbait.
And honestly using clickbait on children is actually worse. -
Fair point. But it doesn't address the other things i said, really.
But i suppose,based on already getting downvoted, that I've got a bad take, either that or people who are downvoting me dont understand i can hate tesla and elon, think their cars are shit and still see that tests like this can be nuanced. The attitude that paints with a broad brush is the type of attitude that got trump elected....
I agree the wall is convincing and that it’s not surprising that the Tesla didn’t detect it, but I think where your comment rubs the wrong way is that you seem to be letting Tesla off the hook for making a choice to use the wrong technology.
I think you and the article/video agree on the point that any car based only on images will struggle with this but the conclusion you drew is that it’s an unfair test while the conclusion should be that NO car should rely only on images.
Is this situation likely to happen in the real world? No. But that doesn’t make the test unfair to Tesla. This was an intentional choice they made and it’s absolutely fair to call them on dangers of that choice.
-
I wish all MAGAs a very DEI
Wow you guys even lost the ability to do syntax. I guess it was only a matter of time.
-
Since most grownups aren't interested in safety, I just thought it would be even less for kids.
All sales promotion stats show that car buyers basically don't care about safety features. Almost all significant safety features are there because of regulation.Edit:
I can only laugh at the downvoters, you know nothing. It's been a well established fact that safety doesn't sell cars since the 50's.Including the horrible angle of headrests these days. You're right though: nobody gives a shit about the extra safety features.
-
Because they don’t want their friend to die?
To kids, death is just a word.
-
Maybe I didn't have sound, and that's not the problem, the problem is the thumbnail for the video is clickbait, I don't get why I have to repeat that so many times?
I understand the joke of the analogy to cartoons, and it's perfectly fine they make that in the video. -
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!
Beep beep! Damn things are using ACME LiDAR!
-
Yes, but Styrofoam probably damages the car less than shards of glass.
Glass is far more likely to cause injuries to the driver or the people around the set, just from being heavier material than styrofoam.
-
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!
There's a very simple solution to autonomous driving vehicles plowing into walls, cars, or people:
Congress will pass a law that makes NOBODY liable -- as long as a human wasn't involved in the decision making process during the incident.
This will be backed by car makers, software providers, and insurance companies, who will lobby hard for it. After all, no SINGLE person or company made the decision to swerve into oncoming traffic. Surely they can't be held liable.
️Once that happens, Level 4 driving will come standard and likely be the default mode on most cars. Best of luck everyone else!
-
OK I see it now, a bunch of icons I usually glance over, because such "icon lines" are generally for a bunch of social media crap I don't use.
Apparently it's proprietary crap, so no thanks anyway.
https://github.com/ajayyy/DeArrow
https://sponsor.ajay.app/databaseThis (again) is from the link in the comment you replied to..
Your attitude really doesn't work well with your lack of reading comprehension. -
You think you're reliably going to notice this after a hundred miles of driving? (X) doubt.
Username checks out.
-
He did say lidar was "useless" though.
He's said humans don't use LiDAR so his cars shouldn't have to. Of course humans have a brain, and he's cars don't, but you can't tell him anything.
-
Who was the idiot that removed LiDar to cut costs?
/s
They are so expensive too! /s
Who would have known electronics gets cheaper all the time?? /j
-
Iirc they were using a combination of lidar and radar, but Elmo wanted to cut costs.
Did he want to cut costs or did he want a network of cameras at his control all over the world?
-
Why would children be interested in car safety?
When I was a kid I was extremely interested in junction layouts, it drove my parents mad. Kids like all sorts of random things.
-
You realize Mark Robers target audience is like 8 years old, right? He also references looney tunes and wile e coyote a couple dozen times, including in this thumbnail you're losing your mind over. The thumbnail fits the theme very well if you ask me.
This video isn't a rigorous scientific test. This is a children's video designed to get them interested in the scientific method. Get over yourself.
IMO it doesn't need to be a rigorous scientific test, it's not trying to prove something works as it should under all conditions. It's showing the exact opposite, it does not work under this one condition, which is more than enough to disprove the safety of the car.
