21–30 of 130 posts
If you have to anxiously hover your hands over the wheel constantly like the driver is in this video, is it really helpful even if it doesn't crash? I don't own a Tesla, curious how other drivers are when on Autopilot.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Agree, it didn't hit anything, even though it might've without intervention. "into" is the misleading part.
Right, and it didn't "veer" either, it performed a normal turn. The pedestrians had just started crossing, so it was in the wrong, but barely . It's the sort of manoeuvre that you see human drivers do all the time.
>it didn't "veer" either, it performed a normal turn.
The definition of veer is "to change direction". This did that. Stop arguing semantics.
>The pedestrians had just started crossing
I fail to see how this matters at all. Even if the pedestrians hadn't started crossing yet, and were still on the sidewalk, it would have been wrong for the Tesla to make the turn without yielding to the peds.
Shitty sudden turn against the no-turn sign without using a turn signal aside, why was it turning right at all when the route showed it going straight for another several blocks and then turning left?
Misleading/Exaggerated HN title. Not an illegal turn. No turn sign applies to the left lane, and it's a one way street
[edit] I linked to the law from the wrong state. Here's the right one:
https://app.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=46.61.305
RCWs > Title 46 > Chapter 46.61 > Section 46.61.305
(1) No person shall turn a vehicle or move right or left upon a roadway unless and until such movement can be made with reasonable safety nor without giving an appropriate signal in the manner hereinafter provided.
(2) A signal of intention to turn or move right or left when required shall be given continuously during not less than the last one hundred feet traveled by the vehicle before turning.
Every other state has similar laws.
The Tesla was not signaling before or during that turn. That on its own makes the turn illegal.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Agree, it didn't hit anything, even though it might've without intervention. "into" is the misleading part.
Right, and it didn't "veer" either, it performed a normal turn. The pedestrians had just started crossing, so it was in the wrong, but barely . It's the sort of manoeuvre that you see human drivers do all the time.
"You must yield to pedestrians entering or using a crosswalk in your travel path."
At least one pedestrian was unambiguously "using a crosswalk" in the car's travel path, and the other one was entering the crosswalk as well. I wouldn't consider this a marginal case.
I think Teslas are otherwise great cars but I would never use FSD in a million years. I think it should be banned on public streets until it's gone through testing that is far more rigorous.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Agree, it didn't hit anything, even though it might've without intervention. "into" is the misleading part.
Right, and it didn't "veer" either, it performed a normal turn. The pedestrians had just started crossing, so it was in the wrong, but barely . It's the sort of manoeuvre that you see human drivers do all the time.
when it comes to hitting pedestrians, i dont think you can shade that in terms of "barely". either it is or isnt
The video in the Tweet replies is even worse, IMO: https://twitter.com/TaylorOgan/status/1437743602579423233 The Tesla FSD would've caused a t-bone in the first two clips, and a head-on collision at decent speed in the third clip. Yikes.
Level 3+ requires AGI for unmapped non-highway roads. Change my mind.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Agree, it didn't hit anything, even though it might've without intervention. "into" is the misleading part.
Right, and it didn't "veer" either, it performed a normal turn. The pedestrians had just started crossing, so it was in the wrong, but barely . It's the sort of manoeuvre that you see human drivers do all the time.