this post was submitted on 17 Feb 2026
1043 points (99.5% liked)

Technology

81606 readers
4620 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 news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  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, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
L3s@hackingne.ws
1043
Tesla Robotaxis Reportedly Crashing at a Rate That's 4x Higher Than Humans (gizmodo.com)
submitted 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) by spaghettiwestern@sh.itjust.works to c/technology@lemmy.world
174 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Self-driving cars are often marketed as safer than human drivers, but new data suggests that may not always be the case.

Citing data from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), Electrek reports that Tesla disclosed five new crashes involving its robotaxi fleet in Austin. The new data raises concerns about how safe Tesla’s systems really are compared to the average driver.

The incidents included a collision with a fixed object at 17 miles per hour, a crash with a bus while the Tesla vehicle was stopped, a crash with a truck at four miles per hour, and two cases where Tesla vehicles backed into fixed objects at low speeds.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] T156@lemmy.world 58 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Even if they were, would it not be better to give the car better senses?

Humans don't have LIDAR because we can't just hook something into a human's brain and have it work. If you can do that with a self-driving car, why cut it down to human senses?

[–] 48954246@lemmy.world 35 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Exactly, with this logic why have motors or wheels?

You don't have wheels so you shouldn't use cars

[–] ageedizzle@piefed.ca 5 points 3 days ago (3 children)

I agree it would be better. I'm just saying that in theory cameras are all that would be required to achieve human level performance, so long as the AI was capable enough

[–] AtrusOfDni@lemmy.world 6 points 2 days ago

Except if I get something to replace me, it better do better than me, not just just as good. So I would expect better sensors.

[–] Bronzebeard@lemmy.zip 7 points 2 days ago

Except humans have self cleaning lenses. Cars don't.

[–] embed_me@programming.dev 10 points 2 days ago (1 children)

"So long as the AI has the same intelligence as a human brain" is a pretty big assumption. That assumption is in sci-fi territory.

[–] ageedizzle@piefed.ca 3 points 2 days ago

Yeah thats my point