this post was submitted on 17 Feb 2026
1044 points (99.5% liked)

Technology

81606 readers
4632 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
1044
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
[–] kameecoding@lemmy.world 6 points 2 days ago (2 children)

I am a Human and there were occasions where I couldn't tell if it's an obstacle on the road or a weird shadow...

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 6 points 2 days ago

And, we humans have built-in binocular vision that we've been training for at least 1.5 decades by the time we're allowed to drive.

Also, think about what you do in that situation where there's a weird shadow. Slow down, sure. But, also move our heads up and down, side to side, trying to use that powerful binocular vision to get different angles on that strange shadow. How many front-facing cameras does Tesla have. Maybe 3, and one of those is mounted on the bumper? In theory, 3 cameras could give it 3 different "viewpoints" for binocular vision. But, that's not as good as a human driver who can shift their eyes around to multiple points to examine a situation. And, if one of those 3 cameras is obscured (say the one on the bumper) you're down to basic binocular vision without even the ability to take a look from a different angle.

Plus, we have evidence that Tesla isn't even able to use its cameras to achieve binocular vision. If it worked, it shouldn't have fallen for the Wile E. Coyote trick.

[–] ageedizzle@piefed.ca 6 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Yes. In theory cameras should be enough to get you up to human level driving competence but even that is a low bar.

[–] NikkiDimes@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

I feel like camera only could theoretically pass human performance, but that hinges entirely on AI models that do not currently exist, and that those models, when they do exist, being capable of running inside of a damn car.

At that point, it'd be cheaper to just add LiDAR...

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

This is all true