I was curious how people working on self driving cars handle the large variation in local and region traffic laws and did a bit of searching.
For example in some places a car making a turn that will cross a bike lane is required to merge into the bike lane before the turn (California and Washington for example). On others (Oregon for example) the car must not do so.
School buses are another good example. On a road with lanes in both directions when do you stop for a school bus heading the opposite way that is stopped with its red lights flashing and stop sign extended?
In some place the answer is "always". In others it depends on how many lanes there and whether or not there is a barrier like a median strip between the two directions.
One approach is to not let your self driving system operate in places where you have not explicitly added all the local and regional rules to your system.
Another approach is to try to learn the area with AI. It sees lots of humans making turns from the bike lane, it makes its turns from the bike lane too.
An issue with that approach is that a lot of humans violate traffic laws, so you have the danger that your self driving system learns to violate traffic laws.
Really, your first instinct is: "The journalists are engaging in a baseless smear campaign."
The video evidence clearly demonstrates it engaging in a clearly signed illegal maneuver that it should never have even begun. Furthermore, your mischaracterization of the video is significant. The car straightens out having crossed the pedestrian walkway clearly indicated on the dash screen. The dash screen clearly indicates the vehicle intending to continue to travel on the bike-only road.
In addition, this is Tesla's own official curated video [1]. Tesla is the one who decided that failure to obey clearly indicated signs and engaging in a illegal maneuver is the best representation of their product they could muster.
The text explains turning right at all in that intersection (as shown in the video) is illegal. Edit to add: the car ignored two different signposts, bicycle symbol painted in the lane and yellow centre-marker (indicates everything left of the cycle lane is traffic going towards you). It’s also a promotional video (not approval video), which could explain the sudden cut?
I stand corrected. It doesn't get very far but it turns into it. I didn't notice it's the same lane because after the cut back to approval vid signs were conveniently obscured and because it's bike-only road not just an extra lane. They better pull the permit after this if they are serious about bicyclists in that country.
A driver might get a ticket. The navigation data will be updated. The next version might be better at interpreting signs (or a better balance between the navigation data and visual perception). The end.
Depending on what the car does, the driver might lose a point on their drivers license.
Once you’ve lost three points within three years, you lose your drivers license and will have to retake it. Depending on circumstances you might have a ban for some amount of time(finite or indefinite).
So now I am in a beta test as a vehicle dummy without a chance to opt out. My model Y can’t keep lanes what my entry level Škoda does perfectly fine. My model Y slams on the brakes occasionally when I try cruise control feature on empty highway. I reported this defect as a case for warranty, but according Tesla this is fine functionality.
Do you mean FSD or Autosteer (or Autopilot or whatever it's called now). I think Tesla left Autosteer purposefully crappy. FSD is excellent at keeping the lane, way better than what your Škoda can do.
I agree it is intentional. They haven't updated autosteer, as far as I can tell, since the Model 3 was released. Certainly my 2023 (sold a couple weeks ago) was no better than my 2019 was, and notably worse than my Ford Lightning. Outside of FSD, most everyone else makes superior TACC & lane centering now.
Self driving without lidar just inherently feels very unsafe. There are like a million things we can’t see, especially at night and in bad weather. I just wish they would suck up their pride and put in solid state lidars in their new models (which are very cheap now) so we can actually have good self driving that is actually available directly to the consumer.
Having watched a lot of the Tesla self driving videos. It seems to be getting pretty good but it’s still only at like 98 or 99% reliability what that means is I can’t go to sleep in the car and it needs to get to the point like a waymo where you can just go to sleep in the car.
Skynet has indeed begun. There was a post recently about the very first time completely independent non-humans chose to kill humans (Russians) in the Russia-Ukraine conflict.
Might make sense, in California's driver handbook you're required to pull into the bike lane to make a turn if the bike lane is there. Part of that programming should have already existed given where Teslas were made.
No, as can be clearly seen from the video, it is doing a right turn onto a road where the only lane is a full-size lane with a sign indicating that cars are not allowed to use that road in that direction.
That's wild. In Oregon you will get a ticket for driving in the bike lane at all, turn or not. The only exception are bike lanes that go straight and briefly share a turning lane, but those are clearly marked for that purpose.
Good reminder that you should always be aware of local traffic laws when you travel, most places in the US are similar but not identical.
If there is a sign which explicitly bans cars from entering it is still illegal (I assume; I never took the drivers license in California). In the video you can clearly see the street has a sign that says no cars and no motorcycles. The Tesla presumably saw that sign and either doesn’t recognize it (unlikely) or has a software telling the car to ignore it (more likely).
It most likely does not recognize the sign. Last I saw, after years of furious development they were still unable to recognize standard "Do Not Enter", "Road Closed", and "One Way" signs in the US. Here is a video [1] from a week ago where it fails to recognize a clearly visible "Do Not Enter" sign with "One Way" road indications.
You should have shown the original video and not from Dan O'Dowd. He is not interested in pedestrian safety in any way, he is doing this only to promote his own company, Green Hills Software, with alleged conflict of interest.
This is a lane only for bikes, with no car lane going the same direction. It's like turning onto train tracks (and if you keep going down it, you might well be stuck).
I was curious how people working on self driving cars handle the large variation in local and region traffic laws and did a bit of searching.
For example in some places a car making a turn that will cross a bike lane is required to merge into the bike lane before the turn (California and Washington for example). On others (Oregon for example) the car must not do so.
School buses are another good example. On a road with lanes in both directions when do you stop for a school bus heading the opposite way that is stopped with its red lights flashing and stop sign extended?
In some place the answer is "always". In others it depends on how many lanes there and whether or not there is a barrier like a median strip between the two directions.
One approach is to not let your self driving system operate in places where you have not explicitly added all the local and regional rules to your system.
Another approach is to try to learn the area with AI. It sees lots of humans making turns from the bike lane, it makes its turns from the bike lane too.
An issue with that approach is that a lot of humans violate traffic laws, so you have the danger that your self driving system learns to violate traffic laws.
I don't speak the language but I wonder why the video doesn't show it actually entering the lane...
Really, your first instinct is: "The journalists are engaging in a baseless smear campaign."
The video evidence clearly demonstrates it engaging in a clearly signed illegal maneuver that it should never have even begun. Furthermore, your mischaracterization of the video is significant. The car straightens out having crossed the pedestrian walkway clearly indicated on the dash screen. The dash screen clearly indicates the vehicle intending to continue to travel on the bike-only road.
In addition, this is Tesla's own official curated video [1]. Tesla is the one who decided that failure to obey clearly indicated signs and engaging in a illegal maneuver is the best representation of their product they could muster.
[1] https://x.com/teslaeurope/status/2064350518907167166
Unfortunately journalists do engage in baseless smear campaigns? This seems like a legitimate concern
And companies engage in far more shady things than they get "smeared" for in the press.
Jeez, AI auto response agents are going to bury the world in astroturf
No, it was not my instinct.
The text explains turning right at all in that intersection (as shown in the video) is illegal. Edit to add: the car ignored two different signposts, bicycle symbol painted in the lane and yellow centre-marker (indicates everything left of the cycle lane is traffic going towards you). It’s also a promotional video (not approval video), which could explain the sudden cut?
It does in the last 2 to 3 seconds. You can see the Tesla driving into it as the video ends. It is a weird spot to end the video.
I stand corrected. It doesn't get very far but it turns into it. I didn't notice it's the same lane because after the cut back to approval vid signs were conveniently obscured and because it's bike-only road not just an extra lane. They better pull the permit after this if they are serious about bicyclists in that country.
A driver might get a ticket. The navigation data will be updated. The next version might be better at interpreting signs (or a better balance between the navigation data and visual perception). The end.
If a driver would get a ticket, shouldn't Tesla also get a ticket?
In the US, drivers kill pedestrians all the time and are barely punished.
Is this the same standard that should be adopted everywhere?
How did we get from turning into a bike lane to killing pedestrians?
Depending on what the car does, the driver might lose a point on their drivers license.
Once you’ve lost three points within three years, you lose your drivers license and will have to retake it. Depending on circumstances you might have a ban for some amount of time(finite or indefinite).
The driver will be more attentive next time, while Tesla is working on improvements.
Might be better, might be worse, or the company simply does not care enough.
Five EU countries have now approved, including Belgium, which is interesting considering Brussels (ECC "capital").
So now I am in a beta test as a vehicle dummy without a chance to opt out. My model Y can’t keep lanes what my entry level Škoda does perfectly fine. My model Y slams on the brakes occasionally when I try cruise control feature on empty highway. I reported this defect as a case for warranty, but according Tesla this is fine functionality.
Do you mean FSD or Autosteer (or Autopilot or whatever it's called now). I think Tesla left Autosteer purposefully crappy. FSD is excellent at keeping the lane, way better than what your Škoda can do.
It’s old free Autopilot. It doesn’t convince me to buy FSD, hardware is the same at the end.
I am used that demo shows best features of the product…
I agree it is intentional. They haven't updated autosteer, as far as I can tell, since the Model 3 was released. Certainly my 2023 (sold a couple weeks ago) was no better than my 2019 was, and notably worse than my Ford Lightning. Outside of FSD, most everyone else makes superior TACC & lane centering now.
Autosteer is disabled on all new vehicles too, part of forcing people to buy FSD.
I feel like many won’t consider FSD if their autopilot doesn’t work well.
Maybe they did some market analysis. I find the idea that a shitty autopilot will trigger FSD conversions to be very optimistic.
You can opt out by selling it. I suppose if you think it's enough of an issue you could do us all a favor and just have it crushed.
As a pedestrian, can you sell your neighbor's dangerous car?
How does that help everyone else on the streets? Everyone becomes a victim of poorly working automated driving.
Self driving without lidar just inherently feels very unsafe. There are like a million things we can’t see, especially at night and in bad weather. I just wish they would suck up their pride and put in solid state lidars in their new models (which are very cheap now) so we can actually have good self driving that is actually available directly to the consumer.
Having watched a lot of the Tesla self driving videos. It seems to be getting pretty good but it’s still only at like 98 or 99% reliability what that means is I can’t go to sleep in the car and it needs to get to the point like a waymo where you can just go to sleep in the car.
Bike Street
because thats what elon would do
Reality Distortion Field in full effect.
At first I thought Tesla AI is stupid, trying to kill humans here.
Then I realised: skynet has begun ... it does not care about humans.
Skynet has indeed begun. There was a post recently about the very first time completely independent non-humans chose to kill humans (Russians) in the Russia-Ukraine conflict.
I’m pretty sure non-human tigers have been killing humans for ages.
Tigers can initiate global thermal nuclear war?
What a comment
Might make sense, in California's driver handbook you're required to pull into the bike lane to make a turn if the bike lane is there. Part of that programming should have already existed given where Teslas were made.
No, as can be clearly seen from the video, it is doing a right turn onto a road where the only lane is a full-size lane with a sign indicating that cars are not allowed to use that road in that direction.
Makes sense to use software modeled on California laws in software made for Denmark's laws for sure.
That's wild. In Oregon you will get a ticket for driving in the bike lane at all, turn or not. The only exception are bike lanes that go straight and briefly share a turning lane, but those are clearly marked for that purpose.
Good reminder that you should always be aware of local traffic laws when you travel, most places in the US are similar but not identical.
If there is a sign which explicitly bans cars from entering it is still illegal (I assume; I never took the drivers license in California). In the video you can clearly see the street has a sign that says no cars and no motorcycles. The Tesla presumably saw that sign and either doesn’t recognize it (unlikely) or has a software telling the car to ignore it (more likely).
It most likely does not recognize the sign. Last I saw, after years of furious development they were still unable to recognize standard "Do Not Enter", "Road Closed", and "One Way" signs in the US. Here is a video [1] from a week ago where it fails to recognize a clearly visible "Do Not Enter" sign with "One Way" road indications.
[1] https://bsky.app/profile/realdanodowd.bsky.social/post/3mnhw...
You should have shown the original video and not from Dan O'Dowd. He is not interested in pedestrian safety in any way, he is doing this only to promote his own company, Green Hills Software, with alleged conflict of interest.
The original: https://x.com/DirtyTesLa/status/2062260954709049840 or https://xcancel.com/DirtyTesLa/status/2062260954709049840.
This is a lane only for bikes, with no car lane going the same direction. It's like turning onto train tracks (and if you keep going down it, you might well be stuck).
Dude, there is a sign saying it's not a road for cars. Its driving into a road its banned from entering. It means Tesla can't even read road signs.