this post was submitted on 02 Apr 2025
1123 points (98.8% liked)

Technology

68306 readers
4099 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
 

TL;DR: Self-Driving Teslas Rear-End Motorcyclists, Killing at Least 5

Brevity is the spirit of wit, and I am just not that witty. This is a long article, here is the gist of it:

  • The NHTSA’s self-driving crash data reveals that Tesla’s self-driving technology is, by far, the most dangerous for motorcyclists, with five fatal crashes that we know of.
  • This issue is unique to Tesla. Other self-driving manufacturers have logged zero motorcycle fatalities with the NHTSA in the same time frame.
  • The crashes are overwhelmingly Teslas rear-ending motorcyclists.

Read our full analysis as we go case-by-case and connect the heavily redacted government data to news reports and police documents.

Oh, and read our thoughts about what this means for the robotaxi launch that is slated for Austin in less than 60 days.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 0x0@programming.dev 52 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (4 children)

This is news? Fortnine talked about it two years ago.
TL;DR Tesla removed LIDAR to save a buck and the cameras see two red dots that the 'puter thinks it's a far away car at night when indeed it's a close motorcycle.

[–] LesserAbe@lemmy.world 19 points 2 days ago (2 children)

It's helpful to remember that not everyone has seen the same stories you have. If we want something to change, like regulators not allowing dangerous products, then raising public awareness is important. Expressing surprise that not everyone knows about something can be counterproductive.

Going beyond that, wouldn't the new information here be the statistics?

[–] JordanZ@lemmy.world 13 points 2 days ago

My state allowed motorcycle filtering in 2019 (not the same as California’s lane splitting). They ran a study and found a ton of motorcyclists were being severely injured or killed while getting rear ended sitting at stop lights. Filtering allows them to move to the front of the traffic light while the light is red and traffic is stationary. Many people are super aggravated about it even though most of the world has been doing it basically forever.

[–] bluGill@fedia.io 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

like regulators not allowing dangerous products,

I include human drivers in the list of dangerous products I don't want allowed. The question is self driving safer overall (despite possible regressions like this). I don't want regulators to pick favorites. I want them to find "the truth"

[–] LesserAbe@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

Sure, we're in agreement as far as that goes. My point was just the commenter above me was indicating it should be common knowledge that Tesla self driving hits motorcycles more than other self driving cars. And whether their comment was about this or some other subject, I think it's counterproductive to be like "everyone knows that."

[–] AnUnusualRelic@lemmy.world 10 points 2 days ago

It could be two motorcycles side by side.

[–] explodicle@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 days ago (2 children)

It can't even perceive the depth of the lights?

[–] 0x0@programming.dev 6 points 2 days ago

Not with cameras alone, no.

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

Why not? It’s got multiple cameras so could judge distances the same way humans do.

However there have been both hardware and software updates since most of those, so the critical question is how much of a problem is it still? The article had no info or speculation on that

The argument is that humans can drive with just 2 eyes, so cameras are enough. I disagree with this position, given that the limitations of a camera-only system. But that's what it is.

Different sensors excel at different tasks and different conditions, and cameras are not always it.