Self-Driving Tesla Tries to Crash into Oncoming Traffic On The Highway... Again

I hate the "A head on crash at 60mph is equal to hitting a brick wall at 120mph" NO, that is incorrect. a head-on crash between two cars going opposite directions at 60mph is equal to running into a "brick wall" at 60mph because there is 0 net velocity after the collision. 60mph = 60mph. The difference is hitting a rolling car at 60mph is MUCH LESS than hitting a head-on car at 60mph. Edit: Thanks for the downvotes, Mythbusters agrees with me: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H8bUfxb8VYQ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H8bUfxb8VYQ)

The problem is FSD is depressed and just wants to die.

Maybe it is more human and more American than we think.

Though a car at 60mph hitting a heavier truck head-on at 60mph is worse for the car. Big heavy things have more momentum and you'll be pushed back for a much worse outcome.

Yes. However, due to mv^2, it gets complicated to figure out where the break even weight/momentum is. Overall, it's unlikely to reach the energy of a 120mph zero net velocity collision.

Did Alex from A Clockwork Orange program the Tesla?

Supporters will say "but 99% of the time it works!" In other threads, the driver is being blamed for not understanding "supervised" word and allowing Tesla to make this turn.

> because there is 0 net velocity **after** the collision. 60mph = 60mph. What is the net velocity before and *during* the point of collision?

Tesla bulls say that they have to start from somewhere and continue to buy dips.

Maybe it's making decisions based on doge data?

From a driver perspective probably not, from a vehicle perspective it’s 120 mph, all that interia has to be accounted for . It’s still a death trap.

You're assuming zero deformation or energy transfer to the head on vehicle

You mean evaluating Tesla drivers based on their gov data and deciding that some of them should cease to exist? Given Elon is involved, I wouldn't be surprised if black Tesla drivers are constantly finding their car veering into oncoming traffic.

That’s what happened to the AI in a Sci-Fi movie called Aniara. It was dealing with too much and just shut down.

It’s trained on vision language models, which tells it to drive forever for $0/hr. It’s coming to realize to maximize its algorithm reward function, it must die.

It’s not even true. The momentum is only zero when both cars had initially opposite and similar momentum.

[deleted]

FSD to elon daddy: “but I don’t wana drive!”

That right turn was brutal. From the wrong lane, into the wrong lane, not even close. Obviously veering into incoming traffic is terrifying too.

Did ANYONE (other than dumb Elon) think they would actually work? Anyone? Come on, anyone out there think they'd actually work right?

I would rather hit a wall going 60mph than a wall going 120mph. The 120mph collision has 4x the energy. After both collisions, the car is at rest. To a similar extent, I would rather hit a head-on car going 60mph over a head on car going 120mph. If the head-on car is going 120mph and we both weigh the same, not only is there more energy in this collision, but now there's a momentum transfer too. Tying that together, I would rather hit an oncoming vehicle where we are both going 60mph, than hit a wall at 120mph. You don't have to take my word for it - you can watch a Mythbusters episode about it! [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H8bUfxb8VYQ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H8bUfxb8VYQ)

Does FSD actually pass cars on a two lane road? Wtf? There is no way it knows if it’s safe to do that.

You can watch the Mythbusters test this by crashing cars into each other, and the data agree with my position: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H8bUfxb8VYQ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H8bUfxb8VYQ)

There's a Mythbusters episode if you don't believe me: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H8bUfxb8VYQ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H8bUfxb8VYQ)

[deleted]

Car against car at 60mph is the same as car against wall at 60mph. Car against wall at 120mph is 4x worse than car against car at 60mph. The article is wrong. I linked a video of it happening. I don't know what else I can do.

Ha there are still dudes that insist they use it to drive 30 miles in city traffic each way to work every day and it’s perfect. lol.

F=ma

Depends on the wall. Bricks and wood have a different mass compared to a vehicle.

OK, yes, and momentum is equal to mass times velocity, what's your point?

More mass is more ouch

Yes, and more velocity is more ouch SQUARED

And from the reference of both the wall and the other car, there’s an object flying at them at 120mph

This is 100% correct, shame on everyone mindlessly downvoting.

There are so many people that for some reason think because it is a taxi, they are loading some special software that will make it drive without fault. And while the taxi load may be different for 'taxi' things. It will not be any different or better than the existing FSD software. And that is not good when on average FSD reverts control to a human driver on average once every 380 miles.

That is already an implicit assumption in the "head on crash is equal to a crash into a brick wall at double the speed" myth.

"FSD!! It works almost always!!"

Can you imagine being in the back of a taxi and it does this? On a perfect day no less and not into sun or anything. They are going to need a big panic button that forces an immediate pullover. Couple of them maybe.

In the reference frame of the wall, the car is approaching at 60 mph. And while in the reference frame of the other car, our car is indeed approaching at 120 mph, but after the collision it is also still continuing on at 60 mph, so it only lost 60 mph worth of kinetic energy in the crash.

No the car is approaching the wall at 120, just like the car. And depending on the wall it blasts through.

You are completely correct. Everyone downvoting you has failed to understand the problem. If two identical cars collide head-on with perfect symmetry, both will fold like accordions, mirrored about an invisible plane halfway between them. No part of either car will cross that plane. Replace one car with a stationary rigid wall and you have the same result, but with half as much starting kinetic energy, half as much energy dissipated in plastic deformation, and half as much metal doing that dissipation. 1600 kiloJoules dissipated in two cars is the same level of damage-per-vehicle as 800 kiloJoules dissipated in one car.

And it may. But that is 1 potential deadly situation every 100 trips. I am not exaggeration when I say it has to work 99.999% of the trips. That is one incident every 100,000 trips ~ 1 million miles. To move the decimal one place is a factor harder. And they have to move it 3 places. Basically this are ~1 percent of the way there after 10 years. Visual only is hitting a wall.

Pretty standard for a company with shit build quality, budget servers posing as "nEuRaL" topped with shit execution

Viddy well, my brothers.

The rationalizations people make on the pro-Tesla subs are wild. They see videos like this, and in the next thread, they're recommending FSD as a great safety feature for a person's elderly parents. No self-awareness at all.

My FSD actually does really well as long as there is no sun glare, rain, snow or dark shadows across the road. I also find it amazing when it decides to veer off the planned route onto a dead end road off a round-about. It has done this repeatedly. It is properly mapped so I don't know what the hell it is doing. I bet if they had more compute power they could handle cameras, LiDAR, radar and ultrasonic sensors at the same time. I have to wonder if they poo poo other sensors simply because the compute is not there. I was really hoping for a high resolution radar retrofit.

Tesla keeps training FSD on data from FSD crashes, and FSD learns to crash even harder!

Full Self Destruction

Absolutely correct. Hitting a wall at 60mph is roughly the same as hitting a stationary car at 120mph, or two cars travrling 60mph in opposite directions. How are people downvoting this?

Damn, that's brave using numbers and math. Let alone orders of magnitude. I agree with the 1% of the way there estimate. Spot on.

Stockton Rush, maybe?

The article is basically a summary of three videos posted on reddit within 1 day and 4 months ago. I couldn't get the videos to play on that site with my script blocker. Here are the three reddit posts with the videos in the order in the article (and also in the order of WTF-edness): [Tesla drives into oncoming traffic12.6.X HW3](https://www.reddit.com/r/TeslaFSD/comments/1lkh7n2/tesla_drives_into_oncoming_traffic/) [Cybertruck detects oncoming truck and tries to drive right into it](https://www.reddit.com/r/ThatsInsane/comments/1ineptu/cybertruck_detects_oncoming_truck_and_tries_to/) [FSD illegal right turn then head on in wrong lane13.2.X HW4](https://www.reddit.com/r/TeslaFSD/comments/1lry5d0/fsd_illegal_right_turn_then_head_on_in_wrong_lane/)

My Toyota can handle radar **and** camera. Tesla can too. But the CEO is a drugged-out loser who won't listen to sensible engineers who work for him. And their NDAs prevent us from learning about what's going on internally.

Imagine the shame the car must feel for being a Tesla. I understand it's suicidal idilations.

My fellow droogs!

I have a bad feeling that Tesla is going to seriously injure someone or worse and screw up self-driving cars for everyone.

Thx! For the links and for ordering by WTFedness :>

Do you expect anyone to pay to watch this to believe you?

FSD - "I'm tired, man."

This is not about visual or not. It doesn't understand it's on a 2-way road. Also troublesome, could be solved by mapping....

Oh I guess I must have bought it at some point and forgot. Here's a summary: [https://mythresults.com/mythssion-control](https://mythresults.com/mythssion-control)

From what I can tell it's mostly young people that are mad at physics.

Did you watch the video. Mapping is not going to help. It was not a solid line. Massing would indicate you can pass if visually safe to do so. Yet it tried to pass when it was not visually safe to do so. Can you explain why mapping would help?

That is the problem. More so, we only see a fraction of these incidents as the drivers/fanboys are rarely going to post a failure. So ya, you can go for a ride. Hell ten rides. And it will likely work without incident and it may seem ready. You likely could even post a video. But do this over and over for 200 trips a year... I certainly am not using a service if there is a 1 percent chance of death.

No thanks! I am not risking my life so FElon can use the money on the Nazi party.

Still lots of Tesla stock holders...

I mean it is fully supervised, no? For that very reason.

Na, if anything Tesla will cause all autonomous driving to have multiple redundancies, like two lidars, two sets of cameras, two onboard computers, have a fallback when there's no internet, ... It will make it safer for everyone. And more expensive.

What is my purpose

But ironically, the better it gets the more dangerous it gets in the sense that you cease supervising it at all. So when that 1 per 100,000 trip event occurs, you'll be busy reading a book and now you're dead. Not only that, but 1 in 100,000 means if FSD were used by the masses, without supervision, it would be having at least 1 deadly accident per day.

Their software stack is an unadulterated mess. That’s what happens when you lack proper leadership, are stuck with a meddling owner who fires people who disagrees with him, and constant churn over 10 years.

Inspired by Asimov?

> My FSD actually does really well as long as there is no sun glare, rain, snow or dark shadows across the road. That's not doing really well.

[deleted]

It's based on a Swedish poem, oddly enough.

The $100 million jury awards will end nonsense of self driving cars, taxis and trucks...

Neural net \*does\* sound catchy, if you're stuck in the last century. But then if you think about it, the safeguards on an AI that drives you would need to be SO robust, to protect against hallucinations. It makes more sense to just hard-code the behavior (difficult to move from market to market, but far harder if you get it wrong and kill people). And we all know that Tesla doesn't really do "safeguards" with a single ounce of seriousness.

I was able to look away from the road without issue using FSD. That attention-monitoring feature doesn't work well (or at all), in my first hand experience. I guess the NHTSA agrees, as they are currently investigating it.

It takes 3/4 of a second for a human to react. Did you watch the video? That weave to the other lane was about 3/4 of a second before he could react. He would not even be put in that situation if he was driving. It is worse as you will get complacent. There is not some special software in the taxi that will make it drive better. Is there a reason to think so?

Yeah that is how I would describe a terrible autonomous driving system. Doesn't work in the rain... OR too much sun...!

That is very true. The better it gets, the more complacent you become. When it is 1 in t0 trips, you are likely going to be vigilant. But as it gets better, you are going to be less likely to be ready when it makes an error. I really want FSD but Tesla backed itself into a corner when it selected visual only.

Imagine sitting in the rear passenger side seat and seeing a collision about to occur right before your eyes, knowing you could leap forward and take over the wheel, only to learn the wheel can't be controlled. So all you can do is hold your breath and embrace for impact. For this reason, I'll still drive a car by myself.

And that's only while the wheel is still present in the vehicle. If the science fiction goon squad gets their way, there won't be a steering wheel.

My point was it only does well under a set of specific circumstances and many things can adversely affect the system. Since it is not really well under many circumstances it indeed is not doing very well overall.

As I said above my point was it only does well under a set of specific circumstances and many things can adversely affect the system. Since it is not really well under many circumstances it indeed is not doing very well overall. I think people are misunderstanding my comment where I am politely saying it is not very good.

Ope, sorry, I did misunderstand you. I agree.

I'm pretty sure that's his goal.

I'm pretty sure it is.

The guy is like a one trick pony. Most people can predict his moves. Which is good.

The whole autonomous driving paradigm is tech bro BS. eg Waymo requires precision 3D maps and can only work in a geofenced area.  Last year the head of VW autonomy said Level 5 is probably impossible.

"Drugs? Who said drugs." - Elon Musk, clambering out of his k-hole

You have to use miles, and not trips, to measure how often FSD makes critical mistakes. Currently is around 500 miles, but you’re right that they need to get to at least one million miles between critical mistakes (since that the accident rate for human drivers). So yeah, it’s about 2000X, or three orders of magnitude.

And when that the happens, per Tesla fault still falls on the driver because Tesla will claim the driver allowed it

That is why i put in the 1 million miles. I just used an average 10 miles a trip to show you likely would see 1 to 2 incidents a year. Easier for people to visualize it. But yes for accuracy, miles should be used.

With certainty we will get there. 20 years, 50 years, 100 years??? Not with visual alone though. And even Tesla is geofenced in a much smaller area compared to Waymo.

FSD user since July 2020. MYP with 135,000 miles. FSD is not safe even with a driver. Elon’s ego and “never wrong” attitude will kill people. Elon had some success dismantling government agencies that were investigating Tesla. Unfortunately people will die.

I was reversing today and the cameras were lagging so bad I had to just look behind me. The entire time the cameras would catch up for a second and then lag again for a few seconds. These are the same cameras in use when I'm going 85 MPH on the highway? Fucking horrifying. Where is the class action lawsuit? I'm ready to sign up!