• @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      312 months ago

      Because it’s an extremely narrowly defined set of requirements in order to use it. It’s “approved freeways with clear markings and moderate to heavy traffic under 40MPH during daytime hours and clear conditions” meaning it will inch forward for you in bumper to bumper traffic provided you’re in an approved area and that’s it.

      https://www.mbusa.com/en/owners/manuals/drive-pilot

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            12 months ago

            Well, not always hands on wheel. I have spent over an hour straight on an interstate with hands off. Ford’s system watches your eyes and lets your hands stay off if it’s decent conditions and on a LIDAR-mapped freeway. Note I wouldn’t trust it at night (there have been two crashes, both at night with stopped vehicles on freeway), but then I wouldn’t really trust myself at night either too much (there are many many more human caused crashes at night, I’m not sure a human at freeway speed could avoid a crash with a surprise stationary vehicle in middle of the road).

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -42 months ago

        Still seems not legal to not pay attention to the road. Wouldn’t fly over here at least.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      202 months ago

      They got certification from the authorities, and in the event of an accident, the manufacturer takes on responsibility.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -262 months ago

        lol, ‘manufacturer takes on responsibility’ so… I’m just fucked if one of these hits me?

        see a mercedes, shoot a mercedes. destroy it in whatever way you can.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          332 months ago

          No you’re guaranteed that the Mercedes that hit you is better insured for paying out your damages than pretty much anyone else on the road that could hit you.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -62 months ago

            lol corporations don’t have responsibility though. that’s the whole point of them. they’re machines for avoiding responsibility.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              -22 months ago

              In this case the responsibility to pay will ultimately fall on everyone, not just on the pedestrian getting hit. Still not good, but you won’t be SOL.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                -12 months ago

                If these have lidar (unlike teslas) then they might be better at detecting obstructions but I feel like real world road conditions are not kind to cameras and sensors.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  22 months ago

                  Fixed lidar sensors are not as reliable as it’s made out to be, unfortunately. Dome lidar systems like those found on Waymo vehicles are pretty good, but way more advanced (and expensive) than anything you’d find in consumer vehicles at the moment. The shadows of trees are enough to render basic lidar sensors useless, as they effectively produce an aperiodic square wave of infrared light (from the sun) that is frequently inseparable from the ToF emission signal. Sunsets are also sometimes enough to completely blind lidar sensors.

                  None of this is to say that Tesla’s previous camera-only approach was a good idea, like at all. More data is always a good thing, so long as the system doesn’t rely on the data more than the data’s reliability permits. After all, cameras can be blinded by sunlight too. IMO radar is the best economical complementary sensor to cameras at the moment. Despite the comparatively low accuracy, they are very reliable in adverse conditions.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -112 months ago

            The sad part of this is somehow thinking that payment solves any problem. Like, idk what they would pay me, just bring back my dead wife/child/father whatever. You can’t fix everything with money.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              82 months ago

              It only works on a small handful of freeways (read: no pedestrians) in California/Nevada, and only under 40 MPH. The odds of a crash within those parameters resulting in a fatality are quite low.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              52 months ago

              Human drivers are far more dangerous on the road, and you should be applauding assisted driving development.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                1
                edit-2
                2 months ago

                This presumes the options are only:

                • Human and no autonomous system watching
                • Autonomous system, with no meaningful human attention

                Key word is ‘assisted’ driving. ADAS should roughly be a nice add, so long as human attention is policed. Ultimately, the ADAS systems are better able to react to some situations, but may utterly make some stupid calls in exceptional scenarios.

                Here, the bar of ‘no human paying attention at all’ is one I’m not entirely excited about celebrating. Of course the conditions are “daytime traffic jam only”, where risk is pretty small, you might have a fender bender, pedestrians are almost certainly not a possibility, and the conditions are supremely monotonous, which is a great area for ADAS but not a great area for bored humans.