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.

  • Not_mikey@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    Robots don’t get drunk, or distracted, or text, or speed…

    Anecdotally, I think the Waymos are more courteous than human drivers. Though waymo seems to be the best ones out so far, idk about the other services.

      • dogslayeggs@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        They have remote drivers that CAN take control in very corner case situations that the software can’t handle. The vast majority of driving is don’t without humans in the loop.

        • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          They don’t even do that, according to Waymo’s claims.

          They can suggest what the car should do, but they aren’t actually doing it. The car is in complete control.

          Its a nuanced difference, but it is a difference. A Waymo employee never takes control of or operates the vehicle.

          • KayLeadfoot@fedia.ioOP
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 days ago

            Interesting! I did not know that - I assumed the teleoperators took direct control, but that makes much more sense for latency reasons (among others)

            • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 days ago

              I always just assumed it was their way to ensure the vehicle was really autonomous. If you have someone remotely driving it, you could argue it isn’t actually an AV. Your latency idea makes a lot of sense as well though. Imagine taking over and causing an accident due to latency? This way even if the operator gives a bad suggestion, it was the car that ultimately did it.