Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
3 hours ago, Parliament said:

Abandoned shitbox pickups at an abandoned B, B&B in and abandoned city. Set piece for Robocop 3.

The FSD just has to kick in and we are set for Robocop vs Tesla.

Posted
1 hour ago, SydneyCarton said:

I'd buy a ton of them, and then park the in front of all the neighbors houses I dislike, and just leave them there. 

great way to get locked up for attempted arson

  • Haha 3
Posted (edited)
On 5/22/2025 at 12:25 PM, Chopper said:

Correction: Narrowly miss a direct hit.

image.thumb.png.e9de571bbcec441ad42499cfcf990bd1.png

 

image.thumb.png.816a2007eab672ec93002709fd7bb329.png

 

 

On 5/23/2025 at 10:41 AM, Chopper said:

A very measured response to the breathless reactions to one redditor's viral FSD anecdote.  (Spoiler alert... the actual vehicle data do not support the redditor's version of events.)

 

p.s.  Hi @Felix!

Edited by Guadaloopy
  • Fuck You 1
Posted
19 minutes ago, Guadaloopy said:

 

A very measured response to the breathless reactions to one redditor's viral FSD anecdote.  (Spoiler alert... the actual vehicle data do not support the redditor's version of events.)

 

p.s.  Hi @Felix!

 

Actually he nails it right at 2:30: This was indeed a Full Self Driving Crash.

 

End of argument, he said it, here's that clip cued up, you can stop 2 seconds later.

https://youtu.be/JoXAUfF029I?si=KLjvVmRlHfychouH&t=150

 

Posted
28 minutes ago, Guadaloopy said:

 

A very measured response to the breathless reactions to one redditor's viral FSD anecdote.  (Spoiler alert... the actual vehicle data do not support the redditor's version of events.)

 

p.s.  Hi @Felix!

Can't you fucking defend Tesla until your dying breath on another goddamn forum? You're so fucking annoying, jesus christ.

It was a FSD crash. SHUT THE FUCK UP.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
15 minutes ago, Brian Fantana said:

Can't you fucking defend Tesla until your dying breath on another goddamn forum?

I thought DT was for sharing news and information about news stories.  I'll stay right here, thanks.

Posted
9 minutes ago, Guadaloopy said:

I thought DT was for sharing news and information about news stories.  I'll stay right here, thanks.

Yeah that's totally what you're doing and not being an annoying twat because you happened to buy a Tesla as per usual.

Posted
4 minutes ago, Samson's Wig said:

Who knew Operation Weserübung would have such far-reaching implications?  Fucking Norwegians, man.

Man....and they still fucking HATE them some nazis.  The museum at the Akershus fortress is all about "here's how utterly fucky the Nazis were, and here's how much we hated them.  And we executed that fucker Quisling right over there -- get your photo taken on the exact spot where we ventilated the shit outta him!"  So, you know.....going full Nazi when trying to sell them cars is certainly a choice.

  • Like 3
Posted (edited)
54 minutes ago, Brian Fantana said:

Can't you fucking defend Tesla until your dying breath on another goddamn forum? You're so fucking annoying, jesus christ.

It was a FSD crash. SHUT THE FUCK UP.

 

I watched the video - I would argue that it POTENTIALLY could absolve FSD as the cause of the crash.

MAYBE

But not fully (because even guy in the video say that it could have been the FSD system doing this).

AND

It really raises another issues with FSD that is a problem 7:10 of the video (until about 7:35) - FSD and Autopilot it sounds like does not give warnings when disengaged inadvertently. He outlines in that clips that the NHTSA did analysis of crashes, there were 43 instances that Autopilot was inadvertently disengaged by the driver and they did not know.

That shouldn't be a thing. If Autopilot (or FSD) are disengaged through the system deciding they should be off, then the car should alert the user. There should never be a debate on the state of these systems, and the user should know OR there should be a log of "WE SOUNDED THE FSD DISENGAGED ALERT". The system just being off is not a valid state.

Edited by Captain Ron
  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 3
Posted
4 minutes ago, Captain Ron said:

 

I watched the video - I would argue that it POTENTIALLY could absolve FSD as the cause of the crash.

MAYBE

But not fully (because even guy in the video say that it could have been the FSD system doing this).

AND

It really raises another issues with FSD that is a problem 7:10 of the video (until about 7:35) - FSD and Autopilot it sounds like does not give warnings when disengaged inadvertently. He outlines in that clips that the NHTSA did analysis of crashes, there were 43 instances that Autopilot was inadvertently disengaged by the driver and they did not know.

That shouldn't be a thing. If Autopilot (or FSD) are disengaged through the system deciding they should be off, then the car should alert the user. There should never be a debate on the state of these systems, and the user should know OR there should be a log of "WE SOUNDED THE FSD DISENGAGED ALERT". The system just being off is not a valid state.

Yeah I can't think of a good reason for the car not alerting the user.

Posted
2 minutes ago, Brian Fantana said:

Yeah I can't think of a good reason for the car not alerting the user.

Because the car alerting the user that the system the user is relying upon just disengaged is WOKE.

Why are you afflicted with the WOKE MIND VIRUS, bro?

Posted

Was the driver a man? Maybe the Tesla is female -  and it just assumed that the man knows that she’s not engaged when she doesn’t talk to him or give him the time of day for a while. 

Posted
5 minutes ago, Gatorubet said:

Was the driver a man? Maybe the Tesla is female -  and it just assumed that the man knows that she’s not engaged when she doesn’t talk to him or give him the time of day for a while. 

"Hey FSD, how are you doing?"

"FINE."

[crashing sounds]

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
  • Haha 7
Posted
On 5/31/2025 at 10:26 PM, Bozo_Casanova said:

I was always more of a Veruca Salt guy

Thanks to this thread I listened to Veruca Salt, L7, Slant 6, Bratmobile, Bikini Kill, Hole, Sleater Kinney and The Donnas at the gym this morning. 
 

Also listened to Bloomberg Radio.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Guadaloopy said:

 

A very measured response to the breathless reactions to one redditor's viral FSD anecdote.  (Spoiler alert... the actual vehicle data do not support the redditor's version of events.)

 

p.s.  Hi @Felix!

I've tried to give you the benefit of the doubt but...<jfc dude.>

Edited by Chopper
Posted
14 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

Thanks to this thread I listened to Veruca Salt, L7, Slant 6, Bratmobile, Bikini Kill, Hole, Sleater Kinney and The Donnas at the gym this morning. 

Funny Gym GIFs | Tenor

  • Haha 8
Posted
7 minutes ago, Captain Ron said:

 

I watched the video - I would argue that it POTENTIALLY could absolve FSD as the cause of the crash.

MAYBE

But not fully (because even guy in the video say that it could have been the FSD system doing this).

AND

It really raises another issues with FSD that is a problem 7:10 of the video (until about 7:35) - FSD and Autopilot it sounds like does not give warnings when disengaged inadvertently. He outlines in that clips that the NHTSA did analysis of crashes, there were 43 instances that Autopilot was inadvertently disengaged by the driver and they did not know.

That shouldn't be a thing. If Autopilot (or FSD) are disengaged through the system deciding they should be off, then the car should alert the user. There should never be a debate on the state of these systems, and the user should know OR there should be a log of "WE SOUNDED THE FSD DISENGAGED ALERT". The system just being off is not a valid state.

 

2 minutes ago, Brian Fantana said:

Yeah I can't think of a good reason for the car not alerting the user.

The system absolutely provides an alert when FSD or autopilot disengages.  There is an audible alarm and a screen notification.  Whether or not a driver notices the alert is another question entirely.

Posted
2 minutes ago, Guadaloopy said:

The system absolutely provides an alert when FSD or autopilot disengages.  There is an audible alarm and a screen notification.  Whether or not a driver notices the alert is another question entirely.

I can see I've given you more credit for being an intelligent person than you deserve. You "breathlessly" ran over here with a yt video that debuted online just yesterday claiming it conclusively disproves something posted here. But you ignored that it's totally inconclusive AND that an EV website -- one historically very pro-Tesla -- wrote an article about the crash you're trying too hard to disprove in which the journalist SPOKE WITH the driver of the automobile. You're completely full of shit.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, Chopper said:

I can see I've given you more credit for being an intelligent person than you deserve. You "breathlessly" ran over here with a yt video that debuted online just yesterday claiming it conclusively disproves something posted here. But you ignored that it's totally inconclusive AND that an EV website -- one historically very pro-Tesla -- wrote an article about the crash you're trying too hard to disprove in which the journalist SPOKE WITH the driver of the automobile. You're completely full of shit.

You either didn't watch the video or didn't understand the data presented.  There is left torque applied to the wheel prior to the accident.  The same torque that was applied to the steering wheel that caused FSD to disengage likely caused the swerve to the left.  Go rewatch 5:05-6:10 of that video. 

The Electrek article talked to the driver.  It did not review the data.  The data and the driver's story don't match.  

The data point to user error with the driver somehow applying left torque to the steering wheel which disengages FSD and steers the car off the road.   

Posted

BTW @Brian Fantana you were discussing the failure of Starship and I thought you would find this video interesting (linking, not embedding to save space):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1sysOBFDkw

The TL;DW: The raptor engines of the Super Heavy aren't powerful enough and are being pushed to their limit. This, combined with the heavy weight of the craft results in the vibrations which damaged Starship in all the flights thus far.

There is a lot more in the video - but they basically note that a lot of design decisions are causing problems due to more weight:
1. Starship is made of Stainless steel - SUPER HEAVY compared to aluminium and titanium (Space Shuttle) - that decision is causing issue.
2. The landing chopsticks - cool - but you have to carry all that extra fuel - this is even a bigger issue when you realize just how much distance has to be covered for the return flight (how down range it is). 

There were a few other things, but all the stuff that "looks cool" cause weight issues.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
1 hour ago, Gatorubet said:

Was the driver a man? Maybe the Tesla is female -  and it just assumed that the man knows that she’s not engaged when she doesn’t talk to him or give him the time of day for a while. 

Maybe Tesla needs to hire the team from Excel? You know that Excel is a man - it thinks everything is a date.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 3
Posted
2 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Stupid to build the rocket on stainless steel when they built a whole city on rock and roll.

Dude, look over there - it's the Quayle Monster! We might be up until 11!!

Posted
1 minute ago, Captain Ron said:

BTW @Brian Fantana you were discussing the failure of Starship and I thought you would find this video interesting (linking, not embedding to save space):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1sysOBFDkw

The TL;DW: The raptor engines of the Super Heavy aren't powerful enough and are being pushed to their limit. This, combined with the heavy weight of the craft results in the vibrations which damaged Starship in all the flights thus far.

There is a lot more in the video - but they basically note that a lot of design decisions are causing problems due to more weight:
1. Starship is made of Stainless steel - SUPER HEAVY compared to aluminium and titanium (Space Shuttle) - that decision is causing issue.
2. The landing chopsticks - cool - but you have to carry all that extra fuel - this is even a bigger issue when you realize just how much distance has to be covered for the return flight (how down range it is). 

There were a few other things, but all the stuff that "looks cool" cause weight issues.

Yeah, I knew about the problem with the Raptor engines. It seems pretty much unsolvable at this point without redesigning the entire rocket. The decision to make it out of stainless steel is an understandable one considering I think the ultimate goal with the design was to be a deep space craft, but that seems like a child's dream at this point.

That video is weird, like it's an AI voice dubbed over the guy's video. He seems to know what he's talking about but the audio doesn't seem to be in sync and it's weirding me out lol

Posted (edited)
45 minutes ago, Guadaloopy said:

You either didn't watch the video or didn't understand the data presented.

As if I'm going to watch a 8+ minute video on an accident from weeks ago I have no remaining interest in. lol.

Look, either FSD works and you're going to live your dream of renting out your car as a taxi, or it doesn't. Multiple expert vids posted later conclusively state the latest version of FSD doesn't reliably work and makes mistakes very similar to that which occurred in the video you posted today. I think you're so far deep into Elon's shit, you can't see the forest. 

Edited by Chopper
Posted
1 hour ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

Thanks to this thread I listened to Veruca Salt, L7, Slant 6, Bratmobile, Bikini Kill, Hole, Sleater Kinney and The Donnas at the gym this morning. 
 

Also listened to Bloomberg Radio.

No Garbage?

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
4 hours ago, Guadaloopy said:

 

A very measured response to the breathless reactions to one redditor's viral FSD anecdote.  (Spoiler alert... the actual vehicle data do not support the redditor's version of events.)

 

p.s.  Hi @Felix!

Snips from AI DRIVR's video starting around 00:45:

 

image.thumb.png.81295176f19333d46e75145a94bb1b37.png

image.thumb.png.61363dcdb8cf98990585ff9e15b37c91.png

image.thumb.png.2e588a06dfca2e83cede039b60e01191.png

 

 

In the first snip, it shows there was no input from the accelerator pedal until after the crash. At the same time we see the accelerator pedal input we also see brake pedal input but almost no pressure in the master cylinder (maybe because the brake line was ripped off already and it couldn't build pressure?)... 

 

In the second snip at 00:48,  the autopilot kicked off maybe a second and a half before the crash, cruise control kicked off at the same time. But the car doesn't slow down until after the crash - at the same time the Autopilot and cruise control trend lines drop to fault.

 

Then the third snip is the steering wheel tug that the guy in the video focuses on. 

 

 

I don't know shit about FSD, what does the Driver Monitoring Detection point mean and how is it detected? Is this why some people put weights on their steering wheels? Could a steering wheel weight have caused the accident? If there was no accelerator pedal input, shouldn't the car start slowing down if autopilot and cruise control shut off? 

 

 

Posted
18 hours ago, JMFP said:

I don't know shit about FSD, what does the Driver Monitoring Detection point mean and how is it detected? Is this why some people put weights on their steering wheels? Could a steering wheel weight have caused the accident?

The driver monitoring detection primarily uses the interior camera to monitor the driver's eyes.  If the driver's eyes are visible to the camera and forward, you will see the "Hands-on not required" state.  If the driver's eyes are obscured by a cap or if the interior camera is covered, then the system uses the torque detection on the steering wheel to determine if the driver's hands are on the wheel.  That's why this incident shows "Detected."  For some reason in this case, the camera monitoring of driver's eyes was not available, therefore the driver needed to keep their hands on the wheel.  The data shows that the driver's hands (or a "defeat device") were on the wheel. 

re: A defeat device... Tesla has updated their driver detection algorithm multiple times to detect "defeat devices."  If a device places continuous, steady torque on the steering wheel, the software will detect that it is not a human hand and will disable autopilot/FSD.  That said, people are still jury-rigging ways to avoid keeping their hands on the wheel like the moron below, which could absolutely contribute to an accident.

18 hours ago, JMFP said:

If there was no accelerator pedal input, shouldn't the car start slowing down if autopilot and cruise control shut off?

Yes, it will slow down using re-gen braking.  In the data for this incident, you do see a slight deceleration begin once FSD is disabled, but it is very gradual.  Tesla states that the driver must immediately take over once FSD is disengaged, but based on my experience, re-gen deceleration is not as "immediate" after FSD disengagement.  I think there is a more gradual application of re-gen after FSD disengagement to avoid abrupt deceleration in the event of an inadvertent disengagement, but that is my theory based on experience. 

 

 

Posted
1 hour ago, Guadaloopy said:

The driver monitoring detection primarily uses the interior camera to monitor the driver's eyes.  If the driver's eyes are visible to the camera and forward, you will see the "Hands-on not required" state.  If the driver's eyes are obscured by a cap or if the interior camera is covered, then the system uses the torque detection on the steering wheel to determine if the driver's hands are on the wheel.  That's why this incident shows "Detected."  For some reason in this case, the camera monitoring of driver's eyes was not available, therefore the driver needed to keep their hands on the wheel.  The data shows that the driver's hands (or a "defeat device") were on the wheel. 

re: A defeat device... Tesla has updated their driver detection algorithm multiple times to detect "defeat devices."  If a device places continuous, steady torque on the steering wheel, the software will detect that it is not a human hand and will disable autopilot/FSD.  That said, people are still jury-rigging ways to avoid keeping their hands on the wheel like the moron below, which could absolutely contribute to an accident.

Yes, it will slow down using re-gen braking.  In the data for this incident, you do see a slight deceleration begin once FSD is disabled, but it is very gradual.  Tesla states that the driver must immediately take over once FSD is disengaged, but based on my experience, re-gen deceleration is not as "immediate" after FSD disengagement.  I think there is a more gradual application of re-gen after FSD disengagement to avoid abrupt deceleration in the event of an inadvertent disengagement, but that is my theory based on experience. 

 

 

I bought a new car in late Feb and it has this a security feature. There is a camera that monitors your eyes and hits you with an alert when it doesn't detect them for a period of time (it's not a long period of time either). It drove me nuts on my drive to San Antonio because I tend to sit a little slouched over on the center console when driving longer distances. After that trip, I figured out to turn that setting off.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Posted
23 hours ago, Captain Ron said:

BTW @Brian Fantana you were discussing the failure of Starship and I thought you would find this video interesting (linking, not embedding to save space):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1sysOBFDkw

The TL;DW: The raptor engines of the Super Heavy aren't powerful enough and are being pushed to their limit. This, combined with the heavy weight of the craft results in the vibrations which damaged Starship in all the flights thus far.

There is a lot more in the video - but they basically note that a lot of design decisions are causing problems due to more weight:
1. Starship is made of Stainless steel - SUPER HEAVY compared to aluminium and titanium (Space Shuttle) - that decision is causing issue.
2. The landing chopsticks - cool - but you have to carry all that extra fuel - this is even a bigger issue when you realize just how much distance has to be covered for the return flight (how down range it is). 

There were a few other things, but all the stuff that "looks cool" cause weight issues.

tl/dr  Elon discovers the "tyranny of the rocket equation"

  • Haha 3

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...