Mercedes-Benz debuts turquoise exterior lights to indicate the car is self-driving
www.techspot.com
Most street legal vehicles utilize a combination of three colored lights: white for headlights and reverse lights, red for tail and brake lights, and orange for blinkers....

Mercedes-Benz debuts turquoise exterior lights to indicate the car is self-driving | A visual indicator for other drivers::undefined

  • helenslunch@feddit.nlEnglish
    77·
    1 year ago

    The technology will never be ready if you don’t test it.

    And I would argue we DON’T need warning lights since, while imperfect, most self-driving tech is already vastly better than your average driver. We should have warning lights for cars that DON’T have self-driving.

    This is ultimately why we will NEVER have self-driving cars en masse, because society isn’t willing to take the necessary risks to improve the safety of everyone on the road.

    • firadin@lemmy.worldEnglish
      81·
      1 year ago

      How about we:

      1. Don’t let random customers test it and instead use heavily trained, specialized test drivers
      2. Require permitting and, e.g., an obstacle course before letting a company’s software be randomly updated and thrown on the road?

      Why is there this constant false dichotomy implying that the only way to test self driving cars is a wild west of no regulation?

      And also who said that self driving cars are safer than humans? Tesla’s numbers are all statistical lies (in fact Teslas were recently shown to have the most accidents), Cruise just shutdown in SF because they were a liability, and Waymo is heavily limited in its time/weather/areas for driving.

      • helenslunch@feddit.nlEnglish
        55·
        1 year ago

        Don’t let random customers test it and instead use heavily trained, specialized test drivers

        At some point you need to test it on a large scale. Cruise was even running small-scale and was shut down in short order.

        Require permitting and, e.g., an obstacle course before letting a company’s software be randomly updated and thrown on the road?

        We do.

        Why is there this constant false dichotomy implying that the only way to test self driving cars is a wild west of no regulation?

        There isn’t.

        And also who said that self driving cars are safer than humans?

        …everyone?

        https://arstechnica.com/cars/2023/12/human-drivers-crash-a-lot-more-than-waymos-software-data-shows/

        Tesla’s numbers are all statistical lies (in fact Teslas were recently shown to have the most accidents)

        [Citation needed]

        Cruise just shutdown in SF because they were a liability

        This is actually a great example of exactly what I’m talking about: GM will shut down Cruise permanently because they’ve discovered what I just said: society has zero tolerance for literally anyone getting hurt by autonomous vehicles, whereas the tens of thousands of people who are killed on our roads every year by individuals is considered acceptable.

        • FierySpectre@lemmy.worldEnglish
          3·
          1 year ago

          The teslas having the most crashes I did see pass by on my news feed too. It doesn’t mean that because teslas have self driving and teslas crash the most that this means the self driving tech is the reason for it though. Correlation does not imply causation.

        • Maggoty@lemmy.worldEnglish
          2·
          1 year ago

          You literally just presented that false dichotomy in a previous comment. Don’t try to gaslight us.

          • helenslunch@feddit.nlEnglish
            12·
            1 year ago

            I literally presented zero dichotomies of any kind, don’t try to strawman us.

            • Maggoty@lemmy.worldEnglish
              21·
              1 year ago

              The technology will never be ready if you don’t test it.

              The refrain of the tech CEO demanding we allow it free reign as a test.

    • Maggoty@lemmy.worldEnglish
      2·
      1 year ago

      Sure. But we’re jumping into the deep end by legally allowing the driver to be exempt from distracted driving laws. There’s a big difference between testing the technology and relying on the technology.

      • helenslunch@feddit.nlEnglish
        11·
        1 year ago

        legally allowing the driver to be exempt from distracted driving laws.

        Can you cite the legislation that exempts drivers using driver assistance systems from paying attention while driving?

        There’s a big difference between testing the technology and relying on the technology.

        No one should be relying on the technology.

        • Maggoty@lemmy.worldEnglish
          2·
          1 year ago

          California, Nevada, and Germany all have laws for it. The article this comment section is based on specifically mentions California and Nevada.