Mark Rober just set up one of the most interesting self-driving tests of 2025, and he did it by imitating Looney Tunes. The former NASA engineer and current YouTube mad scientist recreated the classic gag where Wile E. Coyote paints a tunnel onto a wall to fool the Road Runner.

Only this time, the test subject wasn’t a cartoon bird… it was a self-driving Tesla Model Y.

The result? A full-speed, 40 MPH impact straight into the wall. Watch the video and tell us what you think!

  • pjwestin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    1 day ago

    To be fair, the roadrunner it was following somehow successfully ran into the painting.

    • KayLeadfoot@fedia.ioOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      67
      ·
      1 day ago

      The scientists in Ireland calling their data set to prevent this exact fucking thing “Coyote” sent me over the moon.

  • fubarx@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    1 day ago

    There’s a very simple solution to autonomous driving vehicles plowing into walls, cars, or people:

    Congress will pass a law that makes NOBODY liable – as long as a human wasn’t involved in the decision making process during the incident.

    This will be backed by car makers, software providers, and insurance companies, who will lobby hard for it. After all, no SINGLE person or company made the decision to swerve into oncoming traffic. Surely they can’t be held liable. 🤷🏻‍♂️

    Once that happens, Level 4 driving will come standard and likely be the default mode on most cars. Best of luck everyone else!

    • chilicheeselies@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 day ago

      There is no way insurance companies would go for that. What is far more likely is that policies simply wont cover accidents due to autonomous systems. Im honeslty surprised they wouls cover them now.

      • P03 Locke@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 day ago

        What is far more likely is that policies simply wont cover accidents due to autonomous systems.

        If the risk is that insurance companies won’t pay for accidents and put people on the hook for hundreds of thousands of dollars in medical bills, then people won’t use autonomous systems.

        This cannot go both ways. Either car makers are legally responsible for their AI systems, or insurance companies are legally responsible to pay for those damages. Somebody has to foot the bill, and if it’s the general public, they will avoid the risk.

      • rumba@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        24 hours ago

        Not sure how it plays for Tesla, but for Waymo, their accidents per mile driven are WAY below non-automation. Insurance companies would LOVE to charge a surplus for automated driving insurance while paying out less incidents.

    • Ulrich@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      24 hours ago

      Once that happens, Level 4 driving will come standard

      Uhhhh absolutely not. They would abandon it first.

    • Korhaka@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      If no one is liable then it’s tempting to deliberately confuse them to crash

    • KayLeadfoot@fedia.ioOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      77
      ·
      1 day ago

      “But humans can do it with their eyes!” - says the man not selling a human brain to go with the optical sensors

      • FiskFisk33@startrek.website
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        “But humans can do it with their eyes!”

        That’s the best part, they kinda can’t.
        There are videos from before they pulled the sensors of some pretty cool stuff where teslas slammed the breaks before anything visibly happened, based on lidar sensors sensing trouble a couple cars up the road, completely blocked to vision.

        super cool safety tech, and then they pulled it…

        one example here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BIcC2ZMePKI

        • Rexios@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 day ago

          Pretty sure that wasn’t even lidar. It was radar which is even cheaper and pretty much every other new car has if they don’t have lidar.

      • Ulrich@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        24 hours ago

        “But humans can do it with their eyes!”

        The thing is, RADAR can see things humans can’t. There was a whole article a while back about a Model X that avoided an otherwise unavoidable accident by bouncing radar under the car in front of it and seeing that car slam on the brakes.

      • BastingChemina@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 day ago

        The thing is, yes humans can do it with their eyes. But even with the giant amount of progressing power from the brain they are still not great at it.

        So of the ultimate goal is to the minimum/cheapest to be almost as good as human then yes, optical sensors only are enough.

        Of the goal is to prevent deaths and significantly reduce the number of accidents compared to then lidar is the best option.

    • cm0002@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      27
      ·
      1 day ago

      The day I heard that was the day I realized he’s a fucking idiot and I wanted nothing to do with his cars/tech.

      Judging by how things have turned out…damn was that a good decision lmao

      • Ulrich@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        24 hours ago

        They pulled the RADAR from mine just before I took delivery, unbeknownst to me at the time. I received no sort of notification.

    • Flames5123@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      24 hours ago

      I’m kinda confident that even RADAR + cameras was good enough, but they started shipping cars without it and even shutting off the RADAR in existing cars.

      The main negative about LiDAR is the cost, but that’s quickly going down.

    • aname@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      I tried watching it and it forces a horrible dubbing over it so I didn’t want to watch it. Apparently only way to chage it is to change my whole youtube account language

      • jet@hackertalks.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 day ago

        for the youtube website interface click on the gear wheel, and you can select the audiotrack you want

  • Armok_the_bunny@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    94
    ·
    1 day ago

    I saw the video pop up in my Youtube recommended, but didn’t bother watching because I just assumed that any cars tested would be using LIDAR and thus would ignore the fake road just fine. I had no idea Tesla a) was still using basic cameras for this and b) actually had sophisticated enough “self driving” capabilities that this could be tested on them safely.

    • Lukas@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      137
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      They are not still using cameras but removed LIDAR and radar from their cars during the chip shortage 2020/21. The story they were telling was “humans don’t have LIDAR but can drive cars as well, so the cars also only need ‘eyes’ like humans”.

      • SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        79
        ·
        1 day ago

        Humans cannot, in fact, drive cars well. Humans kill tens of thousands of other humans with cars every year in the US alone.

        • ChaoticNeutralCzech@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          68
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 day ago

          Yup, cameras and humans share various exploits. Self-driving is going to work better than humans once every car has it and communicates with each other, allowing for minimal gaps even at high speeds, once roads are all very standardized and in a database, and-

          Wait, that’s trains

          Fucking build more electrified high-speed rail and forget tech bros’ shitty promises

          • frank@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            27
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 day ago

            I was getting mildly outraged and ready to comment how you were re-deriving the train at first. Well played.

          • Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            11
            arrow-down
            7
            ·
            1 day ago

            Trains don’t go from my driveway to my destination exactly when I feel like going there, while carrying all my luggage.

            I get that it’s fun to be smug on the Internet, but private vehicles aren’t going away any time soon.

            • ChaoticNeutralCzech@feddit.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              16
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              1 day ago

              It’s not a binary decision between all cars and no cars. If trains and public transit have enough capacity and convenience to make most trips feasible by them, car infrastructure will no longer have to be added (in fact can be converted into bus and bike lanes) while shortening trip duration (less cars = less jams) and improving safety.

              Also, you barely have luggage for most trips. 99% of my trips are made with luggage I can carry to the nearest stop and board the bus with.

              • Kaboom@reddthat.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 day ago

                Yeah it’s not a binary decision, but trains are almost never the answer for a lot of people. If I’m going less than a couple hours, then I’m driving that distance. If I’m going much further than that, I’m flying. If I need to move a ton of stuff, I’m either taking my car or renting a uhaul. If I’m taking a lot of people, I’m taking my car. Trains never enter the picture unless I’m looking for variety in my mode of transport.

                And trains do not shorten the trip duratiion, not without absolutely kneecapping the roads. And over long distances, they’re absolutely slow compared to planes. In the short distance, they’re slow compared to cars.

                • ChaoticNeutralCzech@feddit.org
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 day ago

                  Depends on where you live. In most of Europe, trains are frequent and direct between city centers.

                  My parents tend to prefer the car for the 3-hour trip (also 3 hours by train and bus) to Grandma’s when at least 3 people go because it’s cheaper. A higher toll on the highway could change the threshold, and we’d go more comfortably. Politicians can smoothly adjust the number of people for which public transport wins out with taxes and investments. You’re more likely to cling to the car and they’ve accounted for that in their models, maybe making you switch for a specific kind of trip is not worth the investment. There are lots of factors, such as political alignment, culture, wealth distribution, existing infrastructure etc. that make some jurisdictions able to move the threshold faster than others. Still, the majority of people using cars is unsustainable for lots of reasons:

                  • noise, smoke, particulate matter pollution
                  • high energy use per unit of distance per person regardless of drivetrain and resulting climate change
                  • cost of road maintenance
                  • waste of space for parking, resulting in poor land use and sprawl
                  • accident fatalities
                  • unwalkable areas ruin business opportunities, resulting in towns that simply go broke

                  so there is an obligation to eventually push the threshold in favor of public transit for most trips.

                • ChaoticNeutralCzech@feddit.org
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  8
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 day ago

                  So you’ll keep using it. And enjoy narrow but way less jammed streets. Maybe you’ll be incentivized/required to join the self-driving network, but in decades, not years, after positioning markers have been added to every road in the last repaving, while infrastructure funds have been directed towards making the city traversible for non-drivers.

        • gnutrino@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          edit-2
          1 day ago

          And the really dumb thing is that lots of modern non-selfdriving cars now have lidar sensors to help the humans not crash into things. Musk apparently wants the AI to be working at a disadvantage.

          • SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            24 hours ago

            He just wants people to buy his junk, and doesn’t care how many people would have to die as collateral damage.

      • baggachipz@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        22
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        Small correction here: they never had LIDAR. Cars with LIDAR have big racks on top with a spinny thing measuring the surroundings. Teslas had radar but removed during the chip shortage (and disabled it on existing cars) and acted like it was an improvement. The radar was used for distance keeping on cars and could actually detect the car in front of the car by bouncing signals off the ground, it was really slick.

        • Korhaka@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 day ago

          Spinny thing is just when you mount one ontop. It doesn’t have to be. The example in the video appears to use a forward facing cone LIDAR. Presumably in addition to other sensors.

      • RobotToaster@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        34
        ·
        1 day ago

        I’ll add that every other self driving car company has a pretty good safety record, specifically because they do use LIDAR and RADAR so they can see better than humans.

      • Undaunted@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        21
        ·
        1 day ago

        That statement of him is not entirely wrong. But we humans have a very powerful bio computer that is perfectly tuned to process those visual inputs in realtime. Until a comparable performance is possible, removing LIDAR is very stupid.

        • jj4211@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          1 day ago

          Besides that, in the fog and rain tests a human likely would have killed a kid anyway, and why settle for human limitations when you could be safer?

          We absolutely should also have lidar or analogous tech as part of a solution here, even if cameras did manage to get to human level safety.

          • SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            24 hours ago

            The child dummy was clearly visible through the water in the rain test. Tesla’s systems just suck.

      • heavydust@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        1 day ago

        IIRC Musk said it would rely on AI using the footage from all the Teslas and it’s better than LiDAR. That idiot was proven wrong once again.

    • KayLeadfoot@fedia.ioOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      54
      ·
      1 day ago

      They tested a LiDAR rigged car, and it stopped just like you predicted. As of 2021, Tesla uses only cameras for FSD, and not even radar (which my stupid fine Toyota truck has).

      They tested the idea safely by building the wall out of styrofoam, or at least that’s what it looks like when it blows apart :)

      • ArchAengelus@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        Front-facing radar is the bare minimum needed to pass the test given (fake-road wall). Many vehicles use it for adaptive cruise control, and radar is even faster than either cameras or lidar for figuring out the range to an object. 1000 Hz measuring distance to an object is enough to find both the relative velocity and the acceleration of another object. This provides enough time to apply the brakes safely when approaching a vehicle or obstacle

        LIDAR is even better, and also more compute intensive and expensive to install.

        I think Tesla was very short-sighted in removing radar sensors, certainly. If they hadn’t, they could’ve spent more of their energy on making the FSD cars better instead of just making them sufficiently safe with insufficient sensors

    • vin@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      Forget lidar, they don’t even have mature tech like radar for emergency braking. Edit: +even

      • blady_blah@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        Why do you think lidar is not mature? It is radar, except it uses light and can get much more resolution than an RF radar. Or was that a joke… That was probably a joke… if it was then nm.

        • davidgro@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          15
          ·
          1 day ago

          That comment just missed the word ‘even’ - as in they don’t even have radar, and that’s on regular non-self-driving cars, and lidar would be a step above that.

          • jj4211@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 day ago

            As far as I’ve seen, any system would be additive. If it has lidar, it would also have cameras and radar. So that you get the best of all the technologies (e.g cameras are the only only of the three that can follow lane markings)

        • vin@lemmynsfw.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 day ago

          Lidar is mature but its automotive application is not. Radar is basic by now in comparison.

  • arankays@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 day ago

    I tried Waymo when I was visiting LA a few months ago. Genuinely terrific stuff.

    I do not trust Teslas one bit though.

  • MidsizedSedan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    12 hours ago

    All these years, I always thought all self driving cars used LiDAR or something to see in 3D/through fog. How was this allowed on the roads for so long?

    • Breadhax0r@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      12 hours ago

      I remember reading that tesla only uses cameras for it’s self driving. My 2018 Honda uses radar for the adaptive cruise so the technology exists, musk is just an idiot.

      • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        11 hours ago

        Radar doesn’t detect stopped objects at high speed. It’d hit the wall too on radar alone.

        This has to be solved by vision and or lidar.

        • Breadhax0r@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 hours ago

          Unless your car is traveling faster than the speed of light, radar will detect objects in front of it. But yeah, I was trying to imply that for a complex system like self driving musk is a buffoon for relying on a single system instead of creating a more robust package of sensors.

  • regrub@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    ·
    1 day ago

    I would say that it’s a good idea to paint more tunnels on walls, but then I remember how dumb human drivers are too

    • Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      1 day ago

      You’d be horrified how many people drive off a bridge that has collapsed, it’s happened multiple times in multiple different incidents.

  • cmhe@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    1 day ago

    I am a bit disappointed to not see the Tesla crash into a real wall. I feel a bit click baited here.

    Also, they prepared the polystyrene wall to break this cartoonishly, but still played on being surprised.

    • tiramichu@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      62
      ·
      1 day ago

      The purpose of the video is to test a hypothesis, not to total a car.

      Mark Rober is a youtuber sure, and some of the stuff he does is to feed the algorithm. But he’s also an engineer, and that involves experimentation and a good dose of science.

      Engineers won’t set up tests that intentionally destroy their expensive test equipment if they can conduct an equivalent test non-destructively.

    • AA5B@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 day ago

      I’m a bit disappointed they painted identical to the actual road. Probably a lot of humans will get fooled by that one. We should send a challenge back: how looney toons can you get? Will something more cartoonish fool it? Will a different landscape fool it? How about drawing an oncoming train?

    • Evil_Shrubbery@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      Yeah, do YTers not have the money to kill one Tesla?
      That seemed like an expensive production, sadly one totaled car couldn’t make it.