This is also the company that promises to prioritise the vehicle occupants over pedestrians.
It’s not really an issue. 99.9% of the time the passengers will already be safe and the pedestrian is the one at risk. The only time I see this being an issue is if the car is already out of control, but at that point there’s little anyone can do.
I mean, what’s the situation where a car can’t break but has enough control where it HAS to kill a pedestrian in order to save the passengers?
Tesla on their autopilot during night. All the time basically. There were number of motorcycle deaths where Tesla just mowed them down. The reason? They had two tail lights side by side instead one big light. Tesla thought this was a car far away and just ran through people.
That’s a problem with the software. The passengers in the car were never at risk and the car could have stopped at any time, the issue was that the car didn’t know what was happening. This situation wouldn’t have engaged the autopilot in the way we are discussing.
As an aside, if what you said is true, people at Tesla should be in jail. WTF
Tesla washes their hands of any wrongdoing with terms of use where owner agrees he’s responsible bla bla bla.
Here’s a related video.
I mean that’s exactly what the driver would do, I’m not sure why this is controversial
Nah, I think most people would crash into a tree rather than clear a sidewalk. Cars are designed to protect you in a crash. Pedestrians don’t have seatbelts, crash zones, and airbags.
I think you’re way over estimating driver reflexes and reaction capabilities. I don’t think most accidents give a good long time to consider the next step.
Yeah, for real, “Someone will 100%, do you want it to be your friends/family/people you know or some absolute random stranger?” Some lemmitors would surely answer “My people, for sure”
The human does it out of self preservation, but the car doesn’t need to feel too preserve itself.
By getting the in the car, the passengers should be aware of the risks and that if there is an accident, the car will protect pedestrians over the occupants. The pedestrians had no choice but the passengers have a choice of not getting in the vehicle.
I feel like car manufacturers are going to favour protecting the passengers as a safety feature, and then governments will eventually legislate it to go the other way after a series of high profile deaths of child pedestrians.
You’re probably over-estimating the likelyhood of a scenario where a self driving car needs to make a such decision. Also take into account that if a self driving car is a significantly better driver than a human then it’s by definition going to be much safer for pedestrians aswell even if it’s programmed to prioritize the passengers.
On the flip side, if you know a car will kill a passenger to save an outsider, it becomes very easy to “accidentally” murder a passenger and get away with it…
Yes. As it should be. I’ll buy the car that chooses to mow down a sidewalk full of pregnant babies instead of mildly inconveniencing myself or my passengers. Why the hell would you even consider any other alternative?
pregnant babies
🤔
I’d consider a 5yr old a baby https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lina_Medina
Who would buy a car that will sacrifice the passengers in the event of an unavoidable accident? If it’s significantly better driver than a human would be then it’s safer for pedestrians aswell.
I like to imagine somebody in a call center remotely driving your car.
Fine print will say it’s still your fault though if they crash
On a lever 3 system it’s not. If it is then it’s level 2.
Paywalled.
Paywalled.
On a different subject, why would someone downvote a one-word comment that accurately describes what the content is behind?
Because some of us have fat fingers and accidentally downvote when we scroll on mobile.
One of the things I liked about reddit was that, since it saved downvoted posts, I could go through the list every once in a while and undownvote the accidents.
Can’t do that here though, and I sometimes notice posts or comments I’ve accidentally downvoted.
Anyway, people shouldn’t care so much, we don’t have a karma system or the like here anyways, so why does it matter?
Can’t do that here though
What client are you using? I can browse both upvoted and downvoted comments in Voyager
Anyway, people shouldn’t care so much, we don’t have a karma system or the like here anyways, so why does it matter?
Well, only speaking for myself, I don’t care, it just seemed so weird since it was an accurate single word, so I was curious.
I also wonder sometimes if it’s a bot system purposely trying to force engagement.
Lol trust me, I get downvotes all the time for things I say here on Lemmy. If I let them bother me I’d be in the psychiatric system by now.
There are people who are pathologically contrarian. I’ve had to end a friendship over it—the endless need to say something negative about literally everything that ever happens and an unwillingness to be charitable to others.
Reddit 1.3 is just like that.
Doesn’t answer my question though.
In the mid-early days of reddit, upvote/downvotes were noticed as a method to hide the algorithm that was used to promote to the front page.
If you can see the exact counts, you can game the system. So the system threw fake up/downvotes into the mix to make it harder to reverse engineer. This could be something similar.
Nope. Someone absolutely downvoted him. Because, just like Reddit, the downvote button here is the ‘wow fuck that guy for saying a thing i don’t like’ button.
Also a “I don’t like you/this page/the content and will go out of my way to systematically down vote everything you have done and everything in this particular thread” button.
I have the theory that archive.is, waybackmachine and 12ft.io are no secret anymore, and that just posting “paywalled” comes across as too lazy to copy/paste or (a lot easier) to use this addon to reduce the work to a click. i dont mind, but i can understand why others might see it that way
and that just posting “paywalled” comes across as too lazy to copy/paste
Blaming the victim, and justifying paywalls.
or (a lot easier) to use this addon to reduce the work to a click.
My phone browser doesn’t use add-ons.
i dont mind
And yet, you took the time out to reply, to chastise me for saying it.
sheesh, you are quite aggressive, i did not want to offend. and as i said, i don’t mind it, i even posted the archivelink, for which you thanked me. check your target before firing, mate :-)
(also, theres always firefox mobile. can apple users use it with addons/firefox browser engine now? i don’t follow apple development actively)
Ty!
On a slightly unrelated note, the Mercedes EQ class are really ugly, both internally and externally.
I think most German cars have had a bad generation.
Mercedes: recent designs have been divisive, sometimes I see one and think they look ok and other times they elicit a yikes. More importantly, Mercedes don’t have a single car in their lineup right now that outshines their rivals. Usually there’d be at least one. There is no reason to have a Mercedes right now.
BMW: does it even need to be said? BMW has designs and recognisability that others would kill to have, yet they destroy that design language and pump out absolutely hideous cars. This is not a Chris Bangle moment. People aren’t initially reeling at these designs but coming around to them and seeing them as being amazing and ahead of the curve like those of the late 90s and into the 2000s. BMWs are ugly now. I’ve even seen car reviewers such as Johnny Smith literally censor the grilles in their videos lol.
VW: the drivetrains are still completely fine, but my god the cabin quality has suffered. The penny-pinching is insane. Touch controls galore, with no backlight for night time driving? Two window controls and a touch toggle to switch between controlling the front/rear windows? Are you fucking serious, VW? VW used to be the king of affordable priced car with an interior that was closer to the likes of Audi/BMW/Mercedes/Volvo than it was to Renault/Citroen/Honda/Toyota/etc. but they’ve thrown that away to save pennies.
Audi: ok their general design still holds up well. But their interior is being cheapened just like VW’s. No doubt a decision from the top. Also the e-Tron’s camera mirrors are unbelievably shit. The Honda e (fuck you Honda for discontinueing, btw) had a much better implementation. And it was fucking dumb to sell the e-Tron GT for £2k less than its Porsche equivalent. Who would buy an Audi when for £2k more you can buy a Porsche?
Porsche: ok Porsche is still mostly excellent, but the first gen Taycan has a little more screen than I’d like. The 2nd generation Taycan is genuinely an engineering masterpiece, though. It feels like the car has finally had as much love poured into it as they do their 911s. People should watch Engineering Explained’s technical overview of it, it’s staggering how much they’ve improved it. But Porsche is somewhat niche anyway, they’re not enough to make the overall German car market look better.
The most frustrating one is VW. They’re supposed to be the mass-market, default, bread-and-butter European brand. And of all times to fuck up, doing it in a time when people are still forming their opinions on EVs is such a massive fuck up. People will look at the ID.3, then look at the likes of the MG4 or upcoming Renault 5 and think “oh, so VW can’t make good EVs”, and that will stick to them for a long time. Look at how long people thought Skoda was a crappy brand for! It was only around 2010 when “huhu crappy communist 80s car” meme truly died. Perceptions last and they’re choosing to trash theirs to recoup some money lost to dieselgate.
Rant over. I’m pretty fed up with the car market right now. I’m gonna keep my MX-5 until the rust claims it.
German brands right now are engaging in stupid “premium theatre”, by which they make their cars seem premium by using stuff like fancy headlights or doors that sound good, but are completely cheaping out on other stuff to an extent that’s gotten ridiculous. They’re being lazy and just resting on their built-up brand image. And that image will collapse if they don’t pull their finger out.
I’ve been watching a lot of car reviews lately and yeah, I think you’re right on all points. I watched a review of the new BMW 7 series and even the air control vents are capacitive sensors refer than little levers and it just seems unnecessary. What was hilarious was that the door release is right by the air vent control, so the review I watched saw the reviewer accidentally open the door when they were trying to control the air vent.
There’s way way way too much reliance on touch screens in cars. I’m not even sure if you’d legally be allowed to use them in some countries, I feel like you’d have to pull over to just change the HVAC settings! You’d swear it was designed by someone that’s never driven a car. They’re decisions that are probably coming right from the top and the actual interior designers are pulling their hair out.
There’s also a common theme across manufacturers where settings for features are lost when the car is switched off. So you have to go into the settings and change them back every single time you get into the car.
If I were in the market for a car (specifically electric), I’d probably go for Kia. The ev6 and ev9 look really nice. I’ve seen a couple of EV9s on the road recently and I was surprised at how much smaller they actually seem than on videos.
Like you though we’re going to keep our car (Nissan Quashqai) as long as possible. There’s no bullshit and it’s practical and comfortable.
If I were in the market for a car (specifically electric), I’d probably go for Kia. The ev6 and ev9 look really nice. I’ve seen a couple of EV9s on the road recently and I was surprised at how much smaller they actually seem than on videos.
Yeah the Koreans seem to have done well with EVs. It’s old now but the Kona was very well received with its EV variant. Someone a couple of doors down has an EV6 and loves it.
Personally I really love the design of the Hyundai Ioniq 5, it’s got that retro-futuristic vibe that I like and it’s based on the same drivetrain platform as the EV6 and EV9 (sidenote, that Hyundai-KIA EV platform is called E-GMP, and pronounced “E-gimp”, which I find hilarious)
Mazda has very nice interiors and didn’t go the touchscreen route.
Those grills are going to be modder meme material, they are basically ai designed grills anyway. Think cartoonesque, Roger rabbit ultra-exaggerated grills with detail highlighted.
It feels like the car has finally had as much love poured into it as they do their 911s. People should watch Engineering Explained’s technical overview of it, it’s staggering how much they’ve improved it.
But Porsche is somewhat niche anyway, they’re not enough to make the overall German car market look better.
I wouldn’t mind the dominant VAG-internal top-down trickle moving from Audi->VW to Porsche->VW.
Also for the record Porsches are about as common in Germany as Teslas. More common than Mazda or Mitsubishi. Granted, about 50% of those are Cayennes and Macans so that Bildungsbürger mums can drive Anne-Luisa to the farmer’s market.
Look at how long people thought Skoda was a crappy brand for!
Because it was, until the Czech moved from “VW but with less fuss, a proper Slav doesn’t need no fancy stuff but a workhorse” to “Eh the Wolfsburg guys are getting too crappy let’s get Bohemian”. It’s all VAG in the end but the brands do have their pride and independence.
Haha are you me?!
I’ve just got a Landrover Defender 2023 (75th) and was so glad is just had buttons for everything. I had a touch screen but other than navigation no need to touch it. Even optional analog dials instead of digital.
Was looking at the van equivalent of the new mercedes (v-class) but same ipad horror on the inside. Glad some brand are reversing this silly phase.
And was long time BMW driver before that but I quit 5 series before electric and the hideous grills. Such a shame.
Most new Mercedes are. Especially from the rear. I can’t imagine what they were thinking when designing those.
And they managed to do it without us obsessing about their CEO several times a day? I refuse to believe that!
Wonder how this works with car insurance. Os there a future where the driver doesn’t need to be insured? Can the vehicle software still be “at fault” and how will the actuaries deal with assessing this new risk.
Berkshire Hathaway owns Geico the car insurance company. In one of his annual letters Buffett said that autonomous cars are going to be great for humanity and bad for insurance companies.
“If [self-driving cars] prove successful and reduce accidents dramatically, it will be very good for society and very bad for auto insurers.”
Actuaries are by definition bad at assessing new risk. But as data get collected they quickly adjust to it. There are a lot of cars so if driverless cars become even a few percent of cars on the road they will quickly be able to build good actuarial tables.
His statement is extremely flawed - insurance companies dream of accepting premiums and never paying out accidents.
He understands there is enough competition in the market that as payouts and accidents go down premiums will have to. There is enough competition they can’t just keep rates high they would be undercut and lose customers.
For BH it’s doubly bad as the large cash reserves GEICO has to maintain are used to borrow against at very low rates. If those reserves drop he has less to borrow against for investing.
I would agree it’s bad for insurance company employees. But the purpose of an insurance company is to collect premiums and deny claims.
Get hurt in america, your insurer will hold a demo!
When you’re clients are a handful of companies who will more aggressively change insurers than consumers to save a penny and have their own legal teams, it becomes harder to price gouge or illegally deny claims.
Yes, clearly Warren Buffet is the one in the wrong here. 🤔
I believe Mercedes takes responsibility if there is an accident while driving autonomously.
And this is how they will push everyone into driverless. Through insurance costs. Who would insure 1 human driver vs 100 bots, (once the systems have a few billion miles on them)
You’re probably right. Another decade or two and human driver controlled cars might be prohibitively expensive to insure for some or even not allowed in certain areas.
I can imagine an awesome world where that’s a great thing but also imagine a dystopian world like wall-e as well. I guess we’ll know then which one we chose.
I feel you’re misapplying the advantage. Right now people hit other people in cars and insurance is what it is. It would be more appropriate to say that humans will pay normal rates, while autonomous car companies will charge you an insurance subscription, and work out much lower rates with the insurer.
You would think that’s how it should be right? Not a chance. They’ll find another reason to stiff you.
As long as there is free competition, the cost will be around 10% over the operating cost. After that point it becomes worthwhile for another competitor to step in.
And that will probably be safer for everyone, honestly. Better or worse will vary by individual perspective.
It’ll be interesting to see how it pans out, with local city traffic being essentially reduced to all taxis and only the countryside 4x4 and farm vehicles being the last hold out of human control because of hilly terrain. Once the lorries go fully self-controlled (note: modern lorries have a lot of driver support aids as it is.) it’ll only be a matter of time.
Totally agree that car incidents will go down dramatically, some police forces will see their entire income disappear. Soo many changes that we can’t even imagine coming.
Farm vehicles are far more automated than any cars these days.
Good points. I bet local towns are the biggest holdout just because of dependence on ticket revenue.
I included that line thinking of America, it vastly reduces police interaction chance as well which gives me more thought.
Will it pull a Tesla and switch off the autopilot seconds before an accident?
Wow I hope we see some regulation about that kind of thing.
If memory serves, that’s not an intentional feature, but more a coincidence, since if the driver thinks the cruise control is about to crash the car, they’ll pop the brakes. Touching the brakes disengages the cruise control by design, so you end up with it shutting down before a crash happens.
That makes perfect sense. If the driver looks up to notice that he’s in a dangerous, unfixable situation, slams the breaks, disconnecting the autopilot (which have been responaible for letting the situation develop) hopefully the automaker can’t entirely say “not our fault, the system wasn’t even engaged at the time of the collision”
Which is how it should be. The company creating the software takes on the liability of faults with said software.
No. I don’t think this is a good solution. Companies will put a price on your life and focus on monetary damage reduction. If you’re about to cause more property damage than your life is worth (to Mercedes) they’ll be incentivized to crash the car and kill you rather than crash into the expensive structure.
Your car should be you property, you should be liable for the damage it causes. The car should prioritise your life over monetary damage. If there is some software problem causing the cars to crash, you need to be able to sue Mercedes through a class action lawsuit to recover your losses.
You’ve been downvoted, but I don’t get why. Are people in denial that corpos will put money above all else?
Oh, there are a lot of Tesla/self driving cars fanboys out here. They’re caught up in the idea that these corporations will save us from traffic congestion/paying taxes for public transit/car accidents/climate change/car ownership/ you name it and self driving cars will solve it. They don’t tend to like it when you try to bring reality to their fantasy.
Self driving cars are a really cool technology. Electric cars as well. However, they don’t solve the fundamental problem of transporting a 200lb person using a 3000lb vehicle. So they’re at best a partial solution. I also don’t really want a future where corporations own more of our stuff and force into monthly payments for heated car seats and “prioritise human life” premium options.
Fanboys gonna fanboy I guess!
Love how companies can decide who has to supervise their car’s automated driving and not an actual safety authority. Absolutely nuts.
Who said there was no safety authority involved? I thought it was part of the 4 level system the government decided on for assisted driving.
Assuming a functional legal system, they’d be liable for damages if they lie about product safety.
That’s gonna do the people murdered by an algorithm a lot of good… /s
You can’t have a babysitter following every human to make sure they don’t do something dangerous. Except for high risk areas, liability is the most practical option.
Or maybe, like, regulation?
So you want to read 50 page regulation about how to boil water in your home because boiling water can hurt people?
And how do you regulate AI when you have no idea how it works or what could go wrong. Not as if politicians are AI experts. Driving itself is already heavily regulated, the AI has to follow traffic rules just like anyone else, if that is what you are thinking.
Why do you believe that judges (or even juries made of lay people) can make sense of the very things that you’re so confident legislators or regulators cannot?
I’m not saying regulation is perfect, and as a result, certainly there is a role for judicial review. But come on, man…lots of non sequiturs and straw dogs in your argument.
Quite often, juries don’t have to rule on technical matters. Juries will have available internal communications of the company, testimonies of the engineers working on the project etc. If safety concerns were being ignored, you can usually find enough witnesses and documents proving so.
On the other hand, how do you even begin to regulate something that is only in the process of being invented? What would the regulation look like?
They actually did get certified by an authority
An “authority” of people who fell for some marketing bullshit.
Read the dammed article, it literally said the DMV for California and Nevada. It’s the fucking government.
Spoken like someone who clearly knows nothing about the technology.
U.S. customers can buy a yearly subscription of Drive Pilot in 2024 EQS sedans and S-Class car models for $2,500
yeah, fuck that.
I think you can afford that if you own an EQS
Those cars cost well over $100k each. The demographic buying that doesn’t care about $2500.
They’re also accepting full liability if anything happens while using this feature so it’s actually a type of insurance
I wonder how much cheaper it will make auto insurance. I also wonder if this will open transportation options those who have lost a license.
Not this. It’s limited to specific scenarios on specific roads. So you’re going to need a licensed driver.
Eventually with actually full self driving? I’d hope so, though it’s going to take legislation first.
I kinda like that system because eventually people will put their own OSes on the car, which the manufacturer obviously can’t cover. Having separate insurance/service eliminates having to pay for it if you’re accepting the liability yourself.
Ok, then I’ll do it if I don’t have to pay for other insurance on the car.
Have you seen Tesla’s price for full self driving? And they don’t take liability
This is really cool and you’re all sad wankers.
Oh it doesn’t work in all these conditions.
Well it went from not working at all to a completely self driving car in certain situations. That’s great. It’s the future. We are living in the future
The better future isn’t better cars it’s removing cars
We had that. It wasn’t a future.
Getting on a train definitely feels like the future compared to a car.
Don’t have to drive, faster, cleaner, more space, more comfort, can buy food, can go to toilet, better view.
When the train can park next to my house so that my grandma on a wheelchair can get in, or get me to a KFC in the middle of the night, or move a random piece of furniture, I’m in.
A nice bike lane infrastructure would be a blast too, for when you don’t need to move a cargo.
Both are must for large cities, but unrealistic pretty much everywhere else.
Good job that most trips don’t involve moving a grandma or furniture. Most people rent something if they want to move furniture anyway so that seems like a non issue.
As for KFC deliveries. That doesn’t involve your own personal car so that doesn’t make any sense. No one is complaining about delivery vehicles.
Cycle lanes are good. Last mile is the real problem. Cargo bike are a thing.
So we need cycle lanes, we need trains, both of those are policy issues. Once they have self driving cars, or they invent taxis, that you can use to pick your grandma up for 1% of human trips. What’s the excuse then?
how dare someone enjoy driving
Autonomous my ass. Is a person remote controlling it from a low wage county?
Yeah I doubt this can drive American roads in any weather condition and not have issues.
Read article
in any weather condition
LOL. Weather is probably the smallest of the problems they have solved.
German car makers have a habit of actually testing all their models in all weather conditions, routinely, around the globe.
Correct, it only works when certain conditions are met.
Drivers can activate Mercedes’s technology, called Drive Pilot, when certain conditions are met, including in heavy traffic jams, during the daytime, on spec ific California and Nevada freeways, and when the car is traveling less than 40 mph. Drivers can focus on other activities until the vehicle alerts them to resume control. The technology does not work on roads that haven’t been pre-approved by Mercedes, including on freeways in other states.
It will be litigated almost immediately. There is no current combination of model and hardware platform that a car could reasonably run that could be called “fully self driving” at any useful speed. This thing sounds like parking assist on steroids maybe, or “stalled traffic assist”. They will be sued.
There’s tons of conditions
when certain conditions are met, including in heavy traffic jams, during the daytime, on spec ific California and Nevada freeways, and when the car is traveling less than 40 mph. Drivers can focus on other activities until the vehicle alerts them to resume control.
I doubt this is a mistake, they must have really high confidence in the tech as well as with the restrictions, not even Tesla had the balls to announce that you could drive distracted.
not even Tesla had the balls to announce that you could drive distracted.
That’s the difference between Level 2 and Level 3 full self driving. Teslas are Level 2.
That’s what I’m saying, they could have called this a “Ultra advanced level 2” and avoided opening themselves up to a TON of liabilities. Once you start saying this is a level 3 system and you don’t need to pay attention to the road with it, well, that shuts the door to many defenses they could use of it was “just” level 2 if something happens. So that means they must be really confident in their system
Did you read the article? There are already plenty of conditions for activating the self driving mode.
There is no current combination of model and hardware platform that a car could reasonably run that could be called “fully self driving” at any useful speed.
It’s still not flawless and reguires an attentive driver but Tesla FSD Beta V12 is pretty damn impressive. They made a huge leap forward by going from human code to 100% neural nets. I don’t think we’re too far a way from a true robo-taxi and there’s going to be some humble pie served for the LiDAR/radar advocates. I highly recommend everyone to watch some reviews on YouTube if you aren’t up to speed with the recent changes they’ve made.
Sued for what?
I mean I disagree with most of what the person you’re responding to is saying, but they are entering into a new stage of vehicular liability. By telling the driver they don’t have to pay attention there is an implied transfer of liability.
It probably says somewhere in the terms of use that Mercedes isn’t at fault or that you have to carry some special kind of insurance, and frankly computers have a pretty good shot at being better than your average human driver so they’ll hopefully be easier to insure, but nevertheless, people on both sides of every accident for the first few years with this tech will sue. Any chance to squeeze a few milly out of a 100 billion dollar car company.
https://www.roadandtrack.com/news/a39481699/what-happens-if-mercedes-drivepilot-causes-a-crash/
“Mercedes will accept full legal responsibility for the vehicle whenever Drive Pilot is active.”
It will only activate if all the conditions are met, but not clear on how long the driver has to take over on deactivation before they stop accepting liability…
Sure, anyone can sue for any reason. That doesn’t mean that a case will be successful. I do agree with you that there if a transfer of liability, until the car tells the driver that manual intervention is needed. But also, this can be used on only specific roads, under specific weather and traffic conditions, I really don’t think it’s much to ask of a robot to do. It actually seems like a pretty boring level of autonomy.
…
As of April 11, there were 65 Mercedes autonomous vehicles available for sale in California, Fortune has learned through an open records request submitted to the state’s DMV. One of those has since been sold, which marks the first sale of an autonomous Mercedes in California, according to the DMV. Mercedes would not confirm sales numbers. Select Mercedes dealerships in Nevada are also offering the cars with the new technology, known as “level 3” autonomous driving.
…
Drivers can activate Mercedes’s technology, called Drive Pilot, when certain conditions are met, including in heavy traffic jams, during the daytime, on spec ific California and Nevada freeways, and when the car is traveling less than 40 mph. Drivers can focus on other activities until the vehicle alerts them to resume control. The technology does not work on roads that haven’t been pre-approved by Mercedes, including on freeways in other states.
…
U.S. customers can buy a yearly subscription of Drive Pilot in 2024 EQS sedans and S-Class car models for $2,500.
…
Mercedes is also working on developing level 4 capabilities. The automaker’s chief technology officer Markus Schäfer expects that level 4 autonomous technology will be available to consumers by 2030, Automotive News reported.
…
Hmm, so only on a very small number of predetermined routes, and at very slow speeds for those roads.
Still impressive, but not as impressive as the headline makes out.
And definitely not worth the $2500 a year they’re asking for the feature.
If they assume full liability for any collisions while the feature is active (and it looks like they do), then I can see that being fair.
Chances are, If you can afford the car, then that amount is nothing to you.
Having known one, some of their customers love their feature loaded cars to brag about and feel extra special. Some will definitely pay the 2.5k gladly.
Conspicuous Consumption.
Come on, you have been able to pay the price of that Mercedes in the first place.
These 2500 are not going to hurt.
Many people use credit to buy a car out of their league.
They may do so. I have no mercy for them.
Then those people might as well take an extra loan for 2500 a year. I’m not sure what the point is you’re trying to make here.
Yes, but it’s actually level 3.
Not the Tesla “full self driving - no wait we actually lied to you, you need to be alert at all times” bullshit.
We’ll wait and see i guess
I’ve seen this headline a few times and the details are laughably bad. The only reason this can be getting any press is because the headline is good clickbait. But 40 mph top speed on approved roads in 2 states only if a car is in front of you in the daytime is entirely useless. I guess it’s a good first step maybe? But trying to write headlines like this is big news is sad.
The reason this gets attention is because it’s the first level 3 sold to consumers.
The tech is hard, of course it’s gonna start out with laughingly limited capabilities. But it’s the first step towards more automation.
It’s starting in California where there are a meaningful number of high earners who are spending hours per day in 4 lane bumper to bumper traffic.
Having actual autonomy during those hours is still shit. But it’s a hell of a lot less shit than the tedium of the high attention requirements of sitting in traffic at a crawl.
40 mph top speed on approved roads in 2 states only if a car is in front of you in the daytime is entirely useless.
It’s specifically designed to navigate traffic congestion, which happens under 30 mph. It can keep up with the lane, deal with lane changes, honk if someone backs into you, let ambulances through, things like that. Not sure why the article presents it as generic driving.
Fucking subscription. No.
don’t come with a requirement that drivers watch the road
Seems it’s like every other Mercedes then
Hey I’m watching it on my mirrors.
They got an army of thousands of Indians to watch the road for you?
No they just got a few dozens good lawyers instead if the lawsuits costts less than the profits and you get publicity out of it then that’s business for ya
The best lawyers are going to use AI to create their legal arguments. And you know what AI stands for. Always Indians.
No matter how you slice it, it’s Indians all the way down.
This is the best comment I’ve read on Lemmy in the 6 months I’ve been here.
No, you’re thinking of Amazon.
They got an army of thousands of Amazonians to watch the road for you?
Ah, the ol’ reddit swi- oh wait…
Time for snoo-snoo?
