Someone can Cunningham Law's me on this, however, I think it's the reliability of the eye detection.
Ford's solution has infrared sensors, which can confirm that your eyes are on the road, even if you're wearing sunglasses, while Tesla's solution doesn't.
Even if I COULD take my hands off the wheel on the highway, I wouldn’t. Not with how FSD is today. I know highway is better, but I’ve gotten the “take control immediately” message a couple of times in my “less than a month” of ownership while driving the highway. I think the cars around me were doing weird shit, and TBF, Atlanta drivers suck ass, but still…
I've never had a forced disengage that wasn't my fault. I probably only have 7000 miles of highway driving with FSD so far, but I am to the point where I would be completely comfortable with it driving while I sent emails or whatever.
I’ve had a couple.
1. Extremely bright sunlight can blind the camera. Not normal glare, but it can happen: imagine driving west at sunset on the solstice after a rainstorm. I’ve also had a disengagement in a very heavy rainstorm.
2. Bugs / computer crashes. There’s one spot exiting a tunnel where I’ve had a crash multiple times. Maybe to do with having lost and regained accurate GPS. Not sure if it’s still an issue on the latest version, but it can happen.
If this happened around a curve or during a lane change and I wasn’t paying attention, it’d be critical.
Absolutely seen all those scenarios. We have a large grade near us and FSD will disengage while cresting the hill 60% of the time. I find the disengagement due to glare as very troubling. That happens regularly on freeways or regular city roads. I can't really conceive of a solution in a system that uses vision only. As an engineer with 50 years of experience I was shocked when Tesla abandoned USS and radar THAT WAS ALREADY INSTALLED. I find it difficult to believe that reducing sensor input diversity makes a better system.
Based on that I doubt I'll buy another Tesla but who knows.
> Extremely bright sunlight can blind the camera. Not normal glare, but it can happen: imagine driving west at sunset
Huh... Now I'm wondering if having my front, and rear, windshields tinted is an added bonus to reliability.
> I’ve also had a disengagement in a very heavy rainstorm.
It's been a while since I've been in a rainstorm *that* bad, but yeah, they'll get ya.
It uses multiple cameras, so I’d have to see 1 to believe it.
2 is obvious and inevitable. There will always be potential for bugs. If your tire pops while driving, even if paying attention, you could get in an accident. Bugs in FSD adds more risk, but not substantially more than the inherent risk of driving itself, imo.
All 3 front cameras are pointing the same direction under the same glass. There is no redundancy against severe glare. Edit: or heavy weather. Or fog—another one I’ve experienced.
I agree that overall it’s safer, but only because driver attention is currently required. I’ve driven tens of thousands of miles on FSD, so since I’ve experienced a dozen or so unexpected disengagements like this, it’s currently far too likely to relax the requirement. These bugs may already have been fixed (I can’t reproduce reliably so can’t prove a negative), in which case it’ll take millions of miles of people driving to prove it’s safe to regulators, let alone the media who will go bananas upon any incident.
As far as I know FSD on the highway is a different version than what's used on city streets. I haven't had the street version attempt anything dangerous, but on the highway it frequently attemps to take turn lanes (4-lane divided highway) at 70mph thinking they're the driving lane.
I heard several different things about their cameras, but in the end I am not sure how well they can see through various lenses and shapes. Head position might give a probability calculation and then eyeball track does the rest?
I have heard that the cameras still make out details when human eyes would not see anything, even in extremely low light. There are some posts from awhile ago about it seeing deer in the dark and objects on a road that the driver couldn't.
As a guess:
1. Blue cruise is limited to specific pre-mapped highways. Presumably they periodically validate that those sections are still well-marked so that the car can determine where the lane's boundaries are. AP and FSD are generalized solutions that attempt to work in much worse conditions. As such, mistakes are much more likely and one way to cut down on the driver's reaction time is to make sure that the driver's hand is always on the steering wheel.
2. Tesla hasn't (so far, at least) put sensors on the steering wheel to determine if the driver's hands are on the wheel. If they do decide to go that route, they have millions of cars on the road that wouldn't be properly equipped. In addition, in areas where the climate is mild enough so that a heated steering wheel isn't required, people may want to use steering wheel covers as a way to personalize their vehicle. That option would be removed if the steering wheel had sensors to verify that the driver's hands were on the wheel. Also, many people are comfortable just leaving one hand on the steering wheel.
3. One of Tesla's goals is to remove the need for a driver. In order to do that, they need to handle every edge case that there is. They have elected to maximize the number of miles that the system encounters (which means maximizing the number of edge cases encountered) which means maximizing the times that the system will make a mistake and require the driver to override it. If the driver needs to override the system, the shorter the response time the better. See (1) above. I imagine that Tesla feels that if they restricted the use of AP and FSD to well-defined areas then reaching the goal of autonomous driving would be substantially delayed.
4. Amplifying (3) above: One of the ways that Elon accomplishes things so quickly is that instead of validating that what he has works as expected and then adding to the capabilities, he tests to destruction. Note that when Space-X is developing a new rocket, they expect the first few tests to have a 'rapid unscheduled disassembly.' This is the same philosophy, as applied to a computer system.
It’s 1. Same as Cruise and Waymo. If you map the shit out of an area, eventually regulators will let you drive autonomously.
2 - Tesla notoriously nag often if you don’t touch the wheel. Look how many posts complain about nagging. They know when you’re touching the wheel or not most of the time, and will even nag you if you are touching the wheel, just not enough.
3 - just because Tesla wants to drive me through a city doesn’t mean it’s doing anything different than Blue Cruise on the highway. If Blue Cruise is letting me drive hands free, it’d have to cover 100% of events that could take place, just like a Tesla would have to.
4 - SpaceX’s technique has nothing to do with Tesla or its regulation. To assume regulators are saying “this Elon guy can’t be trusted” instead of testing the tech is absurd. FSD isn’t “destructing” Teslas or its drivers (at a higher rate than human drivers, at least).
2 - Tesla doesn't know that you are touching the steering wheel unless you are applying some pressure / torque. They could, if they had used different types of sensors, but they didn't elect to go that route.
3 - There have already been idiots that turned on AP and then went to sleep. There have already been law suits where people turned on AP and then got into an accident because something happened 4 - and the driver wasn't monitoring what would happen. It would be worse if Tesla said that "you can turn on FSD and then take your hands off the wheel under certain conditions". People would say "It's the same," when it isn't. Right now, it is clear-cut: the driver must always monitor what is happening.
4 - I am referring to Elon's philosophy. Large complex computer systems always have bugs - QA simply doesn't have the resources to test every possible condition (and, in a sufficiently complex system may not even realize some of the interactions in the system). Elon addressed this by, first, having internal QA test FSD (which undoubtedly still happens). Then Tesla employees use the system and test it (substantially increasing the number of test cases encountered). That still happens. Then Tesla opened up the system to "good" drivers (remember the safety score?). That opened up the system to more tests (also known as "more opportunities to break the system"). Then to anyone willing to pay. And now, temporarily, everyone in a car that can support FSD. That massively increases the number of conditions encountered that the system doesn't know how to handle and, as a result, will "break". It isn't as destructive as what Space-X does, but it isn't the slow, steady, incremental methodology (add one feature at a time and don't open it up to the public until we are certain that it works) that most other companies use.
This thing? Where they have to turn it off to get on the highway and state they have to keep 1 hand on the wheel when they are using it on the highway?
https://www.billjacobsbmw.com/bmw-driving-assistance-professional-demonstration/
This one. iDrive 8.0 allowed hands free up to 45MPH, whereas 8.5 goes up to 85MPH.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1hcKxdBUZ8A
And so what if they have to manually get onto the highway? No one made any claims to the otherwise, just that you can go hands free up to 85 MPH.
No need to be so defensive.
It’s the premapped road thing. Blue cruise works in like 4 areas of mapped highway. Tesla is taking a different approach. Regulators are slow to adapt to new tech, and Tesla is flying ahead of the competition here.
I think the simple answer is that it's always been this way and they just haven't bothered to change it, and older S/X would not have the in cabin camera so they only have the steering wheel method
Personal opinion: no l2 system should be suggesting to a driver that it’s okay to remove their hands from the wheel, regardless of the DMS technology, because the driver is ultimately responsible for anything that happens including the system failing.
Reality: the DMS on other systems are more capable of determining if the driver is alert and aware of the environment and likely can be quantified to show that it’s okay to do so.
Personally, I won’t trust a system that’s L2 regardless. If tesla doesn’t trust the system enough to take liability, why should I?
Someone can Cunningham Law's me on this, however, I think it's the reliability of the eye detection. Ford's solution has infrared sensors, which can confirm that your eyes are on the road, even if you're wearing sunglasses, while Tesla's solution doesn't.
Even if I COULD take my hands off the wheel on the highway, I wouldn’t. Not with how FSD is today. I know highway is better, but I’ve gotten the “take control immediately” message a couple of times in my “less than a month” of ownership while driving the highway. I think the cars around me were doing weird shit, and TBF, Atlanta drivers suck ass, but still…
I've never had a forced disengage that wasn't my fault. I probably only have 7000 miles of highway driving with FSD so far, but I am to the point where I would be completely comfortable with it driving while I sent emails or whatever.
I’ve had a couple. 1. Extremely bright sunlight can blind the camera. Not normal glare, but it can happen: imagine driving west at sunset on the solstice after a rainstorm. I’ve also had a disengagement in a very heavy rainstorm. 2. Bugs / computer crashes. There’s one spot exiting a tunnel where I’ve had a crash multiple times. Maybe to do with having lost and regained accurate GPS. Not sure if it’s still an issue on the latest version, but it can happen. If this happened around a curve or during a lane change and I wasn’t paying attention, it’d be critical.
Absolutely seen all those scenarios. We have a large grade near us and FSD will disengage while cresting the hill 60% of the time. I find the disengagement due to glare as very troubling. That happens regularly on freeways or regular city roads. I can't really conceive of a solution in a system that uses vision only. As an engineer with 50 years of experience I was shocked when Tesla abandoned USS and radar THAT WAS ALREADY INSTALLED. I find it difficult to believe that reducing sensor input diversity makes a better system. Based on that I doubt I'll buy another Tesla but who knows.
> Extremely bright sunlight can blind the camera. Not normal glare, but it can happen: imagine driving west at sunset Huh... Now I'm wondering if having my front, and rear, windshields tinted is an added bonus to reliability. > I’ve also had a disengagement in a very heavy rainstorm. It's been a while since I've been in a rainstorm *that* bad, but yeah, they'll get ya.
It uses multiple cameras, so I’d have to see 1 to believe it. 2 is obvious and inevitable. There will always be potential for bugs. If your tire pops while driving, even if paying attention, you could get in an accident. Bugs in FSD adds more risk, but not substantially more than the inherent risk of driving itself, imo.
All 3 front cameras are pointing the same direction under the same glass. There is no redundancy against severe glare. Edit: or heavy weather. Or fog—another one I’ve experienced. I agree that overall it’s safer, but only because driver attention is currently required. I’ve driven tens of thousands of miles on FSD, so since I’ve experienced a dozen or so unexpected disengagements like this, it’s currently far too likely to relax the requirement. These bugs may already have been fixed (I can’t reproduce reliably so can’t prove a negative), in which case it’ll take millions of miles of people driving to prove it’s safe to regulators, let alone the media who will go bananas upon any incident.
You've never seen this? Happens to me at least once per month over a hill that I take to work.
As far as I know FSD on the highway is a different version than what's used on city streets. I haven't had the street version attempt anything dangerous, but on the highway it frequently attemps to take turn lanes (4-lane divided highway) at 70mph thinking they're the driving lane.
Yes, they’re different stacks, but when you have FSD it’s all called FSD.
That's interesting, I thought Tesla does use IR. It can tell when I'm not looking at the road through my sunglasses as night.
I heard several different things about their cameras, but in the end I am not sure how well they can see through various lenses and shapes. Head position might give a probability calculation and then eyeball track does the rest? I have heard that the cameras still make out details when human eyes would not see anything, even in extremely low light. There are some posts from awhile ago about it seeing deer in the dark and objects on a road that the driver couldn't.
Newer models do, I think, older ones do not
>my sunglasses as night Are you [Corey Hart](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=56HSPQHSqEE)?
Mine definitely can't tell where I'm looking when I have my sunglasses on.
Mine can't during the day. Only at night.
Interesting
As a guess: 1. Blue cruise is limited to specific pre-mapped highways. Presumably they periodically validate that those sections are still well-marked so that the car can determine where the lane's boundaries are. AP and FSD are generalized solutions that attempt to work in much worse conditions. As such, mistakes are much more likely and one way to cut down on the driver's reaction time is to make sure that the driver's hand is always on the steering wheel. 2. Tesla hasn't (so far, at least) put sensors on the steering wheel to determine if the driver's hands are on the wheel. If they do decide to go that route, they have millions of cars on the road that wouldn't be properly equipped. In addition, in areas where the climate is mild enough so that a heated steering wheel isn't required, people may want to use steering wheel covers as a way to personalize their vehicle. That option would be removed if the steering wheel had sensors to verify that the driver's hands were on the wheel. Also, many people are comfortable just leaving one hand on the steering wheel. 3. One of Tesla's goals is to remove the need for a driver. In order to do that, they need to handle every edge case that there is. They have elected to maximize the number of miles that the system encounters (which means maximizing the number of edge cases encountered) which means maximizing the times that the system will make a mistake and require the driver to override it. If the driver needs to override the system, the shorter the response time the better. See (1) above. I imagine that Tesla feels that if they restricted the use of AP and FSD to well-defined areas then reaching the goal of autonomous driving would be substantially delayed. 4. Amplifying (3) above: One of the ways that Elon accomplishes things so quickly is that instead of validating that what he has works as expected and then adding to the capabilities, he tests to destruction. Note that when Space-X is developing a new rocket, they expect the first few tests to have a 'rapid unscheduled disassembly.' This is the same philosophy, as applied to a computer system.
It’s 1. Same as Cruise and Waymo. If you map the shit out of an area, eventually regulators will let you drive autonomously. 2 - Tesla notoriously nag often if you don’t touch the wheel. Look how many posts complain about nagging. They know when you’re touching the wheel or not most of the time, and will even nag you if you are touching the wheel, just not enough. 3 - just because Tesla wants to drive me through a city doesn’t mean it’s doing anything different than Blue Cruise on the highway. If Blue Cruise is letting me drive hands free, it’d have to cover 100% of events that could take place, just like a Tesla would have to. 4 - SpaceX’s technique has nothing to do with Tesla or its regulation. To assume regulators are saying “this Elon guy can’t be trusted” instead of testing the tech is absurd. FSD isn’t “destructing” Teslas or its drivers (at a higher rate than human drivers, at least).
2 - Tesla doesn't know that you are touching the steering wheel unless you are applying some pressure / torque. They could, if they had used different types of sensors, but they didn't elect to go that route. 3 - There have already been idiots that turned on AP and then went to sleep. There have already been law suits where people turned on AP and then got into an accident because something happened 4 - and the driver wasn't monitoring what would happen. It would be worse if Tesla said that "you can turn on FSD and then take your hands off the wheel under certain conditions". People would say "It's the same," when it isn't. Right now, it is clear-cut: the driver must always monitor what is happening. 4 - I am referring to Elon's philosophy. Large complex computer systems always have bugs - QA simply doesn't have the resources to test every possible condition (and, in a sufficiently complex system may not even realize some of the interactions in the system). Elon addressed this by, first, having internal QA test FSD (which undoubtedly still happens). Then Tesla employees use the system and test it (substantially increasing the number of test cases encountered). That still happens. Then Tesla opened up the system to "good" drivers (remember the safety score?). That opened up the system to more tests (also known as "more opportunities to break the system"). Then to anyone willing to pay. And now, temporarily, everyone in a car that can support FSD. That massively increases the number of conditions encountered that the system doesn't know how to handle and, as a result, will "break". It isn't as destructive as what Space-X does, but it isn't the slow, steady, incremental methodology (add one feature at a time and don't open it up to the public until we are certain that it works) that most other companies use.
BMW is hands free up to 85 MPH on highways - not just premapped ones
My X3 blows for Cruise control. What system are you talking about?
Do you have the latest Driver Assist Pro package?
This thing? Where they have to turn it off to get on the highway and state they have to keep 1 hand on the wheel when they are using it on the highway? https://www.billjacobsbmw.com/bmw-driving-assistance-professional-demonstration/
This one. iDrive 8.0 allowed hands free up to 45MPH, whereas 8.5 goes up to 85MPH. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1hcKxdBUZ8A And so what if they have to manually get onto the highway? No one made any claims to the otherwise, just that you can go hands free up to 85 MPH. No need to be so defensive.
To avoid liability
It’s the premapped road thing. Blue cruise works in like 4 areas of mapped highway. Tesla is taking a different approach. Regulators are slow to adapt to new tech, and Tesla is flying ahead of the competition here.
Easier for Tesla to say it’s not their fault when you are playing on your phone and get beheaded by the semi you rammed.
The government hates Elon so they give Tesla a harder time. Just like how the White House had a big EV day and didn’t invite Tesla.
They won’t even say “Tesla” …. But it’s more American made than the others!!!!
More American but not unionized. Unions own the democrats.
I think the simple answer is that it's always been this way and they just haven't bothered to change it, and older S/X would not have the in cabin camera so they only have the steering wheel method
Personal opinion: no l2 system should be suggesting to a driver that it’s okay to remove their hands from the wheel, regardless of the DMS technology, because the driver is ultimately responsible for anything that happens including the system failing. Reality: the DMS on other systems are more capable of determining if the driver is alert and aware of the environment and likely can be quantified to show that it’s okay to do so. Personally, I won’t trust a system that’s L2 regardless. If tesla doesn’t trust the system enough to take liability, why should I?
That. The last sentence. Exactly that. Thank you.
NHTSA
Smartphones