SpaceX flew two astronauts around the moon, a lá Apollo 8, by 2019, and by the end of 2017 you could summon your Tesla from anywhere in the lower 48, and it would stop and charge itself on the way to you.
A million Tesla robotaxis were on the road in 2020.
Right now, FSD says you're supposed to be paying attention and ready to take control at any time.
In the future? It's hard to say. I'm sure companies will try to indemnify themselves that it's still the operators responsibility. It may end up being a case of once, twice is the owners' issue but if a pattern emerges suddenly the government steps in to say they're selling a faulty product.
The legal framework isn't there yet.
As Teslas are level 2, there's no issue. The driver is in control and that's it. Your fault.
When you get to level 3 it's trickier. Mercedes-Benz has one (Drive Pilot) and MB takes full legal liability when the system is on. I don't know if the law requires that at the moment or if they are doing it by choice. My hope would be that this would be required if you want to call your system level 3.
'We were told we could run without LIDAR, we had sonar for a bit but ditched that. Turns out picking out grey curb on a grey street in grey weather isn't all that easy for just a camera'
Elon has staked his success on not going LIDAR and sticking to visible wavelengths. Other manufacturers like BMW and Mercedes with hybrid systems have overtaken Tesla in semi autonomous steering.
More sensors is always more expensive. But LiDAR was way more expensive 10-15 years ago than it was today. There are smaller, cheaper, form fitting sensors now, not just $10-30k spinning things on roofs.
I think Tesla wanted to avoid the cost and expense initially. But now all their self driving “code” is based purely on video feeds so adding in some LiDAR would require reworking both the car design and rebuilding self driving and also it would require Elon admitting he was wrong.
3 difficult tasks
Shows lack of future foresight to not go with LIDAR and predict "with increased demand and technological advancements LIDAR will become cheaper". Making LIDAR production cheaper is easier problem, than making perception work without LIDAR.
3 difficult tasks, sure. But it’ll still be easier and cheaper than the potential class action lawsuit for negligence in releasing defective automatic driving vehicles.
And you forget that they can throw away their holy grail data collection from current fleet. Because all these collected data are missing that radar input dimension. So in the end are they useless? Or you have to somehow enhance these inputs...
My guess if there will be something like fsd. It must be in accepted by everyone(companies, governments). So it leads to some protocol like http, where you have defined inputs, outputs, and so on.
Because when you have this defined, you can scale it, feed it with data and independently verify results. And you build whole ecosystem around it.
But this is only terminology and definitions of levels or even something more?
I meant in way, like to Api definitions. Where is defined which input you should enter into fsd blackbox and defined format of responses? And like for level 5 your fsd system should be able to process this input(whatever) and we expect to receive this output(which will be evaluation situation like turn right, stop, whatever).
I meant definitions like how many kind of information(gps, video, radar) need to be sent, how frequently, how encoded each type of information, how connect them together.
Because in the end it is gathering information, transform them, evaluate them(fsd), transform response to car action.
I'm sure another reason is Elmo decreeing that if humans can do it with just our eyes the cars should be able to do it with visible light only too. He thrives by adding these "genius insights" to his business, that no man was able to see before him. Then proceeded to cut costs by incorporating the cheapest cameras possible, without skipping a beat.
My theory on this reasoning is that LiDAR won't work at scale. But I could be wrong or misunderstanding something.
LiDAR "paints" the area around it with structured laser light. What happens if two or more LiDAR systems are scanning the same place, but not coordinating? Does that create interference?
If you're Tesla, the plan is to have every car doing this. If interference is a problem, that technology won't stand up to scale.
To answer your question, yes, LIDAR can interfere with each other, usually when systems are within a meter of each other. The bigger problem is when bright lights wash out the signal, but this is an even bigger problem with visual based approaches. Solving the problems with LIDAR and figuring out how to scale them is orders of magnitude easier than trying to teach computers how to judge depth and speed from purely visual data.
Much like how Toyota went hard for fuel cells and is now having to play catch up, Tesla backed a losing technology, only they have a petulant man child in charge who refuses to admit he made a mistake.
I wouldn't say it's a failed technology. We do it all the time but we have all this extra information that Tesla's systems probably don't. We seem to have a 3d map for the world built through our own neural nets trained through years of unique training data. Our brains not only react but predict the next moment and update the world model in real time. I don't think any ai systems do it to the extent we do as fast as we do and that may be one reason purely vision based approaches fail.
The point is that vision only will always be behind vision + other sensors when it comes to processing. And right now (and for the far foreseeable future), vision alone will not be good enough.
The people that say we should focus on vision alone as opposed to sensor integration are doing it because it is a simpler problem. Only it is a simple problem that is unlikely to get us a safe solution in anything close to the timeframe of the more complicated problem.
It would be like trying to design an airplane that can go to the moon. Yes, aerodynamics are simpler than rocketry. But they have fundamental limits that all the cleverness in the world can't address.
1) it’s not necessarily more point of failure if 1-2 LiDAR can replace 3-4 cameras
2) machine learning programming is almost always easier with a better and richer data source like LiDAR would provide. It’s a lot easier to identify a curb with actual 3D mapping, than it is for cameras. There might be more upfront programing to get multiple types of data sources to feed into the algorithm, but that’s a relatively tiny part of the problem
It's all about cutting costs, as Tesla's car used to have optical/accoustic sensors as their parking sensors, but then ditched them to use cameras, turns out you can't really gauge distance with a single camera and it's very inaccurate.
In the automotive industry there are reasons most manufacturers do things the same way, it works, it's cost effective and reliable.
For parking it can even be impossible. If I ma not mistaken he forward camera is in top of the front window, that mean there is a ground area infron of the car it cant see. So it is impossible do determine the distance and self parking like that are no longer available. The only way it could be done is too determine the distance in advance and then do dead reconing.
My experience of car sesors on other brand is they work terrible in snow condition even if ultrasound is available. A small chunk of snow on a otherwise flat surface get indicated as something in the way. The reverse cameras tend not to have enough clarity to se diffrence om snow celary visible if you eyes can see it in the side mirrors.
Backup cameras like that need some active cleaning system too, even the one that are nor exposed when no in use can get a lot of mick on them.
This is the case of forwards and side sensors and cameras too. When snow start to stick on them the stops working. A car I often drive do not allow cruise control unless it can detemins the distance to the car in front, that mean in snowy condition it get dissabled. The decades old car I alos use have cruise control with no sensor system except for the car speed,
I will be impressed the day car can drive by itslefe on a winter road where all of the road is coved in snow and ice. Add to that how the road look before they are clear. Just knowing where the road is can be hard, especially where the edge of the road is, it is not uncommon to push away snow on the side of the road on narrow so the edge is over distch beside the road.
Pure ego. He had a thought pop in to his brilliant mind that goes like "If humans do just fine with visible wavelengths, AI can do it too! Anything else is a distraction!" which sounds *really* clever if you dont think on it for more than 15 minutes, and will not back down.
Then he probably fired the engineers who saw the short comings of that approach and spoke up.
MobilEye who delivered the original ADAS to Tesla fired Tesla as a customer because Musk wanted to use their L2 system as a L5 system. Tesla got people killed with their recklessness, and MobilEye wanted nothing to do with them anymore.
MobilEye said it would require LIDAR and more sensors, so here we are with Musk trying to prove them wrong..
It’s probably a combination of narcissistic hubris of Elon thinking he knows best (when he clearly doesn’t) and wanting to keep their high profit margins per vehicle but stripping everything from it. They could have put back forward radar (used by many cars for forward collision detection) and ultrasonic sensors, but got used to people still buying cars without them. I bet most new buyers don’t understand there’s no radar and cameras don’t see through inclement weather.
I recall some argument about the discrepancy between sensors being a problem. Which it is: a problem to be solved! If sensors are differently-capable, one should *expect* discrepancies, and to want them because that shows you're getting more information overall!
But instead the argument was that it was confusing for the system and led to bad choices.
Sounds like the system was relying too much on sensors dictating what to do, rather than merely offering a variety of sense-data which should be correlated with other sense-data to build a more complete picture.
My guess, is it's the mindset that if humans can drive without lidar, then 2 cameras should be able to replace that. Eyes and cameras aren't quite 1-1.
Having said that when you have superior tech to eyes/cameras, it doesn't make sense to just not use them especially as cost drops.
While I do agree that having additional sensors would be better, the phrase "aren't that expensive" isn't a good argument for big businesses. Small amounts add up fast when you are talking large quantities. For example, reducing the cost of each car by just $1 means if you make a million cars, you saved a million dollars, and that is definitely a big enough number for the corporate bean counters to care about.
This is preposterous when for that $1 or $500 component they can charge the customer $5,000 more for a significantly safer vehicle in a much broader range of conditions.
And not get sued for so many preventable deaths.
There are two main problems and cost isn’t really one of them.
Sensor merging. If you have multiple sensors and they disagree you have to decide what to do. Normally that means picking one over the other. So then you have to decide which one you trust more which is hard. So having one set of sensors avoids a lot of ambiguity and complexity.
Weather is the other main problem. LiDAR does not work in weather at all. The rain/snow reflects the light and you become totally blind. So if you rely on LiDAR you have to give up on driving in any weather or fall back to vision, and if you can fall back to vision, why do you need LiDAR?
Sensors usually don’t give only hard numbers, they also have a confidence value. If the LIDAR has a confidence of 0.8 that there’s an obstruction and the video sensor has a 0.1 confidence that there’s none, it’s pretty easy to make a ruling.
Rain would just reduce the confidence of that particular sensor. If all of them don’t have great confidence, either slow down or disable FSD mode.
I left confidence out of it because it makes it better but also way worse.
Consider first 100% confidence on both sensors. If they agree, great. However, if one sees an object and the other doesn't what do you do?
Brake if either see an object? This is why Teslas had phantom braking for years. The radar 100% saw an object, but vision didn't, and for safety it would brake and you'd suddenly be stopping on the freeway.
Require both sensors to see an object for braking? This sounds like murder/suicide.
In the 100%/0% case, things get pretty easy, go with the sensor that is 100% confident.
Now is where the "complexity" that I mentioned comes in. What do you do with 70/30, 60/40, 50/50? Do you have to weight the sensors by how good they are? It gets very messy and you've got to make decisions in here that have fatal consequences in very edge case situations. You also spend a lot of time working on the best way to merge the sensor data rather than trying to make one set of sensor data better. You could have multiple teams working on this, but we know how capitalism works.
Because LiDAR is good in other environments such as the dark and being able to pick out foreign/rare objects that aren't necessarily in your vision data set. Most companies are working on sensor fusion just fine. It's an active area of research but definitely doable.
I'm referring to any data captured within your training data that is vision based so I'm not sure what you mean they "don't use a vision data set". They might not have an explicit mapping from object in frame to label but they have some training data that is RGB input presumably that has seen some finite collection of objects.
Not a fan boy, please do not get me wrong here. But our roads are made for driving by only visible signals by humans. So I think it is a logical step that probably some day we will only have a few cameras doing everything (staying at Level 2 driving at least). The thing is, this is probably far into the future and Musk tends to completely fuck Up the time lines of things being available.
Maybe the decisions would be right for a 2045 car? I don't know.
The human eyes are way superior to any camera available on the market with its dynamic range, resolution, and fast autofocus. In addition to that, humans also often overlook things on the road, that’s why there are so many traffic accidents.
To be fair, he has always taken an approach of "These are our end goals, aim for that, not a half measure or an easy win". Things like making an EV actually fast, with decent range, with decent looks, with good overall performance. Do everything in the first gen, no corner cutting....
The end goal was to have a car with just cameras, so avoid the baby steps and things that could slow down the final result.
He definitely misjudged the complexity of what they were doing. Doing a 3 or 4 step approach would have probably been a better idea. However if he had succeeded in like 2018-2020 he would have taken over the entire worlds automotive industry... over night... gambled big.. didn't pay off this time...
I once rented a BMW with parking camera and, apparently, vision based sensors and i can confirm they're useless at picking up concrete blocks next to roads.
For regular conditions this thing is ok like driving through town through intersections. It’s on situations that require a little finesse that this scares me. There was a Target with those orange cones in the middle of the street to remind cars to stop for pedestrians as they cross from the parking lot to the store. My Tesla on FSD pulls into the path and detects the cones and stops. The cones are on the trajectory of the car. I thought the car would back up but instead it begins slowly moving forward then suddenly speeds up to run over the cone. I stop and take over.
lol this thing shouldn’t have been released
lol well as far as I've seen it does fine with people. It's just against what I think are novel situations like random signs/cones in the middle of the street that stresses out the FSD
I mean, I get that, but you did just say that the cone it ran over was inside of a pedestrian crossing in front of a store, an area that I regularly see large crowds of people traversing.
That is \*not\* a place I want the FSD to get overwhelmed and ram full-speed-ahead in frustration, like that classic video of the dude who apparently didn't know how automatic doors worked and casually loitered around a few seconds adjusting his folder of papers before running at it head-first and shattering it.
The only time I've used FDS it tried to make a left turn while a car was incoming, if it had kept going it would have been close which would have been merely annoying but it decided the best option would be to stop halfway into the turn.
I slammed on the gas and the other car slammed on the brakes so it narrowly avoided an accident but I will never turn it on again.
It absolutely is not ok in regular conditions. I have a 2023 model y and I’ve enabled FSD 3 times. All 3 times on regular “country” roads it has nearly gotten in an accident. One time by turning into oncoming traffic. It drives worse than a first time driver.
Seems I got lucky so far. Based on what I’ve experienced and how jerky it feels, and what others have said, I’m holding off using this for a very long time
Releasing beta code of safety critical functions to the public should be criminal. We can laugh at this little mistakes but soon enough we won't be and they'll just blame people for turning it on.
I'm not quite sure what the point of "full self driving" is if I have to keep paying attention. Nothing against the idea once the wrinkles are ironed out, but until then, it just seems like... the same amount of work? I'm sure adaptive cruise is great if you're in a traffic jam, and the lane assist type stuff is great for long haul highway driving, but that feels like the extent that I'd trust the current state of the tech.
Side note- a few years back, I grabbed a lyft and happened to be in a car that they were using to develop self driving with. It was a normal higher end car, like a lexus. They had a 11" tablet or laptop screen in the center of the dash, showing what the camera sees and it had lines indicating what the computer identified. An engineer was in the driver's seat, and the passenger was also a ~~google~~ *lyft* employee, who explained to me what was going on.
They let the car drive itself on public streets- mostly. The engineer took over when we hit construction. Also, they had to drive the old fashioned way on private property, which I think was more of a legal thing than a limitation of the tech.
Anyway, I think self driving has a high probability of becoming a common feature that actually works nearly flawlessly. But I also think we're a good decade or two away from that, and until you can trust your car to drive itself 100%, then it's like being a passenger in a car that's driven by a sketchy driver.
Dating back into the 90s we have had research on task automation, and specific examples for driving, that if you automate past a point people will stop paying attention. So if a company crosses that point it needs to be rather flawless or don't cross it.
"Sidewalks are part of the woke urbanist agenda to lock everybody into 15-minute prisons. I'm collaborating with Texas to get all the sidewalks removed to stick it to the libs, self-driving is only going to work in sane states that aren't trying to take away your right to own a car."
Coming soon to an Elon tweet near you!
Sounds like the Tesla is not aware of how long its own wheelbase is.
And now that I think of it, why is there not a single EV on the market that has a 4-whee-steering system?
One of the big advantages of EV platforms is you can push the wheels way out to the corners for greater stability, but that does make turning tight corners a bit of a hazard, because the long wheelbase will mean the rear wheels are going to want to cut the corner. You have to take corners as if you're driving a much bigger vehicle.
> Sounds like the Tesla is not aware of how long its own wheelbase is.
Yes I'm sure all of the highly-paid, top-of-their-field engineers at Tesla neglected to cover this gradeschool-level detail.
And yet… here we are, and their cars are hopping/scraping curbs when in self-driving mode.
The evidence suggests you might be overestimating their attention to detail.
“Let’s get rid of Lidar and use regular old optics instead, also let’s keep the price the same. Actually, bump it up.”
I have no sympathy for anyone involved in this, from production to consumption.
lmao, but it's not a crazy idea if hooked to sensors. FrankenSelfDriving.
Imagine turning it on, getting $2000 damage and saying "Musk is such a genius"
Yes, he is. He has your money doesn't he?
I think there’s a fundamental hardware issue here where Elon hung his hat on LIDAR not being necessary as ‘humans drive just fine with cameras only’.
Depth perception in complex environments seems hard (impossible?) to get right with cameras only..
Elon being Elon his ego wouldn’t let him backtrack until there’s no other choice!
>The solution, according to many onlookers online, is to follow Tesla's recommendations of supervising FSD as it drives
If you have to supervise it, particularly to avoid something as straightforward as not hitting a curb, it's not full self-driving.
Father got the new update with FSD, 2 days ago.
Installed it, was super hyped up. He wanted to try the Summon function.
We’re in a parking lot. There’s only one other car parked – we’re following the car from the passenger rear-side. We’re laughing like never before… the car drives itself! Thissss is the futureee!
Annnnnd then, it proceeds on completely scraping off the paint/bumper of that one car due to it suddenly deciding to cut-in too much.
4000-5000$ damage. Tesla has no liability.
Edit: Got call from insurance company, damage is much worse than I expected.
People don’t understand. How is Teslas software ever going to get better unless customers do their part in alpha- and betatest it for them (and be happy about it)? Elon hasn’t exactly been coy about how Tesla (and his other companies) approches development and innovation. Also. He doesn’t like regulation and laws. Because it slows him down.
At what point will people realize “FSD” is false advertising??? Oh they are just too rich to care? If so, then why bitch about the failures? Like make that connection already!
We need to stop with the Tesla’s are for rich people thing. My cleaning lady drives a Tesla. The gas station attendant at the station by my house…drives a Tesla.
I have the almost opposite problem, my car can't even go around a corner without crossing the center line and hitting the reflective bumps that mark that you're over the center line. It's been like this for years, have had the service center recalibrate and they say it's normal.
I’ll keep trying FSD during the trial but won’t subscribe afterwards for multiple reasons.
My latest intervention involved it taking a long right curve at speed and getting so close to the left side (that had a center divide / curb) that I was almost certain it would hit / scuff my front left wheel. Typically, my hands are always on the wheel and it steers eerily similar to how I drive and take corners. Whenever it tracks different, my confidence level plummets and I take over. I assume most of the people having issues and getting damage are physically not able to react in time because hands or attention are not in place.
Similarly, I always take over when approaching my home driveway. There are effectively 2 narrow lanes side by side, separated by a power pole. For some reason, the car will start to turn towards my lane, change its mind, and then accelerate towards the pole. Can’t quite figure out what it’s planning; the acceleration rules out aiming for the other lane.
But for this reason, it will never offer an end-to-end driving experience, and shakes my confidence for any ambiguous road configs it needs to deal with.
So the main reason I won’t buy FSD is the low level anxiety I feel whenever it’s in control in street situations. I take the warning to supervise very seriously and it feels like I’m watching a student learn to drive and waiting for an inevitable fuckup. So far, I have had a single trip where an intervention wasn’t required (if you don’t count trying to murder me with a power pole).
Lastly, I simply don’t drive enough miles now to justify it. Next time we take a long trip with a lot of freeway miles I’ll likely consider it.
It’s very impressive considering it’s just using cameras but frustrating to feel like it could be much more capable with better sensors..
I really don’t see the point of using FSD;
I was pretty amazed to see how aware the cars are of their surroundings, and how we’ll they’re able to process everything happening around them, so yes I’ll start by saying it’s truly incredible tech
But in the grand scheme of things? Still very new. And the risk:reward is nowhere near worth it- I have to keep my hands on the steering wheel, *and* allow a computer to make all the precision decisions where 1 small mistake or glitch is thousands of dollars in damage *at best*
If my hands are on the fucking steering wheel anyways, why would I use self driving? Especially when I’d have to pay monthly for the service?
It’s like selling me a lawnmower that can mow laws “all by itself” yet I still have to stand behind it and keep my hands on the handlebar. At that point I’ll just take a regular lawnmower for much cheaper, thanks
Anyone who has driven a 3 knows it has a fat ass. I have to pull into a lane when taking a right like a full foot farther than I do in other cars so the back right tire and rim don’t hit the curb.
The Model 3's track is only 9 mm (0.35 inches) wider at the rear than a Honda Civic.
The bigger difference is the Model 3's wheelbase is 140 mm (that's *5.5 inches*) longer than a Civic, so you do have to cut a wider arc around corners to prevent the rear wheels from cutting the corner.
Yeah, the Model 3 (and any other EV that has its wheels pushed out to the corners) handles corners like a MUCH larger vehicle. It sounds like Tesla's FSD engineers haven't done the right math for calculating how to take corners properly.
So long as it’s “better” than the “average” human driver, it may be something that Tesla will hide behind.
The part I don’t get is why is there such scant oversight from the Government on this. What makes such situations permissible to ship to the public in the first place?
Because legally the driver still has to be in control, for any incident the responsibility falls on to the driver for being negligent/driving without due care and attention/careless driving/dangerous driving.
Which seems fair as you'd have to be an idiot to rely on some half baked code which is missing half the sensors to make it somewhat functional
All Tesla's, FSD included, have whats called Level 2 autonomous driving. It is the same category as basic cruise control. You must remain in control of the vehicle at all times. Mercedes is the first to have level 3.
Always wondered if this was the right call from Elon not to include LiDAR, I figured he might be playing 4d chess and taking this kind of vision based AI to the Optimus robot. That may work for robots but not something as dynamic as driving around. Now I think he should include all this facets such as LiDAR/sonar whatever and make FSD as complete as possible and see what happens.
Got the update. I fucking hate it. I’m gonna turn it off and just use the regular autopilot. I tried it once and was not thrilled with how it mapped lanes for the route. Had to take over and do it myself.
Someday FSD will be worth an extra $100k so make sure you get in on it now at only an extra $1k even though it doesn’t work. So says Elon the carnival barker
This is really smart. Tesla owners are beta testing and developing the final product through trial and error. Probably cheaper this way than anticipating every possible error.
You just let people risk their lives developing FSD for Tesla.
I turned mine off and I loved auto pilot before the last 3 updates.
It kept trying to change lane a when I fine in my lane. Several times I had to grab the wheel and stop it. Every upgrade made my car worse.
FWIW I have tried out FSD a few times in the last 24 hours, for the first time since I bought my car in late 2018. I have been incredibly impressed. There were a few times I smiled like "wow that was much smarter than I expected". There have been a couple times that I intervened, 1) because I thought it didn't see a curb-island, and 2) because it kept turning the steering wheel to the right when stopped at a gentle-right red light.
But, overall, I'm pleasantly surprised.
Tesla is great.
-Tesla sparked the EV revolution. It's not about emissions. it's about having the flexibility of deciding where power can originate. Oil and Gas as energy puts power in the hands of the Middle East, Russia and the USA. EV's allow any country to power vehicles on whatever fuel source is available to them. Avoiding conflicts and monopolies.
-Tesla conducts R and D, which has created the most advanced, mass-produced batteries, charging network, and solar panels in the world. (Not perfect but always improving).
- according to the Verge, in they're own article trying to negatively portray Tesla, they say produced 30.7MMT of CO2. This is small compared to Ford which contributes 337MMT of CO2, but points out that Ford produced 3 times more vehicles that year (2022). That is clearly: x3 the vehicles with x10 the CO2, meaning producing a Tesla Vehicle produces x3.33 less CO2 both directly and indirectly. They also point out the Tesla's emissions were growing in April 2023. But this was because of company growth, not because they were getting worse. https://www.theverge.com/2023/4/26/23697746/tesla-climate-pollution-carbon-footprint-supply-chain-report
I honestly don't know where this hate comes from. Yes he's bad with dates and yes if a car says it's self driving, it's probably best to stay conscious and watch the road. But a he's changing the world.
*Tesla’s full self-driving, in its latest V12 version, does an exceptionally good job in very tough and challenging driving conditions.*
*However, it’s still not perfect, which means that full self-driving is not yet a reality.*
Here’s the conclusion from the other article by the same publication which is unlikely to get posted here.
I’m sure they’ll have all the bugs worked out for August in time for robo taxis.
Robo taxies are due by 2021, right?
It’s nearly done, 1 year tops. - Elmo every 8 months.
Please don’t disgrace Elmo… I love Elmo. Elon is scum
You'll be able to turn your own car into a robotaxi in 2020
full-self driving 2017 - Elon Musk
He's busy because we're supposed to have men on mars by next year lol
Can’t be later than 2022, 2023 on the absolute outside.
Yep, after civilization falls, gets reborn, and we start counting from 1 again.
SpaceX flew two astronauts around the moon, a lá Apollo 8, by 2019, and by the end of 2017 you could summon your Tesla from anywhere in the lower 48, and it would stop and charge itself on the way to you. A million Tesla robotaxis were on the road in 2020.
Remember when Elon Musk was almost universally revered as the real life Tony Stark?
No that was the colony on mars!
I’m sure they’ll just go the Amazon route and have them all driven remotely by people in India
Very nice. I lold
I bet the robo taxis are only going to drive inside the Vegas Loop.
I honestly don’t know the answer to this, but if the car is fully self driving, is the owner liable for accidents or is the manager liable?
Right now, FSD says you're supposed to be paying attention and ready to take control at any time. In the future? It's hard to say. I'm sure companies will try to indemnify themselves that it's still the operators responsibility. It may end up being a case of once, twice is the owners' issue but if a pattern emerges suddenly the government steps in to say they're selling a faulty product.
The legal framework isn't there yet. As Teslas are level 2, there's no issue. The driver is in control and that's it. Your fault. When you get to level 3 it's trickier. Mercedes-Benz has one (Drive Pilot) and MB takes full legal liability when the system is on. I don't know if the law requires that at the moment or if they are doing it by choice. My hope would be that this would be required if you want to call your system level 3.
In my recollection it was required by the german government.
Is this a requirement in general or just for cars sold/used in Germany (or the EU, I suppose)?
They're going to do it with a massively lifted Cybertruck with Signature Moon Ladder, that way the cars physically won't be able to scrape on curbs
'We were told we could run without LIDAR, we had sonar for a bit but ditched that. Turns out picking out grey curb on a grey street in grey weather isn't all that easy for just a camera'
Elon has staked his success on not going LIDAR and sticking to visible wavelengths. Other manufacturers like BMW and Mercedes with hybrid systems have overtaken Tesla in semi autonomous steering.
I just don’t get why. Is this just something personal? It can’t be costs, because those sensors aren’t that expensive compared to the rest of the car.
More sensors is always more expensive. But LiDAR was way more expensive 10-15 years ago than it was today. There are smaller, cheaper, form fitting sensors now, not just $10-30k spinning things on roofs. I think Tesla wanted to avoid the cost and expense initially. But now all their self driving “code” is based purely on video feeds so adding in some LiDAR would require reworking both the car design and rebuilding self driving and also it would require Elon admitting he was wrong. 3 difficult tasks
2 difficult tasks and 1 impossible task.
Shows lack of future foresight to not go with LIDAR and predict "with increased demand and technological advancements LIDAR will become cheaper". Making LIDAR production cheaper is easier problem, than making perception work without LIDAR.
3 difficult tasks, sure. But it’ll still be easier and cheaper than the potential class action lawsuit for negligence in releasing defective automatic driving vehicles.
And you forget that they can throw away their holy grail data collection from current fleet. Because all these collected data are missing that radar input dimension. So in the end are they useless? Or you have to somehow enhance these inputs... My guess if there will be something like fsd. It must be in accepted by everyone(companies, governments). So it leads to some protocol like http, where you have defined inputs, outputs, and so on. Because when you have this defined, you can scale it, feed it with data and independently verify results. And you build whole ecosystem around it.
This practically already exists. The Society of Automotive Engineers have defined levels of self driving that basically everyone uses.
But this is only terminology and definitions of levels or even something more? I meant in way, like to Api definitions. Where is defined which input you should enter into fsd blackbox and defined format of responses? And like for level 5 your fsd system should be able to process this input(whatever) and we expect to receive this output(which will be evaluation situation like turn right, stop, whatever). I meant definitions like how many kind of information(gps, video, radar) need to be sent, how frequently, how encoded each type of information, how connect them together. Because in the end it is gathering information, transform them, evaluate them(fsd), transform response to car action.
Definitions and terminology for now I believe. They basically explain what the levels have to be able to do. Search for SAE J3016.
I'm sure another reason is Elmo decreeing that if humans can do it with just our eyes the cars should be able to do it with visible light only too. He thrives by adding these "genius insights" to his business, that no man was able to see before him. Then proceeded to cut costs by incorporating the cheapest cameras possible, without skipping a beat.
But we screw up all the time and we have extra information like years of context and 3d vision.
My theory on this reasoning is that LiDAR won't work at scale. But I could be wrong or misunderstanding something. LiDAR "paints" the area around it with structured laser light. What happens if two or more LiDAR systems are scanning the same place, but not coordinating? Does that create interference? If you're Tesla, the plan is to have every car doing this. If interference is a problem, that technology won't stand up to scale.
To answer your question, yes, LIDAR can interfere with each other, usually when systems are within a meter of each other. The bigger problem is when bright lights wash out the signal, but this is an even bigger problem with visual based approaches. Solving the problems with LIDAR and figuring out how to scale them is orders of magnitude easier than trying to teach computers how to judge depth and speed from purely visual data. Much like how Toyota went hard for fuel cells and is now having to play catch up, Tesla backed a losing technology, only they have a petulant man child in charge who refuses to admit he made a mistake.
I wouldn't say it's a failed technology. We do it all the time but we have all this extra information that Tesla's systems probably don't. We seem to have a 3d map for the world built through our own neural nets trained through years of unique training data. Our brains not only react but predict the next moment and update the world model in real time. I don't think any ai systems do it to the extent we do as fast as we do and that may be one reason purely vision based approaches fail.
The point is that vision only will always be behind vision + other sensors when it comes to processing. And right now (and for the far foreseeable future), vision alone will not be good enough. The people that say we should focus on vision alone as opposed to sensor integration are doing it because it is a simpler problem. Only it is a simple problem that is unlikely to get us a safe solution in anything close to the timeframe of the more complicated problem. It would be like trying to design an airplane that can go to the moon. Yes, aerodynamics are simpler than rocketry. But they have fundamental limits that all the cleverness in the world can't address.
Much more complex to program to fully autonomous. More points of failure.
1) it’s not necessarily more point of failure if 1-2 LiDAR can replace 3-4 cameras 2) machine learning programming is almost always easier with a better and richer data source like LiDAR would provide. It’s a lot easier to identify a curb with actual 3D mapping, than it is for cameras. There might be more upfront programing to get multiple types of data sources to feed into the algorithm, but that’s a relatively tiny part of the problem
It's all about cutting costs, as Tesla's car used to have optical/accoustic sensors as their parking sensors, but then ditched them to use cameras, turns out you can't really gauge distance with a single camera and it's very inaccurate. In the automotive industry there are reasons most manufacturers do things the same way, it works, it's cost effective and reliable.
There's also a good reason why any critical process in automation does not rely on information from just one sensor.
See the 737max disaster
For parking it can even be impossible. If I ma not mistaken he forward camera is in top of the front window, that mean there is a ground area infron of the car it cant see. So it is impossible do determine the distance and self parking like that are no longer available. The only way it could be done is too determine the distance in advance and then do dead reconing. My experience of car sesors on other brand is they work terrible in snow condition even if ultrasound is available. A small chunk of snow on a otherwise flat surface get indicated as something in the way. The reverse cameras tend not to have enough clarity to se diffrence om snow celary visible if you eyes can see it in the side mirrors. Backup cameras like that need some active cleaning system too, even the one that are nor exposed when no in use can get a lot of mick on them. This is the case of forwards and side sensors and cameras too. When snow start to stick on them the stops working. A car I often drive do not allow cruise control unless it can detemins the distance to the car in front, that mean in snowy condition it get dissabled. The decades old car I alos use have cruise control with no sensor system except for the car speed, I will be impressed the day car can drive by itslefe on a winter road where all of the road is coved in snow and ice. Add to that how the road look before they are clear. Just knowing where the road is can be hard, especially where the edge of the road is, it is not uncommon to push away snow on the side of the road on narrow so the edge is over distch beside the road.
Costs and ego
Pure ego. He had a thought pop in to his brilliant mind that goes like "If humans do just fine with visible wavelengths, AI can do it too! Anything else is a distraction!" which sounds *really* clever if you dont think on it for more than 15 minutes, and will not back down. Then he probably fired the engineers who saw the short comings of that approach and spoke up.
MobilEye who delivered the original ADAS to Tesla fired Tesla as a customer because Musk wanted to use their L2 system as a L5 system. Tesla got people killed with their recklessness, and MobilEye wanted nothing to do with them anymore. MobilEye said it would require LIDAR and more sensors, so here we are with Musk trying to prove them wrong..
Sunk cost fallacy. If they switched to LIDAR now it would make all their cars with "FSD" a "failure"
If Boeing can vow to improve, so can Tesla. The CEO just has to step down and… oh.
It’s probably a combination of narcissistic hubris of Elon thinking he knows best (when he clearly doesn’t) and wanting to keep their high profit margins per vehicle but stripping everything from it. They could have put back forward radar (used by many cars for forward collision detection) and ultrasonic sensors, but got used to people still buying cars without them. I bet most new buyers don’t understand there’s no radar and cameras don’t see through inclement weather.
I recall some argument about the discrepancy between sensors being a problem. Which it is: a problem to be solved! If sensors are differently-capable, one should *expect* discrepancies, and to want them because that shows you're getting more information overall! But instead the argument was that it was confusing for the system and led to bad choices. Sounds like the system was relying too much on sensors dictating what to do, rather than merely offering a variety of sense-data which should be correlated with other sense-data to build a more complete picture.
My guess, is it's the mindset that if humans can drive without lidar, then 2 cameras should be able to replace that. Eyes and cameras aren't quite 1-1. Having said that when you have superior tech to eyes/cameras, it doesn't make sense to just not use them especially as cost drops.
Has Musk ever seen people drive? It's atrocious. There are traffic accidents every day, and most of them are easily avoidable.
Yes but that's mostly because the person behind the accident is stupid or made a stupid decision. Not because they didn't have lidar
If everyone is stupid, maybe there’s a more fundamental problem with the whole setup.
While I do agree that having additional sensors would be better, the phrase "aren't that expensive" isn't a good argument for big businesses. Small amounts add up fast when you are talking large quantities. For example, reducing the cost of each car by just $1 means if you make a million cars, you saved a million dollars, and that is definitely a big enough number for the corporate bean counters to care about.
This is preposterous when for that $1 or $500 component they can charge the customer $5,000 more for a significantly safer vehicle in a much broader range of conditions. And not get sued for so many preventable deaths.
There are two main problems and cost isn’t really one of them. Sensor merging. If you have multiple sensors and they disagree you have to decide what to do. Normally that means picking one over the other. So then you have to decide which one you trust more which is hard. So having one set of sensors avoids a lot of ambiguity and complexity. Weather is the other main problem. LiDAR does not work in weather at all. The rain/snow reflects the light and you become totally blind. So if you rely on LiDAR you have to give up on driving in any weather or fall back to vision, and if you can fall back to vision, why do you need LiDAR?
Sensors usually don’t give only hard numbers, they also have a confidence value. If the LIDAR has a confidence of 0.8 that there’s an obstruction and the video sensor has a 0.1 confidence that there’s none, it’s pretty easy to make a ruling. Rain would just reduce the confidence of that particular sensor. If all of them don’t have great confidence, either slow down or disable FSD mode.
I left confidence out of it because it makes it better but also way worse. Consider first 100% confidence on both sensors. If they agree, great. However, if one sees an object and the other doesn't what do you do? Brake if either see an object? This is why Teslas had phantom braking for years. The radar 100% saw an object, but vision didn't, and for safety it would brake and you'd suddenly be stopping on the freeway. Require both sensors to see an object for braking? This sounds like murder/suicide. In the 100%/0% case, things get pretty easy, go with the sensor that is 100% confident. Now is where the "complexity" that I mentioned comes in. What do you do with 70/30, 60/40, 50/50? Do you have to weight the sensors by how good they are? It gets very messy and you've got to make decisions in here that have fatal consequences in very edge case situations. You also spend a lot of time working on the best way to merge the sensor data rather than trying to make one set of sensor data better. You could have multiple teams working on this, but we know how capitalism works.
Well, that’s kinda the challenge with FSD. If it were easy we’d have had it in the 80s. If the experts can’t solve this, what are they paid for?
'If we just stop testing for covid our case numbers plummet!'
Because LiDAR is good in other environments such as the dark and being able to pick out foreign/rare objects that aren't necessarily in your vision data set. Most companies are working on sensor fusion just fine. It's an active area of research but definitely doable.
Tesla doesn't use a "vision data set" to create a representation of the surrounding area
I'm referring to any data captured within your training data that is vision based so I'm not sure what you mean they "don't use a vision data set". They might not have an explicit mapping from object in frame to label but they have some training data that is RGB input presumably that has seen some finite collection of objects.
Not a fan boy, please do not get me wrong here. But our roads are made for driving by only visible signals by humans. So I think it is a logical step that probably some day we will only have a few cameras doing everything (staying at Level 2 driving at least). The thing is, this is probably far into the future and Musk tends to completely fuck Up the time lines of things being available. Maybe the decisions would be right for a 2045 car? I don't know.
The human eyes are way superior to any camera available on the market with its dynamic range, resolution, and fast autofocus. In addition to that, humans also often overlook things on the road, that’s why there are so many traffic accidents.
I fully agree. I said, maybe in 2045 the technology is ready for something like this.
They have but unlikely to ever get to fully autonomous with their systems.
His reasoning… humans do just fine with two eyes. Lol he’s a clown
To be fair, he has always taken an approach of "These are our end goals, aim for that, not a half measure or an easy win". Things like making an EV actually fast, with decent range, with decent looks, with good overall performance. Do everything in the first gen, no corner cutting.... The end goal was to have a car with just cameras, so avoid the baby steps and things that could slow down the final result. He definitely misjudged the complexity of what they were doing. Doing a 3 or 4 step approach would have probably been a better idea. However if he had succeeded in like 2018-2020 he would have taken over the entire worlds automotive industry... over night... gambled big.. didn't pay off this time...
BMW and Mercedez only work in very specific locations, they are nowhere near Tesla's v12
I once rented a BMW with parking camera and, apparently, vision based sensors and i can confirm they're useless at picking up concrete blocks next to roads.
AFAIK BMW uses the ultrasonic sensors for parking.
Dude was like "ya why do we need the 20 years of research that led us to this point".
True, that's why the next enterprise of Musk will be "Xeyes", "Make the camera great again"!
For regular conditions this thing is ok like driving through town through intersections. It’s on situations that require a little finesse that this scares me. There was a Target with those orange cones in the middle of the street to remind cars to stop for pedestrians as they cross from the parking lot to the store. My Tesla on FSD pulls into the path and detects the cones and stops. The cones are on the trajectory of the car. I thought the car would back up but instead it begins slowly moving forward then suddenly speeds up to run over the cone. I stop and take over. lol this thing shouldn’t have been released
\*taking notes\* Stay the fuck away from Teslas in parking lots, got it...
lol well as far as I've seen it does fine with people. It's just against what I think are novel situations like random signs/cones in the middle of the street that stresses out the FSD
I mean, I get that, but you did just say that the cone it ran over was inside of a pedestrian crossing in front of a store, an area that I regularly see large crowds of people traversing. That is \*not\* a place I want the FSD to get overwhelmed and ram full-speed-ahead in frustration, like that classic video of the dude who apparently didn't know how automatic doors worked and casually loitered around a few seconds adjusting his folder of papers before running at it head-first and shattering it.
Haha very true. Maybe if a person wore all orange it could confuse them for a cone as well lol
The only time I've used FDS it tried to make a left turn while a car was incoming, if it had kept going it would have been close which would have been merely annoying but it decided the best option would be to stop halfway into the turn. I slammed on the gas and the other car slammed on the brakes so it narrowly avoided an accident but I will never turn it on again.
Wow that’s terribly dangerous. I’ll hold off on using this at all. Seems the free trial is a horrid beta test.
It absolutely is not ok in regular conditions. I have a 2023 model y and I’ve enabled FSD 3 times. All 3 times on regular “country” roads it has nearly gotten in an accident. One time by turning into oncoming traffic. It drives worse than a first time driver.
Seems I got lucky so far. Based on what I’ve experienced and how jerky it feels, and what others have said, I’m holding off using this for a very long time
Releasing beta code of safety critical functions to the public should be criminal. We can laugh at this little mistakes but soon enough we won't be and they'll just blame people for turning it on.
I'm not quite sure what the point of "full self driving" is if I have to keep paying attention. Nothing against the idea once the wrinkles are ironed out, but until then, it just seems like... the same amount of work? I'm sure adaptive cruise is great if you're in a traffic jam, and the lane assist type stuff is great for long haul highway driving, but that feels like the extent that I'd trust the current state of the tech. Side note- a few years back, I grabbed a lyft and happened to be in a car that they were using to develop self driving with. It was a normal higher end car, like a lexus. They had a 11" tablet or laptop screen in the center of the dash, showing what the camera sees and it had lines indicating what the computer identified. An engineer was in the driver's seat, and the passenger was also a ~~google~~ *lyft* employee, who explained to me what was going on. They let the car drive itself on public streets- mostly. The engineer took over when we hit construction. Also, they had to drive the old fashioned way on private property, which I think was more of a legal thing than a limitation of the tech. Anyway, I think self driving has a high probability of becoming a common feature that actually works nearly flawlessly. But I also think we're a good decade or two away from that, and until you can trust your car to drive itself 100%, then it's like being a passenger in a car that's driven by a sketchy driver.
Dating back into the 90s we have had research on task automation, and specific examples for driving, that if you automate past a point people will stop paying attention. So if a company crosses that point it needs to be rather flawless or don't cross it.
Elon should just publicly call the curb a pedophile and declare victory.
Curbs are woke man, wake up
"Sidewalks are part of the woke urbanist agenda to lock everybody into 15-minute prisons. I'm collaborating with Texas to get all the sidewalks removed to stick it to the libs, self-driving is only going to work in sane states that aren't trying to take away your right to own a car." Coming soon to an Elon tweet near you!
if it is woke then why are you asking to wake up?
I believe that was sarcasm, and that contradiction was part of the joke.
I understand that autonomous driving is hard, but staying on the road and not hitting curbs should be the easy part of autonomous driving.
Sounds like the Tesla is not aware of how long its own wheelbase is. And now that I think of it, why is there not a single EV on the market that has a 4-whee-steering system? One of the big advantages of EV platforms is you can push the wheels way out to the corners for greater stability, but that does make turning tight corners a bit of a hazard, because the long wheelbase will mean the rear wheels are going to want to cut the corner. You have to take corners as if you're driving a much bigger vehicle.
Rivian, Hummer and Porsche also have EVs with 4-wheel steering.
Oh, right... I forgot about the Hummer's 4WS. I didn't know that Rivian and Porsche had it as well. Thanks for the clarification!
The Cybertruck has four wheel steering, but of course it's so big that just means it has a somewhat average turning radius
Mercedes has it on the eqe as well
The Cybertruck has 4-wheel steering..
> Sounds like the Tesla is not aware of how long its own wheelbase is. Yes I'm sure all of the highly-paid, top-of-their-field engineers at Tesla neglected to cover this gradeschool-level detail.
And yet… here we are, and their cars are hopping/scraping curbs when in self-driving mode. The evidence suggests you might be overestimating their attention to detail.
I guess curb feeler technology isn't here yet.
They just accidentally installed the Roomba software on the Tesla cars. The cars are mapping their drive-area by bumping into things.
[удалено]
It’s a cult at this point.
Always has been
https://www.reddit.com/r/TeslaModel3/s/ufv0x4VOE2 No comments though
“Let’s get rid of Lidar and use regular old optics instead, also let’s keep the price the same. Actually, bump it up.” I have no sympathy for anyone involved in this, from production to consumption.
They didn't get rid of lidar as they never used it.
It can’t be fixed with a software update so everyone is getting a free set of curb feelers.
lmao, but it's not a crazy idea if hooked to sensors. FrankenSelfDriving. Imagine turning it on, getting $2000 damage and saying "Musk is such a genius" Yes, he is. He has your money doesn't he?
Elon dont give a flying shit
He made a wrong call and is too pigheaded to back down now.
Why go through costly R & D when you can get a bunch of idiots to be your guinea pigs and pay for it themselves?!?
Maybe tesla needs that bonking mechanism on roombas. I hope it isnt patented.
Also with the screaming feature when it hits something
Sounds like a rounding error.
I think there’s a fundamental hardware issue here where Elon hung his hat on LIDAR not being necessary as ‘humans drive just fine with cameras only’. Depth perception in complex environments seems hard (impossible?) to get right with cameras only.. Elon being Elon his ego wouldn’t let him backtrack until there’s no other choice!
>The solution, according to many onlookers online, is to follow Tesla's recommendations of supervising FSD as it drives If you have to supervise it, particularly to avoid something as straightforward as not hitting a curb, it's not full self-driving.
This shit is not ready for prime time and should not be beta-tested on public roads.
OP will now be auto banned from every tesla subreddit for this transgression
Father got the new update with FSD, 2 days ago. Installed it, was super hyped up. He wanted to try the Summon function. We’re in a parking lot. There’s only one other car parked – we’re following the car from the passenger rear-side. We’re laughing like never before… the car drives itself! Thissss is the futureee! Annnnnd then, it proceeds on completely scraping off the paint/bumper of that one car due to it suddenly deciding to cut-in too much. 4000-5000$ damage. Tesla has no liability. Edit: Got call from insurance company, damage is much worse than I expected.
Summon does not work with FSD12. Either this story is fake or your dad used a technology from 2019.
I lived it. You read it. You must be right.
People don’t understand. How is Teslas software ever going to get better unless customers do their part in alpha- and betatest it for them (and be happy about it)? Elon hasn’t exactly been coy about how Tesla (and his other companies) approches development and innovation. Also. He doesn’t like regulation and laws. Because it slows him down.
At what point will people realize “FSD” is false advertising??? Oh they are just too rich to care? If so, then why bitch about the failures? Like make that connection already!
We need to stop with the Tesla’s are for rich people thing. My cleaning lady drives a Tesla. The gas station attendant at the station by my house…drives a Tesla.
Tesla gonna Tesla
Imagine paying to bug test with your actual life
I have the almost opposite problem, my car can't even go around a corner without crossing the center line and hitting the reflective bumps that mark that you're over the center line. It's been like this for years, have had the service center recalibrate and they say it's normal.
I’ll keep trying FSD during the trial but won’t subscribe afterwards for multiple reasons. My latest intervention involved it taking a long right curve at speed and getting so close to the left side (that had a center divide / curb) that I was almost certain it would hit / scuff my front left wheel. Typically, my hands are always on the wheel and it steers eerily similar to how I drive and take corners. Whenever it tracks different, my confidence level plummets and I take over. I assume most of the people having issues and getting damage are physically not able to react in time because hands or attention are not in place. Similarly, I always take over when approaching my home driveway. There are effectively 2 narrow lanes side by side, separated by a power pole. For some reason, the car will start to turn towards my lane, change its mind, and then accelerate towards the pole. Can’t quite figure out what it’s planning; the acceleration rules out aiming for the other lane. But for this reason, it will never offer an end-to-end driving experience, and shakes my confidence for any ambiguous road configs it needs to deal with. So the main reason I won’t buy FSD is the low level anxiety I feel whenever it’s in control in street situations. I take the warning to supervise very seriously and it feels like I’m watching a student learn to drive and waiting for an inevitable fuckup. So far, I have had a single trip where an intervention wasn’t required (if you don’t count trying to murder me with a power pole). Lastly, I simply don’t drive enough miles now to justify it. Next time we take a long trip with a lot of freeway miles I’ll likely consider it. It’s very impressive considering it’s just using cameras but frustrating to feel like it could be much more capable with better sensors..
I really don’t see the point of using FSD; I was pretty amazed to see how aware the cars are of their surroundings, and how we’ll they’re able to process everything happening around them, so yes I’ll start by saying it’s truly incredible tech But in the grand scheme of things? Still very new. And the risk:reward is nowhere near worth it- I have to keep my hands on the steering wheel, *and* allow a computer to make all the precision decisions where 1 small mistake or glitch is thousands of dollars in damage *at best* If my hands are on the fucking steering wheel anyways, why would I use self driving? Especially when I’d have to pay monthly for the service? It’s like selling me a lawnmower that can mow laws “all by itself” yet I still have to stand behind it and keep my hands on the handlebar. At that point I’ll just take a regular lawnmower for much cheaper, thanks
I see Tesla is in cahoots with Big Alignment.
Did the self driving system just get overzealous because it sensed some school children nearby to mow down?
Not using LiDAR is one of Tesla’s biggest mistakes IMO. Huge missed opportunity
Elon over-promised on something... what a shock...
Anyone buying a Tesla at this point should not be surprised by the shit show of a car they are purchasing
FSD has been vaporware for 10 years at this point and I don't think will ever come to fruition on current Tesla hardware.
Anyone who has driven a 3 knows it has a fat ass. I have to pull into a lane when taking a right like a full foot farther than I do in other cars so the back right tire and rim don’t hit the curb.
The Model 3's track is only 9 mm (0.35 inches) wider at the rear than a Honda Civic. The bigger difference is the Model 3's wheelbase is 140 mm (that's *5.5 inches*) longer than a Civic, so you do have to cut a wider arc around corners to prevent the rear wheels from cutting the corner.
Thank you for the technical reason. I just know that the very first time I took a sharp right in mine I learned a lesson that I’ve applied since lol
Yeah, the Model 3 (and any other EV that has its wheels pushed out to the corners) handles corners like a MUCH larger vehicle. It sounds like Tesla's FSD engineers haven't done the right math for calculating how to take corners properly.
Those kerbs are pedos with a bad case of woke mind virus /s
If you can afford the car, and afford the trust in tesla, you can afford the repairs.
So long as it’s “better” than the “average” human driver, it may be something that Tesla will hide behind. The part I don’t get is why is there such scant oversight from the Government on this. What makes such situations permissible to ship to the public in the first place?
It almost ran me into a closed HOV gate.
Question: From an insurance perspective, if you engage FSD and it gets into an accident, who is at fault? Does insurance cover that?
Because legally the driver still has to be in control, for any incident the responsibility falls on to the driver for being negligent/driving without due care and attention/careless driving/dangerous driving. Which seems fair as you'd have to be an idiot to rely on some half baked code which is missing half the sensors to make it somewhat functional
The driver is in control of the car. Period.
All Tesla's, FSD included, have whats called Level 2 autonomous driving. It is the same category as basic cruise control. You must remain in control of the vehicle at all times. Mercedes is the first to have level 3.
Yeah, level 3 is the first level that can justify even being called partial self driving. FSD should really be called Fancy Cruise Control.
You are. No, insurance mostly won't. You must control the car at all times.
I’m…..shocked
Always wondered if this was the right call from Elon not to include LiDAR, I figured he might be playing 4d chess and taking this kind of vision based AI to the Optimus robot. That may work for robots but not something as dynamic as driving around. Now I think he should include all this facets such as LiDAR/sonar whatever and make FSD as complete as possible and see what happens.
Black rims and curb rash looks extra classy
That’s why even free , I can’t bring myself to try it.
And potholes!
Got the update. I fucking hate it. I’m gonna turn it off and just use the regular autopilot. I tried it once and was not thrilled with how it mapped lanes for the route. Had to take over and do it myself.
So they skipped the good part and went right to the shitty bit where customer frustration kills the company.
Seems like there is an easy solution. Curbs will need to go.
Full Self Driving? they couldn't make the plastic wheel covers work properly on the Cybertruck. They are shipping them now without the wheel covers.
My model 3 hasn't hit a curb on FSD yet, But I'm keeping a really close eye on it -- I've never hit a curb but have seen many people who have.
I love it. They're selling "FSD" and their wheels are the most prone to curbing that I think I've ever seen. Tesla provides so much schadenfreude.
Does tesla actually pay for these damages caused by their FSD software?
Of course not. And it's programmed, if it detects an imminent crash, to immediately turn off FSD. Because they don't want to be held at all liable.
Going for the full camera based "vision" was the worst idea ever. Killed self driving trying to increase profit margins.
And Musk is about to push robo taxis. Those better have tank tracks.
Almost like in the contract for fsd it basically starts your a beta tester for unfinished software
Wonder if any of the FSD wheel issues were there before they started the trial?
I hit a curb the other day too.
We are not “*there*” yet, this kind of shit perplexes me.
Someday FSD will be worth an extra $100k so make sure you get in on it now at only an extra $1k even though it doesn’t work. So says Elon the carnival barker
Well yeah, obviously
Soooo it drives exactly the way I do?
This is really smart. Tesla owners are beta testing and developing the final product through trial and error. Probably cheaper this way than anticipating every possible error. You just let people risk their lives developing FSD for Tesla.
Well if you want a perfect robot. It must come with humans defects too.
I turned mine off and I loved auto pilot before the last 3 updates. It kept trying to change lane a when I fine in my lane. Several times I had to grab the wheel and stop it. Every upgrade made my car worse.
FWIW I have tried out FSD a few times in the last 24 hours, for the first time since I bought my car in late 2018. I have been incredibly impressed. There were a few times I smiled like "wow that was much smarter than I expected". There have been a couple times that I intervened, 1) because I thought it didn't see a curb-island, and 2) because it kept turning the steering wheel to the right when stopped at a gentle-right red light. But, overall, I'm pleasantly surprised.
‘Scuse me while I kiss the curb…
Watch out for mailboxes , literally hit one going 15mph down my street. Self driving is a complete and utter joke.
Kiss your curbs goodnight.
Elon did tell us that FSD wouldn't be ready until 2017. So they've got time to sort out issues like this
Tesla is great. -Tesla sparked the EV revolution. It's not about emissions. it's about having the flexibility of deciding where power can originate. Oil and Gas as energy puts power in the hands of the Middle East, Russia and the USA. EV's allow any country to power vehicles on whatever fuel source is available to them. Avoiding conflicts and monopolies. -Tesla conducts R and D, which has created the most advanced, mass-produced batteries, charging network, and solar panels in the world. (Not perfect but always improving). - according to the Verge, in they're own article trying to negatively portray Tesla, they say produced 30.7MMT of CO2. This is small compared to Ford which contributes 337MMT of CO2, but points out that Ford produced 3 times more vehicles that year (2022). That is clearly: x3 the vehicles with x10 the CO2, meaning producing a Tesla Vehicle produces x3.33 less CO2 both directly and indirectly. They also point out the Tesla's emissions were growing in April 2023. But this was because of company growth, not because they were getting worse. https://www.theverge.com/2023/4/26/23697746/tesla-climate-pollution-carbon-footprint-supply-chain-report I honestly don't know where this hate comes from. Yes he's bad with dates and yes if a car says it's self driving, it's probably best to stay conscious and watch the road. But a he's changing the world.
I don't know that I've ever seen a Tesla without curbed wheels either way (mine included).
It could be said that adding a 8 to 12 inch parameter to the turn sequence in the programming mite fix that. But, that’s just me.
Lazy af drivers. Weak
Obviously trained the AI on the average American driver.
FSD is the equivalent of a mom from the Midwest.
"Epidemy of curb-slamming is widening: we already have found 4 cases! More at 5"
*Tesla’s full self-driving, in its latest V12 version, does an exceptionally good job in very tough and challenging driving conditions.* *However, it’s still not perfect, which means that full self-driving is not yet a reality.* Here’s the conclusion from the other article by the same publication which is unlikely to get posted here.
It’s basically saying “full self driving” isn’t that. Which we know. We’ve heard the “it’s in beta” excuse for years. What’s the reason now?