Full FSD Free Trial: Why I'd never buy it . . . ever.

[Raisin45567]

OP objections are legit and common. Mostly based on personal driving preference, and FSD does still make mistakes. However, if you've been driving the beta for a few years and saw how slowly things progressed up to this point, and then got this version, you might change your mind about saying "Never".

Exactly. In the context of past versions, 12 is almost a miracle.

 

[OxBrew]

Both are really down to training data. They need to train with hyper-miler drivers on that behavior and not aggressive drivers there. I have only seen a handful of things that might be hard to solve gracefully with current hardware-- they tend to be things that are also hard for a regular driver, things you might ask a passenger to keep an eye on while pulling out. When it is down to a badly designed intersection I am not sure what the long term solution would be.

I know the long term solution for bad intersections and unsolvable problems: don't even try.

FSD research is a waste of billions of $$$ we should be plowing into solutions to our life support on this planet, not iterative improvements to problems that don't threaten our survival.

Fiddling while Rome burns. Lost the plot.

We have 6 years to get to zero carbon, if you're honest with yourself.

All the rest of this is luxury fluff. Get over it and lets solve real problems so our grand kids don't live in a dystopian wasteland.

I mean, it might already be too late, but we have to try.

 

[OxBrew]

Exactly. In the context of past versions, 12 is almost a miracle.

Yet still an abject failure, 1/25th as good as it needs to be.

 

[dachshund]

I know the long term solution for bad intersections and unsolvable problems: don't even try.

FSD research is a waste of billions of $$$ we should be plowing into solutions to our life support on this planet, not iterative improvements to problems that don't threaten our survival.

Fiddling while Rome burns. Lost the plot.

We have 6 years to get to zero carbon, if you're honest with yourself.

All the rest of this is luxury fluff. Get over it and lets solve real problems so our grand kids don't live in a dystopian wasteland.

I mean, it might already be too late, but we have to try.

Uh huh.
I think we probably won't put AI back in the bottle. I mean, we probably should, but come on.
Yes, Teslas are luxury fluff, and... Someone else take this. Next.

 

[JHCCAZ]

When did it become the three second rule? It was two seconds when they taught me how to drive and that works just fine if you’re paying attention. If you’re texting or shaving or blow drying your hair the ten second rule won’t help.

Yes they changed it some time ago even though almost no one follows the two second rule. I posted about this before:

They used to teach the two second rule in driving classes. More recently they are teaching a three second rule or more. Based on pure physics and human reaction time this is a good thing, but it's completely unrealistic when it comes to everyday driving behavior.

The following distance that most people are comfortable with is a lot more like 1 second or so, often less. It's pretty easy to prove that isn't safe, but it's also not safe to have people getting upset and swerving around you aggressively all the time. Not to mention the psychological stress of being treated like slow grandpa when yours is actually the fastest car on the road.

 

[JHCCAZ]

but I didn’t want to brag

Too late

 

[ewoodrick]

I'm not an outlier here. Following at such absurd distances, especially while in the passing lane, is less safe as it turns you into a rolling chicane as you are perceived to not be moving with the flow of traffic. Plus, as I said, an ADAS system does not need the 3/4 second reaction time that a human does, so the distance can be even closer and still be safe. Choose a more conservative following distance if you like, but as it stands, even the most aggressive setting is nothing like a human following at a distance that won't frustrate those that follow him or her.

What about the cars behind you?

Those are not absurd distances, they are distances for which research has found that humans are able to stop reliably. And in today's environment with people using cellphones while driving, the distance should actually be a lot more.

And believe it or not, not every mile driven is in rush hour, heavy traffic.

But ask yourself, how many rush hour traffic jams are caused by rear-enders, where people were following too closely?

And at this point, near ALL ADAS systems require monitoring, which means that YOU have to be able to react in time, not the car.

 

[comanchepilot]

@ewoodrick I'd say MOST rear end collisions are caused by people not paying attention to the vehicles in front of them - and not just to the one guy in front but the two or three in front of that vehicle -

 

[ewoodrick]

@ewoodrick I'd say MOST rear end collisions are caused by people not paying attention to the vehicles in front of them - and not just to the one guy in front but the two or three in front of that vehicle -

You are absolutely correct. People not focused on driving.

And that's EXACTLY WHY you are following too closely. Are you 100% focused on driving 100% of the time? Of course not.

But even if you were, what's the stopping distance of your car? Shorter than a school bus?

Deer jumps out in front of car in front of you. Neither you nor the car in front of you could see the deer until it was in the road. The car ion fronts slams brakes. You are guaranteed to run into them. You get the ticket for following too closely. YOUR FAULT.

Try to explain yourself all you want, but there is absolutely no question that you are following too closely. Find any las enforcement officer and ask them.

 

[Unclepaul]

Perhaps we have a dilema. People have shown, time and time again, that even though most consider themselves good drivers, they still get into thousands of accidents every day. The human mind, just does not tend to remain totally focused, every minute they are driving. Even then, our two eyes, two hands, two feet and one brain, are not always able to instantly process the actions necessary to avoid every possibility of an impact.
Every day, people are killed, maimed, and vehicles damaged by well meaning human drivers.
Tesla is attempting to develop an AI/computer, camera, vehicle system to take some of this load off.
People are resistant to change and feel pretty self important.

 

[KLam]

We have to drive defensively, especially on the left passing lane. Make sure you have enough stopping distance if there is a stopped obstacle. More caution when the car in front of you is following very close to the car further up and you cannot see them.
There are a lot of insurance scams on the LA freeway. Usually, the car in front of you just pull to the right lane suddenly exposing a stopped car in front of it. They are a pair. The car to your right might also be part of the team blocking your evasive action to the right.

 

[comanchepilot]

Perhaps we have a dilema. People have shown, time and time again, that even though most consider themselves good drivers, they still get into thousands of accidents every day. The human mind, just does not tend to remain totally focused, every minute they are driving. Even then, our two eyes, two hands, two feet and one brain, are not always able to instantly process the actions necessary to avoid every possibility of an impact.
Every day, people are killed, maimed, and vehicles damaged by well meaning human drivers.
Tesla is attempting to develop an AI/computer, camera, vehicle system to take some of this load off.
People are resistant to change and feel pretty self important.

Yup. Humans are fallible. FSD seems more fallible than humans in many situations. I trust my vision and reflexes [for now] well above the current state of the art of FSD.

 

[ewoodrick]

Yup. Humans are fallible. FSD seems more fallible than humans in many situations. I trust my vision and reflexes [for now] well above the current state of the art of FSD.

But there have already been numerous example of FSD being less fallible than humans, but they just don't get the press that the anti-FSD fanboys read.
Just basic TACC is a great example of it. Humans get distracted all of the time. FSD never gets distracted.

I absolutely can guarantee you that in some instances, FSD is MUCH safer than you are.

 

[rjack1282]

When I learned to drive the rule of thumb was 1 car length follow distance for every 10 mph. During my v12 trial month this is more or less the behavior I noticed in the Standard setting. I didn't really use the other settings much. Yes, the late braking and unnecessary acceleration is annoying when I just want a relaxing FSD drive to work, but the chill setting didn't affect these two issues, only follow distance and lane change. The driving aspect for v12 has been a spectacular upgrade from previously using v10 and early v11.

 

[ArchHamster]

You've certainly amassed an impressive collection of vehicles, and maintaining a clean driving record is no small feat, regardless of the car. However, I find it even more noteworthy when someone manages to keep a spotless record in an older, less glamorous vehicle like a ten-year-old Altima. It sometimes feels like there's an unspoken rule in affluent neighborhoods that the nicer the car, the less scrutiny one faces from local law enforcement. For instance, a neighbor of mine was simply driven home after being pulled over for a DUI, rather than receiving a ticket or facing jail time, which really speaks to the different standards that can apply based on one's status or vehicle.

I understand and respect your perspective on driving, which many might share. However, Full Self-Driving (FSD) technology isn't designed to mimic any single driving style but to adapt to a range of real-world conditions and the unpredictable nature of road environments. It’s not flawless and could certainly be better named to manage expectations. While it’s reasonable to expect the technology to live up to its promises, embracing its learning curve might change your perception of its effectiveness. Just be mindful that a strong stance on such matters doesn't inadvertently come across as entitlement or arrogance.

 

[zoros]

What on gods earth does flying a plane got to do with FSD??
Let's stay centred on this subject shall we? It's growing arms and legs because (a) it's new(ish) technology and (b) peeps are parting with their money. Ergo it is becoming an emotional subject matter.
Facts - let's talk facts ....
1. Autonomous driving will become part of the fabric of society as sure as night follows day. It is in our genes to improve technology. As has been stated before - humankind will resolve all software issues thrown at it when it comes to FSD. However.......
2. Due to unknown unknowns - human behaviour either in front of or behind the (theoretical steering wheel) is unstable. Consequently software cannot cater for all unknowns. As a result of this, legislation will prevent existing trials and deliberations from coming to fruition - as we know it.
FSD will be taken out of the hands of the OEM's and placed squarely in the hands of the legislators.
This means FSD will only be allowed where full control of the vehicles' trajectory can be guaranteed and that folks means only one thing. Transport that utilises FSD (full autonomy - no steering wheel, no pedals) will compulsorily be required to use dedicated highways/routes where the vehicle in question is hooked up to a physical connection OR the vehicle is contained by geofencing.

We are currently 'barking up the wrong tree'. The future lies with the legislators not the OEM's

 

[Overdo]

Thanks for the trial. FWIW, it's completely useless! Since I've owned the car, it has been unable to distinguish Illinois route signs and speed signs. It sees Illinois route 38 and thinks the speed limit is 30 mph, therefore the car slows to 30 mph. Duh!! I couldn't use it, even for free.

 

[afadeev]

Thanks for the trial. FWIW, it's completely useless! Since I've owned the car, it has been unable to distinguish Illinois route signs and speed signs. It sees Illinois route 38 and thinks the speed limit is 30 mph, therefore the car slows to 30 mph. Duh!! I couldn't use it, even for free.

At least yours stayed on the road.
My wears off into the trees on top of local hills when it looses perspective. Or attempts to impale me on the pedestrian island where the road splits into two. Or phantom breaks when the sun / shadows / landscape take a certain shape. Same error conditions, with the same frequency, as way back in 2018.

Zero material progress over the past 5 years.
Just peachy!

a

 

[ewoodrick]

Thanks for the trial. FWIW, it's completely useless! Since I've owned the car, it has been unable to distinguish Illinois route signs and speed signs. It sees Illinois route 38 and thinks the speed limit is 30 mph, therefore the car slows to 30 mph. Duh!! I couldn't use it, even for free.

Interesting. First person I have heard mentioning this, ever.

 

[ewoodrick]

The automatic updates are a mixed bag. You're driving and suddenly something is different. I don't agree with the way FSD Supervised was rolled out. I had FSDb and there was no warning about the single-pull change. I used the TACC a lot, and suddenly it was lane-centering.

There are these things called Release Notes that come with every release. You can actually see them in the app before you install the update.

Single-pull was mentioned.