Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Tesla recalls 2 million vehicles to limit use of Autopilot

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
While I don't fully disagree with the basis of this response to the naysayers, the issue I'm facing is that in my area, those issues are not being addressed and will not be addressed before it becomes a major issue. The naysayers are correct.

Given the success of the Model Y, one could argue we are getting really close to a tipping point for EV ownership. And my country has 'no more ICE vehicle sales' legislation that is just over a decade away. Yet, 40% of households do not live in a place that supports charging. And the response in the building code is that newly built high rises must include an L2 charging station.

I live in a building that is 55 years old. I 'won' as an early adopter because for some reason my landlord miraculously allowed me to pay to install a 110v outlet in my underground garage parking spot (I bought the car before having a way to charge it because, at the time, I didn't understand an EV was not like an ICE and that quick charging would be hard on the battery life and a huge pain in the ass. I got the last available circuit on the basement electrical panel. The new owners of the building have 'grandfathered' in my use of my outlet (after all, I paid the equivalent of a year's worth of gas to install it.) But no-one else can install any form of charging and there is no plan to add shared L2 or L3 chargers. To do so would require new power lines being brought in to the property.

A new building is going to be added to this complex and it will have two L2 chargers. Those will serve the 200+ apartments in the new tower, along with the 650 apartments in the existing tower. Obviously, the only solution to high rise living and EV ownership is L3s on the property, not L2s. If, after the new building is built, only 10% of our units have EVs that need to charge 500km worth a week (which is only 300km range, or roughly 25 MILEs a day in winter), we'd need to be connected to that L2 for 1190 hours a week. Yet there are only 168 hours in a week. So we'd need significantly more than the TWO L2s required by zoning. And that assumes everyone is comfortable with starting or ending charging sessions in the middle of the night or on a regular fixed schedule to provide access for everyone.

The city has also started a pilot project to put in L2 chargers for street parking. As I live in a granola eating neighbourhood, it was chosen for the pilot, but that charger is 800M away from my home and has a 3 hour parking limit. It is also unavailable during snow clearing events (we usually get 5 of these a year.) The nearest L3s are a 15 minute drive away (at a library or an auto supply store, those ones being used at night by a government fleet of cars that plug in there at 6 each evening and get picked up at 7 each morning, blocking the use by the general public) and the nearest supercharger (and currently only one in this city that isn't inside a paid parking lot), is 20 minutes away with no useful activity that could be added to that weekly errand if I didn't have home charging.

The province of Quebec, in highly populated areas has promoted the installation of L3s at grocery stores. It means access to washrooms can be limited if you are road tripping at night, but for the local renters, they can drive to the grocery store, doing their weekly shopping while charging for 30 - 40 minutes and the "Always be charging" mantra of EV owners is nicely settled. Montreal have also installed L2 chargers at the end of light rail lines so that EV owners without home charging who live outside of the city limits can drive to the LRT station, plug in, and return back after work downtown to a fully charged vehicle. (Quebec also has the largest government incentives for EV ownership and has the highest concentration of EV ownership as a result of these measures.) There is a way of doing things 'better' but the most populous province in Canada has refused to plan ahead.

Charging at home even at L1 is almost a requirement for EV ownership here, especially once EVs are not rare but the norm. Yet nothing is being done to change the situation for renters. In my case, it is not possible to retrofit the building. Given the age of this building most of the apartments are underpowered for today's lifestyles, my apartment has fuses and my overloaded circuits require creative management in order to avoid blowing fuses all the time. The problem isn't choices (all parts of the building is underpowered), it is expanding the supply to the building which is a prohibitive cost unless one is building new and able to recover that cost through higher rents.

Obviously there are solutions that could be implemented but it doesn't appear that any government is taking the situation seriously when they 'take action'. Look at power generation capacity in my province: 34% nuclear, 28% gas/oil, 23% hydro, 13% wind, 1% solar and under 1% biofuel. Our three nuclear reactors are ancient, opening between 1971 and 1993. Additional reactors are being considered. The argument the grid won't support EVs is not a strawman. Expansion isn't in the works. In fact, failure of the grid due to lack of maintenance is a common problem. Storms aren't the only threat, squirrels have the power to do so as well.

Homeowners and businesses are being encouraged to produce further electricity demand by switching from gas/oil heating. Our homes, in general are very energy efficient (we aren't stupid, heat is expensive so we've been focused on decent windows and insulation for decades and bonus - it makes the hotter summers easier to cope with as well) but that doesn't help the grid any, people still are switching from carbon taxed oil to electricity. Home solar installation is expensive and given our latitude, not enough to support a household without an EV over the year. Ground source heat pumps would be the best alternative but they aren't legislated for new construction of multiple unit residential and heating plants for commercial areas and subdivisions (something Europe has offered over the years) is not a 'thing' here, aside from a few high-profile projects.

So, I don't see any serious use of the "time to prepare" actually happening as far as the electrical grid goes, or as far as serious policies to reduce individual green house gas emissions. Our government recently rescinded the tax on heating oil because too many rural homeowners were affected negatively by that 'encouragement' to switch to electricity, ignoring that our rural electricity grid is precarious due to decades of reduced maintenance, and increases in storm events attributable to climate change. Even our 23% of electrical capacity coming from hydro is at risk due to changing weather patterns affecting the watersheds.

When I was a homeowner, I owned a heavily insulated home, added a steel roof to reduce the number of new roofs needed and that oil requirement and put in a ground source heat pump for heating, cooling, and hot water. We also added a generator that could keep the house livable in all seasons, since we were rural and two major, lengthy, power failures made the need for backup power obvious (and rather than install a propane furnace, we chose ground source heat pump which could by run from the generator when needed.) We also became a single, hybrid, vehicle family.

When the kids were obviously gone for good, we downsized and moved to the city where we could use our feet and transit for a lot of our errands, living in a high rise to reduce our energy use for heating (and with old school hot water radiators which still provide heat from the gas fired boiler due to a generator), and bought an EV since we still needed a car to be part of our children and grandchildren's lives.

But I have observed that my response to climate change and the experts' advise is not typical. There is time to plan for the coming changes but populations are not doing so, either through regulation or personal changes in the numbers required. Even the majority of tesla owners don't seem to drive the car to reduce emissions but because the cars are cool and FAST and they get annoyed when asked to travel the speed limit despite that being an easy way to reduce one's emissions (after all, most power grids are not emission-free so tesla owners generate emissions, just not from a tailpipe.)

So while I strongly dislike the naysayers and don't engage with them, they are coming from a kernel of truth, and there is little evidence that the time to plan for the switch is being used at all. (And note, I haven't even addressed the question of battery production and end of life questions.)
I know people living in apartments don't like to hear this (and cities/policy makers don't seem to understand this), but unfortunately they are the ones that are least suitable for initial EV adoption. I still remember when people and OEMs predicted that short range city cars should be the most suitable application for EVs, but they very much are not, as per the issues you pointed out.

The EV with longer ranges used by homes with garages/carports are most suitable and there is a very long time before anywhere close to 100% of those cars are replaced. It's that demand that will drive public DC/AC charger installation, grid upgrades, as well as possibly even apartments to install more chargers (given if you have close to 100% adoption by houses with garages/carports, the probability that some of those people move to an apartment is much higher).

As for the deadlines set for 100% adoption by various countries and states, I wouldn't regard those as anything other than aspirational goals. They will be adjusted as necessary.
 
I just did a 2500+ mile road trip with the recall update and I'm happy Autopilot works mostly the same as it did before. The only real difference is the larger text with more visible placement, and it seems to notice a bit quicker if I look away from straight ahead. Other than that it's the same Autopilot in my opinion, which is a good thing to me.

Very minor "recall".
I suspect it still works the same to you because you've already been using it properly. The recall was aimed at correcting bad usage by some, and those people probably get a log of nags now.
 
I suspect it still works the same to you because you've already been using it properly. The recall was aimed at correcting bad usage by some, and those people probably get a log of nags now.
On my MS, nothing has changed, but my MY it instantly gives me a warning when I enable FSD to please pay attention (red wheel), even if I'm looking forward with my hand applying torque....every single time, but after that it's fine. It is a bit more sensitive if you take your hand off, but not a big deal.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: zoomer0056
If this was supposed to be Tesla's response to the "recall" - it was nothing more than a fig leaf.
I'm not prepared to say what more, if anything, SHOULD have been done. But what WAS done, will hardly address NHTS's core objections - that the AP/FSD engage and create an impression of "working" in areas where they routinely fail, as per Tesla's own declaimers buries in the manual.

[snip]

We all know what Tesla has been promising for AP/FSD functionality for the past 5+ years vs. what it has actually delivered.
AP & FSD are two different things (yes: they are both autonomy routines but they are as similar as a Nissan Frontier and an 18-wheeler are both "trucks")

While I personally see very little value to FSD at this point, AP works extremely well (IMO) and has been fully functional as advertised for the quite a while
 
While I don't fully disagree with the basis of this response to the naysayers, the issue I'm facing is that in my area, those issues are not being addressed and will not be addressed before it becomes a major issue. The naysayers are correct.

Given the success of the Model Y, one could argue we are getting really close to a tipping point for EV ownership. And my country has 'no more ICE vehicle sales' legislation that is just over a decade away. Yet, 40% of households do not live in a place that supports charging. And the response in the building code is that newly built high rises must include an L2 charging station.

I live in a building that is 55 years old. I 'won' as an early adopter because for some reason my landlord miraculously allowed me to pay to install a 110v outlet in my underground garage parking spot (I bought the car before having a way to charge it because, at the time, I didn't understand an EV was not like an ICE and that quick charging would be hard on the battery life and a huge pain in the ass. I got the last available circuit on the basement electrical panel. The new owners of the building have 'grandfathered' in my use of my outlet (after all, I paid the equivalent of a year's worth of gas to install it.) But no-one else can install any form of charging and there is no plan to add shared L2 or L3 chargers. To do so would require new power lines being brought in to the property.

A new building is going to be added to this complex and it will have two L2 chargers. Those will serve the 200+ apartments in the new tower, along with the 650 apartments in the existing tower. Obviously, the only solution to high rise living and EV ownership is L3s on the property, not L2s. If, after the new building is built, only 10% of our units have EVs that need to charge 500km worth a week (which is only 300km range, or roughly 25 MILEs a day in winter), we'd need to be connected to that L2 for 1190 hours a week. Yet there are only 168 hours in a week. So we'd need significantly more than the TWO L2s required by zoning. And that assumes everyone is comfortable with starting or ending charging sessions in the middle of the night or on a regular fixed schedule to provide access for everyone.

The city has also started a pilot project to put in L2 chargers for street parking. As I live in a granola eating neighbourhood, it was chosen for the pilot, but that charger is 800M away from my home and has a 3 hour parking limit. It is also unavailable during snow clearing events (we usually get 5 of these a year.) The nearest L3s are a 15 minute drive away (at a library or an auto supply store, those ones being used at night by a government fleet of cars that plug in there at 6 each evening and get picked up at 7 each morning, blocking the use by the general public) and the nearest supercharger (and currently only one in this city that isn't inside a paid parking lot), is 20 minutes away with no useful activity that could be added to that weekly errand if I didn't have home charging.

The province of Quebec, in highly populated areas has promoted the installation of L3s at grocery stores. It means access to washrooms can be limited if you are road tripping at night, but for the local renters, they can drive to the grocery store, doing their weekly shopping while charging for 30 - 40 minutes and the "Always be charging" mantra of EV owners is nicely settled. Montreal have also installed L2 chargers at the end of light rail lines so that EV owners without home charging who live outside of the city limits can drive to the LRT station, plug in, and return back after work downtown to a fully charged vehicle. (Quebec also has the largest government incentives for EV ownership and has the highest concentration of EV ownership as a result of these measures.) There is a way of doing things 'better' but the most populous province in Canada has refused to plan ahead.

Charging at home even at L1 is almost a requirement for EV ownership here, especially once EVs are not rare but the norm. Yet nothing is being done to change the situation for renters. In my case, it is not possible to retrofit the building. Given the age of this building most of the apartments are underpowered for today's lifestyles, my apartment has fuses and my overloaded circuits require creative management in order to avoid blowing fuses all the time. The problem isn't choices (all parts of the building is underpowered), it is expanding the supply to the building which is a prohibitive cost unless one is building new and able to recover that cost through higher rents.

Obviously there are solutions that could be implemented but it doesn't appear that any government is taking the situation seriously when they 'take action'. Look at power generation capacity in my province: 34% nuclear, 28% gas/oil, 23% hydro, 13% wind, 1% solar and under 1% biofuel. Our three nuclear reactors are ancient, opening between 1971 and 1993. Additional reactors are being considered. The argument the grid won't support EVs is not a strawman. Expansion isn't in the works. In fact, failure of the grid due to lack of maintenance is a common problem. Storms aren't the only threat, squirrels have the power to do so as well.

Homeowners and businesses are being encouraged to produce further electricity demand by switching from gas/oil heating. Our homes, in general are very energy efficient (we aren't stupid, heat is expensive so we've been focused on decent windows and insulation for decades and bonus - it makes the hotter summers easier to cope with as well) but that doesn't help the grid any, people still are switching from carbon taxed oil to electricity. Home solar installation is expensive and given our latitude, not enough to support a household without an EV over the year. Ground source heat pumps would be the best alternative but they aren't legislated for new construction of multiple unit residential and heating plants for commercial areas and subdivisions (something Europe has offered over the years) is not a 'thing' here, aside from a few high-profile projects.

So, I don't see any serious use of the "time to prepare" actually happening as far as the electrical grid goes, or as far as serious policies to reduce individual green house gas emissions. Our government recently rescinded the tax on heating oil because too many rural homeowners were affected negatively by that 'encouragement' to switch to electricity, ignoring that our rural electricity grid is precarious due to decades of reduced maintenance, and increases in storm events attributable to climate change. Even our 23% of electrical capacity coming from hydro is at risk due to changing weather patterns affecting the watersheds.

When I was a homeowner, I owned a heavily insulated home, added a steel roof to reduce the number of new roofs needed and that oil requirement and put in a ground source heat pump for heating, cooling, and hot water. We also added a generator that could keep the house livable in all seasons, since we were rural and two major, lengthy, power failures made the need for backup power obvious (and rather than install a propane furnace, we chose ground source heat pump which could by run from the generator when needed.) We also became a single, hybrid, vehicle family.

When the kids were obviously gone for good, we downsized and moved to the city where we could use our feet and transit for a lot of our errands, living in a high rise to reduce our energy use for heating (and with old school hot water radiators which still provide heat from the gas fired boiler due to a generator), and bought an EV since we still needed a car to be part of our children and grandchildren's lives.

But I have observed that my response to climate change and the experts' advise is not typical. There is time to plan for the coming changes but populations are not doing so, either through regulation or personal changes in the numbers required. Even the majority of tesla owners don't seem to drive the car to reduce emissions but because the cars are cool and FAST and they get annoyed when asked to travel the speed limit despite that being an easy way to reduce one's emissions (after all, most power grids are not emission-free so tesla owners generate emissions, just not from a tailpipe.)

So while I strongly dislike the naysayers and don't engage with them, they are coming from a kernel of truth, and there is little evidence that the time to plan for the switch is being used at all. (And note, I haven't even addressed the question of battery production and end of life questions.)

You said you installed a 110V charger. That must take forever to charge the car. For a 240V 45A (42A? I can't remember exactly) charger, the car my Model S will charge around 35 miles of range per hour. For a typical commute situation a car is only going to need a 1-2 hr charge per day. What we need is a multi-headed L2 charger where multiple people can plug in and the charger charges cars serially. When one reaches it's charge level and quits charging, the second to plug in starts charging and so on. Several cars can be charged in one night without anyone having to move a car.

High density housing is a big problem for EV ownership. In some cities like New York it's a problem for ICE ownership.

Charging scenarios for single family housing is pretty easy. For medium density housing (smaller apartment/condo complexes) it's being dealt with here with government subsidies. My neighbor is in management at a commercial electric company and about 80% of their business right now is installing L2 chargers at apartment/condo complexes and businesses. Most apartment complexes around here are 2 story buildings with at least one parking spot for each apartment, often 2. Condos tend to be similar layouts with townhouses that are two stories instead of single story apartments. The density is low enough that putting in a fair number of L2 chargers is possible.

Electricity in this county is very cheap (among the cheapest in the US $0.08/KWH) thanks to abundant hydro power. A lot of people here also work in the Portland area and commute across the state line every day. We also have some of the most expensive gasoline in the US (though still cheaper than Canada). Electric cars became very popular here because it makes the commute much cheaper.
 
Autopilot including
You said you installed a 110V charger. That must take forever to charge the car. For a 240V 45A (42A? I can't remember exactly) charger, the car my Model S will charge around 35 miles of range per hour. For a typical commute situation a car is only going to need a 1-2 hr charge per day.
The average daily driving distance in the US is less than 40 miles.

It takes about 10 hours to add that much range to a Model Y from a 120V receptacle on a 15A circuit. That's no problem - just plug in when you get home in the evening and unplug when you leave for work the next morning.

There's no need to recharge in 1-2 hours if the vehicle will not be driven for a 12-hour period while you're eating dinner, watching TV, sleeping, showering, etc.; although, it is more efficient to do so because you're minimizing the amount of time the vehicle stays awake.
 
Autopilot including

The average daily driving distance in the US is less than 40 miles.

It takes about 10 hours to add that much range to a Model Y from a 120V receptacle on a 15A circuit. That's no problem - just plug in when you get home in the evening and unplug when you leave for work the next morning.

There's no need to recharge in 1-2 hours if the vehicle will not be driven for a 12-hour period while you're eating dinner, watching TV, sleeping, showering, etc.; although, it is more efficient to do so because you're minimizing the amount of time the vehicle stays awake.

If you're charging at an apartment or condo with limited charging resources, faster charging is probably necessary. For daily charging 110V is sufficient, but if you drive further, even occasionally it would take a while longer than overnight to fully charge back up.
 
You said you installed a 110V charger. That must take forever to charge the car.

Well lah-de-dah, thanks for assuming I have no idea what the charging speeds of L1 and L2 are (especially in winter in Canada) and boasting about how fast you can charge compared to me.

You seemed to have missed the part where I said we got the last 15 amp circuit on the basement electrical panel of our building. Or, in case I wasn't clear, I got the last circuit on the basement electrical panel and it was 15 amp. Installing 220v to our parking spot simply was not an option.

Charging 110v is a helluva lot better than taking the car to the L2 in our neighbourhood and walking home, then walking back later. It costs me no time whatsoever to plug in. And, in general, the 100km in range we get overnight is sufficient for the next day since we aren't commuting daily. The only time we run into issues is if we are away (like over last the weekend) and then want to visit our son the following day. That requires hitting an SC on the way home so we can leave with enough range. Yesterday I learned in this weather, it takes 18kWh to do the round trip. But we had had topped up rather than arriving home with the estimated 7% left that the car thought we'd have. We try never to return home with less than 30% so we can do an emergency run out to him in the middle of the night.
 
  • Like
Reactions: navguy12
If you are charging at a rental apartment, YOU HAVE NO OPTIONS EXCEPT WHAT THE LANDLORD ALLOWS.

Assuming that the tenant pays the power bill, why would the landlord have any say over charging? I'm not saying you can install an outlet on their property, but who is to say a tenant couldn't get one of those auto-sensing dryer plugs that swap between EV charging, or drying clothes?
I'm also making the assumption that this is a single family home, duplex or triple decker - not a building.

Edit: I see what you're referencing now, sounds like you're in a building - in which case, yes, you're extremely limited by what the property manager has for resources available to their tenants, if anything.
 
Well lah-de-dah, thanks for assuming I have no idea what the charging speeds of L1 and L2 are (especially in winter in Canada) and boasting about how fast you can charge compared to me.

You seemed to have missed the part where I said we got the last 15 amp circuit on the basement electrical panel of our building. Or, in case I wasn't clear, I got the last circuit on the basement electrical panel and it was 15 amp. Installing 220v to our parking spot simply was not an option.

Charging 110v is a helluva lot better than taking the car to the L2 in our neighbourhood and walking home, then walking back later. It costs me no time whatsoever to plug in. And, in general, the 100km in range we get overnight is sufficient for the next day since we aren't commuting daily. The only time we run into issues is if we are away (like over last the weekend) and then want to visit our son the following day. That requires hitting an SC on the way home so we can leave with enough range. Yesterday I learned in this weather, it takes 18kWh to do the round trip. But we had had topped up rather than arriving home with the estimated 7% left that the car thought we'd have. We try never to return home with less than 30% so we can do an emergency run out to him in the middle of the night.

I'm sorry you were offended, but I did not intend any offense. The comment about the charging speeds was not meant as an insult or to sound like I was lording over you. I did have to charge on a 110V outlet when charging once and it took three days to charge from 20% to 90%. It was painful. Fortunately I didn't need to drive during that time.

I understand you're stuck with the last 15A circuit in the building.

If you are charging at a rental apartment, YOU HAVE NO OPTIONS EXCEPT WHAT THE LANDLORD ALLOWS.

I was talking about policy for installing charging in apartments and condos when possible. There will be times when lower power is all that is available, but when there aren't limitations, L2 with multiple head chargers and software that cycles from car to car plugged in when they reach the charge limit is the best way to go. That gives the most cars possible access to charging.
 
How do I get the wife update?
Oh, it's a VERY expensive upgrade! Financially and more
I've heard it's going to be an optional "Elon" package on CTs. Off-menu, of course.

AP & FSD are two different things (yes: they are both autonomy routines but they are as similar as a Nissan Frontier and an 18-wheeler are both "trucks")
While I personally see very little value to FSD at this point, AP works extremely well (IMO) and has been fully functional as advertised for the quite a while
AP is a sub-set of FSD functionality.
A bunch of features have been moving around between the two over the years (auto-park, auto lane change, navigate on AP, etc.). Occasionally, Tesla interjects and intermediate feature package known as EAP between the two.

To claim AP works extremely well is akin to saying that Titanic's voyage was mostly successful, except for that one little accident.
For me, five years into toying with AP, it continues to fail on me with 90+% reliability in three (3) scenarios:
  • Y road splits (tries to email itself on the median, whenever there is not a car to follow).
  • Phantom breaking around bridges on sunny days (and in some other less predictable scenarios).
  • Veering off the road and steering into the ditch when cresting either one of the 2 minor hills near my house (in other words, limited horizon lane keep meltdown).
There has been ZERO (0) improvement in AP functionality in those scenarios for the 5 years I've owned my TM3P.
I expect just as much for the next 5 years.

Robo-taxis and cars as appreciating assets - my a$$ !

Yes! However, too many people get behind the wheel without knowing how to use the features, and that includes their limitations.
Too many?
How about 99+% of new buyers!
You think anyone at Tesla SC's educates anyone on AP and FSD limitations?

Common, man.
 
If you're charging at an apartment or condo with limited charging resources, faster charging is probably necessary. For daily charging 110V is sufficient, but if you drive further, even occasionally it would take a while longer than overnight to fully charge back up.
One downside side, you must do a lot of charging during peak rates?

I drive 70/100 miles a day, 100% of my charging is during off peak rates.
 
  • Like
Reactions: navguy12
LOL! You'll still get the download through cellular, like every single major update. I held off on getting my radar turned off for months (you just need to delete your wifi network from your car, dont just disconnect it, it resets to "on" after every drive, but it never connects to a network it doesnt know the password for). After it downloads through cellular, you just have to ignore the install every time you get in the car and drive (press the x). Eventually it goes away (that means its downloading the next update), and then days later it'll start again.

That said.... the ability to play solitaire while the car was in motion was quietly removed and I'm pretty sure I didnt do any installs. Any govt related safety stuff will be forced on you I think.

Godspeed to you though! I ended up giving up once I thought it would affect my warranty (battery charging stuff, thermal controls updates, etc), plus a lot of new stuff was added that I wanted. The thing that helped me do it was driving a friends car without radar. It was "acceptable" to me. Not the best, but acceptable. You may want to see how this goes, it may not be nearly as bad as you think.... then again, maybe it will be worse!
Yes I'm one of the people that never had radar or USS which I'm not sure if people are referring to this as the same thing but either way I've never had either. The thing I'm noticing about these recalls and safety updates that are being forced on us is how much they are distracting my attention from the road with constant admonitions to pay attention. I'm not sure why the car interprets me as not paying attention when I'm actually open-eyed looking straight at the road but it often scolds me and makes me look at the screen to see what the problem is which honestly is a safety issue to take my eyes off the road. Not sure of the solution here since Tesla does seem to be a target for lawsuits. Many tell me not to worry about missing the radar and or USS so I try to be content with what is on my MY 23 LR
 
Yes I'm one of the people that never had radar or USS which I'm not sure if people are referring to this as the same thing but either way I've never had either. The thing I'm noticing about these recalls and safety updates that are being forced on us is how much they are distracting my attention from the road with constant admonitions to pay attention. I'm not sure why the car interprets me as not paying attention when I'm actually open-eyed looking straight at the road but it often scolds me and makes me look at the screen to see what the problem is which honestly is a safety issue to take my eyes off the road. Not sure of the solution here since Tesla does seem to be a target for lawsuits. Many tell me not to worry about missing the radar and or USS so I try to be content with what is on my MY 23 LR
Radar and USS have nothing to do with the steering wheel torque and cabin camera monitoring. USS is not even used for AP or FSD and the wheel torque requirement existed long before Tesla disabled radar in all cars.

If you are getting pay attention warnings while you are looking straight ahead, then there is a problem with your car. It is possible to set the visor such that it obscures your face from the camera. You might check that if you are getting undeserved warnings. My only FSD strike was for this exact issue. If the camera does have a clear view of your face, then perhaps you have a cabin camera issue and should request service to have it tested.

If you find the notices on the display a safety issue, then maybe you should file a complaint with NHTSA about it.