$12K for FSD is insane

[JustJohn]

Is there a formal committee that is reviewing the deification of Tesla or is it already settled canon?

Stuff like this is/should be a major facepalm: 54,000 Teslas Recalled Because Full Self-Driving Beta Allows 'Rolling Stop'

 

[Knightshade]

Stuff like this is/should be a major facepalm: 54,000 Teslas Recalled Because Full Self-Driving Beta Allows 'Rolling Stop'

Why?

 

[Supcom]

Instead, they should allow FSD to stay with the account.

Yeah, who wouldn't want a lifetime software license with free updates? It's a shame it's a poor business model.

 

[OncomingStorm]

Is there a formal committee that is reviewing the deification of Tesla or is it already settled canon?

Stuff like this is/should be a major facepalm: 54,000 Teslas Recalled Because Full Self-Driving Beta Allows 'Rolling Stop'

i like how all the media outlets jump on this, a "problem" that hasn't been shown to cause problems and will be solved with an OTA update just days after they requested the change. how many extremally serious recalls are out there right now for other vehicles that have been ongoing for years lol.

 

[Supcom]

Funny how all FSD discussions eventually gravitate to one, or more, of Phantom Braking, Auto Wipers or Auto Headlights. All items that are part of the basic car package, not FSD.

 

[JustJohn]

Why?

Why not? I'm not proud when my company screws up and is forced to recall a bad product launch. I also don't justify it by claiming other companies do it too and we do it less so that's ok.
Maybe you could get an admin involved if you don't like dissention?

You still haven't justified "physically impossible."

 

[JustJohn]

Like it or not, it's happening:
NHTSA Reviewing Tesla Phantom Braking After Complaint Count Spikes

 

[Knightshade]

Why not? I'm not proud when my company screws up and is forced to recall a bad product launch.

You appear to be trying to discuss something you don't understand.

Again.

This wasn't a "production launch"...let alone a "bad" one.

I also don't justify it by claiming other companies do it too

...what?


Which other companies are routinely improving their vehicles, even years old ones, via free OTA updates?

You still haven't justified "physically impossible."

You making a sensical post appears to fit the bill.

Like it or not, it's happening:
NHTSA Reviewing Tesla Phantom Braking After Complaint Count Spikes

What do you think is "happening?"

NHTSA reviews all reports, from all car makers.

And has for decades.

That's a non story.

What would be a story is if the NHTSA actually opened an investigation from a car maker.

Which, for the story you're describing, they have not.




BTW- they HAVE done that for phantom braking. For other car brands where there's a far more serious issue.

Examples include:

Mazda3 Recalled for Sudden, Unexpected Emergency Braking

Consumer Reports shares details of the Mazda3 recall. More than 35,000 Mazda3 vehicles are being recalled because their automatic emergency braking (AEB) system could falsely activate.

www.consumerreports.org

and

Nissan Admits to More Than 1,400 Reports About Faulty Automatic Emergency Braking but Continues to Refuse Recall

%

www.autosafety.org

They have not done that for Tesla....which has had vastly fewer complaints than brands like those of braking issues.

 

[AndreP]

They have not done that for Tesla....which has had vastly fewer complaints than brands like those of braking issues.

This might not be entirely accurate if we include the recall on ~12,000 FSD Beta 10.3 vehicles for the crazy forward-collision warnings and AEB activation

It was a one-off thing but maybe the most extreme example of phantom braking the industry has seen, I remember logging in here the day that rolled out and thinking how crazy it was that a software update could conceivably have vehicles all around the world suddenly slamming on their brakes on highways

 

[Knightshade]

This might not be entirely accurate if we include the recall on ~12,000 FSD Beta 10.3 vehicles for the crazy forward-collision warnings and AEB activation

No, it's perfectly accurate.

The buggy SW had already been stopped by the time the NHTSA was even aware there was a problem, and Tesla had already rolled out a fix via OTA before the voluntary recall notice was even on file.

No NHTSA investigation was ever opened for that. NHTSA had no involvement in it whatsoever other than publishing the voluntary notice Tesla filed after the fact.


You can check for yourself here:

Search Safety Issues | NHTSA

www.nhtsa.gov

Search from Oct 1 2021 to today and the only Tesla investigation at all is the one because passengers were allowed to play video games on a screen the driver could see.

(Something Tesla has also already "fixed" via OTA, but not until after the investigation had been opened)

 

[AndreP]

No, it's perfectly accurate.

The buggy SW had already been stopped by the time the NHTSA was even aware there was a problem, and Tesla had already rolled out a fix via OTA before the voluntary recall notice was even on file.

No NHTSA investigation was ever opened for that. NHTSA had no involvement in it whatsoever other than publishing the voluntary notice Tesla filed after the fact.


You can check for yourself here:

Search Safety Issues | NHTSA

www.nhtsa.gov

Search from Oct 1 2021 to today and the only Tesla investigation at all is the one because passengers were allowed to play video games on a screen the driver could see.

(Something Tesla has also already "fixed" via OTA, but not until after the investigation had been opened)

There was no "investigation" because the situation was so dire that Tesla immediately started disabling FCW/AEB on Beta vehicles and then rolling back the update, but it is a recall related to phantom braking

Here is the recall report

https://static.nhtsa.gov/odi/rcl/2021/RCLRPT-21V846-7836.PDF

 

[Knightshade]

There was no "investigation" because the situation was so dire that Tesla immediately started disabling FCW/AEB on Beta vehicles and then rolling back the update, but it is a recall related to phantom braking

You're moving goalposts now my dude.

Here's what actually was said that you then cited as not being accurate.

They have not done that for Tesla

What is "that"? in the post my quote comes from that too is clear-

What would be a story is if the NHTSA actually opened an investigation from a car maker.

Which, for the story you're describing, they have not.

BTW- they HAVE done that for phantom braking. For other car brands where there's a far more serious issue.

The thing I said was NHTSA had not opened an investigation into Tesla for this.

Which remains 100% accurate.

Here is the recall report

https://static.nhtsa.gov/odi/rcl/2021/RCLRPT-21V846-7836.PDF

Did you read it?

Because the chronology section makes it clear NHTSA took no action of any kind the entire time other than publishing that notice once Tesla filed it.

100% of what happened apart from publishing the notice was by Tesla, and entirely voluntary.






Possibly you'd benefit from scrolling back and re-reading where JustJohn posted a story he didn't understand and told us "Like it or not, it's happening"

Which led to questioning what he thinks is "happening"

So far, it's nothing other than the normal NHTSA routinely reviewing all complaints about all vehicles filed on their website- nothing "special" is "happening" at all regarding Tesla.

There's no "investigation" open for them on this.

As you can see at the URL I provided.

 

[AndreP]

Whether or not the NHTSA initiates an investigation into longer-term phantom braking in Tesla vehicles remains to be seen, feels like we're arguing semantics otherwise.

But I think the NHTSA is already fully aware of false positives across all AV systems. If they were to initiate an investigation for Tesla, it would assumedly be regarding whatever has caused a major uptick in phantom braking reports rather than phantom braking as a whole.

And in the end, they likely think the crash avoidance systems with false positives are better than not having them at all knowing that other drivers should technically be following far enough back to mitigate risk from a vehicle phantom braking.

 

[Knightshade]

Whether or not the NHTSA initiates an investigation into longer-term phantom braking in Tesla vehicles remains to be seen, feels like we're arguing semantics otherwise.

But I think the NHTSA is already fully aware of false positives across all AV systems. If they were to initiate an investigation for Tesla, it would assumedly be regarding whatever has caused a major uptick in phantom braking reports rather than phantom braking as a whole.

And in the end, they likely think the crash avoidance systems with false positives are better than not having them at all knowing that other drivers should technically be following far enough back to mitigate risk from a vehicle phantom braking.

Agreed to all of the above.

Which is why what John posted was such a non-story, though he didn't appear to understand that.

 

[EVNow]

And in the end, they likely think the crash avoidance systems with false positives are better than not having them at all knowing that other drivers should technically be following far enough back to mitigate risk from a vehicle phantom braking.

NHTSA has been asleep at the wheels for a long time.

Radar has been available for a long time and it was possible for auto makers to include AEB a couple of decades back. As usual the NHTSA which is basically completely controlled by automaker lobbyists dragged its feet and even now the "industry" has only agreed to include AEB in all the cars "voluntarily". Its insane how trillion dollar industry regulations can be bought off with a few 100k.

We have the best regulators the money can buy.

 

[JustJohn]

You appear to be trying to discuss something you don't understand.

Again.

This wasn't a "production launch"...let alone a "bad" one.




...what?


Which other companies are routinely improving their vehicles, even years old ones, via free OTA updates?



You making a sensical post appears to fit the bill.





What do you think is "happening?"

NHTSA reviews all reports, from all car makers.

And has for decades.

That's a non story.

What would be a story is if the NHTSA actually opened an investigation from a car maker.

Which, for the story you're describing, they have not.




BTW- they HAVE done that for phantom braking. For other car brands where there's a far more serious issue.

Examples include:

Mazda3 Recalled for Sudden, Unexpected Emergency Braking

Consumer Reports shares details of the Mazda3 recall. More than 35,000 Mazda3 vehicles are being recalled because their automatic emergency braking (AEB) system could falsely activate.

www.consumerreports.org

and

Nissan Admits to More Than 1,400 Reports About Faulty Automatic Emergency Braking but Continues to Refuse Recall

%

www.autosafety.org

They have not done that for Tesla....which has had vastly fewer complaints than brands like those of braking issues.

The cars don’t drive on water. You act like you’re in a cult.

 

[Knightshade]

The cars don’t drive on water. You act like you’re in a cult.

are you drunk or something?

Literally nothing you've posted has made any actual sense.

You keep spamming the thread with links to news stories you don't understand then making nonsensical comments about them- and when someone points out how even your own sources don't support your claims you resort to personal attacks.

You've got 98 total posts here and like 80 of em are how much Tesla sucks.

 

[EVNow]

Stuff like this is/should be a major facepalm: 54,000 Teslas Recalled Because Full Self-Driving Beta Allows 'Rolling Stop'

L
O
L.

 

[HD1222]

Everyone is saying the same thing about 12k for FSD. Makes financial sense to subscribe to it if you really want it. I suspect he’s doing it so it’ll force more subscriptions. Subscription based companies have a higher revenue multiplier for their stock, and therefore would help their stock out more.

 

[drtimhill]

Why not? I'm not proud when my company screws up and is forced to recall a bad product launch. I also don't justify it by claiming other companies do it too and we do it less so that's ok.

Explain how this is a screw up? There is no already agreed-upon standard or regulatory framework around AVs, so how would Tesla know in advance that the NHTSA would push back on the car behavior. And bear in mind that the car was essentially doing something harmless, with no reported problems or related accidents.

If a company installs faulty air-bags, that's a screw-up .. adding a feature that a government agency later decides is bad isnt.

And forget about "the car should always obey the law", there are dozens of real-world scenarios where you have to technically "break the law". Ever crossed a center yellow line to pass a double-parked truck? Ever driven slightly above the posted speed limit cause everyone else is and you are worried about being tailgated?