2.48.16 limits max autosteer speed to speed limit on local roads?

[Max*]

This thread is quite interesting in one aspect, and that's the general thoughts around speed limits in that seemingly no one follows them...

That's because most people don't.

 

[drewsny]

Did any of you really think there wasn't going to be a reaction from Tesla with regards to some owners doing irresponsible, and even deadly, actions while AP is engaged? I don't see what the big deal here is. I certainly don't see any reason to be "outraged" like some seem to think the reaction should be...

This thread is quite interesting in one aspect, and that's the general thoughts around speed limits in that seemingly no one follows them... (I'm not commenting on my application of posted speed limits)

Jeff

Personally my problem with it is that there are a ton of roads that aren't divided highways technically but perfect for autopilot and basically what autopilot was made for. And a lot of these roads you'll have a line of people behind you honking if you follow the speed limit exactly, 5mph over is pushing it but still doable bit 0mph over is going to have a lot of people road raging at you.

 

[u00mem9]

It just seems like a really lazy step. There are some roads where using Autopilot is not safe. Tesla didn't try to make the system perform better on these roads. They didn't try to identify more accurately which roads are in this category. They didn't do anything smart or innovative to correct the situation.

Currently our car has a very intelligent and advanced system that can identify roads where Autopilot is appropriate...the driver. In this case, Tesla would like to substitute the most rudimentary logic...If road_divided=true, then max_speed = 55. Zero machine learning or artificial intelligence, or anything else more clever than an 8yr old brought to bear on the situation.

Those who live in areas with only divided highways or so much traffic that travelling the speed limit seems like a fairy tale, it is a minor change. For some of us, it is a huge problem.

 

[Pezpunk]

That's because most people don't.

definitely true. honestly, in northern VA if you are on 66 or 495 if there isn't heavy traffic and you are going the speed limit (55mph) you are an asshole. you are also operating your vehicle more dangerously than if you were traveling with the flow of traffic (generally somewhere between 65 and 75 mph).

however, if you are trying to get your vehicle to auto-drive itself in violation of existing laws, you are also an asshole. if you want to speed, put your hands on the wheel and drive it yourself with the rest of us law-breakers. it just makes sense to me that Tesla does not want to assume the liability of its autopilot willingly breaking traffic laws when it doesn't have to.

 

[sdorn]

definitely true. honestly, in northern VA if you are on 66 or 495 if there isn't heavy traffic and you are going the speed limit (55mph) you are an asshole. you are also operating your vehicle more dangerously than if you were traveling with the flow of traffic (generally somewhere between 65 and 75 mph).

however, if you are trying to get your vehicle to auto-drive itself in violation of existing laws, you are also an asshole. if you want to speed, put your hands on the wheel and drive it yourself with the rest of us law-breakers. it just makes sense to me that Tesla does not want to assume the liability of its autopilot willingly breaking traffic laws when it doesn't have to.

In Atlanta a lot of the interstates have 55 mph speed limits, but the flow of traffic is between 70mph and 80mph. That sort of disparity isn't as true on the surface streets though. There are some places where the speed limit is 45mph and traffic is flowing at 55mph - 60mph, but those are specific spots and not the general rule.

 

[u00mem9]

Tesla does not want to assume the liability of its autopilot willingly breaking traffic laws when it doesn't have to.

A bit late for that decision. They have already accepted payment. Time to put the big-boy pants back on.

Again, this logic falls apart when you consider that the system will gladly exceed the speed limit on divided highways.

 

[kavyboy]

it just makes sense to me that Tesla does not want to assume the liability of its autopilot willingly breaking traffic laws when it doesn't have to.

Then the obvious solution is to not set the max above the speed limit when initially engaged, but allow the driver to do so manually later. Otherwise, I see this as shifting the liability more toward Tesla than away. As in, "I knew the speed was too slow for the traffic conditions, but AutoPilot wouldn't let me set the cruise control to a higher speed. I wouldn't have started that multicar pileup if I could have set the speed I wanted, like any other normal cruise control. Autopilot thwarted my attempts to drive more safely." And then the press goes wild.

 

[Sonny Daze]

This goes to the reason why I have no interest in AP/FSD. I don't want the car to drive the way it wants to drive. The goal appears to be safety, which lends the car to drive like an old lady (sorry if I offend any old ladies). I don't want the car to go the speed limit, come to a complete stop at stop signs. Will it turn right on red, will it pass the actual old lady in front of me? It sounds absolutely frustrating to me.

 

[Max*]

This goes to the reason why I have no interest in AP/FSD. I don't want the car to drive the way it wants drive. The goal appears to be safety, which lends the car to drive like an old lady (sorry if I offend any old ladies). I don't want the car to go the speed limit, come to a complete stop at stop signs. Will it turn right on red, will it pass the actual old lady in front of me? It sounds absolutely frustrating to me.

You shouldn't poo-poo on something before you try it.

Also don't forget, that on interstate travel (i..e long distance trips) where AP shines, none of this thread applies. Nothing was changed there.

 

[Sonny Daze]

Also don't forget, that on interstate travel (i..e long distance trips) where AP shines, none of this thread applies. Nothing was changed there.

I'm just thinking ahead to the way AP appears to be headed. Don't take long road trips and even though I would appreciate the features in stop and go traffic on 66 and "the beltway"; not at that price. Obviously I'm following along with the changes and reserve the right to change my mind.

 

[Drone Flyer]

Th

He wants to speed.


I just hit the gas during auto steer

Tesla vehicles do not have a gas tank or gas engine!

 

[Drone Flyer]

B

A few others have answered that Autopilot is speed restricted on non-divided roads. The OP says in the latest update that limit changed from +5 to +0. For me even the +5 is too low as on a speed limit 35 road people are traveling anywhere from 40-50 mph. So I just don't use Autopilot in these situations.

But you can use Tacc in this situation no problem.
It will go to whatever you set it to regardless of posted speed.

 

[thegruf]

Why is full AP restricted when TACC is not?

I dont get the difference other than AP is doing a bit more than TACC, both are driver asistance systems (as indeed are other assistance features such as auto-headlights).
In both cases the driver is responsible for the vehicle, it's direction. it's speed and all other behaviour for that matter.

This is increasingly starting to look like silly inconsistencies being implemented due to pressure from over-zealous and under informed regulators.

Complained about elsewhere by me, in the UK we also now get a "no undertaking" feature on AP but not on TACC, we also get slow downs to 40mph on roads with incorrectly recorded map data on AP but not TACC, both of which cause unexpected braking and have the potential to create unnecessary safety issues.

If these restrictions are valid for AP then they should be applied on TACC too, but ONLY if every other manufacturer in the world is compelled to apply the same restrictions. And if this isn't to happen (which of course it wouldn't) then they should back off on these unecessary and potentially incident inducing AP restrictions. The driver is in charge of the vehicle.

 

[glh280]

Crap, I was afraid this was actually and issue and not just a fluke. I just got my car back from the service center and they installed the software that now limits it to the speed limit. It will become useless to me on all but highways now. I use it as a second hand on the wheel, but doing the speed limit is painfully slow. You could easily set the cruise to 10 mph over and keep up with traffic. Doing the speed limit might actually put you at risk in some places, or more likely piss a ton of people off who are piled behind you.

My fear is that this is Tesla's way of incentivizing AP 1.0 drivers to upgrade to AP 2.0. I still have 2 years left on my lease. I would hate to not be able to use AP on non-highways for 2 years. The 5 mph over was a bit of an inconvenience, I would not have agreed to 0 mph over.

I am kind of pissed that the service center installed this without my consent. Worst part is they didn't even know that the change to AP occurred.

 

[glh280]

Then the obvious solution is to not set the max above the speed limit when initially engaged, but allow the driver to do so manually later. Otherwise, I see this as shifting the liability more toward Tesla than away. As in, "I knew the speed was too slow for the traffic conditions, but AutoPilot wouldn't let me set the cruise control to a higher speed. I wouldn't have started that multicar pileup if I could have set the speed I wanted, like any other normal cruise control. Autopilot thwarted my attempts to drive more safely." And then the press goes wild.

Either way, you are looking at Autopilot as a driver. Autopilot is just lane keeping assist. It is an assistant, not a driver. When looked at as an assistant it shouldn't matter how fast you are going. It isn't driving, it is doing what you tell it to do.

 

[kavyboy]

Either way, you are looking at Autopilot as a driver. Autopilot is just lane keeping assist. It is an assistant, not a driver. When looked at as an assistant it shouldn't matter how fast you are going. It isn't driving, it is doing what you tell it to do.

No, it would be setting the speed upon engaging AP, but then allow the driver to override. The driver would have total control in that case.
I totally agree with your point about driver assist. If it's always the driver's fault in case of an accident, then the driver has to have total control.

 

[glh280]

The service center is not aware that the speed limit (5 mph) should have changed. They are looking into it, though their response is still that AP is only meant for the highway.

 

[u00mem9]

The service center is not aware that the speed limit (5 mph) should have changed. They are looking into it, though their response is still that AP is only meant for the highway.

Didn't they see Elon's tweets about the downgrades in AP and the new launch counter?

 

[brianman]

Yes the new version limits your AP to the speed limit on undivided roads. This is probably getting us ready for self driving cars which will not exceed the speed limit or the driverless cars could get a speeding ticket. Bummer.

A post a few before yours reminded me of the "protest at speed limit" events of the past.

It will be interesting to see if AP and/or FSD will provide a new way for much larger demonstrations of "improperly" set speed limits on various routes.

 

[brianman]

As someone else mentioned above, I think this is just getting everyone used to the fact that autonomous cars will not be able to intentionally break traffic laws (including speed limits).

I wonder if they'll have a specific +10 setting for Arizona.