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

Any hack to remove the autopilot nag?

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Blame Tesla has nothing to do with it. You go right ahead and "we can do what we want". When it adversely impacts someone else, its called "willful negligence".

doesn't do a dag on thing unless a crash happens which is unlikely. Unless you saying everybody that uses this hack will crash

Because for the Pre March 2019 folks FSD doesn't exist yet. None of their cars have it.

Those folks only have EAP- which has all the current features of the "new" FSD, and which is explicitly an L2 system never intended to not require full driver attention.


So all their cars nag too right now- because the "software that doesn't need to nag" stuff doesn't actually exist yet. (or at least doesn't outside of a lab/test cars)


Because they're entirely different systems with vastly different capabilities- and only one of them (the much less safe one) even exists in current consumer teslas.

Even once it DOES exist- the AP-only cars will still be dangerous to use with the hack because they won't be running the more advanced, more capable, software.

I'm confused. I still don't understand the difference. I bought car in October 2019. Lets go back to step 1:
People say don't do this hack...Exactly what is the danger of making the car not nag?
Step 2: the FSD will not nag you. So again, how is FSD safer when it does not nag you vs regular AP which one uses a hack to not nag? Either way you are depending on the computer. Please give me an example how a no nag FSD will prevent an accident driving on the highway,no lane switching, vs driving with AP set on 50mph and no nag hack on?????????

I repeat, people say this hack is dangerous, when all it does is remove the nag. FSD does not or will not have a nag. Why isn't FSD dangerous?????

Bypassing any safety feature on any vehicle is dangerous and shows poor judgement.
Just think about if you get into an accident and your insurance company or the other persons lawyer finds out you disabled a safety feature..

ah okay, so what happens when I get into a crash with FSD, u know, that doesnt have a nag option?

I didn’t realize that. So in the USA people can drive 100 in a 60 zone, drive through red lights, and stop at green lights?

I thought basic common sense would allow people to understand what I meant. People can go out and rob and kill people. I guess you thought that was what I meant too because I said people can do what they want????

I’m not sure you are doing yourself any favours by arguing that what you are doing is no worse than the kind of behaviour that causes thousands of deaths and hundreds of thousands of injuries each year.

y

Give me the stats of injuries/crashes using this hack, vs texting and driving.
I'll wait...................
 
Last edited:
I’m not sure you are doing yourself any favours by arguing that what you are doing is no worse than the kind of behaviour that causes thousands of deaths and hundreds of thousands of injuries each year.

Op-Ed: Texting while driving is as dangerous as driving drunk. We need to treat it accordingly

I think his warped logic is thinking defeating the nag is not as bad as texting while driving, therefore it’s OK, because they all get away with it and what I’m doing isn’t as bad. For just him of course. What’s most scary is he truly believes it.
 
I think his warped logic is thinking defeating the nag is not as bad as texting while driving, therefore it’s OK, because they all get away with it and what I’m doing isn’t as bad. For just him of course. What’s most scary is he truly believes it.

eh, do you know what the no nag hack is? it just stops the computer from saying touch the wheel
Do you know what texting and driving is? when you text you are looking down and away from the road.......
With this hack you still look at the road and pay attention.
Do you not understand the clear difference?
Yall are assuming people will take a nap with the hack. But when FSD hits and no nag by default, people will nap. So I don't understand your concern for this hack, but not for FSD which doesn't even have a nag!!!!

But PLEASE, show me the stats on number of accidents/injuries of people using this nag hack, vs people getting hurt/accident from texting and driving.....
 
biker, you don't get the message we are trying to convey. And I don't care if you get it or use the hack. Use it it you wish. But you have left bread crumbs here that you knowing try to bypass this safety feature. So, IF, you do have a wreck, NOW your insurance company can use it against you to deny your claim or the other side can use this info against you to sue you. TMC is an easy search from Google. You've left public evidence now that you are trying to bypass the safety. But drive on.
 
  • Funny
  • Like
Reactions: MIT_S60 and mswlogo
biker, you don't get the message we are trying to convey. And I don't care if you get it or use the hack. Use it it you wish. But you have left bread crumbs here that you knowing try to bypass this safety feature. So, IF, you do have a wreck, NOW your insurance company can use it against you to deny your claim or the other side can use this info against you to sue you. TMC is an easy search from Google. You've left public evidence now that you are trying to bypass the safety. But drive on.

That's not the way it works. They can't use a internet post,posted by somebody they don't know who was driving at the time, to PROVE what happened in an accident. They would need proof it was on at the time of the incident. Plus there's things called proxies and VPNs.
I mean that's like saying, last week I went over the speed limit. So I guess any time I get into a crash they will bring up this post to prove I was speeding? NO, they would need to prove I was speeding at the time of said incident
 
I'm confused. I still don't understand the difference. I bought car in October 2019

You don't understand the difference between:

"full level 5 driving everywhere"

and

"level 2 driving everywhere"
?

If not, you're probably going to have a lot of trouble following a lot of threads here and should probably read up some on the SAE levels of autonomy then get back to us.


But the main difference is level 2 requires a fully attentive driver, at all times, remaining the only entity responsible for the safe driving of the car. The automated systems can aid that driver, but never replace him, and never fully execute the dynamic driving task.


The nags exist to check that the driver is still there, and engaged enough to at least be interacting with the steering wheel.


A level 5 system (which, again, doesn't exist yet) would NOT require this. The driver could be sleeping in the back seat. In which case there wouldn't be any nags to defeat, because he's never required to be paying attention or ready to take over.


That's a pretty massive difference.


People say don't do this hack...Exactly what is the danger of making the car not nag?

It means the driver can ignore the operation of the car. Which the system is explicitly not designed for because it's a driver aid not a driver replacement


Step 2: the FSD will not nag you. So again, how is FSD safer when it does not nag you vs regular AP which one uses a hack to not nag?

The no-nag FSD does not exist

Not sure where you're getting lost here.

It's a much more advanced system than the car has today and much more capable.


Do you not understand why "a vastly more capable system" would be safer to use without driver attention?


Either way you are depending on the computer. Please give me an example how a no nag FSD will prevent an accident driving on the highway,no lane switching, vs driving with AP set on 50mph and no nag hack on?????????

The same way radar cruise control prevents slamming into the back of a slower driver ahead of you when regular cruise doesn't.

One system is fundamentally more capable and advanced than the other.


I repeat, people say this hack is dangerous, when all it does is remove the nag. FSD does not or will not have a nag. Why isn't FSD dangerous?????

Not sure how many times we can tell you they're totally different systems.



Let me try a much simpler analogy-

It's always inherently dangerous to give a loaded gun to a 2 year old.

It's NOT always inherently dangerous to give one to an adult.


That track for you?

Why the difference?

Because the control system involved (a 2 year old vs an adult) has a massive difference on capability.




I thought basic common sense would allow people to understand what I meant.

So did everyone who keeps trying to explain this to you.
 
You don't understand the difference between:

"full level 5 driving everywhere"

and

"level 2 driving everywhere"
?

If not, you're probably going to have a lot of trouble following a lot of threads here and should probably read up some on the SAE levels of autonomy then get back to us.
Lets not get silly, I guess you going to picture and choose about what I dont understand the difference between? Don't talk to me like I'm a tard when Obviously you're not comprehending what I'm asking.



But the main difference is level 2 requires a fully attentive driver, at all times, remaining the only entity responsible for the safe driving of the car. The automated systems can aid that driver, but never replace him, and never fully execute the dynamic driving task.


The nags exist to check that the driver is still there, and engaged enough to at least be interacting with the steering wheel.


A level 5 system (which, again, doesn't exist yet) would NOT require this. The driver could be sleeping in the back seat. In which case there wouldn't be any nags to defeat, because he's never required to be paying attention or ready to take over.

So let me get this straight: people are in rage because one can put weight on the steering wheel now, and fall asleep. But I guess are okay that FSD will (did you see the word will? as in the future? smh) allow you to fall asleep without putting weight on the wheel? that's one of my points.



The no-nag FSD does not exist

Duh, I know this, did you read where I said FSD will not nag, I said WILL, not that it doesn't no nag you now!!!


Not sure where you're getting lost here.

It's a much more advanced system than the car has today and much more capable.
Do you not understand why "a vastly more capable system" would be safer to use without driver attention?

But you're not giving examples, you're just talking technology dribble.

"a vastly more capable system" would be needed in a fully autonomous system, but we are only talking about AP!!!!

basically AP today does not lane change. Doesn't even let you use it on all streets,it will let you drive in one lane, say on the highway at a set speed and steer. So tell me how I would crash with this hack on, vs having FSD, but doing the same thing: driving in one late on a highway,with no nag, since it doesn't nag by default. You fail to answer this scenario, which is the whole point.

All you're saying is basically FSD is a better system to drive straight than the current AP system we have know which I simply disagree on would cause accidents. That better system is to do more things than drive in a straight line (pass, turn off on offramps, do a full complete navigation, etc, but were talking just AP!!!) So me get me real world proof, or laboratory tests that show you will get into an accident using a hack on AP going in a straight line, than using FSD going in a straight line like down 95 south. Don't just say its newer technology and it will do better, smh



The same way radar cruise control prevents slamming into the back of a slower driver ahead of you when regular cruise doesn't.
One system is fundamentally more capable and advanced than the other.
Exceot we are talking about a nag. JUST A NAG. If one is paying attention with the hack on you have shown no proof they will get into an accident simply because they don't have the new super duper system that will come with FSD. Again, you're just talking tech dribble,no facts to support your case



It's always inherently dangerous to give a loaded gun to a 2 year old.

It's NOT always inherently dangerous to give one to an adult.

Apples to oranges. All your analogies are off base and don't relate to the issue at hand

So did everyone who keeps trying to explain this to you.

so if 25,000 people tell me the wrong thing, it must be right huh? smh
 
Last edited:
Lets not get silly, I guess you going to picture and choose about what I dont understand the difference between?

No, I think there's a pretty big menu there...


Don't talk to me like I'm a tard when Obviously you're not comprehending what I'm asking.

I'm not sure you are either.




So let me get this straight: people are in rage because one can put weight on the steering wheel now, and fall asleep. But I guess are okay that FSD will (did you see the word will? as in the future? smh) allow you to fall asleep without putting weight on the wheel? that's one of my points.

Yes- and it's nonsensical.

It's the same as asking why people get mad if you hand a 2 year old a loaded gun, but not an adult.

They're two vastly different things with vastly different capabilities and margins of safety.




Duh, I know this


You very clearly didn't in your previous post- thus why I had to explain it.


But you're not giving examples, you're just talking technology dribble.

No, I'm explaining technology and you're not understanding the answer.

I did give you an example of course, the 2 year old and the adult.

Did you not understand that one either?


"a vastly more capable system" would be needed in a fully autonomous system, but we are only talking about AP!!!!

Right... which is why disabling the system that insures the driver is paying attention is a bad idea.

And why a much more advanced system won't need such a system.

Which is the point you somehow seem confused on.



basically AP today does not lane change. Doesn't even let you use it on all streets,it will let you drive in one lane, say on the highway at a set speed and steer. So tell me how I would crash with this hack on, vs having FSD, but doing the same thing


Because FSD can handle a lot more unexpected things happening while you're doing that and not paying attention.

TODAY if you don't pay attention and there's a fire truck parked on the side of the road, partly in your lane, AP will slam into the back of it at full speed

FSD would not.

Lots of other cases like that- where FSD is inherently able to handle things without driver help... but AP is not... thus, again, disabling the system that is checking if the driver is paying attention and ready to help is dangerous.



: driving in one late on a highway,with no nag, since it doesn't nag by default. You fail to answer this scenario, which is the whole point.

It's been answered a number of times.

I can explain it to you.

I can't understand it for you though.



All you're saying is basically FSD is a better system to drive straight than the current AP system we have know which I simply disagree on would cause accidents.


Then you're wrong. Period. Full stop.

There's already been accidents on AP, with a driver not paying attention, that FSD would not have gotten into (because the system can't fully exist until it's able to handle those)


That better system is to do more things than drive in a straight line

Again, wrong. Period. Full stop.

It's to do every task well enough that the driver is not required.

INCLUDING driving straight in a single highway lane.

If they were equal today then you'd have a level 3 system in AP, not level 2.


So me get me real world proof, or laboratory tests that show you will get into an accident using a hack on AP going in a straight line

Tesla car was on Autopilot when it hit a Culver City firetruck, NTSB finds


There you go.


Driver was on AP. Their hands were not on the wheel and not paying attention. (the thing the nag is trying to make happen)

The car slammed into the back of a parked fire truck.

Because AP is not capable of replacing a human driver. FSD will be.

THAT is the difference.



Exceot we are talking about a nag. JUST A NAG. If one is paying attention with the hack on you have shown no proof they will get into an accident simply because they don't have the new super duper system that will come with FSD. Again, you're just talking tech dribble,no facts to support your case


I'm picturing the guy doing the "I award you no points" bit from Billy Madison right now....





so if 25,000 people tell me the wrong thing, it must be right huh? smh


No, but if even one tells you the right one, it's right.

Multiple folks already have, inducing me.

You just are unwilling, or unable, to listen and understand the answer.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: Thp3 and Akikiki
Stick about 11-12 oz to the back & bottom of either the 3 or 9 o'clock spoke. Clean looking from the front, cheap & easy to remove. Just make sure the plastic is clean or it won't stick very well. I wiped mine off with rubbing alcohol. Works great.

Pit Posse Motorcycle ATV Car Truck Wheel Balancing Weights Adhesive Stick On 72pcs 1/4oz (Black) https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00OQWS98S/ref=cm_sw_r_sms_apap_ZJ1kISalTbQY3
 
I have done it a few times with a water bottle and I have gone as long as 100km without the nag coming on. I was fully paying attention and ready to grab the wheel at anytime, it was for testing purposes only.

Fill a water bottle 1/3 to 1/2 way, then rest the bottle at either the 2 o'clock or 10 o'clock position. The water acts as a weight and I think the bumps in the road moves the water around so there is some motion.

IMG_0334 copy.jpg

 
Stick about 11-12 oz to the back & bottom of either the 3 or 9 o'clock spoke. Clean looking from the front, cheap & easy to remove. Just make sure the plastic is clean or it won't stick very well. I wiped mine off with rubbing alcohol. Works great.

Pit Posse Motorcycle ATV Car Truck Wheel Balancing Weights Adhesive Stick On 72pcs 1/4oz (Black) https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00OQWS98S/ref=cm_sw_r_sms_apap_ZJ1kISalTbQY3
Sorry. Just noticed that one's not available anymore. These should work too.

CKAuto 1/4oz, 0.25oz, Black, Adhesive Stick on Wheel Weights, EasyPeel Tape. Cars, Trucks, SUVs, Motorcycles, Low Profile, 60 oz/Box, U.S. OEM Quality, (240pcs) https://www.amazon.com/dp/B06XDG1JJH/ref=cm_sw_r_sms_apa_i_KvEsEb9X6PKYB

In case it's not obvious, it will take 2-3 layers stacked to get enough weight.
 
I have done it a few times with a water bottle and I have gone as long as 100km without the nag coming on. I was fully paying attention and ready to grab the wheel at anytime, it was for testing purposes only.


yeah that's the thing, you pay attention while doing this and people will be fine
most people on here act like people are advocating to go to sleep while at the wheel, ridicolous
 
yeah that's the thing, you pay attention while doing this and people will be fine
most people on here act like people are advocating to go to sleep while at the wheel, ridicolous


If you're actually both paying attention, and holding the wheel in a way you can instantly take over, you won't ever get nags.

Nothing to defeat.


Defeating the nags= you're not holding the wheel right to begin with.

(disclaimer- I've seen a few folks claim they need to violently jerk the wheel to clear a nag- those folks should schedule service)
 
Give me the stats of injuries/crashes using this hack, vs texting and driving.
I'll wait...................
You were the one who asserted,

Wat I'm doing is no worse than people talking on the phone or texting while driving.

I provided the statistics for your comparator. I think it is up to you to provide the statistics for all of the users who defeat the safety reminder.
 

Please give me an example how a no nag FSD will prevent an accident driving on the highway,no lane switching, vs driving with AP set on 50mph and no nag hack on?????????[/quote]

Sure. People drive at night when they are tired. They use AutoPilot appropriately as an aid to driving. When their attention fails from tiredness, the safety reminder alerts them. If they were defeating the safety reminder system, they would be at greater risk of the kind of “asleep at the wheel” crashes of drivers without a level two autonomous vehicle.

Remember, the TM3 is only level two autonomous.

Why isn't FSD dangerous?????

FSD is not dangerous because it doesn’t exist.

BTW, you may have a problem with your keyboard. The “?” key appears to be stuck.
 
You don't understand the difference between:

"full level 5 driving everywhere"

and

"level 2 driving everywhere"
?

If not, you're probably going to have a lot of trouble following a lot of threads here and should probably read up some on the SAE levels of autonomy then get back to us.


But the main difference is level 2 requires a fully attentive driver, at all times, remaining the only entity responsible for the safe driving of the car. The automated systems can aid that driver, but never replace him, and never fully execute the dynamic driving task.

Here you go not reading and not comprehending again. I never said I didn't understand the difference between full level 2 and full level 5, you can no where quote me where I said said level 2 is same as level 5,smh. Stop making up your own wrong arguments

The nags exist to check that the driver is still there, and engaged enough to at least be interacting with the steering wheel.
This is common sense,nobody has debated what the nag is or exists for, smh. Once again, you debating something NOBODY is.


A level 5 system (which, again, doesn't exist yet) would NOT require this.
The no-nag FSD does not exist

Why do you keep repeating this? We already know when it does it won't nag. Why do you keep acting like you trying to make a point by saying it doesn't exist? that has nothing to do with the actual debate here




It's a much more advanced system than the car has today and much more capable.
Do you not understand why "a vastly more capable system" would be safer to use without driver attention?
Right here proves your poor reading skills and comprehension. I will get back to this below, you keep selective reading my stance on this issue.






I did give you an example of course, the 2 year old and the adult.

Did you not understand that one either?

I was only asking for Tesla driving examples, not silly 2 year old examples. A Tesla example (scenario) would of course more directly relate to the issue at hand. You did come up with one below, but of course your poor reading made you reply in the wrong manner, as usual. See below.



Because FSD can handle a lot more unexpected things happening while you're doing that and not paying attention.

TODAY if you don't pay attention and there's a fire truck parked on the side of the road, partly in your lane, AP will slam into the back of it at full speed

FSD would not.

Lots of other cases like that- where FSD is inherently able to handle things without driver help... but AP is not... thus, again, disabling the system that is checking if the driver is paying attention and ready to help is dangerous.

Okay, so heres where your reading/comprehension is bad. You keep changing the issue to make it seem like you're right. I've clearly said from the get go that if one uses the hack AND PAYS ATTENTION then there will be no problem. Please note the words that are CAPITALIZED. Do you know what paying attention means? It means that even though one has weight strapped onto the steering wheel, while still paying attention, why in the world would they not see a big ole red firetruck on the side of the road and make adjustments?

I agree that if you don't pay attention, bad things can happen. I've never disagreed on this, never. So we agree that not paying attention is bad (and will cause accident in any car for that matter) YET you keep throwing up examples where the driver is not paying attention. HELLO, we are not debating that not paying attention while driving is bad. I think everyone on this board would agree not paying attention is bad, so why are you trying so hard to support and defend that not paying attention is bad..... WHEN NO ONE IS DEBATING YOU ON THAT ISSUE?????

So See again your reading is bad. I've always say use the hack and pay attention. If you pay attention it does NOT matter how super advanced this super level 5 computer is .....why? Because if you're paying attention you're not relying on level 2 nor level 5. Do you understand and comprehend that?

All you need to do is hit the volume up or down on the wheel to avoid the nag right now. Putting weight on it just stops you from reaching the wheel every min or so. Not much difference. None of it matters though if you are paying attention.

Now if I had said I used the weight and like to take a nap, THEN AND ONLY THEN, do any of your comments make sense. Because a better more advance computer (although as you mention doesn't even exist, smh) would be the better thing to use when you purposely want to drive without having to attend to the driving. But anybody that can read plain english, would know that was never my original stance on this issue!!!!!


.

There's already been accidents on AP, with a driver not paying attention, that FSD would not have gotten into (because the system can't fully exist until it's able to handle those)

another example you've mentioned that doesn't pertain to my whole stance on the issue because I've always said to use the hack and pay attention,smh. For some reason, you keep ignoring that I say pay attention, but all your examples are drivers NOT paying attention. Do you understand the nonsensical route you're taking to defend your case? You not even arguing the actual point stated by the other side



Driver was on AP. Their hands were not on the wheel and not paying attention. (the thing the nag is trying to make happen)

The car slammed into the back of a parked fire truck.

Because AP is not capable of replacing a human driver. FSD will be.

Yet another silly example of a NON paying attention accident, when whole time I've stated to use hack and pay attention




You were the one who asserted,


I provided the statistics for your comparator. I think it is up to you to provide the statistics for all of the users who defeat the safety reminder.

no, you and your crew claim its as dangerous as texting and drunk driving, so the burden is on YALL to prove it true. So far yall listed one case of AP crash vs what.... 2.3 million car crashes due to texting/driving???? I don't know the exact number but you should get the point.

Please give me an example how a no nag FSD will prevent an accident driving on the highway,no lane switching, vs driving with AP set on 50mph and no nag hack on?????????

Sure. People drive at night when they are tired. They use AutoPilot appropriately as an aid to driving. When their attention fails from tiredness, the safety reminder alerts them. If they were defeating the safety reminder system, they would be at greater risk of the kind of “asleep at the wheel” crashes of drivers without a level two autonomous vehicle.

Remember, the TM3 is only level two autonomous.

FSD is not dangerous because it doesn’t exist.

.

Again, if you pay attention, you do not have to rely on FSD. I've always said pay attention when using the hack. I never advocated taking a nap. I never advocated going to sleep,but yet you and others keep using sleeping examples to support your case, smh. I guess you were taught that falling asleep at the wheel is considered paying attention? Of course not, that's why examples like these are useless because it doesn't support the actual debate of "using this hack and paying attention". Please google what paying attention means because that's what I've been saying the whole thread,but nobody seems to acknowledge it
 
Last edited:
  • Disagree
Reactions: Knightshade