Autonomous Car Progress

[stopcrazypp]

Tesla flied this with the SEC in 2013:

Form 8-K

Are you saying that only applies to investors?

I'm simply saying Elon's statements are not a contract with the owners, so it's not something they can easily sue for. I've seen suggestions whatever Elon says is essentially a verbal agreement with the owners, but that's not the case, as there is no acknowledgement/agreement between the two parties in the given statements. It would be a different case for example if an owner walked up to Elon, Elon told them the car would have L5, and owner acknowledged back to Elon they would buy the car based on that promise and did so (and even then, many areas have limits on the value a verbal agreement can apply to, so that agreement may not be valid either).

Owners however can sue for what have been specifically promised on the order page (there's already been cases that had been settled on that in regards to AP). So for owners, it's best to look very closely (and take screen shots, as the website changes constantly) at what you are actually ordering when you do so, and don't focus on what Elon is saying to the media.

Investors are different, as there are laws and precedence that establish what a CEO says publicly has legal consequences for them (which SEC sometimes steps in, although generally not for heavily caveated forward looking statements).

There is zero evidence that Tesla has applied to any regulator anywhere for approval of an L3+ system (or even L2). They can't use this as an excuse when they have failed to get to a level where they themselves are willing to present it as L3+ capable. In the USA the general question is "what regulator?" and "what laws"? They are out testing "city streets beta" without having involved a regulator in any way, which when probed by a possible regulator, they answered with "this has such minimal functionality that it does not fall into an area that is regulated".
I'll start buying the regulator issue when they actually apply to one and are denied.

But that argument is predicated on Elon saying regulatory approval being the only barrier (instead of one of the barriers), but even in those Autonomy Day statements that's not the case. It was made clear there are more steps along the way (first being "feature complete", second "person in the car does not need to pay attention", third step is to a level or reliability where they apply for regulatory approval).

 

[mikes_fsd]

Your mistake is that you only look at the geofence area in Chandler and you compare that with FSD Beta.

I am sorry, you want me to fall into the trap of reading some BS disengagement report from Cali DMV?

I compare what is publicly available for users to record without being filtered by the company. And what I've seen from both, Tesla hands down has way more capability than the gimped Waymo!

 

[diplomat33]

And what I've seen from both, Tesla hands down has way more capability than the gimped Waymo!

It is laughable that you believe that. Waymo is literally a L4 autonomous car that can do all the driving tasks. There is dozens, if not, hundreds of capabilities that Waymo has, that Tesla lacks. For example, Waymo cars can pull over automatically for emergency vehicles, which Tesla's FSD can't do.

You just choose to see what you want to see.

 

[mikes_fsd]

It is laughable that you believe that.

Have a good laugh then! Because I believe what I see.

This is what I find laughable and scary at the same time... all while Waymo is posturing that they are safety first.
What a scam!

 

[diplomat33]

Have a good laugh then! Because I believe what I see.

This is what I find laughable and scary at the same time... all while Waymo is posturing that they are safety first.
What a scam!

Really? What about the dozens of videos of Waymo driving well? Do you believe those?

You just choose to see what you want to see. You focus on a video where Waymo makes a mistake. You ignore videos where Waymo drives perfectly. And you ignore the dozens of FSD beta videos where FSD Beta almost crashes. You are the quintessential Tesla fanboy.

 

[gearchruncher]

I'm simply saying Elon's statements are not a contract with the owners, so it's not something they can easily sue for. I've seen suggestions whatever Elon says is essentially a verbal agreement with the owners, but that's not the case, as there is no acknowledgement/agreement between the two parties in the given statements.

Appreciate your POV. I don't see how reading an Elon tweet (an "official" source) is any different than reading a Tesla.com page (another official source). They are both in writing, not verbal. Neither is referenced in the purchase agreement. Both are acknowledged by Tesla as official places for product information. Tesla has no knowledge that you did or did not read it, so what bilateral agreement exists?

Owners however can sue for what have been specifically promised on the order page (there's already been cases that had been settled on that in regards to AP). So for owners, it's best to look very closely (and take screen shots, as the website changes constantly) at what you are actually ordering when you do so, and don't focus on what Elon is saying to the media.

That may be valid today, but what was shown to someone that purchased in 2016? You think they accurately explained what you were actually ordering with EAP and FSD as part of the checkout process?

I actually have a screenshot of my 2018 checkout page. You know what it says for the "build details?" "Enhanced autopilot." That's it. No details as to what that does. I think it's false to believe that Tesla's checkout process in the past did a reasonable job of indicating what you are purchasing. The Tesla.com/autopilot page sure told a story though. It even said the car uses "A forward-facing radar with enhanced processing provides additional data about the world on a redundant wavelength that is able to see through heavy rain, fog, dust and even the car ahead."

Oh wait. It still says that. So much for Tesla being careful about what they are selling.

 

[gearchruncher]

And what I've seen from both, Tesla hands down has way more capability than the gimped Waymo!

We're talking about safety critical autonomous systems here. One of the "capabilities" of an autonomous vehicle is not killing the passengers during the trip, and actually completing the trip. There are no points for 1000 cool tricks when everyone dies on the 1001th one.

You'd seriously get in the back seat of a Tesla running city streets v8 beta with no human in the driver seat before you'd get in a Waymo?

It’s a bold move Cotton. Let’s see if it pays off.

 

[stopcrazypp]

Appreciate your POV. I don't see how reading an Elon tweet (an "official" source) is any different than reading a Tesla.com page (another official source). They are both in writing, not verbal.

Note the quoted sources are verbal statements by Elon made in a podcast and on Autonomy Day, respectively, not tweets.

Neither is referenced in the purchase agreement. Both are acknowledged by Tesla as official places for product information. Tesla has no knowledge that you did or did not read it, so what bilateral agreement exists?

Right, which is why it's not part of the agreement when you buy the car.

As for "official places for product information" based on some wording in an old SEC filing, and somehow that making it part of the purchase agreement, that's a huge stretch. Especially given the actual wording does not say twitter is a source for product information (much less to be incorporated into vehicle purchase agreements), only for "additional information" on Tesla.
"Interested in keeping up with Tesla?
For more information on Tesla and its products, please visit: teslamotors.com

For more information for Tesla investors, please visit: ir.teslamotors.com

For the latest information from Tesla, including press releases and the Tesla blog, please visit: teslamotors.com/press

For additional information, please follow Elon Musk’s and Tesla’s Twitter accounts: twitter.com/elonmusk and twitter.com/TeslaMotors"

Even in written press releases, that does not constitute an agreement with owners. To keep it on a related topic, take for example Audi's very sure sounding promises that the 2019 Audi A8's Traffic Jam Pilot would be SAE Level 3 (they even issued a detailed written press release linked below) and then reneging on that promise later on (using the "regulation" excuse you say Tesla can't use). Owner's can't sue Audi for that given when they order the car, it doesn't say it's L3.
https://audimediacenter-a.akamaihd....m_pilot.pdf?1504179630&disposition=attachment

That may be valid today, but what was shown to someone that purchased in 2016? You think they accurately explained what you were actually ordering with EAP and FSD as part of the checkout process?

I actually have a screenshot of my 2018 checkout page. You know what it says for the "build details?" "Enhanced autopilot." That's it. No details as to what that does. I think it's false to believe that Tesla's checkout process in the past did a reasonable job of indicating what you are purchasing. The Tesla.com/autopilot page sure told a story though. It even said the car uses "A forward-facing radar with enhanced processing provides additional data about the world on a redundant wavelength that is able to see through heavy rain, fog, dust and even the car ahead."

I'm talking about the order page (as in all the info that is shown along the way, while you are clicking through the options while ordering), not the build details. For example, this is what was shown for EAP back in 2018 from what I can find:

Tesla decreases the price of Enhanced Autopilot after delivery temporarily, still hasn't fixed Full Self-Driving price - Electrek

The other pages however, like the general autopilot page you mentioned, are not specifically tied to the order or even that specific model, so does not necessarily apply, and can't be relied on as part of the "contract".

Oh wait. It still says that. So much for Tesla being careful about what they are selling.

Tesla have not indicated they are removing the radar unit from the cars yet. As a sanity check, the new Model S product page says "Forward-facing radar provides a long-range view of distant objects". It's only Elon saying they are eliminating reliance on radar in upcoming Beta software, but nothing yet from Tesla saying they are eliminating the hardware. This is again a prime example as an owner, that you should pay attention to (and keep a record of) the pages when you order, not to what Elon is saying in a given day (especially inaccurate paraphrasing which typically gets the nuances wrong, I'm pretty sure through the typical telephone game that happens, some people have already interpreted things to mean that all Tesla coming out of the factory today already have no radar in them).

Model S

Model S is built for speed and range, with beyond ludicrous acceleration, unparalleled performance and a refined design.

www.tesla.com

 

[mikes_fsd]

What about the dozens of videos of Waymo driving well? Do you believe those?

Did you watch the actual video of Waymo sh!tting its pants?
It is the most simple of "construction" zones -- in reality just a row of cones placed very neatly (not even in the lane, but on the lane line) and no construction of any kind in sight.

 

[Microterf]

We don't know who is going to win FSD, but we all know the advantages/disadvantages of most companies approach. Words don't mean anything, it's all about actions.

What I will say is that the Tesla seems very confident in their approach as the redesigned MS/X seem to have the same camera layout as all previous cars. The one thing I wasn't sure of is the front repeater cameras, and whether they give enough visibility to cross traffic. Since they didn't change those on the new model, I'm assuming Tesla is confident that it does.

If that's the case, and then they have the clearest path to generalized FSD (not giving a prediction as to how long the software will take)
For everyone else, it's a matter of who can scale the quickest with HD mapping

 

[diplomat33]

Did you watch the actual video of Waymo sh!tting its pants?
It is the most simple of "construction" zones -- in reality just a row of cones placed very neatly (not even in the lane, but on the lane line) and no construction of any kind in sight.

Yes, I saw the video. Waymo messed up. And the Remote Assistance made the Waymo screw up. But you can't judge all of Waymo based on one video. Even you should know that! You have to look at the total picture. You can't just cherry pick one video. There are other videos of Waymo handling construction zones just fine. And there are lots of videos of Waymo driving just great.

 

[mikes_fsd]

Yes, I saw the video. Waymo messed up. And the Remote Assistance made the Waymo screw up.

The fact that Waymo Driver needed remote assistance for that "situation" is telling in itself, but I'll leave you to your fantasy!

And there are lots of videos of Waymo driving just great.

JJ confirmed that they normally bypass ALL construction, in a desert, in a tiny sandbox, with every inch of the roads they travel on mapped and massaged.

Yes, we've seen videos where they groom the route to the point that my dog could drive the car and yet Waymo fails miserably when a cone shows up on the road.

That's not autonomy... that is a waste money!

 

[dhanson865]

My point is he was well aware the car could disengage at anytime, but decided to watch a video on a portable DVD player anyways. Knowing the specific about not designed for cross traffic is irrelevant, as he was not looking at the road anyways.

I'll repeat what I said in 2017

We can now say conclusively that he was NOT watching harry potter.

https:// dms.ntsb.gov/public/59500-59999/59989/604759.pdf (note the URL is no longer valid as the database has been moved) The new file is at NTSB Docket - Docket Management System pay attention to Electronic Devices Examination Factual Report in spot 40 on the list.

The
National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB)Vehicle Recorder Division received the following devices

Device 1:
Laptop Computer
Device 1 Serial Number:
ECN0CX305107503

Device 2:
Chromebook
Device 2 Serial Number:
FCNLCX051001518

Device 3:
Chromebit
Device 3 Serial Number:100A
-
CM2XXNF

Device 4:
Micro
SD
Memory Card
Device 4 Serial Number:
n/a

The hard drive was removed from the laptop and was imaged using forensic software. The image of the hard drive was reviewed. The most recent accessed, modified, and created files were from April 6, 2016. The screen of the laptop was broken so the clock drift of the laptop could not be determined. Without the offset of the laptop clock to real time, it could not be concluded whether or not the driver was on the laptop at the time of the crash. No Harry Potter movie file was found on the hard drive of the device

The micro SD memory card contained photos and music files. The photos were not pertinent to the investigation and the music included parts of the Harry Potter movies’ soundtracks.

So no proof of a Harry Potter DVD or movie file was documented. No authority in the case has said he was watching a movie. I think we can safely say he wasn't watching a movie.

after months (now years) of people saying he was watching a DVD it should be repeated loud and clear that there was no DVD player or DVD media in the car.

The report found a laptop, a chromebook, and some SD cards. None of which had a movie on them.

 

[mikes_fsd]

I'll repeat what I said in 2017

Please stop, the driver was NOT paying attention, he was watching EVERYTHING else BUT the road -- the end result is tragic history.

 

[dhanson865]

Please stop, the driver was NOT paying attention, he was watching EVERYTHING else BUT the road -- the end result is tragic history.

Yes, but saying he was watching a movie is as accurate as saying he was dancing with a giraffe in the back seat. It just didn't happen. There was no giraffe, there were no DVDs, and there were no digital movie files.

I'm not saying he was paying attention, I'm saying stop spreading misinformation.

You don't know that he was watching anything. He could have been asleep, passed out, staring off into the distance with unfocussed eyes, could have been in the middle of a seizure.

You just don't know what he was looking at.

But you sure as heck know he wasn't watching a movie, BECAUSE NO MOVIE EXISTED IN THE CAR.

 

[Doggydogworld]

Did you watch the actual video of Waymo sh!tting its pants?
It is the most simple of "construction" zones -- in reality just a row of cones placed very neatly (not even in the lane, but on the lane line) and no construction of any kind in sight.

I've also seen FSD Beta drive directly at those giant barricades with diagonal stripes and "Road Closed" signs on them. Multiple times.

The Waymo van originally plotted a course toward the left lane, but asked Fleet Response for help. The humans screwed up (presumably telling it to use the right lane). What will Tesla cars do when unsure? Take the best guess and plow ahead? Ask a remote monitor? Stop and wait for Roadside Assistance?

 

[gearchruncher]

Did you watch the actual video of Waymo sh!tting its pants?

Did you watch the actual video of a Tesla turning in front of oncoming cars repeatedly in a way that would have injured multiple people if it wasn't for the active driver in the seat reacting in millseconds?

You keep pointing out Waymo videos where it doesn't do a great job and nobody dies, and ignoring the litany of Tesla videos where it doesn't do a great job and someone would have died.

If your threshold is one video of less than perfect operation indicating that a system is crap, then Tesla's system is equally worthless. Pick an argument and at least apply it consistently.

And if you're going to use something tech leads at the company have said, don't forget that CJ said "Elon’s tweet does not match engineering reality."

 

[Dan D.]

Yes, but saying he was watching a movie is as accurate as saying he was dancing with a giraffe in the back seat. It just didn't happen. There was no giraffe, there were no DVDs, and there were no digital movie files.

I'm not saying he was paying attention, I'm saying stop spreading misinformation.

You don't know that he was watching anything. He could have been asleep, passed out, staring off into the distance with unfocussed eyes, could have been in the middle of a seizure.

You just don't know what he was looking at.

But you sure as heck know he wasn't watching a movie, BECAUSE NO MOVIE EXISTED IN THE CAR.

As you have read the NTSB report you should agree that what they said was they could not prove there was a movie in the car, nor could they prove that he had been watching a movie in any manner.

However he might have been watching a movie, just they could not prove it.

His laptop could not be operated post-crash but did not contain any movie. The Chromebook & Chromebit were too damaged to investigate. It is possible to watch a streaming movie using these devices and they could not determine whether or not he was doing so. Certainly he was distracted.

It is incorrect to state that he was watching a movie, also incorrect to state he was not watching a movie. NTSB found it to be inconclusive as to whether he was watching a movie.

 

[mark95476]

Only look at the good and ignore the bad -- Isn't that the very definition of cherry-picking? And you call others fanboys...

Dozens of Waymo videos -- There's ~2000 people using FSDbeta and probably dozens of FSDbeta videos posted weekly.

I've watched Waymo vehicles drive around Mountain View for years.
I've had my Tesla for ~11 months, drive nearly daily, and use FSD regularly. That's why I have confidence in Tesla's AP and FSD, even though I doubt I'll use city autosteer, except when I traveling.

Really? What about the dozens of videos of Waymo driving well? Do you believe those?

You just choose to see what you want to see. You focus on a video where Waymo makes a mistake. You ignore videos where Waymo drives perfectly. And you ignore the dozens of FSD beta videos where FSD Beta almost crashes. You are the quintessential Tesla fanboy.

 

[gearchruncher]

There's ~2000 people using FSDbeta and probably dozens of FSDbeta videos posted weekly.
I've watched Waymo vehicles drive around Mountain View for years.

71 non-employees. You both knock waymo for lack of exposure and then say you've been watching them for years? Waymo has 600 vehicles for years vs Tesla's 2k for a few months. Which has more experience?

I've seen those FSD videos. Are you saying they give you confidence? It's cherry picking to ignore the ones where Tesla's FSD massively fails too.

I've had my Tesla for ~11 months, drive nearly daily, and use FSD regularly. That's why I have confidence in Tesla's AP and FSD, even though I doubt I'll use city autosteer, except when I traveling.

You have "confidence" in Tesla's AP. Would you get in the back of the car with nobody in the driver's seat and let the car drive 50 miles on the highway with the AP that is in your car? What about 5 miles in a "FSD beta" car in downtown SFO?

If not, Apples and Oranges to Waymo, and it's clear that useful, broad, L4 autonomy is a long way off from either Waymo or Tesla.