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

Autopilot Brake checking

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Yes.
I'm pretty sure you haven't, so here is the link, smart-ass: https://www.tesla.com/sites/default/files/model_3_owners_manual_north_america_en.pdf

Thanks for posting that.

It makes it easier for me to point out the fact that the manual is a contradictory mess.

It claims that both TACC, and Traffic Light and Stop Sign Control are both in beta.

It also says not to use TACC on city streets. But, you can't use Traffic Light and Stop Sign Control unless you use at least TACC.

So is it or is it not intended for City Streets? It's a bit of a tie.

So lets use AP as the tie-breaker, and my interpretation is that it says it can be used on City Streets.

" Autosteer is intended for use only by a fully attentive driver on freeways and highways where access is limited by entry and exit ramps. If you choose to use Autosteer on residential roads, a road without a center divider, or a road where access is not limited, Autosteer may limit the maximum allowed cruising speed and the touchscreen displays a message indicating that speed is restricted. The restricted speed will be the speed limit of the road plus 5 mph (10 km/h)."
 
I had my first case of phantom braking today. Was on the highway with NoA on, the car was changing lanes from the left lane to the right, there was no car in front of me or next to me but for some reason when it was halfway through the lane change the car suddenly brakes, it completed the lane change though without aborting.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: SlimJim
Yes.
I'm pretty sure you haven't, so here is the link, smart-ass: https://www.tesla.com/sites/default/files/model_3_owners_manual_north_america_en.pdf


Not only have I read it- I often quote it.

It's pretty clear AP is intended for exactly the sort of roads on which I do about 95% of my driving (divided, controlled access, freeways).

And as I mention I can count on 1 hand the # of times I've had genuine phantom braking in almost 2 years (and nearly 20,000 miles) of ownership and driving.


I also mentioned I have my EB trigger set to late- which at least 2 other members have suggested is the fix for folks getting such braking far more often- in case anyone wants to try that.


See also this thread where an owner (not me) actually did iterative testing of all 3 settings and found a significant difference between early and the other settings for phantom braking events.

Reduce/eliminate phantom braking (trigger warning)



So maybe give that potential actual fix a try.

Or you can just complain more about a thing the rest of us rarely need to experience. Your choice I guess :)




So lets use AP as the tie-breaker, and my interpretation is that it says it can be used on City Streets.

" Autosteer is intended for use only by a fully attentive driver on freeways and highways where access is limited by entry and exit ramps. If you choose to use Autosteer on residential roads, a road without a center divider, or a road where access is not limited, Autosteer may limit the maximum allowed cruising speed and the touchscreen displays a message indicating that speed is restricted. The restricted speed will be the speed limit of the road plus 5 mph (10 km/h)."


"can" be? Obviously it CAN be- because you can turn it on there.

But the wording's pretty clear it's not INTENDED for use there.... says that right in the very first sentence.

Which is probably why so many folk complain about how it acts there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lUtriaNt
Not only have I read it- I often quote it.

"can" be? Obviously it CAN be- because you can turn it on there.
But the wording's pretty clear it's not INTENDED for use there.... says that right in the very first sentence.

Which is probably why so many folk complain about how it acts there.

FSD's long touted goal is city driving which involves more than just limited access divided roads and freeways unless my understanding of what city driving means is not what Tesla has in mind. And if that's the case, their website says something completely different:

From their order page:

Upcoming:
  • Autosteer on city streets.

Streets are not divided roadways and highways.

Also, their future of autopilot very clearly states what they envision for Autopilot, and it clearly shows driving on two-way crowded city streets:

https://tesla-cdn.thron.com/static/WFUGOU_the_future_of_autopilot.mp4-2000_XZFEMC.mp4?xseo=

So their intentions for Autopilot are far more ambitious than what's in the manual.

Phantom braking is a real issue they need to solve. And I should not have to lower the sensitivity of any safety feature to mitigate it. I have confidence they'll address the problems, but I'm not going to deny they exist, because they do.
 
Last edited:
I'm sorry too, but I'm with @Knightshade on being able to count on one hand the number of "phantom slowdowns" in 18 months. No idea what the variables are, why some people get more than others.

Reading this thread, it's kind of like reading a "my girlfriend" forum, where I'm thinking "I'm lucky, I guess, mine is way better than that".

And are we talking about braking or slowing down, and then with standard or reduced regen? I don't think I've ever gotten a real random braking event. I use 1 pedal driving, and actually hitting the brakes would be pretty dramatic.
.
 
Last edited:
  • Funny
  • Like
Reactions: lUtriaNt and KenC
And are we talking about braking or slowing down,

What I care about is when the car does something significantly different from what other road users or I would expect.

Since regen can slow the car as much as a normal brake application, I'm not considering exactly how hard I think I would have pushed on an ICE cars brake pedal.

The most common event for me is coming up behind a truck with AP engaged and getting the message to change to faster lane. I acknowledge with the turn signal and the car pulls into the agacent lane maintaining the same speed as when nearing the truck. Under some circumstances, as I draw level with the rear of the truck, my car suddenly slows - in a situation where I would normally expect to at least maintain speed or more likely accelerate to pass the truck.

The amount of slowing / braking varies from a tiny hesitation to quite a strong slowing say from 65 to 50 mph.

Other FB events like when going under a large gantry sign / may be with shadows are infrequent. Haven't had one in a few months but haven't driven much either! They have been sufficiently infrequent that when they happen they really catch me off guard. Again, sudden slowing from say 70 to 55. I would have to drive maybe 3 or 4000 miles with no such events to start thinking they weren't going to happen.

Finally, speed limiting based on road junctions and specific GPS locations tend to be less dramatic and on frequently travelled routes you get to know where they are. IMO while this catagory is still unexpected / unwanted braking, it isn't the same as the car 'seeing' something that triggers a brake application.
 
FSD's long touted goal is city driving which involves more than just limited access divided roads and freeways unless my understanding of what city driving means is not what Tesla has in mind


Yes- that's ABSOLUTELY their goal.

That is not at all what it is today

In fact- they're doing a complete re-write of the system in order to get to that goal.

Latest Elon-time estimate is 2-4 months before the update is pushed to fleet- and then maybe some new/better features depending on safety testing after that.



So being mad the system TODAY doesn't work how they HOPE it will in the FUTURE when they've explicitly said WE ARE NOT EVEN GONNA USE THIS SYSTEM IN THE FUTURE to REACH that goal seems a little odd to me?

Phantom braking is a real issue they need to solve. .


And again- they've in the midst of a complete re-write of the system toward those future goals.

Right NOW the system doesn't really understand moving vehicles outside the context of "all going the same direction as you are and not making turns"

In part because each camera is largely independent and there's little to no concept of object permanence or WTF an intersection is or how it works.

The re-write is intended to fix all that- so that unlike today the car might actually understand what it's seeing when someone, far far ahead, in an oncoming lane, turns across your lane with PLENTY of time to get clear without you slowing down.

But the system today can't do that.

Which is why it's only intended for use on roads.... where access is controlled by on/off ramps, not intersections... and all the traffic is going the same direction.




But in the meantime the braking early/medium/late setting appears to SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCE the issue for multiple owners.... so anyone currently heavily bothered by it might wanna try that themselves and see how it works out.
 
Yes- that's ABSOLUTELY their goal.
Ok so we agree their intension is city driving.
That is not at all what it is today

I think the majority is aware and would agree with this, but talking about the issues is useful on a forum. And I'm acknowledging they exist even on even roads that are supposed to be optimal. Because you're not having them doesn't mean other aren't.

And again- they've in the midst of a complete re-write of the system toward those future goals.

Right NOW the system doesn't really understand moving vehicles outside the context of "all going the same direction as you are and not making turns"

From my experience, it does a good enough job with two way roads except some situations where a car might make a quick turn as discussed already. That same braking can happen on a divided road as well if the light is green and is car is making a left turn. So blaming it on just two-way roads is ignoring the facts. I drive on divided roads, it has happened. It brakes too early at times.

Everyone understands why the car brakes in these scenarios,(it's trying to avoid plowing into a turning car) however, it needs tweaking and it's OK to talk about it. The more it's talked about and reported, the better the system becomes for everyone.

Now, braking on the freeway for no reason should not happen at all. No amount of adjusting forward collision is going to prevent that. And it's obvious location plays a role. Freeways here often run adjacent to and over residential areas with different speed limits. Just this morning, the speed limit reported 45 mph all along the 55 mph freeway. That's a problem, but luckily, it didn't cause any braking. However, there have been many times when it did. I've also had it drop to 35 resulting in a hard brake. It's recoverable but can cause an accident if the driver isn't ready. IMO, this is OK to be p@ssed about.

Another example. This morning, coming up on the left side of a delivery truck, clear lane, it braked. Not very hard but enough to cause anyone close behind to take evasive action. This is also a known issue.

It's not just me. I will add though, I'm no longer getting the braking for overpasses, so cross my fingers, that's taken care of. And today, it seemed to ignore the 45 mph limit along the freeway. If this keeps up, that's another big issue solved (somewhat).

I think in my case, you're mistaking my acknowledgement of the problem for being mad. I'm not mad. I know it takes time, and will get better. But some needs to be taken care of sooner than later.

I've read here from people that have HW 2.5 that the phantom braking seems to happen less. Don't you still have HW 2.5?
 
Last edited:
Ok so we agree their intension is city driving.

Their future intention.

With an entirely different set of software that isn't on cars today.



I think the majority is aware and would agree with this

I don't think they are- otherwise they wouldn't keep complaining how it "doesn't work right" in places Tesla themselves tells you, in the manual, it's not intended to

And people wouldn't keep hitting DISAGREE on posts pointing out Tesla themselves says so :)

, but talking about the issues is useful on a forum.


Other than trying to inform those unaware the issue is largely user error (plus possibly the braking setting the people complaining seem uninterested in checking out as a possible patch) I'm not sure how.


It's not like Tesla isn't aware the system has issues when used on roads it's not intended for- that's why they're doing a complete re-write of it.

So in what way is it useful for the 10,001st person to ALSO post "MAN THIS SYSTEM DOES NOT WORK WELL IN PLACES IT IS NOT INTENDED TO BE USED" exactly?


And I'm acknowledging they exist even on even roads that are supposed to be optimal. Because you're not having them doesn't mean other aren't.

And I'd again suggest folks try the "late" setting since multiple users reported that largely eliminated the issue for them (outside of incorrect map speed limits- which isn't at all an autopilot issue- it's a map database issue.... one that'll ALSO be fixed in the re-write since it'll read speed limit signs)




From my experience, it does a good enough job with two way roads except some situations where a car might make a quick turn as discussed already. That same braking can happen on a divided road as well if the light is green and is car is making a left turn. So blaming it on just two-way roads is ignoring the facts.

No it does not.

Because the manual lists TWO requirements.

Divided road.

AND

Controlled/limited access. Which means NOBODY IS EVER MAKING A TURN IN FRONT OF YOU.

So again it appears the only value here is educating folks unaware of what the manual says and why the system is working exactly as intended even if folks aren't using it that way.


Everyone understands why the car brakes in these scenarios


I don't really think they do.

See above for example.

however, it needs tweaking and it's OK to talk about it. The more it's talked about and reported, the better the system becomes for everyone.

Literally none of that is correct.

It does not need "tweaking" it needs "a complete re-write of the system"

Which is the thing Tesla is actually doing, and has been working on for quite a while.

because there's no amount of "tweaking" to the current system that will allow it to handle this stuff. Hence the re-write.


Talking EVEN MOAR about the limits of the current system-the one they're throwing in the trash in a few months- here has 0 impact on that.


Now, braking on the freeway for no reason should not happen at all. No amount of adjusting forward collision is going to prevent that

And yet- weirdly- owners have tested this and found it had a LOT of impact.


I even linked to an owner doing repeated testing on all 3 settings on the highway.

Did you read it? If so why do you not believe him? Have you tested it yourself?


. And it's obvious location plays a role. Freeways here often run adjacent to and over residential areas with different speed limits. Just this morning, the speed limit reported 45 mph all along the 55 mph freeway.

But again, none of that is a problem with AUTOPILOT.

It's a problem with incorrect speed limits in the database.

And it's ALSO going to be fixed (mostly) when the re-write starts reading speed limit signs.


I think in my case, you're mistaking my acknowledgement of the problem for being mad. I'm not mad. I know it takes time, and will get better. But some needs to be taken care of sooner than later.

2-4 months for the re-write to get to the public, in Elon Time, so maybe 3-6 if we're lucky?


I've read here from people that have HW 2.5 that the phantom braking seems to happen less. Don't you still have HW 2.5?

Nope. Finally got HW3 (after 4 cancelled appointments over 4 months for lack of parts previous) a couple of weeks ago.

I've only driven maybe 150-200 miles since then due to lockdown... I haven't noticed a significant difference, but then it's a pretty small sample set of data.... and none of the highways on which I drive ever had incorrect speed limit issues anyway....

Some local roads do- but they still do- no change there- and as discussed any weirdness in AP on such roads is an outside-intended-use case anyway.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DanDi58 and Runt8
Their future intention.

With an entirely different set of software that isn't on cars today.
No where has Tesla stated anything of the sort. Their intentions were clear a long time ago. The rewrite is a result of hitting a brick wall with the current code. Is the stop light / stop sign feature for the current or future intention?
It's not like Tesla isn't aware the system has issues when used on roads it's not intended for- that's why they're doing a comple
te re-write of it.
So why release the stopping at stop sign / stop light feature? I agree they know, but if you're right, their actions speak differently.
which isn't at all an autopilot issue- it's a map database issue.... one that'll ALSO be fixed in the re-write since it'll read speed limit signs)

Actually no, it's an autopilot issue for 2 reasons. 1. It's reading adjacent road data when it shouldn't. 2. It's being re-written because it can't read
speed limits. If it can't do something, then its to blame.
No it does not.

Because the manual lists TWO requirements.
Divided road.
AND

Controlled/limited access. Which means NOBODY IS EVER MAKING A TURN IN FRONT OF YOU.
People make left turns on green at stop lights where I live. Or, should I not be driving on roads with stop lights? I guess Tesla is messing with us.

because there's no amount of "tweaking" to the current system that will allow it to handle this stuff. Hence the re-write.

Unless you're on the inside, you can't possibly know this.
It's a problem with incorrect speed limits in the database.
In my case that's inaccurate. It's not the map data, but how it reads it. I've proven this over and over. If I stay on the middle or left lane at a certain point, it would not read the adjacent parallel road's limit until I move to the right lane in which case it matches the speed limit of the adjacent road. Maybe it's a map resolution issue? But incorrect speed limits? No. There have been times where it would say the correct speed limit on the same freeway. If the map data was bad, it would be wrong every time.
 
No where has Tesla stated anything of the sort.

Yes, they have. Repeatedly.


Their intentions were clear a long time ago. The rewrite is a result of hitting a brick wall with the current code.

Right.

They can't GET TO the "future state" that they're not at today with the current software.

So they're doing a re-write. This has been known for a while now.

Hence the pointlessness of discussing how the CURRENT software can't do the FUTURE stuff.

We've known that for a while.


Is the stop light / stop sign feature for the current or future intention?

Some of both.

Since the current code around that mostly deals with straight-line driving not a ton will need to change for THAT code when the re-write that understands intersections and turning comes along.

Plus by releasing it now they get to book FSD revenue to make Q2 profitable- fairly important thing at the moment.


So why release the stopping at stop sign / stop light feature? I agree they know, but if you're right, their actions speak differently.

See above.

The code to handle "sign/light on a road while going straight" isn't super complicated compared to the stuff they really need the re-write for- plus FSD revenue in Q2 instead of waiting for the re-write in Q4.

We do know there's stuff it's not very good at that the re-write should address though- like sometimes it's not SURE which light is relevant to which lane of the road (seems to especially be an issue with TURN LANE lights from posts I've seen)....


Actually no, it's an autopilot issue for 2 reasons. 1. It's reading adjacent road data when it shouldn't.

That's not an AP issue at all. AP code doesn't tell it what road it's on. (how could it? not like it reads road name signs).

There's 2 issues:

Map data (wrong speed limit in general)

GPS data (it thinks by GPS it's on some other road)

Neither is an AP issue- though they impact AP behavior by themselves getting something wrong.

You can't FIX "database says it's 55 mph not 70 mph here" with smarter AP code- other than sign reading which is coming in the re-write.


People make left turns on green at stop lights where I live. Or, should I not be driving on roads with stop lights? I guess Tesla is messing with us.

APs description in the manual still pretty clearly says it's not intended for such roads- even though it has some functionality there.

Again you're welcome to use it anyway- but sound silly complaining when it doesn't "work right" someplace they explicitly tell you it's not intended to work right.

Wait for the re-write and they should resolve that.


(THAT said- whoever wrote the stoplight documentation is an idiot- as he should've just said the functionality applies when TACC is on... that would've been exactly as true and accurate as what they actually wrote- without confusing the issue of APs operational domain)





Unless you're on the inside, you can't possibly know this.

You mean besides the people who are inside and/or actually write the code having said this in public? Go look up Karpathy discussing the rewrite (or Elon for that matter- or greentheonlys discussion of how the current code sees and works and makes decisions)


Or- just apply some basic logic.

If the CURRENT code could handle this stuff- why would they be scraping it for a complete re-write in the first place?




In my case that's inaccurate. It's not the map data, but how it reads it. I've proven this over and over. If I stay on the middle or left lane at a certain point, it would not read the adjacent parallel road's limit until I move to the right lane in which case it matches the speed limit of the adjacent road. Maybe it's a map resolution issue? But incorrect speed limits? No. There have been times where it would say the correct speed limit on the same freeway. If the map data was bad, it would be wrong every time.


If the map data says the GPS location of that left lane is actually the parallel road then yes, bad map data.

Because it's that, or your GPS resolution has a problem and it thinks you're physically ON that other road when you're not.

Either way that's not APs code causing the issue. (How could it be? the ONLY thing AP does is set your limit to whatever the map/location tells it to.... or to 45 if there's nothing in the database for the road)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: DanDi58
Yes, they have. Repeatedly.

Tesla has never made any official statement saying they can't get there with the current software.
We know that's not true because of the delays, the tidbits from the programmers and Elon. But show me any official statement from Tesla that the current software cannot do it.


Right.

They can't GET TO the "future state" that they're not at today with the current software.

The original point was about what their intentions were. City driving was it, as clearly pointed out already. You took it on a different tangent.
The original intention has always been city driving, from day one. Period end of story.

How they get there and with what software is irrelevant.


Some of both.

Since the current code around that mostly deals with straight-line driving not a ton will need to change for THAT code when the re-write that understands intersections and turning comes along.

Plus by releasing it now they get to book FSD revenue to make Q2 profitable- fairly important thing at the moment.

We were talking about using it on roads it was intended for. Who's talking about what code is capable of what? They released it to the public and according to you, limited access roadways don't have people turning in front of oncoming traffic. However, stop lights do. So, if the intention was for limited access only as you've repeatedly said, why release a feature that applies to other roads / streets?


That's not an AP issue at all. AP code doesn't tell it what road it's on. (how could it? not like it reads road name signs).

There's 2 issues:

Map data (wrong speed limit in general)

GPS data (it thinks by GPS it's on some other road)

Neither is an AP issue- though they impact AP behavior by themselves getting something wrong.

You can't FIX "database says it's 55 mph not 70 mph here" with smarter AP code- other than sign reading which is coming in the re-write.

Arguing what aspect of the data affects Autopilot is beside the point. Although I don't believe the map data is wrong. The point is, AP is not doing what it should as well as it should. It's like a customer saying "my car won't start", and the mechanic saying "well, it's not the car, it's the battery". To the customer, the cause of the problem is irrelevant.

To anyone reviewing or using AP, the cause is irrelevant. As far they're concerned, AP is behaving erratically. So yes, it's an AP problem.

APs description in the manual still pretty clearly says it's not intended for such roads- even though it has some functionality there.

Again you're welcome to use it anyway- but sound silly complaining when it doesn't "work right" someplace they explicitly tell you it's not intended to work right.

It's not about using it any which way I want. It's a feature that works at stop lights. I didn't release it. Tesla did. And they wrote the manual too. So your beef should be with Tesla.

(THAT said- whoever wrote the stoplight documentation is an idiot- as he should've just said the functionality applies when TACC is on... that would've been exactly as true and accurate as what they actually wrote- without confusing the issue of APs operational domain)

Or maybe it was meant for AP after all.


You mean besides the people who are inside and/or actually write the code having said this in public? Go look up Karpathy discussing the rewrite (or Elon for that matter- or greentheonlys discussion of how the current code sees and works and makes decisions)

Not one of them as said anything about not being able to tweak the current software to not brake too early when a car turns in front of oncoming traffic. If you saw that, please post a link.

If the CURRENT code could handle this stuff- why would they be scraping it for a complete re-write in the first place?

I was being very specific. There is a re-write happening because they've hit a wall. What that wall was, we don't know. We've already seen videos showing the car turning on its own from start to finish. Some years old. So the capability was there.

Yes, the rewrite should fix a lot of issues, but assuming the current software can't be tweaked is making an assumption based on no solid facts.
 
Last edited:
Tesla has never made any official statement saying they can't get there with the current software.

You mean besides where they've repeatedly mentioned for months and months now they're having to totally re-write the current software to get there?

But show me any official statement from Tesla that the current software cannot do it.

Elon Musk said:
Pretty much everything had to be rewritten, including our labeling software, so that it’s fundamentally ‘3D’ at every step from training through inference.


HAD to be rewritten.

Not "we decided to rewrite it for funsies!"

And the re-write has been ongoing for a long while now.




The original point was about what their intentions were. City driving was it, as clearly pointed out already. You took it on a different tangent.
The original intention has always been city driving, from day one. Period end of story.

How they get there and with what software is irrelevant.

It's 100% the only thing relevant if your topic is the capabilities of the CURRENT SOFTWARE.

Which it is.

The current software is intended for use on divided highways with controlled/limited access on/off said roads.

Says so right in the manual.

So complaining it doesn't work well in other places is ignoring the folks who are telling you why it's user error.


The fact the current software can't work well on city streets is why they are rewritting 'pretty much everything'


So yeah- that's pretty relevant.



according to you, limited access roadways don't have people turning in front of oncoming traffic. However, stop lights do.

Not "according to me" according to the actual definition of the term.

And there's limited access roadways with stoplights BTW (though they're not super common).



Arguing what aspect of the data affects Autopilot is beside the point.

It's really not though.

You can't correct an error if you don't know where it's coming from.

So knowing where it's coming from is CORE to the point of resolving it.


Although I don't believe the map data is wrong. The point is, AP is not doing what it should as well as it should. It's like a customer saying "my car won't start", and the mechanic saying "well, it's not the car, it's the battery".

No- it'd be like the mechanic saying "It's not the transmission, it's the battery"

Because you keep wanting to blame an irrelevant part of the system that you're unable to show how it could be responsible.

While I'm pointing out where to look to fix the actual problem


To the customer, the cause of the problem is irrelevant.

Not really.

Different parts are harder or easier to fix than others- and cheaper or costlier to fix than others if you're out of warranty (or it's a non-covered part)

As a customer I sure as hell care a LOT to know why something isn't working, specifically.


If it's "Speed limit database has the wrong #" that's MUCH easier to fix than "GPS receiver in car is incapable of being precise enough to know what road it's on" for example.


That first one can be fixed with a quick update of one database field.

That second one can't be fixed without hardware changes.

Pretty huge difference.



To anyone reviewing or using AP, the cause is irrelevant. As far they're concerned, AP is behaving erratically. So yes, it's an AP problem.

Except, of course, it's not one.

If you wanna blame other things that aren't the cause- knock yourself out. It's nothing but a waste of time, but hey it's your time.





It's not about using it any which way I want. It's a feature that works at stop lights. I didn't release it. Tesla did. And they wrote the manual too. So your beef should be with Tesla.


Not one of them as said anything about not being able to tweak the current software to not brake too early when a car turns in front of oncoming traffic. If you saw that, please post a link.

The setting appears to fix the braking problem for the roads AP is intended for use on.

It MIGHT help on other roads too (in fact it seems likely it would)- you'd need to try it and find out.

That'd probably be more useful than complaining about it more on here, but again you do you.



I was being very specific. There is a re-write happening because they've hit a wall. What that wall was, we don't know.

Sure we do.

Both Elon and Karpathy have talked about it at some length in various places.

There's an entire forum all about the autonomous driving stuff on here you might wanna check out.


We've already seen videos showing the car turning on its own from start to finish. Some years old. So the capability was there.

The "years old" one was mostly faked... in that they needed something like 500 miles of repeatedly running the like 10 mile same route to get enough footage to show ONE clean run.

So not a great example of anything.



Yes, the rewrite should fix a lot of issues, but assuming the current software can't be tweaked is making an assumption based on no solid facts.


Other than the fact they wouldn't have bothered with an almost total re-write if they just could tweak the current code.


It'd be like sending your car to the junkyard because it got a flat tire.
 
You mean besides where they've repeatedly mentioned for months and months now they're having to totally re-write the current software to get there?
Who’s they?
Elon Musk said:

Pretty much everything had to be rewritten, including our labeling software, so that it’s fundamentally ‘3D’ at every step from training through inference.

Tesla already demoed their old software navigating city streets years ago. Musk actually believed FSD was capable by the end of 2017. They’ve since learned it’s not as reliable as they thought and their approach did not take advantage of the new hardware and that using the cams to simulate a 3d scene is superior.
The current software is intended for use on divided highways with controlled/limited access on/off said roads.

Says so right in the manual.
The manual makes no mention of ‘current software’. If you mean ‘autosteer’, sure. And the fact they released stop light / stop sign recognition and response means even Tesla disagrees with the manual.
Not "according to me" according to the actual definition of the term.

And there's limited access roadways with stoplights BTW (though they're not super common).

Don’t beat that strawman up too badly.
So knowing where it's coming from is CORE to the point of resolving it.
Agreed, but that’s still beside the point.
While I'm pointing out where to look to fix the actual problem

The average Joe does not care about the underpinnings of AP.
That first one can be fixed with a quick update of one database field.
If it was that simple assuming it’s the problem or part of it, it should be fixed already.
The setting appears to fix the braking problem for the roads AP is intended for use on.
The setting has nothing to do with braking because of the wrong speed limit detected.
The "years old" one was mostly faked... in that they needed something like 500 miles of repeatedly running the like 10 mile same route to get enough footage to show ONE clean run.
So not a great example of anything.
It was an example of the old software actually making turns and navigating city streets as evidenced in the video. The car did it without the driver touching the steering wheel.
Other than the fact they wouldn't have bothered with an almost total re-write if they just could tweak the current code.

Bug fixes are tweaks. Overpass issue largely solved (for me at least). So yeah, the current software can be tweaked.

I never said the current software can be tweaked to achieve reliable, bug free full self driving on city streets like the type needed to help fulfill Musk’s Robotaxi promise.[/quote][/quote]
 
Who’s they?

I already told you.

At least 2-3 times now.

With specific names including the CEO and the head of Tesla AI.

If you're still asking it's not a question in good faith at this point.



Tesla already demoed their old software navigating city streets years ago.

Again- I debunked this claim like 2 posts ago.

Are you just ignoring 90% of what you're replying to now?

They did roughly fifty runs on the same route to get enough "good" footage to edit into ONE demo video.

That software was utter, utter, near-vaporware level garbage.

Which is why it's 4 years later and the car still doesn't do much of what you saw there- and they're in midst of a complete re-write of it.


Like you've been told 3 or 4 times already. Notice a trend?



Musk actually believed FSD was capable by the end of 2017

And yet- it wasn't.

And still isn't.

See again they're having to almost totally re-write it.



The manual makes no mention of ‘current software’. If you mean ‘autosteer’, sure.


It does actually.

The VERY FIRST PAGE describes what the CURRENT version of the software it applies to is.



Agreed, but that’s still beside the point.

You agree knowing the cause of the problem is the core of solving the problem....but then ALSO think that's besides the point?

If solving the problem isn't the point... what is?


The average Joe does not care about the underpinnings of AP.

Ok.

And I don't care if he's too lazy or dumb to read the manual and understand when a problem is user error like not understanding why the car brakes when he uses it someplace it's not intended for.




If it was that simple assuming it’s the problem or part of it, it should be fixed already.

It has been. Many many times.

The database is wrong in LOTS of places.

Every time there's a map update we get a flood of people mentioning places it was fixed since the last version.

But there's so many errors (think about the # of speed limit signs in the world) it's slow to get them all fixed.

It's VERY VERY simple to fix ONE database error. It's very hard to get a perfect 100% correct database.

None of that has anything to do with how the current version of AP does anything though. It can't magically fix the map database no matter how you "tweak" it.




The setting has nothing to do with braking because of the wrong speed limit detected.

Because the system does not detect speed limits at all

So again- there's nothing in the AP code to tweak to fix that.

It's not an AP problem- it's a database problem.

The re-write will work around this limitation by actually reading signs.

(though I suspect that still won't fix EVERY issue as I know there's at least many country roads where there's no visible sign for a while after turning on to em, and I"m sure at least some are wrong in the database)


There really isn't any "always 100% perfect" solution for that.


It was an example of the old software actually making turns and navigating city streets as evidenced in the video. The car did it without the driver touching the steering wheel.

That's flatly false.

Again they had to run that short route dozens and dozens of times to edit together enough short snippets to make it look like it did that all without touching the wheel.

They touched the wheel a ton in reality.

Tesla had 180 disengagements through only 550 total miles driven to be able to mock up that fake demo video.

That means the software failed and needed a human to take over once every ~3 miles on average. That's garbage

Stop citing fake news as a source of facts please.
 
I already told you.

At least 2-3 times now.

With specific names including the CEO and the head of Tesla AI.

If you're still asking it's not a question in good faith at this point.

Yeah,but they never said anywhere the current software was not capable of city driving.

Again- I debunked this claim like 2 posts ago.

You gave an opinion and appear to be calling Tesla liars and accusing them of false advertising.

And yet- it wasn't.

And still isn't.

See again they're having to almost totally re-write it.

Sure, but that brings us right back to the points made several posts back. Their intention was driving on
city streets way back then and still is today.

It does actually.

The VERY FIRST PAGE describes what the CURRENT version of the software it applies to is.

Here's your statement:
The current software is intended for use on divided highways with controlled/limited access on/off said roads.

Says so right in the manual

Show me in the manual where it says that?

You agree knowing the cause of the problem is the core of solving the problem....but then ALSO think that's besides the point?

If solving the problem isn't the point... what is?

The point was, the average Joe doesn't care about the underpinnings of AP. As far they are concerned, AP is the problem.

It has been. Many many times.

The database is wrong in LOTS of places.

Then it's not fixed.

It's not an AP problem- it's a database problem.
So then, why does the same same stretch of road in the same place show one speed one day and another day a different speed? Is the database dynamic?

That's flatly false.

Again they had to run that short route dozens and dozens of times to edit together enough short snippets to make it look like it did that all without touching the wheel.

They touched the wheel a ton in reality

Did they do the same thing with the current video on their site?
 
Last edited:
Yeah,but they never said anywhere the current software was not capable of city driving.

Other than where they've been saying they had to totally re-write the software to be capable of reaching their long-stated goal of city driving and have been doing so since last year and hope to be able to release it by end of this year?

It's frankly baffling you keep misunderstanding basic facts this badly.




You gave an opinion and are calling Tesla liars and accusing them of false advertising.

No, I presented documented facts you seem unwilling to accept. That's on you.

The fact it took Tesla 550 miles of running that short route over and over, and the fact they had 180 disengagements over those 550 miles, are all documented in California state records as required by law.

I don't believe Tesla ever claimed it was done in 1 take- so they didn't technically lie. They just let folks like you assume.



Sure, but that brings us right back to the points made several posts back. Their intention was driving on
city streets way back then and still is today.

Yes and they do not intend to deliver that with the current software

Like you've been told like 6 times now. Including by Elon Musk in a direct quote.




Here's your statement:


Show me in the manual where it says that?

Dude.

Again- the current version of the software is listed on PAGE ONE OF THE MANUAL.

Where AP is intended to be used is listed RIGHT UNDER THE DESCRIPTION OF THE FEATURE in the manual.


it was already quoted by several folks throughout the thread.

Why do you keep repeating things you've already been given the answer to multiple times?





The point was, the average Joe doesn't care about the underpinnings of AP. As far they are concerned, AP is the problem.

And they are wrong.

Hence why I bothered explaining what actually IS the problem so they might understand what's actually wrong instead of continuing to complain about something that's not even broken.

If they are uninterested in understanding the actual problem- that's on them.


Then it's not fixed.

You again don't seem to understand what the actual issue is- nor why nothing in autopilot code can really "fix" it.



So then, why does the same same stretch of road in the same place show one speed one day and another day a different speed?

It can't.

Nor did you claim it did.

In fact you specifically claimed the speed was different in the far left lane and far right lane.

Which- and lemme know if you need me to go into this in more depth- is not the same place


I then gave you 2 specific reasons why that might be the case- neither of which have anything to do with AP code.

You- yourself- have been unable to offer any way/reason/explaination of how it could be related to AP code. Because there isn't one.




Did they do the same thing with the current video on their site?


No, but that's not the "years old" one you were referring to... which as explained to you is largely special effects not a real demo.

The one in the video from about a year ago was a single run, on a predetermined route running unknown (not public) code. For all we know it was an early beta test of the re-write. Or possibly it was just specially written to handle that specific route.

We do know none of the demo rides given to guests present that same day were done using the same system (all the demo rides were level 2 human supervised- rather than the one-time-only level 3 demo used to shoot the video).

So whatever they used- it ain't what's on your car.