Autopilot improvement in "MarioKart Rainbow Road" firmware update?

[kort677]

someone believed a salesman and didn't do any due diligence

 

[kort677]

my AP will Detect the 80 and THEN THE 60 and now my Auto Steer will be limited to 65 mph in an 80 mph zone. I can always put pressure on the accelerator with my foot and bring it up to the correct speed until another 80 mph sign appears, but if it has another Truck Speed limit sign, It will happen again. This is only on I-90 that this happens since secondary roads don't have Separate Truck speeds.

the AP should NOT restrict speeds on roads like I-90

 

[green1]

someone believed a salesman and didn't do any due diligence

Au contraire, I knew exactly what I was getting in to, and am still glad I did. It's an awesome vehicle and I love driving it.

Of course, that was before they crippled AP in 7.1, luckilly, people on this forum posted about this so I was able to avoid the downgrade to 7.1 and thus stop Tesla from taking away some of the features they gave me when I picked up the car.

But it doesn't have to be all or nothing. Just because I love the car, doesn't get Tesla out of the obligations they made.

 

[green1]

the AP should NOT restrict speeds on roads like I-90

And yet it does, and it restricts speeds on all sorts of roads that it shouldn't, because Tesla chose to use an extremely flawed methodology to decide which roads should be restricted.
It bases it on the speed limit, which the car has no clue about, and whether or not the road is a divided highway, which again the car has no clue about.

It's a simple example of the programming axiom "garbage in, garbage out" Using this as a means of taking away a feature from people was incredibly stupid.

Yet a lot of people defend it. Of course a lot of people would defend Tesla no matter what they did. That sort of rabid fanboism really isn't healthy, nor constructive.

There's nothing wrong with liking a car, and a company, and not agreeing with every thing they do, especially when what they do hurts their customers, their cause, and themselves in the long term.

 

[bhzmark]

No, they are completely true. You've just been trying to spin it to protect Tesla's image.


It's not all or nothing. This is the car for me, I love it, and use the AP on a daily basis. On 7.0. I have the right to stay on the software I chose.


I bought my car with autopilot used from Tesla after 7.0 was released. One of the features advertised was the autopilot convenience features. The false statements included that the car would drive hands free on-ramp to off-ramp, and that it would automatically change the speed of the vehicle in response to speed limit changes, and that it could be summoned to your front door from your garage on private property. These were stated to be rolled out in a few months after the fall of 2014, and in no possible universe are we still within that timeframe. I have discussed it with Tesla, and they (hillariously) told me they would forward my concern to my local service centre, as if them not developing the software could be fixed by a ranger visit or something.


I don't have time to read the 47 page document right now, if there's a particular passage that both applies to the jurisdiction I live in, and states that automakers must remove features that they already sold to a customer, after the customer paid, and the car has been delivered, please point out the location within the document.

1. your statements that various Tesla actions are "illegal" are unsupported and unsupportable and are based on no recognizable concept of criminal or civil liability in the US (or I would guess Canada). Ask any lawyer to educate you, or read the pdf I pointed you to educate yourself on the real risks to car companies from product safety negligence vs. false advertising.

2. "I have the right to stay on the software" Your proliferation of "rights" that you find everywhere similarly shows a confused understanding of how legal rights work and when it is relevant to assert them.

3. Where exactly, precisely, in the purchase agreement, or other documentation or materials supplied to you and relied on by you when you made your purchase decision did Tesla say "the car would drive hands-free on-ramp to off-ramp" and that "it would change speed of the vehicle in response to speed limit changes"? And what related comments did they also make at the time that autopilot features were in a beta state?

If those features were so important to you, did you specify those requirements in your purchase agreement?

The website at the time didn't say totally hands free: Model S | Tesla Motors

from the blog post at the time: Your Autopilot has arrived | Tesla Motors

You would be better off, and would be taken more seriously, if you acknowledged the very real legal risk management issues that Tesla has to deal with and for which they must minimize the risk of something catastrophic happening with a car in AP.

One can argue reasonably that as a technical matter a certain AP feature should or shouldn't be implemented or made less restrictive because empirically it would or wouldn't have certain safety consequences.

But you can't argue reasonably that you are legally entitled to certain technical functions or features no matter their safety consequences.

 

[green1]

As you refuse to ground any of your assertions in reality, or on the obvious nature of what's going on. Refuse to take previous precedent in to account, and ignore all statements made by Tesla themselves as to the feature they are selling in exchange for the money provided, I give up.

Believe whatever you want. You're wrong on a millon different levels, but believe whatever you want. It won't help you, it won't help Tesla, but it might make you feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

I am legally entitled to exactly what Tesla said they would provide, for the price I paid, barring any laws stating otherwise (which nobody has ever found)

I'm sorry you won't see reason, you also will not see any more replies to your absurd assertions.

 

[kort677]

And yet it does, and it restricts speeds on all sorts of roads that it shouldn't, because Tesla chose to use an extremely flawed methodology to decide which roads should be restricted.
It bases it on the speed limit, which the car has no clue about, and whether or not the road is a divided highway, which again the car has no clue about.

It's a simple example of the programming axiom "garbage in, garbage out" Using this as a means of taking away a feature from people was incredibly stupid.

Yet a lot of people defend it. Of course a lot of people would defend Tesla no matter what they did. That sort of rabid fanboism really isn't healthy, nor constructive.

There's nothing wrong with liking a car, and a company, and not agreeing with every thing they do, especially when what they do hurts their customers, their cause, and themselves in the long term.

I have never been restricted on an interstate style highway, the balance of your post IMHO is hackneyed hyperbole

 

[RogerHScott]

I'm sorry you won't see reason

I must have missed the post where the community appointed you arbiter of reason.
I suspect any attempt on your part to assert your claimed legal rights in this matter will
be met with a bucket of cold water reality in the face and untold legal bills with no return.

 

[Pinarello]

I upgraded to the Mario Kart Rainbow release about a week ago. As someone who uses AP 80% or more of my driving, I immediately noticed that it may have forgot some of what it learned on roads I regularly drive. After driving those roads again for the past week, the AP seems to have relearned the roads and is now performing better than the prior release. Could all be in my mind, but that's how it appeared it me.

 

[davidc18]

Here is a fact. With V 7.0 autopilot worked without any restrictions. With version 7.1 autopilot now incorrectly restricts the speed on a variety of mis identified roads, including freeways, interstates and express lanes. It is only a matter of time before these newly imposed restrictions cause an accident when an MS suddenly and incorrectly slows down. Tesla has removed a working autopilot system and replaced it (without permission) with a version that no longer works correctly. To make matters worse, given the technology in the car, it will never be able to correctly identify which road it is actually on, so we will never again have a "working" autopilot unless the restrictions are removed.

 

[bhzmark]

cause an accident when an MS suddenly and incorrectly slows down.

That is a risk. I suppose. I think it is a very small and unlikely risk. It would likely be on a highway with no pedestrians around and would require a car following closely behind at speed and which would fail to take notice of Tesla's massive and high brake light and not slow down in time and rear end the Tesla. And the Tesla driver wasn't paying attention to what has happening either and allowed the car to slow. Frankly not much risk.

On the other hand: with the old 7.0 implementation there were other risks. For instance someone sets the autopilot for 75mph while on a secondary residential road and the autopilot first engages and gets to the 75 mph speed, but then at speed it has no appropriate lane markings or other indications to travel safely at that speed and careens off the road and causes injury, destruction of property and death. Yes that driver will likely be legally responsible, but small comfort to the mother of the toddler who was mowed down by a Tesla APing at 75mph in a residential neighborhood. And small comfort to Tesla owners and stockholders who see the bad PR generated from such an incident.

A good solution to control the second risk is to say "Eh, most people won't intend to engage AP significantly above the speed limit in those higher risk areas, so let's help them out and not allow it. Whether they weren't paying attention, or intended to drive recklessly in those neighborhoods, let's not have AP participate in that." Seems perfectly sensible to me. Even if it takes some time and updates to dial it in just right, seems like a wise and prudent measure to take.

I think the real concern motivating the complaints isn't a concern about causing accidents -- because if that was really the concern it would be focused on second risk instead of the first. I think the real motivation is selfish sense of entitlement and anger about being inconvenienced. In the same way that some people were cranky at the seat belt warning buzzers -- and sat on their buckled seat belts in defiance. At least in that case the risk was to them, not to others on residential roads.

 

[kort677]

Here is a fact. With V 7.0 autopilot worked without any restrictions. With version 7.1 autopilot now incorrectly restricts the speed on a variety of mis identified roads, including freeways, interstates and express lanes. It is only a matter of time before these newly imposed restrictions cause an accident when an MS suddenly and incorrectly slows down. Tesla has removed a working autopilot system and replaced it (without permission) with a version that no longer works correctly. To make matters worse, given the technology in the car, it will never be able to correctly identify which road it is actually on, so we will never again have a "working" autopilot unless the restrictions are removed.

while I agree the system is imperfect I disagree with your issue because if you are properly monitoring the car, as per instructions, you would be able to IMMEDIATELY take over from auto pilot.

 

[Todd Burch]

For what it's worth, I've never seen any of the issues mentioned here such as AP restricting TACC speed on the interstate or recognizing signs 40 ft above the car. I have seen it very infrequently read a school zone speed limit and apply it even though it's not valid when I drive through.

And maybe once or twice in the last several thousand miles of autopilot driving has it misidentified a speed limit sign. In those cases I just knocked the stalk up or down a few times and all was well.

I also cannot recall where it improperly misidentified the category of road I was on and incorrectly restricted the set speed. It has worked that well for me. Not saying it's never happened, but it's so infrequent I've never really noticed it.

I also don't understand how those of you on 7.0 are NOT seeing the car take turnoffs or other issues that were much worse in 7.0.

I'm not even sure how you can compare it to 7.1, probably not having driven with it more than a few days at most (if you had a loaner with some version of 7.1).

So I can understand the truck speed limit issue. I can understand the general sign reading issue if your locality has unusual speed limit signs. I can understand the car reading a speed limit sign for a frontage road while on the highway.

But I cannot reconcile the rest with my own experience.

Can anyone post any video of this behavior which shows the view outside the windshield plus the instrument panel? After all, video or it didn't happen .

Would help to understand what's going on.

 

[bhzmark]

The 7.0 zealots don't have 7.1 so they only experience these problems in their imagination.

Others with 7.1 who have experienced these sorts of issues once in a great while are too busy enjoying the happiness that 7.1 routinely delivers every day and they can't be bothered to record and post the occasional glitch that they encounter. It's such a nonissue. The 7.0 jihadists will eventually get upgraded and will realize that their fatwa was for naught.

 

[Todd Burch]

The 7.0 zealots don't have 7.1 so they only experience these problems in their imagination.

Others with 7.1 who have experienced these sorts of issues once in a great while are too busy enjoying the happiness that 7.1 routinely delivers every day and they can't be bothered to record and post the occasional glitch that they encounter. It's such a nonissue. The 7.0 jihadists will eventually get upgraded and will realize that their fatwa was for naught.

Funny, but I genuinely would like to see video because the only way I can believe that it's really this bad is:

1. Those cars have different firmware.
2. Those cars have a hardware/assembly tolerance problem.
3. Those cars have dirt/grime permanently on the inside of their camera enclosures, or never get washed and the windshields are super-dirty.
4. All of their local signs are super-wierd, and/or they live in remote, poorly-mapped areas, or
5. It's all a lie .

Whichever it is, I want to see this behavior!

 

[RogerHScott]

Tesla has removed a working autopilot system and replaced it (without permission) with a version that no longer works correctly.

To even sum up a system of the complexity of these AP systems with a single binary attribute like "work" or "doesn't work" betrays a perspective on this issue so narrow as to be of little interest to anyone other than the the person themself. It is useful to say "this facet of AP works in this situation" and "that aspect of AP doesn't work in that situation", or, better yet, "I don't care for the way this aspect of AP works in that situation" (thus avoiding making indefensible absolutist statements about the world). Saying "AP doesn't work" is not.

 

[brianman]

I must have missed the announcement. When (i.e., by what date) did Tesla say all Model S development would be complete?

You make a fair point. Here's a counterpoint. Is the expectation that Tesla has "met the promise" of Autopilot features advertised in 2014 if "full delivery of those features" doesn't arrive until 2018? If they deliver only in 2019+ then some cars will be out of warranty before paid-for features were ever delivered.

Tesla doesn't tend to give firm dates, and if they do they tend to miss them. When is it appropriate for customers to be rightfully upset?

 

[brianman]

the AP should NOT restrict speeds on roads like I-90

I see this in California as well. When {car 65, truck 55} signs are changed in some areas to {car 65} then {truck 55}, Autopilot reads both the 65 and the 55 -- and "keeps" the 55. Every firmware I've tried in Model S w/Autopilot has this bug. I hope they fix it.

 

[RogerHScott]

When {car 65, truck 55} signs are changed in some areas to {car 65} then {truck 55}, Autopilot reads both the 65 and the 55 -- and "keeps" the 55

Clearly you need to petition the State to reverse the sequence in which these signs appear

 

[RogerHScott]

Is the expectation that Tesla has "met the promise" of Autopilot features advertised in 2014 if "full delivery of those features" doesn't arrive until 2018?

That would depend whether you're fixated on specific features by a specific date -- in which case Tesla ownership may well be a
frustrating experience -- or whether you're "along for the ride" and satisfied with overall progress over time. In a perfect world
Tesla wouldn't say things that set people up for disappointment, but the reality is that mealy-mouthed hedged generalisms just
aren't as effective (in virtually any sense) as specifics, even if those specifics aren't 100% accurate/reliable.