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

CA DMV "revisiting" approach towards Tesla FSD

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Yes, those are the same claims that Uber made. How is what Tesla is doing different?
Are you saying you don't see a difference between one company that only develops self-driving cars (that had an "autonomous mode") and another company that develops driver assistance features that customers buy and use?

I suppose at a high level, both of those companies are developing technologies that could lead to high driving automation.
 
  • Disagree
Reactions: momo3605
Are you saying you don't see a difference between one company that only develops self-driving cars (that had an "autonomous mode") and another company that develops driver assistance features that customers buy and use?

I suppose at a high level, both of those companies are developing technologies that could lead to high driving automation.
I'm saying that testing FSD Beta is indistinguishable from testing a prototype autonomous vehicle so those two things should be treated the same by the regulations.
FSD Beta is high driving automation, any unplanned disengagement is a failure of the system.
 
The CA DMV should decide if they are testing autonomous driving or not
those two things should be treated the same by the regulations
There's a quite a difference between what the regulations allow and "should" do. If you believe there's a difference, then you should write to CA legislators, and I would guess that's what CA DMV will do in their response to California Senate’s Transportation Committee, Lena Gonzalez, who requested the "reevaluation."
 
There's a quite a difference between what the regulations allow and "should" do. If you believe there's a difference, then you should write to CA legislators, and I would guess that's what CA DMV will do in their response to California Senate’s Transportation Committee, Lena Gonzalez, who requested the "reevaluation."
I am saying that the regulations should and do treat them the same. Are you saying that they should treat them the same but Tesla has found a loophole?

I would guess that the DMV will do nothing until there is collision resulting in injuries.
 
I am saying that the regulations should and do treat them the same
I'm not a lawyer… ;) but how does "(1) An autonomous test vehicle does not include vehicles equipped with one or more systems that provide driver assistance" not exclude all Tesla vehicles? In fact, many (most?) commercially available vehicles (that have something as "basic" as ultrasonic "park assist") but have autonomous driving added on could presumably be excluded. Maybe the real story is that Uber and others haven't invested enough in their legal departments. :p

Potentially, the law might practically only apply to vehicles that were built from scratch where sensors are only used for autonomous driving and not for driver assistance.
 
I'm not a lawyer… ;) but how does "(1) An autonomous test vehicle does not include vehicles equipped with one or more systems that provide driver assistance" not exclude all Tesla vehicles? In fact, many (most?) commercially available vehicles (that have something as "basic" as ultrasonic "park assist") but have autonomous driving added on could presumably be excluded. Maybe the real story is that Uber and others haven't invested enough in their legal departments. :p

Potentially, the law might practically only apply to vehicles that were built from scratch where sensors are only used for autonomous driving and not for driver assistance.
Yep, that seems somewhat contradictory since it wouldn't be a test vehicle if it didn't require active monitoring.
And of course most AV prototypes are modified production vehicles that have ADAS.
I doubt that is what the drafters of the regulations had in mind though. When there are contradictions I'm going to go with the intent of regulations.
I know you are extremely jealous of people who are nerding out testing ... but ... they should not and they do not.
It doesn't seem worth the money to me, I guess I should get some more rides from @AlanSubie4Life.
I still don't see how it's any different than the testing that every other AV company is doing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Terminator857
Are you saying you don't see a difference between one company that only develops self-driving cars (that had an "autonomous mode") and another company that develops driver assistance features that customers buy and use?

I suppose at a high level, both of those companies are developing technologies that could lead to high driving automation.
Sorry which company is the one that develops self-driving cars? The one that sells a package called “Full Self Driving” right?
 
... We will have to see if electric shock therapy from Tesla heating coils are necessary. ...
Missy Cummings says she is in favor of electric shock therapy.
Video is from 2020.
 
Missy Cummings says she is in favor of electric shock therapy.
Video is from 2020.

If you watch the video, she clearly said it in jest. It was a joke.
 
If you watch the video, she clearly said it in jest. It was a joke.
What? You are not in favor of electrodes randomly shocking you to make sure you are paying attention? Maybe we could patent the idea for regular office chairs? If your desktop camera senses you're not paying attention, it sends some electrons your way. Can be used as an alternative to coffee, with the advantage of it won't keep you awake at night.
 
  • Funny
Reactions: diplomat33