California Reviewing FSD/AP

[T3SLAROD]

California places Tesla's 'Full Self-Driving' under review​

LOS ANGELES — California’s Department of Motor Vehicles is reviewing whether Tesla is violating a state regulation by advertising its vehicles as being fully autonomous without meeting the legal definition of self-driving.

The department confirmed the review Monday in an email to The Associated Press. State regulation prohibits advertising vehicles for sale or lease as autonomous if they can’t comply with the regulatory definition, it said.

Tesla advertises a $10,000 “Full Self-Driving” option on the website for its electric vehicles, but the same website says the vehicles cannot drive themselves. CEO Elon Musk has said he expects Tesla’s vehicles will be able to drive themselves more safely than humans sometime this year.

“The current enabled features require active driver supervision and do not make the vehicle autonomous,” the website says.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/california-places-teslas-full-self-driving-under-review/2021/05/17/7e14f4e4-b76c-11eb-bc4a-62849cf6cca9_story.html

 

[willow_hiller]

Actually the Washington Post headline leaves out half of what the California DMV said.

Here's the original article from the LA Times: DMV probing whether Tesla violates state regulations with self-driving claims

If the DMV finds Tesla is misleading customers, potential penalties include suspension or revocation of DMV autonomous vehicle deployment permits and manufacture and dealer licenses, the DMV spokesperson said. She added that “a vehicle operating on public roads using autonomous technology without first obtaining a permit can be removed from the public roadway by a police officer.”

So part of it is whether the name "Full Self Driving," is misleading, but the other half is that California wants Tesla to register their vehicles as autonomous and report disengagements.

This probably related to those emails exchanged between Tesla and the DMV earlier this year where Tesla continued to claim they don't need to report disengagements because FSD beta is level 2. And the DMV is playing hardball back saying "If you won't report disengagements because it's not autonomous, then you're not allowed to sell it with a name that implies autonomy."

 

[Tesomega]

Well, I would say good for the DMV doings its job, Tesla sold several thousands of vehicles that can do Full Self Driving when regulators approve it. If they don't submit their system for full approval, it will never be liable to deliver the feature or provide a refund to the impacted people by this outrageous claim.

Someone here will claim that they have provide line item level features this was not the case when I got my FSD and Tesla was hyping to do a Coast-to-Coast drive of their system in 2017.

 

[DanCar]

Elon should stop fighting with everyone and change the names to something like:

1. Autopilot -> Tesla Vision
2. EAP -> Freeway assist
3. FSD -> City assist

5+ years down the road when it is truly FSD, then change the names back.

 

[Tam]

...Elon should stop fighting with everyone and change the names to something like...

There's nothing wrong with branding the name that's short of satisfying the high bar such as:

"Not-a-Flamethrowers"

They were sold out (20,000 x $500 = $10 million) in an instant even though they did not meet the criteria to shoot a 10-foot flame be a flamethrower in California.

Since the current FSD is not meeting the criteria for L3 and above, there's nothing wrong with naming it:

"Not-Fully-Self-Driving"

 

[mark95476]

Or DMV busy bodies staying busy by going on fishing expeditions at the behest of TESLAQ detractors...

 

[Tam]

Or DMV busy bodies staying busy by going on fishing expeditions at the behest of TESLAQ detractors...

I think DMV is busy trying to be consistent and fair to all parties who claim their cars will be robotaxis someday but not just yet for now.

In 2016, Uber used the same 2021 Tesla argument:

"Uber countered that its system wasn’t very advanced yet and was indistinguishable from a mere Advanced Driver Assistance System (ADAS), which does not require special permits. Uber cited Tesla’s autopilot software, which drivers currently use without adhering to the DMV's autonomous vehicle rules. Tesla, however, has registered with the state’s motor department to test autonomous vehicles."

Essentially, Uber said in 2016 that its system was still L2 that required a human behind the wheel so it didn't want to register theirs for autonomous vehicle permits. However, publically, Uber's message was different: It was touting that indeed its system will be autonomous vehicles someday and it will save investors so much money by skipping human drivers. DMV wanted the message to be consistent and get the paperwork done appropriately.

Today, Tesla told DMV that its system is still L2 and its final release of City Streets will still be L2 so it means it does not have to file additional paperwork such as disengagement reports for the City Streets now and in the future. However, publically, Tesla touts its system as "Self-Driving".

All Tesla Cars Being Produced Now Have Full Self-Driving Hardware

Just like Uber case, DMV wants the public message and the message to DMV to be consistent and get the appropriate paperwork done.

 

[T3SLAROD]

Or DMV busy bodies staying busy by going on fishing expeditions at the behest of TESLAQ detractors...

DMV cant just sit around doing nothing when we have all these Morons crashing into anything and everything because they aren't paying attention.

 

[mark95476]

DMV: This is false advertising! You're forcing drivers with FSD to pay attention, like everyone else.

Tesla & rest of the world: Duuhhhhh...

DMV cant just sit around doing nothing when we have all these Morons crashing into anything and everything because they aren't paying attention.

 

[diplomat33]

DMV: This is false advertising! You're forcing drivers with FSD to pay attention, like everyone else.

Tesla & rest of the world: Duuhhhhh...

That's not what is happening! Everybody agrees that Tesla should require drivers to pay attention. That's a good thing.

The issue is that if you are testing FSD in CA on public roads, you are required to register the FSD cars and file safety reports with the CA DMV. Tesla appears to be testing FSD but is not registering the FSD cars or filing any safety reports. So it looks like Tesla is trying to cheat the system. And there have been several instances now where it looks like Tesla is testing FSD but when asked about it, they deny it. The CA DMV is getting tired of the games. They simply want to know if Tesla is testing FSD or not because if Tesla is testing FSD, then they need to file the reports like everyone else. But if Tesla is not testing FSD then they need to make it clear that they are not testing FSD. Tesla can't have it both ways. They can't test FSD but not follow any of the FSD regulations. They either test FSD and follow the regulations or they don't test FSD and make it clear that it is not FSD.

 

[Tam]

...They either test FSD and follow the regulations or they don't test FSD and make it clear that it is not FSD.

To be fair, Tesla has officially told DMV that its FSD is L2 even in its final release. Is that not clear enough?

Also, on the FSD ordering page, Tesla also posts "The currently enabled features require active driver supervision and do not make the vehicle autonomous...". Is that not clear enough?

How much clearer would DMV want Tesla to declare?

 

[clydeiii]

When you can update a car's software over the air, there's no such thing as "final release."

 

[willow_hiller]

I think we've gotten a bit too hung-up on the SAE levels. Even though the SAE levels are referenced in California law, the text of the law differs a bit from them:

(b) “Autonomous test vehicle” is a vehicle that has been equipped with technology that is a combination of both hardware and software that, when engaged, performs the dynamic driving task, but requires a human test driver or a remote operator to continuously supervise the vehicle's performance of the dynamic driving task.

(1) An autonomous test vehicle does not include vehicles equipped with one or more systems that provide driver assistance and/or enhance safety benefits but are not capable of, singularly or in combination, performing the dynamic driving task on a sustained basis without the constant control or active monitoring of a natural person.

(2) For the purposes of this article, an “autonomous test vehicle” is equipped with technology that makes it capable of operation that meets the definition of Levels 3, 4, or 5 of the SAE International's Taxonomy and Definitions for Terms Related to Driving Automation Systems for On-Road Motor Vehicles, standard J3016 (SEP2016), which is hereby incorporated by reference.

(3) The presence of a natural person who is an employee, contractor, or designee of the manufacturer in the vehicle to monitor a vehicle's autonomous performance shall not affect whether a vehicle meets the definition of autonomous test vehicle.

https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/file/adopted-regulatory-text-pdf/

So my reading there is that, if a vehicle is capable of performing the dynamic driving task on a sustained basis, and is equipped with technology that could meet the definition of level 3 or higher, California deems it to fall under the definition of "autonomous test vehicle"

 

[stopcrazypp]

I think we've gotten a bit too hung-up on the SAE levels. Even though the SAE levels are referenced in California law, the text of the law differs a bit from them:

https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/file/adopted-regulatory-text-pdf/

So my reading there is that, if a vehicle is capable of performing the dynamic driving task on a sustained basis, and is equipped with technology that could meet the definition of level 3 or higher, California deems it to fall under the definition of "autonomous test vehicle"

You omitted this part "without the constant control or active monitoring of a natural person".
If you look at the FSD Beta videos, the system definitely still needs intervention from the driver much of the time, with zero buffer time available (unlike L3, which gives at minimum a few seconds buffer time).

 

[stopcrazypp]

To be fair, Tesla has officially told DMV that its FSD is L2 even in its final release. Is that not clear enough?

Also, on the FSD ordering page, Tesla also posts "The currently enabled features require active driver supervision and do not make the vehicle autonomous...". Is that not clear enough?

How much clearer would DMV want Tesla to declare?

That's technically not what Tesla said. Tesla said the currently testing "FSD Beta" is targeting "City Streets," which is a L2 feature. Tesla did not say the FSD option package overall will remain L2. They said they plan to develop L3+ and they will comply with relevant CA laws when they reach that point.

 

[diplomat33]

To be fair, Tesla has officially told DMV that its FSD is L2 even in its final release. Is that not clear enough?

Also, on the FSD ordering page, Tesla also posts "The currently enabled features require active driver supervision and do not make the vehicle autonomous...". Is that not clear enough?

How much clearer would DMV want Tesla to declare?

Yes, that is what Tesla is saying. But Tesla is trying to develop autonomous driving. And Tesla is deploying software called "Full Self-Driving Beta" to hundreds of cars in CA. So, I think the CA DMV wants to make sure that Tesla is not just saying it is L2 to avoid regulations while actually using the FSD Beta testers to help develop their autonomous driving.

Perhaps part of the issue is that the CA DMV regulations were designed for companies like Waymo or Cruise who already have an autonomous driving prototype and want to test it with safety drivers. The regulations were not really designed for a company like Tesla that releases L2 to their customers as part of their approach to developing autonomous driving.

 

[Barklikeadog]

To be fair, Tesla has officially told DMV that its FSD is L2 even in its final release. Is that not clear enough?

Also, on the FSD ordering page, Tesla also posts "The currently enabled features require active driver supervision and do not make the vehicle autonomous...". Is that not clear enough?

How much clearer would DMV want Tesla to declare?

Think about that phrase:
'Full self driving is level 2, even in final release'

So no, it's not clear enough.

If KFC didn't use actual chicken, can they call it a Chicken sandwich?

 

[diplomat33]

Honestly, I think if Tesla just changed the name and stopped using the name "full self-driving", it would probably solve a lot of problems. The name "full self-driving beta" sounds like you are testing autonomous driving so if FSD Beta is only L2, then that creates some confusion. If Tesla called it something else like "City Assist Beta" and promised to never remove driver supervision for the "City Assist" feature, I think the CA DMV would be happy with that. Then when Tesla does achieve autonomous driving, Tesla could introduce a new feature called "FSD" and report disengagements to the CA.

 

[mark95476]

More DDDDdddurrrr...... Here's the first sentence for you to read and try comprehending again:

LOS ANGELES — California’s Department of Motor Vehicles is reviewing whether Tesla is violating a state regulation by advertising its vehicles as being fully autonomous without meeting the legal definition of self-driving.

That's not what is happening! Everybody agrees that Tesla should require drivers to pay attention. That's a good thing.

The issue is that if you are testing FSD in CA on public roads, you are required to register the FSD cars and file safety reports with the CA DMV. Tesla appears to be testing FSD but is not registering the FSD cars or filing any safety reports. So it looks like Tesla is trying to cheat the system. And there have been several instances now where it looks like Tesla is testing FSD but when asked about it, they deny it. The CA DMV is getting tired of the games. They simply want to know if Tesla is testing FSD or not because if Tesla is testing FSD, then they need to file the reports like everyone else. But if Tesla is not testing FSD then they need to make it clear that they are not testing FSD. Tesla can't have it both ways. They can't test FSD but not follow any of the FSD regulations. They either test FSD and follow the regulations or they don't test FSD and make it clear that it is not FSD.

 

[mark95476]

Reductio ad absurdum

Ford F150 "Lightning"

CA DMV and TMC peanut gallery: DDDdduuuurrrr... False advertising! It's actually a pick-up truck and doesn't make a thunderclap when I hit the gas! I thought I was going to be hurling thunder bolts like Zeus.

Honestly, I think if Tesla just changed the name and stopped using the name "full self-driving", it would probably solve a lot of problems. The name "full self-driving beta" sounds like you are testing autonomous driving so if FSD Beta is only L2, then that creates some confusion. If Tesla called it something else like "City Assist Beta" and promised to never remove driver supervision for the "City Assist" feature, I think the CA DMV would be happy with that. Then when Tesla does achieve autonomous driving, Tesla could introduce a new feature called "FSD" and report disengagements to the CA.