EVNow
Well-Known Member
LOL.
We can't say Model 3 won't fly in space. We can only say Model 3 hasn't been deployed in space yet.
By definition, a geofenced vehicle, will NOT work in a place it is not allowed to work.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Elon: "Feature complete for full self driving this year"
- Thread starter dckiwi
- Start date
We can't say Model 3 won't fly in space. We can only say Model 3 hasn't been deployed in space yet.
By definition, a geofenced vehicle, will NOT work in a place it is not allowed to work.
diplomat33
Average guy who loves autonomous vehicles
That is a dumb analogy. We know a car cannot physically operate in space. Waymo are cars that are designed to operate on roads. It is just a matter of how good they would be.
You don't understand how waymo works. The geofence is an artificial limit. Waymo does not need the geofence to work. They could remove the geofence if they wanted to and the waymo driver would work everywhere. Now, there would likely be some cases that require interventions/disengagements but it would work. We know this to be true because when Waymo wanted to deploy outside the geofence in Chandler, they simply mapped the new area and then deployed there and it worked. When they wanted to deploy in SF, they mapped and deployed. When they wanted to deploy in downtown Phoenix, they just mapped and deployed. And now they have mapped areas of LA and have started testing. Waymo can deploy anywhere. They just map first and then deploy.
In the case of Seattle, Waymo would just map Seattle and then deploy the Waymo Driver in Seattle. Again, we don't know how well it would work in Seattle. There could be situations in Seattle that cause interventions/disengagements. But the Waymo Driver would work in Seattle.
diplomat33
Average guy who loves autonomous vehicles
Getting back on topic of "feature complete", Aurora defines "feature complete: this way:
Obviously, Tesla is not doing trucking along a specific route. But we can extrapolate from their definition that "feature complete" means having all the key capabilities to navigate autonomously all of the common driving situations you expect to encounter.
So based on this definition is FSD beta "feature complete" yet? If you say no, how soon will it be "feature complete"?
Personally, I think Tesla FSD will be "feature complete" when they release "single stack".
Obviously, Tesla is not doing trucking along a specific route. But we can extrapolate from their definition that "feature complete" means having all the key capabilities to navigate autonomously all of the common driving situations you expect to encounter.
So based on this definition is FSD beta "feature complete" yet? If you say no, how soon will it be "feature complete"?
Personally, I think Tesla FSD will be "feature complete" when they release "single stack".
pilotSteve
Active Member
When I have to take a *sugar* there’s little difference between a toilet that’s not working and one that hasn’t been deployed/installed.
diplomat33
Average guy who loves autonomous vehicles
Who cares if the AV works, if it has not been deployed? I get it. Obviously, deployment is what matters the most. I am simply pointing out that "working" and "deployment" are different concepts and it is not accurate to say that Waymo does not work in Seattle. It is more accurate to say it is not deployed in Seattle. I just want people to be a bit more precise with their statements.
Missile Toad
MSLR Wht/Blk/19 | OD 6/10/21 | RN11512
Editted (no sarcasm necessary):
We can expect him to deliver all the features he promised... soon (™ Elon Musk)
in fact it is completely wrong to say "Waymo does not work in my city and NOA works" because obviously NOA does not work in the same sense waymo works anywhere.
The proper statement I think is "I can drive my Tesla anywhere where I can physically get it to with whatever assist features that happen to work there, meanwhile Waymo public driverless deployments are fairly confined to very restricted areas (non public testing deployments are much wider, but we don't know the level of performance)".
It might come down company policies of delivering something that works versus delivering something with the old 'college try.'
Geofencing is actually required by law.
It’s not technical limitation. Per regulation- all L4 operator needs to demonstrate reliability of it system with in area of operation during testing. Only hitting the threshold before license for operation can be granted.
I am not sure how this is relevant to my comment?
There's no "try" on the part of Tesla.
Tesla legal already stated FSD is a failure in court.
What else is needed to prove that Tesla was on the wrong path from day one.
www.latimes.com
In addition-
Let me clarify how self driving certification and SAE definition works.
In majority of L4 certification requirement-
The license to test L4 function is given by local authority in US (sandbox- geo fencing). Only when the operator demonstrate reliable operation before operating license is given.
If everyone bother to read SAE J3616 definition clearly mentioned that geo fencing is needed for L4 certification.
US and EU does not have federal level law that regulate self driving. In US this is currently managed at state and city level. Hence for Waymo to operate in your city. It actually needs agreement with that city and setup geo fencing per requirement of that city.
Same thing apply to EU- where German KBA is leading the effort in certify L3+ system. That is why EQS can only operate on certain roads in Germany.
L4 system by its architecture was never limited to certain geographic area. Because from day one it’s already capable of regenerate 4D environment surround the vehicle (4th dimension- means object speed, direction of movement is also scanned real-time)
What else is needed to prove that Tesla was on the wrong path from day one.
Tesla says its self-driving technology may be a 'failure' — but not fraud
In a class-action lawsuit, customers say they were duped by Tesla's $15,000 Full Self-Driving feature. Company lawyers say failure isn't fraud.
www.latimes.com
In addition-
Let me clarify how self driving certification and SAE definition works.
In majority of L4 certification requirement-
The license to test L4 function is given by local authority in US (sandbox- geo fencing). Only when the operator demonstrate reliable operation before operating license is given.
If everyone bother to read SAE J3616 definition clearly mentioned that geo fencing is needed for L4 certification.
US and EU does not have federal level law that regulate self driving. In US this is currently managed at state and city level. Hence for Waymo to operate in your city. It actually needs agreement with that city and setup geo fencing per requirement of that city.
Same thing apply to EU- where German KBA is leading the effort in certify L3+ system. That is why EQS can only operate on certain roads in Germany.
L4 system by its architecture was never limited to certain geographic area. Because from day one it’s already capable of regenerate 4D environment surround the vehicle (4th dimension- means object speed, direction of movement is also scanned real-time)
Yeah, but he long insisted that his statements are just his opinion and nobody should be taking those seriously or something along those lines.
When you buy a Tesla car, the purchase agreement specifies that you are only getting what is in the contract, all outside promises including statements by any Tesla personnel and website are null and void.
Actually no. Elon is CEO of Tesla- his comment on FSD does have liability.
One of the main reason why both civil and criminal case on FSD is progressing.
that is for the courts to decide. I am just enumerating facts known so far.
It’s like there is a disconnect between teslas legal team, and Elon
Not really.
Similar threads
