Elon: FSD Beta tweets

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

"Supervised autonomy", the latest Teslafication of what should be straightforward and universally-accepted terminology lol

Don't think this is a combination of words I ever would have imagined

"Supervised autonomy" makes perfect sense. Essentially it's saying that it can make the decisions necessary to perform all maneuvers, but it's not yet fully trusted so you need active supervision to prevent dangerous errors.

The strongest human equivalent is a permit holder who can drive, but needs to be supervised by a a licensed driver in the front passenger seat.
The licensed driver isn't required to give any instruction.

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

Oh, its a combination of words that you absolutely create when you've realized your CEO has backed your company into a corner that they cant get out of by 12/31/2022.

"we cant say autonomous driving so we will say supervised autonomy. Most dolts wont realize, that really means same as what we've had since 2015: the driver must still be 100% fully in control at all times for the forseeable future, and there is no Robotaxi service in sight. All for $15k".

No, they're different things. A Tesla with Autopilot isn't an autonomous vehicle.

 

[j0shm1lls]

@2101Guy , look... You seem to be borderline deranged when it comes to Elon and what you call his promises which are really just article headlines that aren't promises at all. Maybe you should seek professional help. I wish you the best.

 

[AndrewZ]

"Supervised autonomy" makes perfect sense. Essentially it's saying that it can make the decisions necessary to perform all maneuvers, but it's not yet fully trusted so you need active supervision to prevent dangerous errors.

The strongest human equivalent is a permit holder who can drive, but needs to be supervised by a a licensed driver in the front passenger seat.
The licensed driver isn't required to give any instruction.

You're describing a Level 2 ADAS, Supervised Autonomy seems to be used in other robotics research papers etc to describe Level 4 within that narrow scope and isn't directly applicable to vehicle autonomy.

To me this looks like an attempt to further confuse things with naming conventions, using different robotics L4 terminology for vehicle autonomy that has its own standards and definitions

 

[boonedocks]

@2101Guy , look... You seem to be borderline deranged when it comes to Elon and what you call his promises which are really just article headlines that aren't promises at all. Maybe you should seek professional help. I wish you the best.

To the people that constantly defend @elonmusk as saying he has NOT promised anything. I propose that you may be in the same camp as him as far as honesty goes. If I tell someone I will there at 3:00pm then I have given my word, to me a promise that I will be there at 3:00pm. If I am not I have broken that trust.

Elon HAS said over and over that some things WILL happen by a date. When it doesn't he has broken that trust. You might not want to call it a promise but to most HONEST people it is a promise.

 

[Dewg]

Most of us are grounded in reality, owning an actual car with driver assist software in testing phase. We see progress each update, and continue to help test that software and improve the features and functionality. Most knew what they were getting into, and most had no idea the drama going on in social media land., nor did they care once they discovered it.

Case in point: I have 5 colleagues that I know of in my company with model Ys. I enjoy talking about the car so I engaged them about it. Two of the five didn't even know the car had OTA software updates, and they were several versions behind. The other three didn't know there was Beta software available to test city streets, and had no idea the FSD Beta switch was there. You see, most people get a car and set all the settings they want, then never go back and look at those settings again. They just drive the car and enjoy it. And lastly, when I asked what all 5 thought about Elon's comments, four had no idea he had made them, and the fifth just said "yeah, he [Elon] just needs to shut the F up".

Amusing aside: One of the Y owners just picked up a maxed out X as well and let me drive it around. He had no idea it had software controlled air suspension. I blew his mind when I started raising and lowering the car. We laughed when he answered my question about reading the manual with "uh, clearly no."

 

[2101Guy]

@2101Guy , look... You seem to be borderline deranged when it comes to Elon and what you call his promises which are really just article headlines that aren't promises at all. Maybe you should seek professional help. I wish you the best.

OR..you can put me on "ignore" like others claim to do (then end up forgetting that they said they put me on ignore...and end up responding to me).

 

[2101Guy]

To the people that constantly defend @elonmusk as saying he has NOT promised anything. I propose that you may be in the same camp as him as far as honesty goes. If I tell someone I will there at 3:00pm then I have given my word, to me a promise that I will be there at 3:00pm. If I am not I have broken that trust.

Elon HAS said over and over that some things WILL happen by a date. When it doesn't he has broken that trust. You might not want to call it a promise but to most HONEST people it is a promise.

EXACTLY

Because he (allegedly) hasnt used the words "i promise"...they excuse his lies.

Guess what?

California DMV accuses Tesla of falsely advertising Autopilot and Full Self-Driving features​

 

[2101Guy]

What if this is a regulatorily issue? Elon always believes in FSD. Most FDS beta videos looks great and is impressive with a few exceptions. I believe we'll always see the word Beta but I wonder if their concerned about the legal aspects.

which regulation had Elon change from this:

"your parked car will come find you anywhere in a parking lot, and even park or unpark itself in tight spaces. Summon navigates complex parking situations while abiding by lane markings and stop signs, avoiding pedestrians and obstacles like traffic cones, trash bins and rogue shopping carts."

To this:

"summon is really just a party trick"

 

[EVNow]

Guess what?

STOP SHOUTING.

 

[jabloomf1230]

Yesterday drove for quite a bit on some errands. Probably 90 minutes on FSD Beta. We have now started counting where FSDb is bad (instead what it can do) - that is some real progress !

+ves :
- Turns are less jittery. A few turns it would earlier abort were ok - esp. smaller roads with a car waiting at the stop line on the road the car is turning in to.
- In 90 minutes of driving I didn't get any difficult unprotected lefts. Thats how rare they are here ... But in general rights & lefts have become better - esp. the creeping wall visualization is helpful.
- Unlike what some people were saying, I don't find 69.2 any more jittery when people are around. Seems same as 10.12.

-ves :
- Roundabouts are still problematic. This means my disengagement rate won't go down much. They need to spend substatial amount of time working on roundabouts - like they did with CULT.
- Wide unmarked roads might be somewhat worse, when the road is bending/winding. The path chosen optimizes for lower turning radius than keeping to the right side of the road. So, if they spend some time on this issue, they should able to fix it easily.

If I was Tesla, the first item on the agenda would be to classify roundabouts into broad groups based on configuration. Then I would tackle the easiest ones first. Some multilane roundabout configurations may be the last ones to be conquered. They even defy most US driver's abilities. Unfortunately, every car either within or proximate to a multilane roundabout is a "blue car".

 

[Goose66]

This is a whole new level of autonowashing.
A car is not by any definition autonomous if it requires constant supervision. The word autonomous literarily means that you do not need to supervise it. All other OEMs call what is described above as "supervised automation", also called Level 2.

Almost the whole problem of autonomy is reliability.

Not to mention that Elon has talked about driverless robotaxis (L4/L5) and said the words "level 5" before, so he clearly understands the different levels and that they exist.

As far as what "feature complete" means, as I have said many times it will be "feature complete" when Elon says its "feature complete." There is no outside definition to be found. IMO, the statement quoted above sounds like he means L3, but I don't know first hand where that statement came from.

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

You're describing a Level 2 ADAS, Supervised Autonomy seems to be used in other robotics research papers etc to describe Level 4 within that narrow scope and isn't directly applicable to the vehicle autonomy.

To me this looks like an attempt to further confuse things with naming conventions, using different robotics L4 terminology for vehicle autonomy that has its own standards and definitions

The problem is more people wanting to pigeonhole systems into the SAE Levels and trying to say that you can't call it something other than that. The levels are multi-dimensional and from Level 2 to Level 4 in particular there's a huge variety of system capabilities possible. The Levels seem to assume a particular path of development that doesn't completely match what Tesla is doing.

To me it's very useful to distinguish between a system limited by capability and a system limited by error rate.

Whatever the motivation for it, in my opinion "supervised autonomy" is a useful distinction as it implies that it's limited only by error rate and is therefore a full-featured L2 or L3. In fact, I think it's a better than "full self-driving" which doesn't mention required supervision.

I think of it as being similar to EREV. Not an SAE term, but a useful distinction.

 

[Daniel in SD]

Not to mention that Elon has talked about driverless robotaxis (L4/L5) and said the words "level 5" before, so he clearly understands the different levels and that they exist.

As far as what "feature complete" means, as I have said many times it will be "feature complete" when Elon says its "feature complete." There is no outside definition to be found. IMO, the statement quoted above sounds like he means L3, but I don't know first hand where that statement came from.

The "feature complete" statement is from Autonomy Day and I think a few earnings calls. Clearly FSD beta is not feature complete in the traditional sense, for example it doesn't recognize no right turn on red signs. So I think by feature complete he was referring more to the software architecture having all the features necessary to implement features like no right turn on red response.
He definitely doesn't mean L3. For example if an L3 vehicle can be enabled somewhere with no right turn on red signs it needs to be able to respond to them.

 

[2101Guy]

Not to mention that Elon has talked about driverless robotaxis (L4/L5) and said the words "level 5" before, so he clearly understands the different levels and that they exist.

As far as what "feature complete" means, as I have said many times it will be "feature complete" when Elon says its "feature complete." There is no outside definition to be found. IMO, the statement quoted above sounds like he means L3, but I don't know first hand where that statement came from.

Actually, Elon says Level 4 at the 1:06 mark.

 

[Daniel in SD]

Whatever the motivation for it, in my opinion "supervised autonomy" is a useful distinction as it implies that it's limited only by error rate and is therefore a full-featured L2 or L3. In fact, I think it's a better than "full self-driving" which doesn't mention required supervision.

Why not just call it "Full Self Driving Beta"? Obviously a full self-driving system that is in beta requires supervision! Once it's out of beta it will no longer require supervision.

 

[EVNow]

OR..you can put me on "ignore" like others claim to do (then end up forgetting that they said they put me on ignore...and end up responding to me).

Or you can stop sh*t posting.

I mean why would you waste your time posting here if you don't care for FSDb ? I don't go and sh*t post in all the places I don't care about .... life is too short to waste like that.

 

[j0shm1lls]

To the people that constantly defend @elonmusk as saying he has NOT promised anything. I propose that you may be in the same camp as him as far as honesty goes. If I tell someone I will there at 3:00pm then I have given my word, to me a promise that I will be there at 3:00pm. If I am not I have broken that trust.

Elon HAS said over and over that some things WILL happen by a date. When it doesn't he has broken that trust. You might not want to call it a promise but to most HONEST people it is a promise.

Please don't misconstrue me thinking Dan O'Dowd @2101Guy is irrationally obsessed with posting the same thing over and over as me defending Elon. I prefer to not go by what Elon says and instead look at the software that just drove me to work this morning without my intervention. When more features are added and other characteristics are further refined, I'll only be happier. Being too far into either camp isn't healthy.

 

[boonedocks]

Please don't misconstrue me thinking Dan O'Dowd @2101Guy is irrationally obsessed with posting the same thing over and over as me defending Elon. I prefer to not go by what Elon says and instead look at the software that just drove me to work this morning without my intervention. When more features are added and other characteristics are further refined, I'll only be happier. Being too far into either camp isn't healthy.

I didn't misconstrue anything including reading into what Elon says vs what he says.

I have owned 5 Teslas starting with an origin 85D AP1. I know what was advertised on the Tesla.com website and what Elon has said with every iteration of AP 1-3.

I do give Elon grace, wiggle room, when he has more recently started to use the word "aspirational" vs a direct date or time.

I own the very same Model X that was used in a video posted by Tesla and quoted and referenced by Elon that showed it doing a completely hands free drive and advertised as such.

My love for Tesla includes purchasing the latest Model S as well as a little treasure chest of TSLA. I do believe in the Tesla mission and Elons "aspirations" I have just lost all trust in what he throws out about FSD and time lines. To that point my latest Model S was ordered without FSD and I rent it at the moment after being burnt 2 times over pre-purchasing it on sold cars and possibly on a 3rd that is getting a little long in the tooth.

 

[Bitdepth]

The problem is more people wanting to pigeonhole systems into the SAE Levels and trying to say that you can't call it something other than that. The levels are multi-dimensional and from Level 2 to Level 4 in particular there's a huge variety of system capabilities possible. The Levels seem to assume a particular path of development that doesn't completely match what Tesla is doing.

To me it's very useful to distinguish between a system limited by capability and a system limited by error rate.

Whatever the motivation for it, in my opinion "supervised autonomy" is a useful distinction as it implies that it's limited only by error rate and is therefore a full-featured L2 or L3. In fact, I think it's a better than "full self-driving" which doesn't mention required supervision.

I think of it as being similar to EREV. Not an SAE term, but a useful distinction.

The SAE levels DO NOT describe capability, reliability, error rate or lack thereof. It does not assume a particular path of development.

SAE level describes who is responsible for what and when.

Is the human responsible for driving at all times? L0 to L2
Is the car responsible for driving in as described by the manufacturer ODD, but requires the driver as a fallback safety when requested? L3
Is the car responsible for ALL driving in as described by the manufacture ODD including safety fallback? L4
Is the car responsible for ALL driving in ALL reasonable expected condition an average driver can also drive? L5

That is all the SAE level talks about. A L2 door to door system can be in practice as reliable and capable as a L4 system but as long as the manufacturer states you are responsible for driving at ALL times then it is still a L2 system. What you as an end user thinks does not matter, the manufacturer has to state what the role of the end user is when the system is in operation.