EVNow
Well-Known Member
And difficult to hit. Half the time I was triggering the screen to do / show something else.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Elon: FSD Beta tweets
- Thread starter Terminator857
- Start date
You go first and cite which federal transportation regulation would require Tesla to implement an audio feedback mechanism.
Ok bet.
1)NHTSA encourages consumers to report safety defects.
2) NHTSA REQUIRES manufactures to report known safety defects.
3) NHTSA has found Teslas autopilot to be defective and has issued a recall.
4) From NHTSA site:
. If a safety defect is discovered, the manufacturer must notify NHTSA, as well as vehicle or equipment owners, dealers, and distributors . The manufacturer is then required to remedy the problem at no charge
to the owner . NHTSA is responsible for monitoring the manufacturer’s corrective action to ensure successful completion of the recall campaign .
5) Last sentence gives the the power to monitor Tesla corrective action. The logs are a way to monitor that.
Let's take them in order:
1) Not a regulation, but... Encouraging consumers to report safety defects does not impose a requirement for manufacturers to implement a costly system of soliciting those comments and storing them.
2) Requiring auto makers to report known safety defects does not impose a requirement for auto makers to provide a mechanism in the car to collect driver comments while driving. Note that the system implemented is only for use with FSDb disconnects. If the car's brakes fail, there is no mention of the ability to report this using the voice comments. In addition, the voice comment feature is not, as per the release notes, only for safety issues. Any disconnect can be commented upon, including non-safety related interventions.
3) Not a regulation, but... Every auto maker has safety recalls, yet no auto maker has been required to implement an automated driver voice comment system.
4) Most of what was stated was superfluous. If NHTSA needs individual vehicle telemetry to monitor corrective action, they can do so without driver voice comments. The car's automated log data provides an objective measure of vehicle performance and driver comments are unnecessary for this purpose.
5) Duplicative to 4). Same comment. BTW, it is inconceivable that NHTSA has the resources to ingest and analyze vehicle logs from 360,000 vehicles, let alone deal with millions of voice comments, so there is virtually no possibility that NHTSA is asking for this data. Also, BTW, if this data were going to NHTSA, Tesla would likely be required to disclose this to customers, even if it is supposedly anonymous. The release notes said nothing about the Federal Government listening in to driver comments.
I'd say, nice try, but this really was a poor attempt to justify your wild speculation.
Edit: BTW, the fact that this was in the 11.3 release indicates that Tesla had the voice comments function in work long before the recall discussions began with NHTSA. That in itself disproves your fantasy.
Last edited:
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
I guess that's POSSIBLE--- but occams razor suggests a better possibility-
Tesla already HAD a feedback mechanism- it kinda sucked- so they removed it and now have made a better one.
I don’t have to provide a specific regulation. This is what NHSTA does. Your entire response was just “no I don’t believe that” you are entitled to a bad opinion just like everyone else.
Telsa is disclosing the fact they are recording comments to customers. They don’t have to say why they are doing it. NHTSA also doesn’t have to recieve the comments to monitor Tesla’s fix. Tesla has to monitor them. Nhts just has to be notified if those comments expose flaws in the system. Giving them a way to monitor if teslas system is working.
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
Make up requirements for car makers that aren't supported by any law or regulation?
No, I don't think that's actually what they do- nor what is happening here.
Tesla already had a feedback system long before the recall. With the NHTSA having nothing to do with it. This is just a better version.
You're overthinking this.
I’m not going to get in an argument with you, but everthing I said NHSTA does is what NHSTA says it does on their website. Argue with them.
DO YOUR “RESEARCH”!!1!1!
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
Can you please link to where NHTSAs website says they require car makers to add in-car realtime customer voice feedback mechanisms to their software?
They require proof that the fixes work. Customer feedback is proof. So there are many ways to achieve that, this is one way.
Anyway, here is the link
NHTSA already has a mechanism for drivers to provide safety reports that does not require cooperation from manufacturers. In fact, that's what you want so that those reports are not 'filtered' before NHTSA gets them.
As I said earlier, the fact that Tesla has rolled this out now (before they provided the recall remedies) is strong evidence that this is not part of the recall response. It takes a lot of effort to plan, design and implement a system like this. There are multiple software systems affected, data structures must be changed and backend servers must be modified to receive, interpret and store the information. Then, for Tesla to do anything useful with the voice comments, they need to implement mechanisms to categorize them and provide useful search capabilities so that they can access relevant data. This is not something that gets implemented in a couple weeks.
BTW customer feedback is not proof.
Keep in mind, Elon did NOT have to do the voluntary recall if he felt it wasnt appropriate. As mentioned previously, NHTSA is an agency with no teeth...
And with his new, highly aggressive lawyers who will "fight every unjust case/accusation/etc".....Elon has the upperhand if he felt this was not a just recall request...
And with his new, highly aggressive lawyers who will "fight every unjust case/accusation/etc".....Elon has the upperhand if he felt this was not a just recall request...
Speaking of paying for FSD vs subscription. Based on lifespan of Tesla cars (as pointed out by Tesla's own lawyers), subscription definitely appears to be the way to go (assuming you want to waste money at all on FSD)
teslamotorsclub.com
Tesla Lawyers Dismiss Elon Musk's Claim in Germany, State the Cars Last Only 130,488 Miles
"...electrically powered vehicles are generally more prone to failure than conventional internal combustion vehicles."Tesla lawyers refute Elons assertions about Tesla battery life/reliability compared to ICE
https://www.autoevolution.com/news/tesla-lawyers-dismiss-elon-musk-s-claim-in-germany-state-the-cars-last-only-130488-miles-210418.html
teslamotorsclub.com
DanCar
Active Member
KArnold
Active Member
i.e.., "drivers" or other hardware interfaces? I'd expect HW4 to be able to run "HW3 FSD code" as a compatibility feature. Hard to tell from such a vague statement - but if just drivers or equivalent, I'd not expect that to take months especially if they finalized the specs well over a year ago. So I'm not sure what "software" they are referring to specifically.
Just a curious statement to me and apparently it's in Tesla's top TO DO lists.
DanCar
Active Member
Nothing new here.
www.tesla.com
Quote:
A software update which includes the remedy that will improve how FSD Beta negotiates certain driving maneuvers during specific conditions (as described below), will be deployed over-the-air (OTA) to affected vehicles when the software is available.
Update Vehicle Firmware to Improve Certain FSD Beta Driving Operations | Tesla Support
Tesla has issued a voluntary recall on certain Model S, Model 3, Model X and Model Y vehicles that have installed or pending installation of software that contains the Full Self-Driving (FSD) Beta feature. This recall affects only US and CA vehicles. Affected vehicles were identified based on...
A software update which includes the remedy that will improve how FSD Beta negotiates certain driving maneuvers during specific conditions (as described below), will be deployed over-the-air (OTA) to affected vehicles when the software is available.
I think that's what the Feds want, it could take a long time.
DanCar
Active Member
Agree. The closer the software is to infallible, the more dangerous it becomes, because people will pay less attention.
Similar threads
