Emails between Tesla and CA DMV on Smart Summon, FSD

[diplomat33]

I thought I would start a separate thread for this. Thanks to @Bitdepth and @Bladerskb for finding this info.

This website has some emails between Tesla and the CA DMV from 2018 to 2020 that reveal some interesting stuff:

<redacted>

From the emails, I constructed a timeline of events:

Oct 1, 2018: CA DMV asks Tesla for explanation on their autonomous testing because they have not received any disengagement report from Tesla despite Tesla having several permits for testing. Tesla Rep follows up about Tesla’s testing process.

Nov 16 - Dec 14, 2018: Tesla Rep and CA DMV discuss time and place for a Smart Summon demo. Tesla Rep pushes date back because Smart Summon is not ready yet for demo.

Dec 21, 2018: Tesla demos Smart Summon for CA DMV.

Dec 24, 2018: CA DMV references a demo of Smart Summon on Dec 21, 2018 and tells Tesla Rep that they have concerns about Smart Summon.

Dec 26, 2018: Tesla responds to CA DMV that Tesla is making changes to Smart Summon based on feedback.

Dec 17, 2019: Tesla Rep and CA DMV discuss process for adding/removing drivers on autonomous vehicle testing. Tesla needs to add 1 VIN to their test permits for the FSD demo seen on Autonomy Day.

April 24, 2019: CA DMV asks Tesla Rep about FSD demo rides during Autonomy Day. Tesla Rep responds.

I find this email especially interesting since it appears to be the first reference to L3 that I know of. It also hints that once AP gets more reliable, that Tesla might remove the nags in some cases and try to claim L3.

April 25, 2019: CA DMV asks for Tesla to resubmit form that includes license plates numbers of test vehicles.

May 10, 2019: Tesla Rep submits updated list of VINs for autonomous testing permits.

Aug 7, 2019: CA DMV emails memo about procedures to modify permits for autonomous vehicle testing.

Nov 1, 2019: Tesla demos Smart Summon for CA DMV.

March 6, 2020: CA DMV sends formal letter to Tesla with concerns about Smart Summon.

March 24, 2020: Tesla sends formal letter responding to CA DMV concerns over Smart Summon.

April 29 – May 1, 2020: CA DMV and Tesla Rep set up time to discuss upcoming Traffic Light and Stop Sign Control feature.

----------

From these emails, we see that the CA DMV is engaged with Tesla about their FSD testing and about their new FSD features. We also see that Tesla had several issues with not reporting and also with Smart Summon.

I do think that Tesla is being a bit sneaky with the argument that AP nags make the vehicle L2 so they don't have to report anything even though they are claiming to be testing FSD software. It's a clever loop hole to have their cake and eat it too.

 

[Tam]

...AP nags make the vehicle L2 so they don't have to report anything even though they are claiming to be testing FSD software. It's a clever loop hole to have their cake and eat it too.

I agree that as long as the automation system requires human to be responsible for the driving as evidenced by hands-on-wheel Autopilot nags, then it's not good enough to be L3 when the responsibility starts to be shifted to the machine.

If it's L2, then there's no point in proving that it's good enough for the machine to take on the responsibility because by the definition of L2 it will never be good enough! Thus, there's no point for disengagement reports because, by definition of L2: There will be numerous.

Once it's L3, Tesla does report the detailed reports every time it does video demo and for those years that they don't, they do send a letter saying that they didn't use the public road for that year.

The problem now is smart summon. It is true that it requires remote human monitor but that human is not inside the car and hands-on-wheel is not practiced.

If hands-on-wheel is not practiced, then that means it implies that it's good enough to be L3. And if it's L3, it needs to be in the disengagement report.

So far, Tesla is getting away with it but to be fair, if it doesn't want to report smart summon disengagements, it needs to enforce hands-on-wheel.

Doing so would defeat the purpose of remote driving your car because now you have to be hands-on-wheel.

But at least, it's fair and safe until a true L3 achieves.

 

[Knightshade]

I
The problem now is smart summon. It is true that it requires remote human monitor but that human is not inside the car and hands-on-wheel is not practiced.

If hands-on-wheel is not practiced, then that means it implies that it's good enough to be L3. And if it's L3, it needs to be in the disengagement report..

Aren't they only required to report L3+ testing on public roads?

And isn't smart summon explicitly intended for use in private parking lots?

 

[mikes_fsd]

Uhm, please delete this thread remove the link and rehost the files, PlainSite is not only a known Tesla short-seller but also attacks anyone and everyone who might say anything positive about Tesla.

 

[Bitdepth]

Uhm, please delete this thread, PlainSite is not only a known Tesla short-seller but also attacks anyone and everyone who might say anything positive about Tesla.

Regardless of the source of the data, these are official documents.

 

[willow_hiller]

Regardless of the source of the data, these are official documents.

Then download the documents and host them elsewhere. The administrator of Plainsite has used the IP address records from their server to dox Tesla proponents in the past.

 

[mikes_fsd]

The guy fixates on Tesla, and publishes only things that go along with his narrative.
But sure.....

 

[diplomat33]

Uhm, please delete this thread, PlainSite is not only a known Tesla short-seller but also attacks anyone and everyone who might say anything positive about Tesla.

The emails are official and legit. And the emails themselves are not anti-Tesla. The emails are informative because they show some of the behind the scenes process between Tesla and regulators.

 

[willow_hiller]

The emails are official and legit. And the emails themselves are not anti-Tesla. The emails are informative because they show some of the behind the scenes process between Tesla and regulators.

If you're going to use Plainsite, at least do so with a VPN. From the days when KarenRei still posted on the investor thread: Tesla, TSLA & the Investment World: the 2019-2020 Investors' Roundtable

"For anyone who wants another reason to avoid Plainsite: Greenspan has been accused of using the website to doxx bulls, via things like comparing the time people access his site to when they post content about/from it, so he can get their IP addresses and request metadata."

 

[mikes_fsd]

I am not talking about emails.
I am talking about sending ppl to an @$$hat that literally wishes harm to anyone with a Tesla!

 

[Bitdepth]

The guy fixates on Tesla, and publishes only things that go along with his narrative.
But sure.....

Then ask @diplomat33 to remove the link to the website, don't demand that his thread be deleted because you have an agenda against any tesla detractors.

 

[diplomat33]

By the way, I did not know that PlainSite is a Tesla short seller. But in this case, I fail to see the relevance. I am not sharing an opinion article from a Tesla short seller. The link just happens to be the storage for the emails. I just care about sharing the emails because they are legit and informative.

 

[diplomat33]

If you're going to use Plainsite, at least do so with a VPN. From the days when KarenRei still posted on the investor thread: Tesla, TSLA & the Investment World: the 2019-2020 Investors' Roundtable

"For anyone who wants another reason to avoid Plainsite: Greenspan has been accused of using the website to doxx bulls, via things like comparing the time people access his site to when they post content about/from it, so he can get their IP addresses and request metadata."

Again, I had no idea that plainsite is a Tesla short. It was just the link where the emails are stored. I just wanted to share the emails.

 

[S4WRXTTCS]

Then download the documents and host them elsewhere. The administrator of Plainsite has used the IP address records from their server to dox Tesla proponents in the past.

I love how this went from some emails that were neither pro-Tesla or anti-Tesla all the way to what does seem to be valid concern to avoid doxing by hosting the files elsewhere.

I can't say I saw this coming.

 

[mikes_fsd]

By the way, I did not know that PlainSite is a Tesla short seller. But in this case, I fail to see the relevance. I am not sharing an opinion article from a Tesla short seller. The link just happens to be the storage for the emails. I just care about sharing the emails because they are legit and informative.

It is a FOIA request, there is no copyright that he can claim on it, you can download the email and upload, but sending traffic to a person/service that is basically a cyberbully seems kinda wrong.

 

[diplomat33]

In any case, the time has expired for me to edit my OP so I can't remove the link now. A moderator will have to do it.

 

[mikes_fsd]

I love how this went from some emails that were neither pro-Tesla or anti-Tesla all the way to what does seem to be valid concern to avoid doxing by hosting the files elsewhere.

I can't say I saw this coming.

I guess you've never dealt with the short-sellers on Twitter, they show up out of nowhere, and spam your thread with all kinds of nasty crap.
In fact, I shut down my original (2008) twitter account because it became useless trying to post anything.

 

[Bitdepth]

Fear mongers

It is a FOIA request, there is no copyright that he can claim on it, you can download the email and upload, but sending traffic to a person/service that is basically a cyberbully seems kinda wrong.

Cyberbully? This is rich coming from someone who stalks people via private messages and accuses them of being shill for other companies because they have opinions that are not 100% pro tesla.

 

[diplomat33]

It is a FOIA request, there is no copyright that he can claim on it, you can download the email and upload, but sending traffic to a person/service that is basically a cyberbully seems kinda wrong.

Again, I had no idea that Plainsite was a Tesla Short. I was not doing it on purpose to send people to a Tesla Short.

 

[mikes_fsd]

Cyberbully? This is rich coming from someone who stalks people via private messages and accuses them of being shill for other companies because they have opinions that are not 100% pro tesla.

considering I've only started 1 DM in 2020... hey @diplomat33 how are you doing buddy?