Fed up?

[Fernand]

This FSD issue ties to a wider issue that all of us will be running into soon, when our warranties run out. It's a growing realization that too many companies are cornering people by blocking access to parts and information, so we can't maintain/repair what we purchased. Look at Rich Rebuilds, and at what's happening in the farming sector.

Those of you who support the stale corporate arguments will appreciate the fallacies soon enough, say if you can't buy a tail light assembly or some miscellaneous part to replace on your car. Or access some basic schematics. And how is the next generation to learn anything without hands on experience? We're not demanding access to source code, but isn't it Musk who's saying it's open source?

Tesla's policies are in flux. There is a growing Right To Repair movement and we should be aware, and push Elon Musk to always stand on the right side of the issues. Treating a $10,000 software add-on as not belonging to the person who paid for it cash outright - in advance - is in the same vein as Apple making older iPhones deliberately slow down, making battery replacement nearly impossible, and locking parts to prevent repairs, etc.

Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak is standing up to Apple's abusive practices. There is no reason to accept such behavior. The throw-away monopoly mentality wastes precious resources, keeps people ignorant, and has to end. And today's kids will make sure it does. Learn about the issues and help Tesla be one of the good guys, the way they started out.

.

 

[Sporty]

(Assuming the feature worked) I think this is a reason the subscription option makes some sense. It can move with you to your next car … if you think the value is the other way around (Eg you’d use it all the time, and own the car for > 4 years) then you get buy it out right with the knowledge you’ll do it again on the next car and you’re coming out ahead.

What we need is the price for a personal lifetime subscription.

 

[Steve125]

The promise is no humans in the loop. Full Self Driving.

Full autonomy for wide scale ground transportation is a waste. Wish Musk would go all in on autonomous passenger drones.

 

[Cyberax]

Besides, this isn't a game or a shopping list app.

That's an extremely unfair comparison. Shopping list apps EXIST right now, while FSD is purely theoretical at this point.

This is an expensive accessory. But one that's all software and can be wiped or loaded into any Tesla. So it's a little different from say a rear-view camera. There is no relevant precedent.

At this point there's nothing to wipe or load. FSD doesn't exist and never will on the current production cars.

That's why making it transferable to a future vehicle that _might_ _be_ capable of true FSD is the only honest way forward.

 

[Fernand]

The expression "FSD" was a dumb label. The current understanding is that there are degrees of automation, ranging from the simplest stick on accelerator type cruise control to completely unattended auto-steering and speed/braking control. The latter is called Level 5.

One of the problems with the whole concept is that it doesn't specify usable set, circumstances, or liability. Those of us who use Navigate on Autopilot, NOA, which is part of the "FSD" option on Tesla cars, are running at Level 5 on freeways most of the time, and it works damned well. People who don't have it, or who have only dabbled in using it, are the most vocal skeptics.

The freeway with no cross-traffic is the useful set, and well defined roadways and markings are important circumstances. Those of us who are accustomed to it know when it's appropriate to engage it, and disengage it. That brings us to the liability issue. Although "manual" drivers cause lethal accidents every day, data shows that Tesla's automation is much less likely to do so. But it's not zero. Staying in control, recognizing circumstances that are likely to confuse us, or confuse the automation, is highly advisable. Technically I suppose this makes the Tesla a Level 4 machine.

If we define "Full Self Driving" as an unconditional Level 5, meaning human attention isn't ever required - in unlimited set and circumstances, with no possible liabilities - then your pessimism is spot on. But those of us who use NOA everyday know how useful it is and how much it keeps developing. It's impossible to predict how close we'll come to the ideal, and when.

In practice, the system as it is, call it whatever you want, is extremely useful in reducing fatigue and danger. I'm fine with watching its evolution and using it to advantage at every step. It's something I purchased and I don't want to give up when I trade in my car.

 

[Dan D.]

The expression "FSD" was a dumb label. The current understanding is that there are degrees of automation, ranging from the simplest stick on accelerator type cruise control to completely unattended auto-steering and speed/braking control. The latter is called Level 5.

One of the problems with the whole concept is that it doesn't specify usable set, circumstances, or liability. Those of us who use Navigate on Autopilot, NOA, which is part of the "FSD" option on Tesla cars, are running at Level 5 on freeways most of the time, and it works damned well. People who don't have it, or who have only dabbled in using it, are the most vocal skeptics.

The freeway with no cross-traffic is the useful set, and well defined roadways and markings are important circumstances. Those of us who are accustomed to it know when it's appropriate to engage it, and disengage it. That brings us to the liability issue. Although "manual" drivers cause lethal accidents every day, data shows that Tesla's automation is much less likely to do so. But it's not zero. Staying in control, recognizing circumstances that are likely to confuse us, or confuse the automation, is highly advisable. Technically I suppose this makes the Tesla a Level 4 machine.

If we define "Full Self Driving" as an unconditional Level 5, meaning human attention isn't ever required - in unlimited set and circumstances, with no possible liabilities - then your pessimism is spot on. But those of us who use NOA everyday know how useful it is and how much it keeps developing. It's impossible to predict how close we'll come to the ideal, and when.

In practice, the system as it is, call it whatever you want, is extremely useful in reducing fatigue and danger. I'm fine with watching its evolution and using it to advantage at every step. It's something I purchased and I don't want to give up when I trade in my car.

I'm sure you'll get more feedback from those who know the Levels better than me, but your car is Level 2. That's how Tesla has declared the system, and the responsibility for driving is entirely with the driver = Level 2

 

[t3sl4drvr]

I'm sure you'll get more feedback from those who know the Levels better than me, but your car is Level 2. That's how Tesla has declared the system, and the responsibility for driving is entirely with the driver = Level 2

Elon Musk says Tesla's Full Self-Driving tech will have Level 5 autonomy by the end of 2021

Tesla's CEO also confirmed that customers won't be able to transfer previous FSD purchases between old and new cars.

www.cnet.com

 

[Fernand]

Yeah, well that sucks. How does he justify wanting us to buy it over
again when Tesla only delivered a fragment of what was promised?

With the minority that bought FSD and would be subject to transfer,
is it really that big a financial win for the company to treat us early
adopter like this?

I'm the first to say that what has been delivered is very useful and
remarkable. I'd be happy with any added type of assist on city streets.
I don't care what "level" people want to call things. Damned right it
would be stupid to go to sleep in the back. That doesn't make it
useless.

But what about the naive folks who expected robo-taxis driving their
kids to school in 2021?

It's now irritating that having pre-bought this FSD accessory,
we're being tantalized with a beta pre-release - but we have
to first pass a "safety test" that's not even accurately calculated,
let alone meaningful. I understand the rationale, but why does it
all have to be so poorly handled?