Firmware 8.0

[msnow]

I think this is a pattern we are seeing with regulators getting involved and restricting things.

In the UK we now have a limitation where a car cannot "undertake".
The US I believe are more relaxed about lane discipline but in the UK it is not allowed unless in queueing traffic.
The problem this causes is that if eg I am in the "inside" lane and car in the "outside" lane slows for any reason then I now get slowed quite abruptly by AP, which in turn creates an unexpected braking scenario which I consider a dangerous safety risk in its own right.

The problem Tesla has is that if it is seen to condone speed in excess of the limit or other behaviour considered outside regulations irrespective of "the driver is in control mantra" then it is Tesla that will take the heat not the driver from the less well informed majority.

Steadily excessive and invasive regulation can make AP less and less of a desirable feature.

I think this is exactly right. It's likely the regulators are saying to Tesla that when in AP mode the speed limit is the speed limit. I really wish Tesla would provide Release Notes so we aren't left with just making anecdotal or informed speculation.

 

[WannabeOwner]

Sometimes people ask why every little thing in the UI can't be configurable. This is why.

I don't see why. We have CONFIG in our software, our "framework" allows for something to either be in-the-personal-settings or not-in-the-personal-settings; it is the trivial to decide that it is "in or "out" or, indeed, to change our minds and move it from one to the other; it just needs the design to allow for this ability (which, given that there are "some" personal settings already it would be pretty unforgivable if that was not how the current stuff was designed). There might be a limitation on how much persistent memory/storage there is available though, or some other Gotcha..

the more toggles, the bigger your test matrix

We require no less than 14wks to finish and properly vet our code

I hope not on both count. I would expect there to be a fully automated software test system which was run regularly (probably daily (e.g. overnight) against a daily-build), that way the moment [well "by tomorrow"] that something is built the developer gets feedback as to whether there are any side-effects, and can adjust accordingly - rather than finding out, ages later, that there is a problem and then the fixes that are then made have major impacts on other parts of the system. That's how we used to do it, before automated-testing, and we could never predict a shipping date at all, let alone with any certainty. Machine-testing changed all that for us.

If there are any surprises, here, in testing of a formal QA release, which had not come to light in daily build testing, there would be blood on the carpet! OTOH users saying "I don't like that THIS does THAT" or "Its odd that if I do THIS then THAT displays" does arise (for us) in QA testing, but IMHO there is something seriously wrong with daily build / automated testing if the feedback from a QA Release is "If I do THIS then THAT happens and THAT should never happen / is wrong".

That said we are seeing snafus during Tesla Production Releases, and we aren't party to how much, if any, stuff came up & was fixed during their QA Testing, so there is a lot of room for improvement.

The cost (both actual and PR) of a bug getting into a Production Release is so expensive that they must, surely??, be incentivised into preventing it five-9's, or more, of the time??

 

[180r]

Unfortunately, I can confirm the 2.48.16 speed restriction report made by @cgiGuy . On undivided roads, the speed cannot be set over the speed limit.. On divided highway, the max workable setting is still 90 mph.

 

[kavyboy]

Unfortunately, I can confirm the 2.48.16 speed restriction report made by @cgiGuy . On undivided roads, the speed cannot be set over the speed limit.. On divided highway, the max workable setting is still 90 mph.

Thanks. I now know not to update.

 

[180r]

Done! Can you elaborate on the "Miss Bee" part?

2.48.16 came on my Dog's birthday, same name.

 

[Saghost]

Unfortunately, I can confirm the 2.48.16 speed restriction report made by @cgiGuy . On undivided roads, the speed cannot be set over the speed limit.. On divided highway, the max workable setting is still 90 mph.

Wow. Now I'll really piss people off if I use Autopilot on a non-interstate road. Does the NHTSA really think folks drive anywhere near the speed limit on little roads?

I don't mind not being able to speed beyond the flow of traffic. I do mind having my driver assistance features limited to speeds low enough to infuriate drivers around me.

If they can convince those folks to drive the limit too, I'd be fine with that, but this will be annoying.

 

[eye.surgeon]

I can honestly say that autopilot is worse now and I use it less than when it first came out. So many restrictions, so many nags. Most of the time it's easier to not use it. The first release was highly usable.

 

[aesculus]

I can honestly say that autopilot is worse now and I use it less than when it first came out. So many restrictions, so many nags. Most of the time it's easier to not use it. The first release was highly usable.

True. But I still like TACC.

 

[mblakele]

This reminds me of a passage from Pratchett's Last Continent:

...indeed, many things are not impossible until they have been tried.

Like a busy government which only passes expensive laws prohibiting some new and interesting thing when people have actually found a way of doing it, the universe relied a great deal on things not being tried at all. When something is tried, Ponder found, it often does turn it out to be impossible very quickly, but it takes a little while for this to really be the case* — in effect, for the overworked laws of causality to hurry to the scene and pretend it has been impossible all along.

* In the case of cold fusion, this was longer than usual.​

For "Ponder" substitute "Elon Musk", and for the quirky universe that's "like a busy government" substitute... well, various governments. See also: Hong Kong, Australia, and Singapore.

 

[msnow]

Thanks. I now know not to update.

Be prepared that to save your 5 mph you won't want 8.1. 9.0, and so on either. You'll be left behind for the sake of 5 mph on restricted roads. You might be cutting off your nose to spite your face.

 

[Whitmarsh]

I think this is a pattern we are seeing with regulators getting involved and restricting things.

In the UK we now have a limitation where a car cannot "undertake".
The US I believe are more relaxed about lane discipline but in the UK it is not allowed unless in queueing traffic.
The problem this causes is that if eg I am in the "inside" lane and car in the "outside" lane slows for any reason then I now get slowed quite abruptly by AP, which in turn creates an unexpected braking scenario which I consider a dangerous safety risk in its own right.

The problem Tesla has is that if it is seen to condone speed in excess of the limit or other behaviour considered outside regulations irrespective of "the driver is in control mantra" then it is Tesla that will take the heat not the driver from the less well informed majority.

Steadily excessive and invasive regulation can make AP less and less of a desirable feature.

It's a myth that overtaking on the inside (left in the UK) is not allowed; it's just recommended that one does not. But it's nonsense on a multi-lane road because you have to keep lane-hopping in order to overtake.

 

[Saghost]

Be prepared that to save your 5 mph you won't want 8.1. 9.0, and so on either. You'll be left behind for the sake of 5 mph on restricted roads. You might be cutting off your nose to spite your face.

Yeah. There's stuff promised in 8.1 that I really want, so I'll probably update then. I'm just annoyed and planning to complain a lot.

 

[msnow]

Yeah. There's stuff promised in 8.1 that I really want, so I'll probably update then. I'm just annoyed and planning to complain a lot.

Understood. I feel your pain.

 

[HankLloydRight]

I can honestly say that autopilot is worse now and I use it less than when it first came out. So many restrictions, so many nags. Most of the time it's easier to not use it. The first release was highly usable.

Yup. And lots of people think full self driving is right around the corner. Yeah, sure.

 

[msnow]

Yup. And lots of people think full self driving is right around the corner. Yeah, sure.

It may be right around the corner if you think the next corner is 10 years away. Even if the technology gets there the regulators are not even close to acceptance.

 

[kavyboy]

Be prepared that to save your 5 mph you won't want 8.1. 9.0, and so on either. You'll be left behind for the sake of 5 mph on restricted roads. You might be cutting off your nose to spite your face.

I'm actually really happy right now... completely satisfied. All the stuff I care about, for me, personally, is at a sweet spot. If 8.1 or 9 provides more than it takes away, and it'll have to be compelling, I will reconsider then. For now, no gripes and I'm happy for the change report.

 

[thegruf]

It's a myth that overtaking on the inside (left in the UK) is not allowed; it's just recommended that one does not. But it's nonsense on a multi-lane road because you have to keep lane-hopping in order to overtake.

Wrong - and somewhat of a concern that you are not aware of this.

UK Highway code:
Rule 268
Do not overtake on the left or move to a lane on your left to overtake. In congested conditions, where adjacent lanes of traffic are moving at similar speeds, traffic in left-hand lanes may sometimes be moving faster than traffic to the right. In these conditions you may keep up with the traffic in your lane even if this means passing traffic in the lane to your right. Do not weave in and out of lanes to overtake.

Whilst it is not illegal per se, to breach a rule of the Highway code invites prosecution for Careless or worse Dangerous driving.

The Rule however highlights my precise point, that Tesla by enforcing no "undertaking" (in the UK) at all times, even when in congested traffic, creates unecessary risk situations with unexpected braking when the lane in front is clear.

The specific incident where I really noticed this was when the lane nearest the median suddenly slowed due to queuing traffic, my lane was clear, a car swtiched to my lane behind me from the queuing lane and suddenly my car brakes too, leading to me getting hooted at and flashed for apparently "brake testing" the chap behind me for no reason. Had there been a vehicle behind him that could well have been a rear-ender.

The more I think about it the more I think Tesla/Regulators have overstepped the mark with this feature and it should be withdrawn.

I guess this is an inevitable consequence though of the first (sad) fataility of a driver whilst using AP, even if said fatality was puportedly watching a dvd at the time and not watching the road ahead (to be confirmed whe nthe final report is released).
Everyone else gets the tech tamed down.

 

[LastGas]

Previously you could go 5 mph over the speed limit with Autosteer EVEN IF you had the speed offset to zero. It's not related.

But I understand the change. If the car is driving, it shouldn't go over the limit and that's where we're moving--towards the car driving.

 

[thegruf]

the car isnt driving

 

[HankLloydRight]

Even if the technology gets there the regulators are not even close to acceptance.

I have zero doubt the technology is close. Society and the laws will be at least a decade behind.

By then, we'll have flying cars, but won't be able to drive/fly them because those laws don't exist yet.