Firmware 9 in August will start rolling out full self-driving features!!!

[Bladerskb]

I feel like you are jumping the gun here. We don't even have "FSD" yet to judge and yet it seems you are already concluding that Tesla has rebranded "FSD" as L2 and will therefore break its promises and prove that L4 "FSD" was a lie from the start.

Elon literally just said that the current EAP is FSD. I mean come on...

This validates @rnortman point which is, when you compare what Elon was saying to what he's obfuscating today, its completely different. As @boonedocks pointed out, he is trying to change the narrative of what FSD is so he can claim he delivered it.

Although unlike others i believe at some point his narcissistic ego will take over and he will say that its L5 and you don't have to pay attention and the accidents/deaths start piling up and there will be a war in the media (and he will try use the BS AP accident misleading stat which he created just for this to deflect blame) and the regulators will recall it and then he will be able to say like Trump, "the short enrichment NHTSA regulators and the fake news media are stopping me from saving lives".

This has been my prediction from 2016 and it still lines up

 

[diplomat33]

@rnortman @boonedocks @am_dmd

What @diplomat33 is doing & saying right now is what i said would happen almost 3 years ago.
First its, Yes Tesla will be first to L5 and the model 3 will self deliver itself with no human driver, i can sleep in my car, send out to pick people up and drop off my kids, do work while the car is driving, sleep of long road trip or after a long than.

Then its, who cares, what does it matter if you have to pay attention, why would you want to sleep anyway or do anything else while driving. Aslong as you don't intervene this fulfills Elon's promise. watching a movie while my car drives? lol that's a joke.

I know what you are doing. If I were to stand my ground and insist that AP2 will deliver FSD then you will (rightly) laugh at the ludicrous idea. But if I temper my expectations for FSD, you will accuse me of shifting the goal posts. It's a lose-lose.

I am cautious optimistic about "FSD". I think we will get "drive from A to B without driver intervention" on AP3. No, I don't think it will be L5 though. I want Tesla to succeed. I want my car to get good features that make driving better. I think my position is reasonable. If that is shifting the goal posts, fine.

Elon clearly said that HW2 was FSD and FSD was Level 5, dozens of times. Including that FSD which is level 5 would have "driver-less capability." Including a video that the driver is not there because of legal requirement. So how is that trolling on my part? I'm simply providing a statement directly from Elon

Stop beating a dead horse already! Your problem is that you are only interested in "being right" about Elon's failed statements in the past. That's all you know how to do. No matter what the discussion is, all you know how to do is repeat that Musk was wrong in the past about FSD. Yes, you are right about that. Now what? I am interested in the future, not the past.

 

[BigD0g]

Last 30 posts........Look what happens to the mood and conversation when the last software update was 6 weeks ago(for most of us) and the last meaningful one was moooonths ago.


How does that saying go.....Repeat something (untruths) enough and it will become reality (truths) to those listening. Using this bastardized definition of FSD I guess I will get my pre-paid FSD in my lifetime. WTF

Ugh, when does the class actions start? I'm in, i'd like to be one of the lead plaintiffs so I can get more then a $228 check... Where's @croman !!

 

[diplomat33]

Elon literally just said that the current EAP is FSD. I mean come on...

And, I already told you that I do not defend his statement. My point is that we still need to see what the "FSD" package is. That has not been released yet. Once the "FSD" package is released, we can judge and see how close to true FSD it is.

This validates @rnortman point which is, when you compare what Elon was saying to what he's obfuscating today, its completely different. As @boonedocks pointed out, he is trying to change the narrative of what FSD is so he can claim he delivered it.

Yes, it is possible that Tesla will deliver "drive from A to B without driver intervention" as part of the "FSD" package and thereby claim that they've delivered FSD. It would not be FSD but it would be self-driving.

Here's the thing: Elon did over promise and say a lot of silly stuff in the past. No one is denying that fact. The best he can do now is deliver the best possible self-driving software that Tesla has developed so that owners who purchased the "FSD" package get something for their money.

 

[rnortman]

Well do you want your car to drive itself from A to B without you touching the wheel?

Honestly, in practical layman's terms, I dont think it is all that bad a definition of self-driving. It does get the point across of what the car can do and it does encompass L4 autonomy also. It is just not exclusive to L4.

It is a shitty cop-out definition of self-driving. Having the car drive itself supervised is of very little economic value. What is of economic value is if I can do work or entertainment instead of driving, or simply not be in the car at all and have it pick up my kids for me or give strangers rides (for money). If I have to pay attention constantly I might as well be doing the driving myself -- ideally with a very good driver-assistance system that improves my safety.

In other words, Tesla promised -- and accepted payment for -- something of enormous economic and practical value, and now promises to deliver something of hardly any practical or economic value.

 

[diplomat33]

It is a shitty cop-out definition of self-driving. Having the car drive itself supervised is of very little economic value. What is of economic value is if I can do work or entertainment instead of driving, or simply not be in the car at all and have it pick up my kids for me or give strangers rides (for money). If I have to pay attention constantly I might as well be doing the driving myself -- ideally with a very good driver-assistance system that improves my safety.

In other words, Tesla promised -- and accepted payment for -- something of enormous economic and practical value, and now promises to deliver something of hardly any practical or economic value.

But how do we know that it will supervised self-driving? Are you not making an assumption? After all, if the system is able to drive from A to B without driver intervention with enough reliability, then Tesla could make it unsupervised.

 

[BigD0g]

But how do we know that it will supervised self-driving? Are you not making an assumption? After all, if the system is able to drive from A to B without driver intervention with enough reliability, then Tesla could make it unsupervised.

It's true, but at the current rate pigs might also might be able to fly before then.

 

[Matias]

You are exaggerating. The definition "drives from A to B without driver intervention" is completely consistent with the 2016 video. You can still get what you were promised and what you paid for. There is nothing to suggest that Tesla won't deliver that.

The person in the drivers seat is only there for legal reason

 

[diplomat33]

The person on the drivers seat is only for legal reason
View attachment 373723

And? What's your point? The video says "the person in the driver's seat is only there for legal reasons. He is not doing anything. The car is driving itself" So the video is illustrating exactly what I described, that the car is driving from A to B without any driver intervention.

 

[Matias]

And? What's your point? The video says "the person in the driver's seat is only there for legal reasons. He is not doing anything. The car is driving itself" So the video is illustrating exactly what I described, that the car is driving from A to B without any driver intervention.

That video suggest, that Tesla’s system is so good, that there is no need for a driver monitoring it. i.e. the car can safely drive without a driver. So it must be 99,999% reliable.

 

[diplomat33]

That video suggest, that Tesla’s system is so good, that there is no need for a driver monitoring it. i.e. the car can safely drive without a driver. So it must be 99,999% reliable.

I agree. So what's the issue? That is what Tesla is promising FSD will be and will presumably try to deliver. In fact, Musk hinted at that in the earnings call when he said that they need to get FSD to 99.999% before they can release to the public. So Tesla is trying to get "FSD" to 99.999% in order to do what that video promises.

 

[Bladerskb]

By the way 99.999% that is being tossed about would result in an accident every 100,000 miles

 

[Matias]

I agree. So what's the issue?

I don’t belive, that Tesla will achieve that with the current sensors.

 

[diplomat33]

I don’t belive, that Tesla will achieve that with the current sensors.

Oh, ok.

 

[csanders90D]

By the way 99.999% that is being tossed about would result in an accident every 100,000 miles

You're assuming that the 99.999% number is based on miles and not on trips. If its a percentage of trips, then you're looking at 100,00 trips and probably over a million miles between accidents.

At 100,000 miles, you're almost up to human driver safety, and at a million you're better than most humans.

 

[MP3Mike]

By the way 99.999% that is being tossed about would result in an accident every 100,000 miles

You're assuming that every time it makes a mistake or misses a sign that it causes an accident. And that certainly isn't true.

 

[emmz0r]

I don’t belive, that Tesla will achieve that with the current sensors.

No worries, for people that bought FSD they have to pony up the hardware to meet the product requirements.

 

[f205v]

I think the 99,999% refers to the number of events: i.e 99,999% of the times it sees a red traffic light it stops, the remaining 0,001% of the times it crosses with red.
(scary, TBH)

 

[rnortman]

I agree. So what's the issue? That is what Tesla is promising FSD will be and will presumably try to deliver. In fact, Musk hinted at that in the earnings call when he said that they need to get FSD to 99.999% before they can release to the public. So Tesla is trying to get "FSD" to 99.999% in order to do what that video promises.

That video very strongly implied that it was already performing that well. In 2016. We now know that this was a lie.

When I first started arguing these points with you -- months ago I believe -- I thought you were a reasonable person, open to argument and persuasion. It is now clear that you will simply find any way to twist and distort the plain facts to make it seem like Tesla has done nothing wrong here.

 

[rnortman]

You're assuming that the 99.999% number is based on miles and not on trips. If its a percentage of trips, then you're looking at 100,00 trips and probably over a million miles between accidents.

At 100,000 miles, you're almost up to human driver safety, and at a million you're better than most humans.

Percentage of trips is not a reasonable way to measure it. It is certainly measured by percentage of instances of individual features/capabilities performing correctly in individual situations -- individual traffic lights correctly identified, intersections navigated, exits taken as high-level metrics, but at a lower level even percentage of camera frames in which a pedestrian is correctly identified, etc. 99.999% leaves a lot of room for people to get killed when it is this sort of metric.