FSD Beta 10.69

[nvx1977]

Ironic that it does this but so frequently fails to use the signals in a timely manner for actual turns it knows it is going to take.

doesn't it feel like this is all so easily corrected via heuristics?

Signal should come on at the intent of a lane change. Not sure why there's even a rule in there to use the blinker on a sharp curve. Humans rarely do this, and there's no law (at least where I've driven) that requires it.

In my area, we have a lot of roads that fork into a Y, where both forks are somewhat shallow turns. One of the paths has the right of way, and those traveling it will give a courtesy signal to indicate which fork they are taking. This allows people coming the other way to know for sure whether they can go early or yield. This is the only situation where I will use my blinker while "going straight".

 

[Mardak]

How many people do you think have purchased, or subscribed, to FSD in the US/Canada? ~300k seems like it would be pretty close to everyone

Troy Teslike estimated 329,360 North America FSD fleet as of 2022 Q2. If 160k potential testers at 80+ safety score and the estimated fleet are accurate, that would suggest the current expansion with 10.69.2.2 is to about 50% of NA FSD buyers (ignoring subscribers).

Interestingly, the Safety Score Beta support page also says "Most drivers are expected to have a Safety Score of 80 or above." which does match up with that 50% number for "most."

 

[MP3Mike]

Interestingly, the Safety Score Beta support page also says "Most drivers are expected to have a Safety Score of 80 or above." which does match up with that 50% number for "most."

Don't forget that not everyone has opted in to a safety score. So it could be that only about half of the FSD owners have opted in to the beta program.

 

[DanwiththeMYP]

If I am on 2022.20.9 on a 2022 MYP. Is there a chance I would get added to the testing fleet if I'm opted-in FSD.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

The way you micro analyze each milla-second I question if you will ever be satisfied with any result or progress. For most, simply completing a turn they were not able to accomplish Safely is an acceptable result even if it could have been done .0002 seconds faster lol. And just saying something is “easy” doesn’t make it possible. Sometimes good is good enough as long as it can Safely accomplish the task. So many valuable contributions and feedback on this thread but sometimes the micro analysis with numbers that really mean nothing devalue the context. JMO

Seems Elon agrees with me at least. Happy to be able to contribute here with the micro analysis of the numbers. Tighter gaps will necessitate faster movements from FSD (see above):

https://twitter.com/x/status/1571983721024086018

 

[Knightshade]

Don't forget that not everyone has opted in to a safety score. So it could be that only about half of the FSD owners have opted in to the beta program.

There's also some remaining % of people who:

Bought FSD
Still have MCU1

Those folks count as part of the "bought FSD" total-- but don't have access to the score at all (and presumably will have a good case for getting a free MCU upgrade when the beta goes out to everyone in the geo)

This won't be a MASSIVE number, but probably something in the ~10k range depending how many folks with MCU1 -and- FSD chose not to pay for MCU2.

 

[Dewg]

Ironic that it does this but so frequently fails to use the signals in a timely manner for actual turns it knows it is going to take.

I've never had it fail to signal when changing lanes. If you're referring to signaling when entering a left turn lane that was created, there is no need to signal there, as it's a lane split (left lane becomes two lanes with the creation of a new left turn lane), it's just picking the left lane in the split. It's courteous to signal, but I don't think there is a traffic law requiring it. The law (at least in California) requires a signal at 100 feet before the turn, which my car always signals about 100 feet before the turn. Again, it's courteous to signal while in the left turn lane, even if you're 200 or 300 feet back (long left turn lane), but it's not required by law.

 

[Mardak]

Not sure why there's even a rule in there to use the blinker on a sharp curve

Most likely there isn't actually a specific rule for blinkers on sharp curves. It's more of the "usual" blinkers on making a turn, e.g., right turn at a 4-way intersection. Except, 4-way intersections don't always have perpendicular legs, so FSD Beta handles turning on the blinker for angled legs too. And similar reasoning for T intersections with 3 legs where for the "top" of the "T" can continue without stopping… then curve that a bit and you're not too different from many curves that happen to have an extra leg (might even be a private driveway) that kinda looks like other situations that do want a blinker.

 

[nvx1977]

Most likely there isn't actually a specific rule for blinkers on sharp curves. It's more of the "usual" blinkers on making a turn, e.g., right turn at a 4-way intersection. Except, 4-way intersections don't always have perpendicular legs, so FSD Beta handles turning on the blinker for angled legs too. And similar reasoning for T intersections with 3 legs where for the "top" of the "T" can continue without stopping… then curve that a bit and you're not too different from many curves that happen to have an extra leg (might even be a private driveway) that kinda looks like other situations that do want a blinker.

Sorry I'm referring to a very specific behavior where the car is turning on the blinkers on a winding road with no intersections. There seems to be some sort of heuristic rule coded in that says to turn the blinker if the curve is sharp enough. It makes no sense. Starting with 69.2, the car started to do this on some of my daily-used roads. I have no way to preempt them, so I look like an idiot to the people behind me.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

I've never had it fail to signal when changing lanes. If you're referring to signaling when entering a left turn lane that was created, there is no need to signal there, as it's a lane split (left lane becomes two lanes with the creation of a new left turn lane), it's just picking the left lane in the split. It's courteous to signal, but I don't think there is a traffic law requiring it. The law (at least in California) requires a signal at 100 feet before the turn, which my car always signals about 100 feet before the turn. Again, it's courteous to signal while in the left turn lane, even if you're 200 or 300 feet back (long left turn lane), but it's not required by law.

This is 10.69.1.1, but no change.

This is definitely (nearly exactly) 100 feet before the turn, based on my calculations, but is it adequate on a road at 50mph (could be less than 2 seconds in advance of turning, if you make the turn quickly)? There's compliance with the law and then there is doing what makes sense. (I believe the law should probably provide a requirement in units of time as well as distance.)

Does it make sense to start slowing down before signaling? What decent driver does this?

I would argue that if you're going to be slowing down substantially, it is courteous and safer to signal your intentions in advance.

(You've seen my other example of a right turn onto a freeway, which is a branched lane, so your argument is "no signal required" - I think that's likely fine if FSD doesn't slow down at all, but what if traffic is stacked up in the turn lane? Do you come to a halt without signaling?)

 

[Mardak]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1571983721024086018

Seems like this thread might be longer lived than other 10.x versions. 10.69 is basically a "major release" except it can't actually be "FSD Beta 11.x" series as that's reserved for single stack highway driving. 10.69(.0) -> 10.69.1 -> 10.69.2 and now upcoming 10.69.3 is following pretty closely with the 2-week release cadence of earlier 10.x releases.

 

[Dewg]

This is 10.69.1.1, but no change.

This is definitely 100 feet before the turn, based on my calculations, but is it adequate on a road at 50mph? There's compliance with the law and then there is doing what makes sense.

Does it make sense to start slowing down before signaling?

I would argue that if you're going to be slowing down substantially, it is courteous and safer to signal your intentions in advance.

I'm not going to disagree with you on what is courteous, and what "makes sense". Telsa is focused on what is legally required right now. Once we have L2 stable and following the law, then we can ask Tesla to work on "courteous" behavior. Or feel free to send an e-mail to them asking them to engage signals 50% sooner (150 feet before the turn), or 100% sooner (200 feet). Or perhaps Elon will combine his neurobiology tech for mind reading with the car and signal when you want it to.

 

[SashaZach]

If I am on 2022.20.9 on a 2022 MYP. Is there a chance I would get added to the testing fleet if I'm opted-in FSD.

If you are already opted into the program then yes. If you subscribe tonight it is highly unlikely unless you drove 100+ miles on autopilot AND the rollout lasted over 7 days.

 

[Fiver]

This is 10.69.1.1, but no change.

This is definitely (nearly exactly) 100 feet before the turn, based on my calculations, but is it adequate on a road at 50mph (could be less than 2 seconds in advance of turning, if you make the turn quickly)? There's compliance with the law and then there is doing what makes sense. (I believe the law should probably provide a requirement in units of time as well as distance.)

Does it make sense to start slowing down before signaling? What decent driver does this?

I would argue that if you're going to be slowing down substantially, it is courteous and safer to signal your intentions in advance.

(You've seen my other example of a right turn onto a freeway, which is a branched lane, so your argument is "no signal required" - I think that's likely fine if FSD doesn't slow down at all, but what if traffic is stacked up in the turn lane? Do you come to a halt without signaling?)

Yea, as I get to the turn into my neighborhood I'm cruising along a somewhat major road, at 40-45MPH. As I approach the traffic light intersection where I turn, I typically hit the turn signal manually well before the turn lane starts at the light. When on AP, It's already moved my car into the turning lane (and it's a short turning lane) before it uses the blinker. The distance before a turn where AP uses the blinker should be doubled, possibly tripled.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

not going to disagree with you on what is courteous

It's not so much about courtesy as it is safety. This is unquestionably unsafe. And Tesla cares about that. It's a bug. It's not due to them "complying with the law."

 

[Dewg]

It's not so much about courtesy as it is safety. This is unquestionably unsafe. And Tesla cares about that. It's a bug. It's not due to them "complying with the law."

I have no idea what to tell you except to quote California Vehicle Code 22108: Any signal of intention to turn right or left shall be given continuously during the last 100 feet traveled by the vehicle before turning. People can disagree and yell all they want, but it doesn't change the vehicle code, which Tesla is adhering to right now.

I'm not saying they won't change it in the future, but for now, it's following the law (at least on my car - I can't speak for other people's cars).

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

I have no idea what to tell you except to quote California Vehicle Code 22108: Any signal of intention to turn right or left shall be given continuously during the last 100 feet traveled by the vehicle before turning. People can disagree and yell all they want, but it doesn't change the vehicle code, which Tesla is adhering to right now.

I'm not saying they won't change it in the future, but for now, it's following the law (at least on my car - I can't speak for other people's cars).

I didn't say it was a violation of the vehicle code. It's a failure to signal, based on common sense. And that has a demonstrable safety impact.

The goal is better than human safety. You don't get there by having people pile into the back of you.

 

[Dewg]

I didn't say it was a violation of the vehicle code. It's a failure to signal, based on common sense. And that has a demonstrable safety impact.

Got it, you're arguing the vehicle code is unsafe and not based on common sense. At least we can have a discussion about that, and what is required to change the vehicle code to bring it into line with common sense and safety.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

Got it, you're arguing the vehicle code is unsafe and not based on common sense. At least we can have a discussion about that, and what is required to change the vehicle code to bring it into line with common sense and safety.

I don't really care about that. I care about my car behaving in a safe manner. That seems a lot more achievable than changing the vehicle code!

There are a lot of things you can do out of an abundance of caution that do not introduce ambiguity, which are not prohibited by the vehicle code. The code establishes minimums for this sort of signal of intent.

 

[Dewg]

I don't really care about that. I care about my car behaving in a safe manner. That seems a lot more achievable than changing the vehicle code!

There are a lot of things you can do out of an abundance of caution that do not introduce ambiguity, which are not prohibited by the vehicle code. The code establishes minimums for this sort of signal of intent.

Sounds like you've got a plan - how do you propose to implement it?