FSD Beta 10.69

[legendsk]

I think most agree that semi-intelligent and up biological creatures respond well to positive recognition and reward. It works equally well for dogs, children, spouses, employees, etc. (Have to use a better grade hot dogs for employees.) If someone can invent a reward system that AI will recognize and respond to, there is quite a market developing. A group is always smarter than the smartest person in the group. Surely the group on this forum can figure out rewards that my MYLR will recognize and respond to? Something along the line of a battery with a USB-C that can be plugged in and give the car a little shot of juice when it makes a good UPLT???? Collectively we might be able to provide a boost to the FSD development?

 

[willow_hiller]

Surely the group on this forum can figure out rewards that my MYLR will recognize and respond to?

I pat my steering wheel and tell my car "Good job!" when it does well. Does that count?

 

[JulienW]

I think most agree that semi-intelligent and up biological creatures respond well to positive recognition and reward. It works equally well for dogs, children....

Who's a good boy Neural Network? You are and such a sweet heart of a Neural Network. Daddy loves his little Neural network. Now who deserves a treat but this big boy of a Neural Network? You are daddy's favorite Neural Network in the whole wide world.

 

[Daniel in SD]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1582805523484680192

90% Success on Chuck’s ULT beer secured.
@AlanSubie4Life #neverdoubtelon

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

OMG It’s happening!

https://twitter.com/x/status/1582849119155982336

 

[drtimhill]

However, it can't go through roundabouts in 50% of the time - it starts and then competely stops in the middle, requiring me to disengage and listen for honks of drivers behind me. Let's see.

yeah it's still weak there. But you dont need to disengage, just nudge the car with the accelerator to get it moving.

 

[thewishmaster]

OMG It’s happening!

https://twitter.com/x/status/1582849119155982336

I guess no 10.69.3 for us until then?

 

[sleepydoc]

Who's a good boy Neural Network? You are and such a sweet heart of a Neural Network. Daddy loves his little Neural network. Now who deserves a treat but this big boy of a Neural Network? You are daddy's favorite Neural Network in the whole wide world.

Such a good network! Guess who’s getting more bandwith?

 

[EVNow]

I guess no 10.69.3 for us until then?

69.3 won't be the wide release. We should get 69.3 this/next week and the wide release in Nov/Dec.

 

[Tronguy]

Such a good network! Guess who’s getting more bandwith?

Look, I get it, and the thread is seriously funny.

But about 1.5 years ago, whilst on TACC and LK, while still on EAP, the SO and I were traveling northbound on I95 through Connecticut. Traffic was heavy and fast, around 65 mph. Nothing exciting, but was in the left lane of four at that point.

There was some guy in a pick-up truck who was pushing it a bit, trying to get ahead of traffic by swapping lanes back and forth a bit aggressively; we had passed him, he had passed us a couple of times. As it happened, he was about three cars behind us in the left lane.

Suddenly, without warning, the M3 went into nearly-screetch-the-tires braking. It had reacted a bit faster than I had; traffic up ahead had slowed suddenly, then the lane came to a halt. That was back in RADAR days, so it's likely that the car saw the slow-down starting a few cars ahead. In any case, it came to a halt, 20' behind the car in front of us, seemingly quivering.

The SO and I, without thinking, reached up together and patted the dash. GOOD CAR. You get a car-wash treat!

The pickup truck? Too fast, too close following, and, while attempting not to hit the car in front of him, managed to sideswipe that car and the Jersey Barrier on the left at the same time.

And, except for the smacker behind us, traffic picked up again and continued.

That's about the time I started thinking that Tesla's claims that driving on EAP/FSD was safer than not doing that had some merit.

 

[kabin]

FSDb does seem to struggle a bit with reflections at the moment. One day I happened to have a puddle placed exactly between my vehicle and a large metal pole, such that the reflection of the pole was visible in the puddle. While waiting at the light, FSDb rendered a grey obstruction in the middle of the intersection, right where the puddle was reflecting the pole. It disappeared when the vehicle proceeded through the intersection, as the angle sufficiently changed to reflect something else.

Eventually they'll need to spend some time trying to solve/minimize these real-world scenarios. I recall some excuses Musk had for disliking radar was dropouts and false returns. There's no getting away from them in the video world.

 

[willow_hiller]

This evening, I probably came the closest I have yet to an accident on FSDb. The other driver would have been at fault, and I agree with the choice FSDb made, but that doesn't make it any less startling! Had the opportunity to clip a video so you can judge for yourself:

Speed limit is 35, I was going 40. For just a few frames here in the top left you can make out the two pedestrians that were crossing the road. They had reached the median by the time my vehicle came to a stop in front of the crosswalk. You can see the vehicle immediately in front of mine considered stopping for them but decided against it at the last minute. FSDb stopped quickly, but it was a reasonable amount of decel.

And of course the vehicle behind me was rapidly changing lanes and didn't notice I had stopped. I think their AEB kicked in because I could hear their tires screech:

And then the pedestrians paused for a second upon hearing the tires screech and decided to walk backwards along the median to another crosswalk instead of proceeding to cross:

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

and I agree with the choice FSDb made,

I don’t. In many states in this situation you are not required to stop nor is it even a close call (they were on the other side of the road!). (Can look up the varied rules on the topic regarding which lane pedestrians need to be in to require a stop.)

Would you have really stopped in this situation? If not, just press that accelerator. It’s very risky to stop in a place and manner that people do not expect, especially if you are stopping quickly. Looks like 40mph to 0 in less than 3 seconds (always hard to tell, made more difficult by gif format).

If nothing else, the decision to stop should have been made earlier (lots of risk still).

Crosswalk should have the flashing lights on pedestrian request I guess. Not sure if that makes crossing safer for pedestrians, but might reduce rear ending. This crosswalk position seems very challenging without more flashing lights; just too much to expect of drivers.

If you had been hit, it would have sucked. So never fear intervening (it’ll beep if there is a real hazard). It’s actually pretty hard to monitor though. Judgement calls that have to be overridden in a split second all the time.

 

[willow_hiller]

In many states in this situation you are not required to stop nor is it even a close call (they were on the other side of the road!). (Can look up the varied rules on the topic regarding which lane pedestrians need to be in to require a stop.)

This was within DC, so the laws are pretty strict and unambiguous. Mostly made for 20 MPH city streets instead of the faster outlying areas:

Code of the District of Columbia
§ 50–2201.28. Right-of-way at crosswalks.
"The driver of a vehicle shall stop and remain stopped to allow a pedestrian to cross the roadway within any marked crosswalk, or unmarked crosswalk at an intersection, when the pedestrian is upon the lane, or within one lane approaching the lane, on which the vehicle is traveling or onto which it is turning."

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

This was within DC, so the laws are pretty strict and unambiguous. Mostly made for 20 MPH city streets instead of the faster outlying areas:

Code of the District of Columbia
§ 50–2201.28. Right-of-way at crosswalks.
"The driver of a vehicle shall stop and remain stopped to allow a pedestrian to cross the roadway within any marked crosswalk, or unmarked crosswalk at an intersection, when the pedestrian is upon the lane, or within one lane approaching the lane, on which the vehicle is traveling or onto which it is turning."

Right so I believe that means no stop in this case (this one-lane-away language is what I have seen elsewhere too). Since they were not in the road. These things are always ambiguous, and obviously the median matters since someone could just stand there indefinitely and if they were not “upon” the lane there would be no duty to stop.

1) Upon the lane? No.
2) Within one lane approaching the lane (on which the vehicle is traveling). No.

I would not have stopped and I believe it would be legal as long as the pedestrians were not demonstrating intent to enter upon the lanes.

Even the traffic in the lane closest to them didn’t need to stop, though that would be highly dependent on the exact timing of when the pedestrians got to the median and made a move to the next set of lanes. Obviously at some point you have to stop. But guess you have to ask the lawyers on that one!

 

[willow_hiller]

1) Upon the lane? No.
2) Within one lane approaching the lane (on which the vehicle is traveling). No.

I do wish the dash cam captured the wide angle lens, but maybe this will help. Here's the crosswalk:

And by the time my car came to a stop, the pedestrians we're in the area I marked in red.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

I do wish the dash cam captured the wide angle lens, but maybe this will help. Here's the crosswalk:

View attachment 865556

And by the time my car came to a stop, the pedestrians we're in the area I marked in red.

Right. So they were neither upon the first lane nor were they within one lane of your travel lane.

Anyway while you say the text is unambiguous it seems an bit ambiguous to me.

Looks to me like it is legal to go, basically until the pedestrian indicates intent to cross into the first lane. And even in that case it would be legal for traffic in the far lane (the one to the right of you) to continue on still (I would stop though!). Just how I read it, but what do I know.

In any case they weren’t even close to that point and it’s clear to me there was no duty to stop unless the precedent has interpreted this differently.

 

[Dewg]

We know from release notes and verbiage that the current version is hyper sensitive to pedestrians. Why is this even a discussion?

 

[dckiwi]

This evening, I probably came the closest I have yet to an accident on FSDb. The other driver would have been at fault, and I agree with the choice FSDb made, but that doesn't make it any less startling! Had the opportunity to clip a video so you can judge for yourself:

This example perfectly represents the safety risk of FSDb today - not hitting something/someone else, but getting hit by another driver.

Without interventions, I think it is HIGHLY unlikely that FSDb would run into another object - a car, a pedestrian, a median, etc.

But between phantom breaking, long delays before making unprotected turns, and these overreactions to VRUs, the real risk is another driver will run into you.

 

[EVNow]

But between phantom breaking, long delays before making unprotected turns, and these overreactions to VRUs, the real risk is another driver will run into you

Stopping at protected turns is the real problem - that's where the car is likely to be back ended. One of the reasons empty roundabouts are a problem...