You can install our site as a web app on your iOS device by utilizing the Add to Home Screen feature in Safari. Please see this thread for more details on this.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I refuse to believe that it will go wide release without known issues. That would be extremely impressive with 1000 internal testers.From Elon's latest tweet it sounds like they're working on a series of known issues before releasing 10.69 wider:
It's actually the opposite problem, as a mixed signal circuit designer I do simulations all day so I'm biased by that design flow. In circuit design you must rely heavily on simulations because the cost and time of fabricating chips is so high (months and millions of dollars). Of course there are often unexpected issues that show up in real life so you must add them to your simulation flow.I get the feeling that you're overestimating the abilities of simulation and/or don't understand how much goes into a simulation. (Don't take this wrong, I don't mean it disparagingly) I work in healthcare and we do simulations but even with decades of experience the simulations are still poor models of a complex biological system. This is similar - it's a highly complex and dynamic system with numerous inputs that Tesla is still developing and has relatively limited experience with. If you don't understand the complexities at this point there's not much point in continuing the conversation.
Well, it wouldn’t be double or nothing at this point. But under what terms do you want to bet for two beers? I think we need to be more rigorous in defining the terms this time. We can hash out the details offline and then present themIt does seem like I may need to get two beers from @AlanSubie4Life in the future since what we're seeing now isn't the final 10.69...
Nowhere did he say anything was great. He essentially said you are misallocating resources and working on the wrong problem. In other words, he said that Tesla/Elon/Ashok don't know what they are doing, and they should let him prioritize their work queue.
3. Rail-road crossings (FSD doesn't slow down to speed bump speeds), or
My interpretation of the tweet is that he's quite literal in what he said/meant:From Elon's latest tweet it sounds like they're working on a series of known issues before releasing 10.69 wider
Probably doesn't want another 10.3 debacle. That was a less than fun, anxiety producing update and I still remember day one (almost everyone got updates on day one) and my several scary and perplexing FCWs.soooo why doesn’t it go internal then external? Why is it internal, shills, external?
any word on whether this has been fixed? I have a spot on my way to work where the speed limit drops from 50 to 35 and it takes a full quarter mile for the car to slow down. It's so gradual you can't even tell it's decelerating.personally don't care about Chucks VPL or whatever, really just want fewer (none?) unwanted slowdowns at 70mph from the AP stack.
Conversely want slowdowns to happen at all with the FSDb stack when the speed limit drops
In one of the 10.69 videos published so far (don't remember which one, as usual ), a video has confirmed that this has not been fixed. Of course, that doesn't mean 10.69.1 won't fix it, but at least on their latest published code, it's not.any word on whether this has been fixed? I have a spot on my way to work where the speed limit drops from 50 to 35 and it takes a full quarter mile for the car to slow down. It's so gradual you can't even tell it's decelerating.
Can you share which map update version you have? Last week mine said I had an update but didn’t update and now says it’s current?I’m not sure how they may or might not even be related but since receiving the latest map data my fsd beta 10.12.2 has been driving much better. It’s choosing lanes it’s never done better; ones I would choose.
Current Navigation Data is NA-2022.28-xxxxxCan you share which map update version you have? Last week mine said I had an update but didn’t update and now says it’s current?
Not just subjective, but driven by factors beyond what are available to the car. Specifically, “how safe a human feels” can vary wildly by situation, length of delay, and confidence in judging distances.I'd venture that it wasn't caught because the safety performance of any given maneuver can be really subjective.
[….] You can model this scenario in a simulation and figure out how often the maneuver results in a collision; but you cannot use a simulation to model how safe a human in the car feels during the maneuver.
No, it would be you replacing the beer I bought you and buying me a beer!Well, it wouldn’t be double or nothing at this point. But under what terms do you want to bet for two beers? I think we need to be more rigorous in defining the terms this time. We can hash out the details offline and then present them
here.
The original bet, of course, was for the first set (or sets) of turns done by Chuck. Maybe he’ll do some more turns before 10.69.1/2 come out and then I will owe you two beers. I think I would definitely still win though; FSD Beta is oddly inconsistent. It’s very interesting; the behavior is not apparently deterministic, or at least not in an obvious way. Maybe they left some dither turned on.
Chuck really should do same more turns in heavy traffic though. It is hard to tell how FSD Beta performs on his turn.
But it sure doesn’t feel safer to a human like me who routinely drives multiple cars and doesn’t have as finely calibrated a sense (e.g., to the millimeter) where exactly the car is in the lane!
I got my bachelors (and spend 2 years working on a masters) in electrical engineering. That was several years ago (do they still use SPICE?) but I've actually run circuit simulations so I have an idea what you're talking about. The simulations you're using are quite different from those for biologic systems for a variety of reasons. I consider the FSD simulations to be much more akin to biologic systems just based on the number and degree of variables as well as what you can control vs not control.It's actually the opposite problem, as a mixed signal circuit designer I do simulations all day so I'm biased by that design flow. In circuit design you must rely heavily on simulations because the cost and time of fabricating chips is so high (months and millions of dollars). Of course there are often unexpected issues that show up in real life so you must add them to your simulation flow.
With regards to AV simulations I'm only going by industry presentations. They talk about simulation of scenarios like Chuck's ULT with millions of variations. It's hard for me to imagine that they would bother with all that if it didn't work. Nobody seems to be able explain what about Chuck's ULT is uniquely hard to simulate. It's really not a highly complex and dynamic system since if the maneuver is done correctly there is no interaction with other agents (at least in light traffic situations where we still see failures).
The tools still use spice format for netlists but there are have been much faster simulators for decades. One nice thing about FSD simulations is that they can run in realtime (or way faster if you're not including the perception stack) whereas circuit simulations are millions to billions of times slower than real life.I got my bachelors (and spend 2 years working on a masters) in electrical engineering. That was several years ago (do they still use SPICE?) but I've actually run circuit simulations so I have an idea what you're talking about. The simulations you're using are quite different from those for biologic systems for a variety of reasons. I consider the FSD simulations to be much more akin to biologic systems just based on the number and degree of variables as well as what you can control vs not control.