Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

FSD features to start rolling out in August...

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Here's what Tesla says on their website about FSD. It says that FSD is designed to conduct trips with no action required by the person in the driver's seat. It implies that you don't need to pay attention. Although, I personally still would be.

Full Self-Driving Capability
Build upon Enhanced Autopilot and order Full Self-Driving Capability on your Tesla. This doubles the number of active cameras from four to eight, enabling full self-driving in almost all circumstances, at what we believe will be a probability of safety at least twice as good as the average human driver. The system is designed to be able to conduct short and long distance trips with no action required by the person in the driver’s seat. For Superchargers that have automatic charge connection enabled, you will not even need to plug in your vehicle.

All you will need to do is get in and tell your car where to go. If you don’t say anything, the car will look at your calendar and take you there as the assumed destination or just home if nothing is on the calendar. Your Tesla will figure out the optimal route, navigate urban streets (even without lane markings), manage complex intersections with traffic lights, stop signs and roundabouts, and handle densely packed freeways with cars moving at high speed. When you arrive at your destination, simply step out at the entrance and your car will enter park seek mode, automatically search for a spot and park itself. A tap on your phone summons it back to you.
Ideally it's designed to be able to conduct trips with no action required by the person in the driver's sear, but that's not the same the driver not having to pay any attention to the car or road. If Tesla said I could curl up in the back and take a nap, or read a book in the driver's seat, definitely. As it stands, Tesla doesn't state whether the driver's attention is required or how much attention is needed if it is required.
 
Which description? The only one I know of doesn't say anything about driver attention with respect to FSD.

Not sure what definition you're using. The one on the website- that has been quoted multiple times, explicitly says no action on the part of the driver is required at all for FSD.


Ideally it's designed to be able to conduct trips with no action required by the person in the driver's sear, but that's not the same the driver not having to pay any attention to the car or road. If Tesla said I could curl up in the back and take a nap, or read a book in the driver's seat, definitely. As it stands, Tesla doesn't state whether the driver's attention is required or how much attention is needed if it is required.

... what?

paying attention is an action

So yes, requiring you to do that would be requiring an action. Which FSD explicitly says it does not require.
 
Not sure what definition you're using. The one on the website- that has been quoted multiple times, explicitly says no action on the part of the driver is required at all for FSD.
It says the system is designed to do everything, not that it can and/or will always do everything, or that the driver doesn't have to pay attention.

Edit - I think you double posted.
 
I believe you misunderstood my post. Maybe you did not read it clearly or maybe I was not as clear as I could have been. Maybe I move from EAP to FSD and you thought I meant EAP when I meant FSD. And part of my post was related to when both EAP and FSD are complete. Not while we are still in BETA on one or both.

None of us know what Tesla will do in the future ...

Fair enough...


1. Regarding 4 vs. 8 cameras. I was saying "if" you need 8 cameras to "safely" do on-ramp to off-ramp and the cars with FSD were using 8 cameras safely and EAP with 4 cameras were not able to do it safely (in the same manner as FSD) then I was saying they "could" allow EAP cars to use 8 cameras for on-ramp to off-ramp BUT not for surface streets. Some think that EAP on freeways doing on-ramp to off-ramp will somehow be much different then FSD doing on-ramp to off-ramp. I simply find that hard to believe based on the web site definition of EAP.

Also fair... though I can potentially see cases where that isn't the case.

For example perhaps 4 camera EAP is good "enough" for lane changing safely, but only when there's larger gaps in traffic because 4 camera coverage isn't as precise, and doesn't have as full a view of overall traffic around you. So it will only automatically change lanes/pass other cars when it's VERY sure there's LOTS of room... and then it does what it says on the label. But FSD using 8 cameras has a better picture of all the traffic and can safely use smaller gaps to do that.

I'm sure there's any number of other examples where both would be "safe", but FSD would offer a better experience, even on the highway.

2. When I was talking about Stop Signs I was only talking about FSD. You said AP so not sure if you are talking about EAP or FSD. No where on the Tesla Web Site does it say EAP will support Stop Sign and Traffic Lights. Correct me if I am wrong.

3. Not sure what you are referring to when you say NOTHING about Stop Signs ..... Again, this would be FSD and not EAP. If you are saying the web site does not mention those for FSD. It really does not need when it explains all that it could do. It would not simply run thru them like it does now on EAP.

The text I quoted from you has you using AP, not FSD, repeatedly. That's what I was replying to.


Here's the whole block of text from you again-

Regarding surface streets. I said I have an issue with cars running red lights or stop signs. They say on the web site that AP is designed for freeways but they let it work on surface streets. On my surface streets near my home there are a lot of elementary schools with crossing guards. Letting a car speed is one thing that all cars can do but letting a car under the control of AP run a STOP SIGN and hit a 1/2 dozen kids in the cross walk is a completely different thing. The first time a AP Car runs down kids in a cross walk with be a huge huge problem. You think getting rid of guns gets people going. My point is that I think at some point they may just not allow your to use AP on surface streets because of the potential for this kind of accident.

You say AP 3 times. You say FSD there 0 times.

That's why I was pointing out what you wrote didn't make sense- since you seemed concerned about APs interaction with stop signs, when it doesn't have one and is not intended to.


4. Regarding hitting a child in a cross walk on EAP. Your response is it has never happened. My response is it will take only 1 time after FSD is released with Stop Sign support and customers with FSD expects it to stop at a stop sign but EAP customers do not stop at a stop sign.

Still not following the logic there.

If FSD recognizes and handles stop signs (which it will when done)- and EAP does not (which there's no indication it will ever do)- then yes FSD customers will expect it to stop at one. And it should.

EAP customers don't expect it to stop at one now and never would because it does not do that and never has

I did not say they would change the EAP behavior after all of the years (maybe I said they could change) I just said I could see a real problem if FSD worked and EAP did not at a stop sign and killed somebody. You can say in that case it was the drivers fault but I simply do not think the law makers and courts will let that go.

There's nothing for the law or courts to let go.

The car worked exactly as designed (and exactly how it works today and has for several years now).

"I thought my car magically started having features I never purchased for it, no one ever claimed it had, and it's never ever had" is not a legal defense to running a kid over with your car.
 
It says the system is designed to do everything, not that it can and/or will always do everything, or that the driver doesn't have to pay attention.


I mean, yes, you do likely have to turn it on if it's not already on.

Once you do however the car does everything. (I suppose it's also possible you will be able to set it on as the default behavior too- in which case you won't even need to do that... that actually seems likely given Elons mention of it automatically taking you certain places if you don't give it a destination)

It does say the driver doesn't have to pay attention at that point, because as I already mentioned, paying attention is an action and the FSD description says the driver is not required to take any action when using it.
 
I mean, yes, you do likely have to turn it on if it's not already on.

Once you do however the car does everything. (I suppose it's also possible you will be able to set it on as the default behavior too- in which case you won't even need to do that... that actually seems likely given Elons mention of it automatically taking you certain places if you don't give it a destination)

It does say the driver doesn't have to pay attention at that point, because as I already mentioned, paying attention is an action and the FSD description says the driver is not required to take any action when using it.
To me, designed to do everything != able to always do everything.

I'd be happy to be wrong and reading a book or taking a nap in the front seat, but I wouldn't get too attached to the idea of not having to pay attention with FSD just in case.

Designing a system to do something and designing a system to always do something are different creatures. DW and I's Plug-in Prius is designed to get > 50mpg, but she can drop it into the 40s no problem. ;)

Build upon Enhanced Autopilot and order Full Self-Driving Capability on your Tesla. This doubles the number of active cameras from four to eight, enabling full self-driving in almost all circumstances, at what we believe will be a probability of safety at least twice as good as the average human driver. The system is designed to be able to conduct short and long distance trips with no action required by the person in the driver’s seat. For Superchargers that have automatic charge connection enabled, you will not even need to plug in your vehicle.
 
Not sure what definition you're using. The one on the website- that has been quoted multiple times, explicitly says no action on the part of the driver is required at all for FSD.

That's correct for Levels 4 (on some roads) and 5 (all roads) autonomy, otherwise known as full self driving (eyes off the road). We'll probably get Level 4 in a decade and level 5 five or ten years after that. Tesla has obfuscated the situation by on the one hand referring to its ultimate goal of a full self-driving car, and then in the same sentence introducing a package of driver-assist features which it's calling FSD and which is intended eventually to culminate in a car that can drive itself.

But none of that tells us anything about what these cars will be capable of for the next ten years.

There is no reason to believe that the ultimate goal of a fully self-driving car gives us any information about what Tesla's FSD package of features will allow us to do in the mean time. And there's no way that Tesla is going to allow hands-off-the-wheel driving in any of its cars in the next three years. Maybe in five years "FSD"-equipped cars will allow hands off the wheel on limited-access freeways. Ain't gonna happen before that, because the software just isn't there yet, as we can see by the quirky behavior of today's EAP. You won't get to take your hands off the wheel just because you paid the additional $3K. You'll be allowed to take your hands off the wheel when, and not before, the software can reliably respond to traffic conditions and erratic behavior of other cars better than a human driver can. And even then, an accident in a car that Tesla has formally announced is hands-off-the-wheel, even if it's a situation no human could have avoided, would be such a PR nightmare that Tesla still won't allow it until the car is so much better than a human driver that no jury would convict them of negligence when there's an accident.

Fully self-driving cars are coming. They are the future. And if one comes out while I'm still alive and ambulatory I will buy it. But it will be a very long time before Tesla's "FSD" package achieves that level. Until then, EAP and FSD are just options packages that allow the car to perform some actions under the constant vigilance of the driver.

Back when the Model S came out, Tesla liked to put the price of the base model and the range of the premium model in the same sentence. It's doing that again by talking about what full self driving is, in the same sentence as it promotes the "FSD" package which is far, far away from reaching that level.
 
  • Like
Reactions: omgwtfbyobbq
That's correct for Levels 4 (on some roads) and 5 (all roads) autonomy, otherwise known as full self driving (eyes off the road). We'll probably get Level 4 in a decade and level 5 five or ten years after that. Tesla has obfuscated the situation by on the one hand referring to its ultimate goal of a full self-driving car, and then in the same sentence introducing a package of driver-assist features which it's calling FSD and which is intended eventually to culminate in a car that can drive itself.

But none of that tells us anything about what these cars will be capable of for the next ten years.

There is no reason to believe that the ultimate goal of a fully self-driving car gives us any information about what Tesla's FSD package of features will allow us to do in the mean time. And there's no way that Tesla is going to allow hands-off-the-wheel driving in any of its cars in the next three years. Maybe in five years "FSD"-equipped cars will allow hands off the wheel on limited-access freeways. Ain't gonna happen before that, because the software just isn't there yet, as we can see by the quirky behavior of today's EAP. You won't get to take your hands off the wheel just because you paid the additional $3K. You'll be allowed to take your hands off the wheel when, and not before, the software can reliably respond to traffic conditions and erratic behavior of other cars better than a human driver can. And even then, an accident in a car that Tesla has formally announced is hands-off-the-wheel, even if it's a situation no human could have avoided, would be such a PR nightmare that Tesla still won't allow it until the car is so much better than a human driver that no jury would convict them of negligence when there's an accident.

Fully self-driving cars are coming. They are the future. And if one comes out while I'm still alive and ambulatory I will buy it. But it will be a very long time before Tesla's "FSD" package achieves that level. Until then, EAP and FSD are just options packages that allow the car to perform some actions under the constant vigilance of the driver.

Back when the Model S came out, Tesla liked to put the price of the base model and the range of the premium model in the same sentence. It's doing that again by talking about what full self driving is, in the same sentence as it promotes the "FSD" package which is far, far away from reaching that level.

I know everyone has different expectations, my expectation for fsd in my tesla is to have fsd "features" continuously rolled out through vehicle life Time. Even if car does not get to fsd in 10 years, I'm looking forward to fsd "features" to be useful still. We can all agree that such features are coming. potentially as early as this year and in more likely event next year as I don't believe 9.0 will release on time as part of standard software development process.
 
  • Like
Reactions: d21mike
I know everyone has different expectations, my expectation for fsd in my tesla is to have fsd "features" continuously rolled out through vehicle life Time. Even if car does not get to fsd in 10 years, I'm looking forward to fsd "features" to be useful still. We can all agree that such features are coming. potentially as early as this year and in more likely event next year as I don't believe 9.0 will release on time as part of standard software development process.

Features are definitely coming. And they will be great to have. It will be a long time before those features allow you to take your eyes off the road. Calling those features "FSD" creates the mistaken impression that they allow you to just sit back and let the car drive itself. I am arguing for Tesla to stop calling these features FSD because doing so opens the way for the peddlers of FUD to point to the next crash and blame it on "full self-driving" cars.

FSD means full self-driving. These cars will not be able to completely drive themselves for many years, and using that name, on the grounds that FSD is the intended end point of all these features, is misleading at best and dishonest at worst.

Tesla is selling a package for $3K with the promise of making the car FSD at such (undetermined) time as the software is ready and receives regulatory approval. Musk gives the impression that this time is maybe a couple of years away, which isn't so bad if you understand that Musk is a chrono-optimist and you take such implications with a 50-kilogram bag of salt, but is less than honest if you don't know his history and take his pronouncements at face value.

Then Tesla is providing some driver-assist features to purchasers of the FSD package that purchasers of EAP do not get. There's nothing wrong with this. If you want these features you pay for them. But now, having called this package "FSD" and these features "FSD" features has clearly given a lot of people the idea that with these features the driver will no longer have to pay attention, and this is wrong, because the software is nowhere near there yet. These features are FSD only in the sense that you need to buy the "FSD" package to get them. They will not make the car self-driving until the entire suite of features is enabled, in a decade or more. Until then, you'll still need to remain alert and vigilant, just as with EAP.

It's dishonest to apply the name "full self driving" to a car that is not. It's like the Red Delicious Apple. The apple is unpalatable. It's a "Delicious" apple in name, but is the most vile-tasting apple you can buy. Tesla cars with the FSD package are not full self-driving cars. They still require constant driver alertness and vigilance, and will for many years to come. The name is misleading and dishonest. They are the best cars on the road. Don't give them dishonest names. Nobody would buy a Red Delicious apple if it didn't have "Delicious" in the name. Tesla cars do not need a dishonest name to sell because you cannot buy a better car today.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Daniel in SD
Honestly I don't understand what "full self-driving features" is supposed to mean. Either the car can fully drive by itself or it can't. Note that Tesla's web site mentions "park seek mode" (i.e. driving without any driver being in the car) and car sharing, which also requires that the car can drive without human supervision.

To me, the bar that has to be reached is that Tesla (or any other manufacturer) assumes full liability for accidents in self-driving mode. As long as that doesn't happen, they obviously don't fully trust their own system.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Daniel in SD
Features are definitely coming. And they will be great to have. It will be a long time before those features allow you to take your eyes off the road. Calling those features "FSD" creates the mistaken impression that they allow you to just sit back and let the car drive itself. I am arguing for Tesla to stop calling these features FSD because doing so opens the way for the peddlers of FUD to point to the next crash and blame it on "full self-driving" cars.

FSD means full self-driving. These cars will not be able to completely drive themselves for many years, and using that name, on the grounds that FSD is the intended end point of all these features, is misleading at best and dishonest at worst.

Tesla is selling a package for $3K with the promise of making the car FSD at such (undetermined) time as the software is ready and receives regulatory approval. Musk gives the impression that this time is maybe a couple of years away, which isn't so bad if you understand that Musk is a chrono-optimist and you take such implications with a 50-kilogram bag of salt, but is less than honest if you don't know his history and take his pronouncements at face value.

Then Tesla is providing some driver-assist features to purchasers of the FSD package that purchasers of EAP do not get. There's nothing wrong with this. If you want these features you pay for them. But now, having called this package "FSD" and these features "FSD" features has clearly given a lot of people the idea that with these features the driver will no longer have to pay attention, and this is wrong, because the software is nowhere near there yet. These features are FSD only in the sense that you need to buy the "FSD" package to get them. They will not make the car self-driving until the entire suite of features is enabled, in a decade or more. Until then, you'll still need to remain alert and vigilant, just as with EAP.

It's dishonest to apply the name "full self driving" to a car that is not. It's like the Red Delicious Apple. The apple is unpalatable. It's a "Delicious" apple in name, but is the most vile-tasting apple you can buy. Tesla cars with the FSD package are not full self-driving cars. They still require constant driver alertness and vigilance, and will for many years to come. The name is misleading and dishonest. They are the best cars on the road. Don't give them dishonest names. Nobody would buy a Red Delicious apple if it didn't have "Delicious" in the name. Tesla cars do not need a dishonest name to sell because you cannot buy a better car today.
I'm honestly not sure why you getting hung up on this. This is basic marketing/sales but with tesla, I know they're less misleading than your next leading auto manufacturer. I have other cars with safety features which have been sold as amazing but have been total *sugar*. The difference is that tesla will continue to improve while all other cars safety features will remains piles of *sugar*. I'll take tesla with continuous improvements/"occasional set backs" any day over Mercedes, etc.
 
That's correct for Levels 4 (on some roads) and 5 (all roads) autonomy, otherwise known as full self driving (eyes off the road).

What it's correct for is the full FSD package. Because that's literally where the quote is from. It makes no mention of the NHTSA/SAE "levels" at all.

We'll probably get Level 4 in a decade and level 5 five or ten years after that.

Or much sooner. Or much later. Ask 10 people you'll get 10 different answers.

Tesla has obfuscated the situation by on the one hand referring to its ultimate goal of a full self-driving car, and then in the same sentence introducing a package of driver-assist features which it's calling FSD and which is intended eventually to culminate in a car that can drive itself.

not sure how that's obfuscating. A fully functional FSD option is the features they list when you buy FSD. That's pretty clear.

Starting in V9 they will begin introducing SOME of the individual elements of that feature. But not yet others.

Thus nobody who can read would expect the functionality to match what's in the "when it's done" description they saw when they purchased the option.


There is no reason to believe that the ultimate goal of a fully self-driving car gives us any information about what Tesla's FSD package of features will allow us to do in the mean time.


I mean... it does actually give us some information about that.

Since whatever it allows us to do will be some subset of the full description.

It doesn't tell us what subset- but it's at least a place to start.

And there's no way that Tesla is going to allow hands-off-the-wheel driving in any of its cars in the next three years. Maybe in five years "FSD"-equipped cars will allow hands off the wheel on limited-access freeways. Ain't gonna happen before that, because the software just isn't there yet, as we can see by the quirky behavior of today's EAP. You won't get to take your hands off the wheel just because you paid the additional $3K. You'll be allowed to take your hands off the wheel when, and not before, the software can reliably respond to traffic conditions and erratic behavior of other cars better than a human driver can.

You realize Cadillac already allows this today in areas supercruise can be engaged, right? (which indeed are limited access freeways)

It's a much more limited set of places than EAP can be used, but you're free to take, and leave, your hands off the wheel the whole time it's operating.

So I'm not sure where you get a definitive "no way" amount of years before Teslas system would allow that.


And even then, an accident in a car that Tesla has formally announced is hands-off-the-wheel, even if it's a situation no human could have avoided, would be such a PR nightmare

Everyone keeps saying that.

Yet there's been several Tesla accidents that made big headlines- then went no where as far as causing Tesla significant PR problems long term.

Probably because of 2 other things- The overall accident rate using Tesla systems is lower than humans driving and these accidents usually result in little to no injury because of how safe the car itself is in a crash.

Back when the Model S came out, Tesla liked to put the price of the base model and the range of the premium model in the same sentence. It's doing that again by talking about what full self driving is, in the same sentence as it promotes the "FSD" package which is far, far away from reaching that level.

The full FSD package is that level by definition.

The fact they're going to be releasing individual parts of it prior to the full package being available doesn't change that, and isn't at all deceptive unless you refuse to read, or understand, the clear descriptions they provide of what is what.
 
Fair enough...




Also fair... though I can potentially see cases where that isn't the case.

For example perhaps 4 camera EAP is good "enough" for lane changing safely, but only when there's larger gaps in traffic because 4 camera coverage isn't as precise, and doesn't have as full a view of overall traffic around you. So it will only automatically change lanes/pass other cars when it's VERY sure there's LOTS of room... and then it does what it says on the label. But FSD using 8 cameras has a better picture of all the traffic and can safely use smaller gaps to do that.

I'm sure there's any number of other examples where both would be "safe", but FSD would offer a better experience, even on the highway.



The text I quoted from you has you using AP, not FSD, repeatedly. That's what I was replying to.


Here's the whole block of text from you again-



You say AP 3 times. You say FSD there 0 times.

That's why I was pointing out what you wrote didn't make sense- since you seemed concerned about APs interaction with stop signs, when it doesn't have one and is not intended to.




Still not following the logic there.

If FSD recognizes and handles stop signs (which it will when done)- and EAP does not (which there's no indication it will ever do)- then yes FSD customers will expect it to stop at one. And it should.

EAP customers don't expect it to stop at one now and never would because it does not do that and never has



There's nothing for the law or courts to let go.

The car worked exactly as designed (and exactly how it works today and has for several years now).

"I thought my car magically started having features I never purchased for it, no one ever claimed it had, and it's never ever had" is not a legal defense to running a kid over with your car.
I clearly need to spend more time reading what I write.

Let me add this. Another poster said something like the following which may explain my thinking.

Once FSD is working and it detects and reacts to STOP Signs and STOP Lights. But your car only has EAP which means if the operator does not take action the car will just drive thru without stopping. He says that the car could actually STOP and disengage EAP (because the car can still see the STOP Signs because of FSD). This would be an improvement on EAP while not taking anything away from EAP. The idea is that some of the FSD Capabilities could be used to help EAP but still limit the EAP capabilities. I.E. EAP Cars could "maybe" still be as SAFE as FSD but not have the full FSD capabilities.
 
Honestly I don't understand what "full self-driving features" is supposed to mean. Either the car can fully drive by itself or it can't. Note that Tesla's web site mentions "park seek mode" (i.e. driving without any driver being in the car) and car sharing, which also requires that the car can drive without human supervision.

To me, the bar that has to be reached is that Tesla (or any other manufacturer) assumes full liability for accidents in self-driving mode. As long as that doesn't happen, they obviously don't fully trust their own system.
None of us know for sure what he means but we all have our opinions.

Please look at the video on the Tesla Web Site of FSD. You will notice there is a driver in the driver seat but not touching anything. It starts out following GPS Nav and stops at a stop sign. Then turns left or right then goes to the next stop sign. Then one of the videos it gets on the freeway and Navigates to the off ramp. Each part of that video would be a FSD Feature. Then entire drive is FSD.

So, think about adding 1 or more of the following FSD Features. I/we believe that is what is meant by starting to add FSD Features.

1. Stop at a stop sign is a FSD Feature.
2. Turn left or right if no traffic is a FSD Feature.
3. Use GPS Nav to determine which path to take is a FSD Feature.
4. .... more ... more etc.....

For me personally I think they could FIRST add the "FSD Feature" to STOP at a stop sign but require me to press the accelerator pedal to initiate the next step. I think "FSD Features" is as simple as that. All of which is BETA and the driver is in full control until it is not.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EinSV
Honda only puts some safety features on the top of the model line cars. They have to recoup the cost of hardware and development so they charge more for those cars. The people driving lower trim models don’t sue Honda if they get in an accident that could have been prevented if they only paid more for their car
 
I clearly need to spend more time reading what I write.

Let me add this. Another poster said something like the following which may explain my thinking.

Once FSD is working and it detects and reacts to STOP Signs and STOP Lights. But your car only has EAP which means if the operator does not take action the car will just drive thru without stopping. He says that the car could actually STOP and disengage EAP (because the car can still see the STOP Signs because of FSD). This would be an improvement on EAP while not taking anything away from EAP. The idea is that some of the FSD Capabilities could be used to help EAP but still limit the EAP capabilities. I.E. EAP Cars could "maybe" still be as SAFE as FSD but not have the full FSD capabilities.


Won't an EAP only car eventually do a panic stop rather than running a stop sign? It will have the full perception on the environment as an FSD car, but it won't operate a route automatically off highway.
 
Honda only puts some safety features on the top of the model line cars. They have to recoup the cost of hardware and development so they charge more for those cars. The people driving lower trim models don’t sue Honda if they get in an accident that could have been prevented if they only paid more for their car
Of course. It's a bit different when it's software. Presumably Tesla is going to share much of the same code between EAP and FSD. If that code "sees" a stopped vehicle and then does nothing to avoid it how will that look for Tesla?