FSD on city streets coming later this year with reliability far in excess of human drivers!

[StealthP3D]

It annoys me how much Tesla talks about regulatory approval without saying specifically what they're talking about. It's like saying they aren't releasing the Model Y because of regulatory approval. While it is true that the Model Y is not currently legal that is not the reason they haven't started selling them. Waymo has regulatory approval to test autonomous vehicles without a test driver, why doesn't Tesla? Because their technology is not yet advanced enough.

It's not like that at all because Tesla only speaks of "regulatory approval" in terms of being able to estimate when Full Self Driving will be available. They don't say they would release it now if not for regulatory approval. They say first it has to be developed until it's good enough, then it has to go through regulatory approval. Tesla is in charge of the first hurdle, they have very little control over the second hurdle.

And Tesla has never indicated they would have FSD now if not for regulatory approval. That is simply a necessary and common sense disclosure. It would be fraudulent to NOT mention it in the context of when FSD will be reality. If that "annoys" you, look inside yourself to figure out why.

 

[Eno Deb]

Remove the "supervision" warnings/checks from EAP and you've got a better one than Audi offers already, let alone with the HW3 improvements.

The major difference is that Audi doesn't require constant supervision and assumes liability for accidents that happen while the car is in this mode. This is also why they restrict this mode to traffic situations that the car can safely handle. I think it would be great if the Tesla system could recognize safe situations and allow us to take our hands off the wheel (until the situation changes).

 

[Knightshade]

I guess it's actually "traffic jam pilot" that I'm talking about. They claim it's a Level 3 system and you can read a book, browse the internet, etc. while it's on. So maybe you have to be awake but you don't have to pay attention. Also, Audi is liable for accidents that occur while the system is operating. That sounds like a feature that many Tesla owners would like! Unfortunately plenty of people have commutes that are below 37mph.

that's not a "feature" it's a legal definition.

You suggested Tesla needs to "work on" a system that does what Audis does.

Tesla already has one, and it's generally a lot better feature-wise, works in a ton more places, etc as I described discussing each of the Audi systems actual functions.

They just haven't decided to take legal risk for labeling it level 3.

(worth noting- neither has Audi outside some very specific countries)

 

[Eno Deb]

That sounds like a feature that many Tesla owners would like! Unfortunately plenty of people have commutes that are below 37mph.

Yep, here's one of them. My main use for autopilot is slow bumper-to-bumper traffic (which is almost the normal state in the Bay Area).

 

[Eno Deb]

that's not a "feature" it's a legal definition.

There's more to it than that. The Audi has more comprehensive sensor redundancy (side- and rear radars, front lidar), which is supposedly what makes them confident enough in the system that they will assume liability for accidents. I doubt that Tesla will ever be willing to do that with the current sensor suite.

 

[Knightshade]

I doubt that Tesla will ever be willing to do that with the current sensor suite.

Musk has said, quite recently, he thinks they'll be there by end of next year.

I grant you he's not great with hitting target dates.

 

[Eno Deb]

Musk has said, quite recently, he thinks they'll be there by end of next year.

I grant you he's not great with hitting target dates.

Sometimes they don't deliver on their promises at all (ask drivers with AP1 hardware). In a few years they may introduce new sensor hardware and our current cars could be left behind ...

 

[Daniel in SD]

It's not like that at all because Tesla only speaks of "regulatory approval" in terms of being able to estimate when Full Self Driving will be available. They don't say they would release it now if not for regulatory approval. They say first it has to be developed until it's good enough, then it has to go through regulatory approval. Tesla is in charge of the first hurdle, they have very little control over the second hurdle.

And Tesla has never indicated they would have FSD now if not for regulatory approval. That is simply a necessary and common sense disclosure. It would be fraudulent to NOT mention it in the context of when FSD will be reality. If that "annoys" you, look inside yourself to figure out why.

So I guess we should expect Musk to talk about regulatory approval at the Model Y announcement? It also has not been approved by regulators. You can see in many of these threads that people are under the impression that autonomous vehicles are not yet legal. I think the way that Elon Musk talks about FSD gives people that impression.

 

[StealthP3D]

So I guess we should expect Musk to talk about regulatory approval at the Model Y announcement? It also has not been approved by regulators. You can see in many of these threads that people are under the impression that autonomous vehicles are not yet legal. I think the way that Elon Musk talks about FSD gives people that impression.

Way to bring in a red herring. Regulatory approval of the Model Y will follow the same time schedule as regulatory approval for any of the thousands of other cars that have been approved in recent years. There is no uncertainty there. It's a formality. The same cannot be said about regulatory approval for Full Self Driving because no one has ever achieved that yet. Two completely different things to someone without an agenda.

I'm not surprised you brought this up though. You seem to have a subtle but persistent slant towards promulgating FUD. That's "fear, uncertainty and doubt". Actually, it's not even very subtle.

 

[Daniel in SD]

I'm not surprised you brought this up though. You seem to have a subtle but persistent slant towards promulgating FUD. That's "fear, uncertainty and doubt".

I think the people talking about regulatory approval all the time are promulgating FUD. There are regulations that would allow Tesla to get autonomous vehicles approved. They claim they haven't even begun testing autonomous vehicles in California so it seems a little bit too early to talk about regulatory hurdles.

 

[StealthP3D]

They claim they haven't even begun testing autonomous vehicles in California so it seems a little bit too early to talk about regulatory hurdles.

Your comment is not rational. Obviously, anytime one is projecting when FSD will be ready to actually use on public roads, you cannot ignore the final step, regulatory approval.

 

[Daniel in SD]

Your comment is not rational. Obviously, anytime one is projecting when FSD will be ready to actually use on public roads, you cannot ignore the final step, regulatory approval.

Of course. My point is that the way he talks about it seems to give people the impression that autonomous vehicles are not yet legal. You can see it every time it's discussed on this forum. It may be perfectly clear to you that autonomous vehicles are legal in many jurisdictions (including Tesla's home state of CA!) but many people are under the impression that they are not.

 

[Knightshade]

Of course. My point is that the way he talks about it seems to give people the impression that autonomous vehicles are not yet legal. You can see it every time it's discussed on this forum. It may be perfectly clear to you that autonomous vehicles are legal in many jurisdictions (including Tesla's home state of CA!) but many people are under the impression that they are not.

Personally I read that bit mostly as "We aren't going to do things where features of the car, especially features that might be DRIVING the car, will have to turn themselves on or off based on if you cross a state line or not"

Because right now autonomous driving regulations in the US are a messy state-by-state patchwork varying all the way from "We have literally no laws on the books about this" to "We don't care if your car drives itself at all as long as it obeys all the same laws a human does"

 

[StealthP3D]

Of course. My point is that the way he talks about it seems to give people the impression that autonomous vehicles are not yet legal. You can see it every time it's discussed on this forum. It may be perfectly clear to you that autonomous vehicles are legal in many jurisdictions (including Tesla's home state of CA!) but many people are under the impression that they are not.

No one has the approval to sell FSD cars on public roads.

This is just more FUD from you. Fear, uncertainty and doubt.

 

[lolder]

We've heard this before. I'll believe it when I see it.

BTW, anyone else wondering how they are supposed to collect "billions of miles of experience" by the end of the year, which are supposedly required before the features can be activated?

You do not need the experience before the features are activated, only before you turn off the nags and no longer require an engaged driver, the same as all the features in EAP.

 

[Knightshade]

No one has the approval to sell FSD cars on public roads..

From whom do you imagine they need it?

As noted- a number of states, right now today it's 100% legal to own and operate a fully self driving car as long as it can obey all laws a human driver car can.

No special permits needed.

no special approval needed


(CA is not one of them- FWIW)

 

[Daniel in SD]

No one has the approval to sell FSD cars on public roads.

This is just more FUD from you. Fear, uncertainty and doubt.

Haha. You're the one creating the impression that FSD is not legal!
No one has approval in California because no one has a working self-driving car yet.
Here's the form to register your self driving car in CA:
https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/wcm/c...89c5-b2bc7de3fd2c/ol321.pdf?MOD=AJPERES&CVID=

 

[StealthP3D]

From whom do you imagine they need it?

As noted- a number of states, right now today it's 100% legal to own and operate a fully self driving car as long as it can obey all laws a human driver car can.

No special permits needed.

no special approval needed


(CA is not one of them- FWIW)

More FUD. Not even applicable to what Tesla is doing which is developing full self-driving cars, for sale to the public, that anyone can buy and operate without a driver in place. You have drifted the subject far from your original FUD to distract from the fact that you are spreading FUD. Fear, uncertainty and doubt.

 

[StealthP3D]

Haha. You're the one creating the impression that FSD is not legal!
No one has approval in California because no one has a working self-driving car yet.
Here's the form to register your self driving car in CA:
https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/wcm/c...89c5-b2bc7de3fd2c/ol321.pdf?MOD=AJPERES&CVID=

That's not a registration form as you are claiming, it's an application for a permit. No guarantee the application will eventually result in a permit. Why are you here (besides to spread FUD)? To disrupt the forum from productive discussion about things that matter?

 

[Daniel in SD]

More FUD. Not even applicable to what Tesla is doing which is developing full self-driving cars, for sale to the public, that anyone can buy and operate without a driver in place. You have drifted the subject far from your original FUD to distract from the fact that you are spreading FUD. Fear, uncertainty and doubt.

If Tesla sold an autonomous vehicle that was approved by the state of California that is the form you would fill out to register it!
I have no idea what you think is FUD. I think creating the impression that regulators don't want autonomous vehicles operating on public roads is FUD. There has been an incredible amount of money invested in autonomous vehicle research, everyone wants autonomous vehicles.