pilotSteve
Active Member
yeah... I remember back then how useless and frustrating AP/EAP/FSD was when limited to 45 MPH, when driving in Arizona!
Last edited:
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
FSD rewrite will go out on Oct 20 to limited beta
- Thread starter diplomat33
- Start date
powertoold
Active Member
Nope, just saying the cost was low to reflect the likelihood of success anytime soon. I don't condone how Tesla portrayed FSD. I'm just saying the Tesla driver assistance was competitively priced. And some people unfortunately paid more for the same features. It's similar to the people angry about a price reduction. Everyone got a good and well priced product, but the people who paid more are reasonably mad.
whitex
Well-Known Member
Except for people who leased a car with FSD, unless thousands of dollars for pure vaporware advertised with faked video is what you consider competitive.
I'm not talking about people who paid a different price for the same thing. As a side note, I personally don't have a problem with prices going up and down, as long as the goods are delivered. What I am talking about is someone paying $7,000 or $8,000 for the promise of FSD (they didn't buy a Tesla for adaptive cruise control or lane keeping, they were forced to pay for EAP in order to get FSD - kind of like how I got a premium package on one of my Model S only because I wanted power liftgate, not complaining about having to pay it btw, simply saying if they delivered the better leather but not power liftgate, I would not consider the better leather "competitively priced" since I didn't want it - it's value to me is $0, much like EAP value to someone who specifically wanted FSD is $0).
My friend received an email from Tesla informing him of the upcoming beta scheduled for next week. I was bummed since up until this point he and I received the same EarlyAccess emails. So either he:
1. Is a more careful and expert driver in his X than I am in my 3.
2. Tesla is also excluding folks who connect to 3rd party data loggers (I use TezLab and he doesn’t)*
3. He has been much more proactive with his EA access feedback than I have. I have sent maybe 2 emails to EA over the years. He writes frequent and detailed novellas lol
*Note: In the past, after I received an EA email I would just revoke my Tesla token to whatever 3rd party data logger I was using. Also my 3 points are ONLY highlighting objective and subjective differences between he and I.
I’ll check to see if he will let me shoulder surf his email. I won’t ask him to forward it to me. I am working from home today so I won’t see him until tomorrow at the earliest. Having said that you bring up a good point. He just asked if I got the “FSD email”? I said no and was jealous and then we verbally compared notes and there was no indication the email he received 2 nights ago was different than anything he and I received in the past from EarlyAccess.
Also, I do not work for Tesla.
boonedocks
MS LR Blk/Blk 19”
Actually really happy to see you wrote "his X" because that means the EAP isn't relegated to 3 & Y with the internal camera monitor.
Yeah... in fact it’s a used model X (not sure if the year) with a FSD upgrade sometime in 2019. I got my FSD hardware swap late 2019 / early 2020. The specific timeline is a blur though
This is utterly ridiculous to say.
First of all, it was at least 8000$, because you couldn't buy FSD without first buying "autopilot" then you had to buy "enhanced autopilot" (EAP) on top of that, and then "fully self driving" (FSD) on top of that again.
You could not skip the other two if you wanted FSD.
And second, when I bought my car, they had a video of what the car could do on itself, driving around intersections, parking etc etc, without intervention. "it would just look at your calendar and work out itself when to be fully charged, heated and ready to drive, you don't even need to tell it where to go it would know based on driving history or your calendar.
It would let you off on the entrance and self park wherever it would find a parking spot"
They told us that they had the technology already and was only waiting for the politicians to say yes and approve it.
So stop saying that the price reflected it, you appear not to bright with that statement. because the price was more than what you think it was, and the promise of what they already had on offer was bigger then you seem to be aware of.
powertoold
Active Member
Nope, my point was that the price $8k was competitive with other premium driver assistance packages that were worse in design and capability.
If people actually expected the car to drive itself the moment they paid $3k while other cars were only doing tacc, then power to you.
Also, like I said, I don't condone the way Tesla presented FSD. Although they did say and mention that it was a work in progress pending software validation and regulatory blah blah, they did make it seem it was relatively imminent.
The people who leased with FSD at the time took a risk that unfortunately didn't work out.
KArnold
Active Member
I'd guess differently - let's assume they get the stoplight piece working without human intervention. Then they could employ the same techniques (i.e. pull stalk) to ensure driver is awake just before the required turn, or maybe just 100' before the turn. At least I'd prefer this approach compared to a nag.
Oh yes, Tesla could do a stalk confirmation right before the turn. That would work.
I imagine they were hand picked, and not a randomized selection of EA members.
So I'd say this is the one that likely held the most value, and one of the reasons I kind of laugh at the early access.
I do because it's basically being a free intern for Tesla.
I say this as someone who would write frequent and detailed emails If I was picked for the early access program.
Clearly they have rewritten and continue to improve every part of their system and when they do they show a clearly improvement based on statistics (ex:vectornet). The problem with Tesla is that their so called “rewrite” has no basis in actual statistical improvement, it’s all conjecture and hype. “Quantum leap” “1000x labeling”, “this time it’s right”.
When you actually look at it. This isn’t a rewrite. This is actually the beginning of their autonomous driving development. This is why Andrej categorizes it as networks for FSD. This actually showcases how behind they are. Another thing that’s avoided is that while Andrej focuses on their alternative to maps. They don’t discuss the elephant in the room which is prediction and planning of dynamic actors. Currently they only have a cut in prediction network. If mapping was the crucible of self driving then those other dozens of companies should have hundreds of driverless fleets roaming around.
How will FSD release handle double parked cars or cars backing up in-front of it or people doing u-turns, k-turns, k-turns in-front of it? Etc.
Remember what one driver does affects what another does which affects what another does. So you have to predict ahead and know what will happen and be prepared to handle it.
willow_hiller
Well-Known Member
If you try and use a Level 2 autonomous vehicle as if it's a Level 5 autonomous vehicle, then yes, accidents will be your fault. You know the limitations of the system, and only reckless drivers would allow their attention to lapse in ways not covered by it.
Yeah I can agree with that. As I've said in other threads, Autopilot as it stands now is a series of high-functioning driver assistance features stitched together. Not a cohesive autonomous system. We'll see whether the rewrite is the right approach when we see it. I'm optimistic.
It should be interesting to see how far they can go with Level 2 supervision required stuff before various DMV's, and the NHTSA authority puts a pause on the entire thing.
In a sense its already paused in Europe because of regulatory issues in just how far Autopilot can go while requiring human supervision.
Similar threads
- Question
