FSD rewrite will go out on Oct 20 to limited beta

[2101Guy]

How about option C: Tell Mother in Law to get out and walk.

 

[HighZ]

I think Elon said that this is going to “people who are expert and careful drivers” only to calm the media and those that would say he is being reckless. This is going to a carefully select group of people who, Tesla can be assured, will be able to provide good testing and monitor what the car is doing like a hawk.

Big news! FSD going out on Oct 20 to limited beta.

If we don't get in the limited beta, I am sure there will be lots of leaked videos of the FSD.

 

[clydeiii]

What's your end goal? No one can tell the driver what to do except for the law. If you promise A and to B, you're not trustworthy. This is unrelated to lawful or ethical. As a driver, it's your responsibility to keep everyone inside of the car safe, and drive according to the law.

My end goal is figuring out what is and is not ethical. I too have family members who hate AP and won't let me turn it on while they are in the car. I respect their wishes, even if I think those wishes are ridiculous. I have also had passengers in the car and didn't get their permission to turn on AP, and now question if this was an ethical decision or not. We have phrases like "no means no" or "yes means yes" when it comes to other forms of human-to-human interaction, and I'm starting to feel as though engaging AP while someone else is in the car falls along similar lines. Note that "yes means yes" is a totally different thing than "no means no." Many people are too afraid to say "no" in the moment, even if they want to, so the concept of "yes means yes" is becoming the only acceptable form of consent.

 

[helvio]

My end goal is figuring out what is and is not ethical. I too have family members who hate AP and won't let me turn it on while they are in the car. I respect their wishes, even if I think those wishes are ridiculous. I have also had passengers in the car and didn't get their permission to turn on AP, and now question if this was an ethical decision or not. We have phrases like "no means no" or "yes means yes" when it comes to other forms of human-to-human interaction, and I'm starting to feel as though engaging AP while someone else is in the car falls along similar lines. Note that "yes means yes" is a totally different thing than "no means no." Many people are too afraid to say "no" in the moment, even if they want to.

I don't think a single human being should tell you how to interact with your family. If the person doesn't like it, turn it off. Or try to convince them it's safe and you take over in a split second when needed. I don't think this "ethical/lawful" debate adds to it, it's more of a personal relationship. My car is my transportation and my coolest toy. I do play with it, and when people ride with me, even though there's some level of discomfort (shock?), they usually get used to it (except abrupt acceleration, those can be fun sometimes )

 

[bdub85]

The current AP/FSD is a driver assist feature, so the responsibility solely relies on the driver at all times. When AP/FSD is engaged, the driver should be hands on wheel and actively monitoring and ready to take over at any time.

To me it's only unethical if you enable AP and don't pay attention and take your hands off the wheel. Then, you are improperly using a driver assist feature.

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

My end goal is figuring out what is and is not ethical. I too have family members who hate AP and won't let me turn it on while they are in the car. I respect their wishes, even if I think those wishes are ridiculous. I have also had passengers in the car and didn't get their permission to turn on AP, and now question if this was an ethical decision or not. We have phrases like "no means no" or "yes means yes" when it comes to other forms of human-to-human interaction, and I'm starting to feel as though engaging AP while someone else is in the car falls along similar lines. Note that "yes means yes" is a totally different thing than "no means no." Many people are too afraid to say "no" in the moment, even if they want to, so the concept of "yes means yes" is becoming the only acceptable form of consent.

The ethics are no different to driving without AP.

 

[clydeiii]

It's interesting, because that seems to be the prevailing opinion here, but to me it still seems possibly unethical.

I don't mean to get all yicky/off topic here I'll give you a similar situation and then you tell me if it's ethical or not:

Spoiler: another ethical decision

You're about to have sex with someone. They tell you to put on a condom. You agree to this by putting on the condom, then turn out the lights and remove them condom, then proceed to have sex. Ethical? To my mind, telling someone you won't engage AP then doing so is no different than this scenario. The other scenario then is, you're in bed with someone. They don't give explicit permission to have sex with them, but they don't say no. You proceed to have sex with them. Ethical? I see this as very similar to engaging AP while driving without the passengers' explicit consent. Why? Because both activities involve some amount of risk that the second party might not wish to take.

 

[totteraptor]

Don't get me wrong. As a Model 3 owner who paid for FSD, I would love for the FSD rewrite to be real autonomous driving. But I am skeptical. Too many false promises and disappointments. After all, AP2 was supposed to be FSD capable and then Elon admitted they needed AP3. AP3 was supposed to be FSD capable, and then Elon was like "actually, we need a rewrite". Now, he is claiming they were stuck in a local max but this rewrite is the true FSD. Let's see next week.

The fact that Tesla has always been at risk of going bottom up has made it somewhat understandable that Elon was always trying to sell things that were not finished. However, with the impressive shareprice increases there really is no reason left to promise more than reality. Hence I sincerely hope this “re-write” makes a real and meaningful difference - to all of us - when it comes out.

 

[clydeiii]

The current AP/FSD is a driver assist feature, so the responsibility solely relies on the driver at all times. When AP/FSD is engaged, the driver should be hands on wheel and actively monitoring and ready to take over at any time.

To me it's only unethical if you enable AP and don't pay attention and take your hands off the wheel. Then, you are improperly using a driver assist feature.

While you and I both agree that it's a very safe driver assist feature, I have family members who are terrified of it and won't allow its use around them. And clearly, someone a few pages back has someone similar in their life. This thread has made me realize that I am not alone in this regard. So the ethics of the situation involve around the various amounts of risks people are willing to take. My family members trust me to drive them safely. They do not trust my computer, even if I do. This realization has lead me down a path of thinking that it might be unethical to use AP without explicit consent from all passengers. I am wondering if anyone else here feels the same way.

 

[2101Guy]

sounds like there are persons in your family, who are ignorant (no offense) of the statistics surrounding autopilot miles driven. Im too lazy to google right now, but its my understanding that Tesla's driven with AP engaged are FAR safer than when driven without. Like, exponentially so.

Perhaps a each one/teach one approach would help? Showing them statistical facts that they should WANT you to have AP on WHILE you are fully attentive, of course.

Knowledge is king.

 

[mtndrew1]

While you and I both agree that it's a very safe driver assist feature, I have family members who are terrified of it and won't allow its use around them. And clearly, someone a few pages back has someone similar in their life. This thread has made me realize that I am not alone in this regard. So the ethics of the situation involve around the various amounts of risks people are willing to take. My family members trust me to drive them safely. They do not trust my computer, even if I do. This realization has lead me down a path of thinking that it might be unethical to use AP without explicit consent from all passengers. I am wondering if anyone else here feels the same way.

What if I use cruise control in my ‘94 Ford without my passengers’ knowledge and let it blow through a red light?

What if a pigeon is in the glove box?

It’s a car. As long as the driver is using any safety or convenience aids installed by the OEM it’s the driver’s responsibility to manage them safely.

 

[clydeiii]

I think the disconnect between your examples at the AP is one of artificial intelligence. We just assume that the 94 cruise control is dumb and will do dumb stuff. But the Tesla AP? It's...kinda like a baby brain. Maybe the brain of a toddler at the moment. It has the chance of being a full-blown adult brain one day, but it isn't there yet. But regardless, to our human minds, it's a fundamentally different thing than dumb cruise control. That's why people are terrified of AP but not of cruise control. It's like they think that if we engage AP, it might decide that humans are no longer required on this planet and it's going to send us off of a cliff without our ability to stop it.

At least that's my interpretation of why people are scared of AP. I could be wrong. Not sure how to get in the heads of our collective Mothers-in-law here.

 

[BlueRocket]

That depends. Are you a fanboy?
If so, prepared to be fooled for a sixth or is it ninth time now? Either way, come equipped with a soup spoon to gobble up whatever’s served

I'm confident this time... 3 months likely, 6 months for sure

 

[Lexdysic]

With my mother-in-law, it's not only unethical, it's extremely unwise. I would be reminded of the "horrifying" car ride at every encounter with her. The unwarranted anxiety seems to run through all the females on her side. AP stays off for now, unless I'm driving alone.

Got me thinking though- what about Uber/Lyft drivers using AP/FSD?

 

[willow_hiller]

This isn't a thread about the ethics of autonomy. There are plenty of those floating around, and there's not much to be gained by discussing it here, where we're awaiting news about the latest release.

 

[mikes_fsd]

Karpathy chiming in... https://twitter.com/karpathy/status/1318985160117817344

 

[DanCar]

I expect Level 4 by 2023
Level 5, next decade at the earliest

I'm willing to bet Level 4 won't happen by 2023.

 

[Catbiscuits]

What a dud!

 

[diplomat33]

Karpathy tweets that Elon will cover the FSD rewrite during the earnings call. So we might get some good info.

 

[dckiwi]

A note about FSD in the Q3 release. It's nothing new really, except they refer to the release as 'City Streets':

"In October, we sent the first FSD software update enabled by the rewrite to a limited number of Early Access Program users - City Streets. As we continue to collect data over time, the system will become more robust".

https://redirect.viglink.com/?format=go&jsonp=vglnk_160331134672312&key=1a191e4b4fb604347e07a98f5714a295&libId=kgju28cn01002cim000DA10nhw847vr6hs&loc=https://electrek.co/2020/10/21/tesla-tsla-q3-2020-results/&v=1&out=https://www.scribd.com/doc/481056908&title=Electrek - EV and Tesla News, Green Energy, Ebikes, and more&txt=View this document on Scribd