Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register
This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
theoretically that would be a great idea, except they would be using the energy of the parked cars, costing the owners money and potentially draining the battery without them knowing. They could potentially set up some system with supercharging credits but that doesn’t fix the problem of someone coming out to the car and finding the battery 15% lower than they expected
I totally agree with the problem and the solution too. It should use the FSD power of the cars that are plugged in and charging. In addition, limit the drain to 10% or less, as long as your battery is charged over 50%. Every available computing source especially the ones Tesla can reach out to easily should be reached out.
 
I totally agree with the problem and the solution too. It should use the FSD power of the cars that are plugged in and charging. In addition, limit the drain to 10% or less, as long as your battery is charged over 50%. Every available computing source especially the ones Tesla can reach out to easily should be reached out.
Sorry guys but this is not a practical solution. The main problem with the training phase is not performing the calculation, it is moving the right data into the pipeline for each of the processors so that many operations can be executed in parallel. This is discussed in the Dojo presentations. In addition to this HW3/HW4 are built for inference, not for training. This is why Tesla created Dojo rather than just putting a couple of hundred thousand HW4 systems into a data centre.
 
My head hurts from reading all the fan-fiction in this thread. Use the customers' the cars for training is the dumbest idea.

Also, Dojo is dead. DOA. Or did it even arrive? Most of the team leads quit, and the thing doesn't scale. Turns out you can't build a super computer architecture that scales using power point. Musk has gone from pushing it as the solution to everything, to calling it a "long shot" in the latest quarterly call and ordering more stuff from Nvidia. I expect Optimus, the teleoperated demo robot, to go down the same path.

Funny how software can be harder than shooting rockets into space.
 
Last edited:
The last paragraph is especially interesting. Those here who proclaim that robotaxi could never work on HW3 or even HW4 simply don't know. Nobody knows.
I disagree. Robotaxi can't work on HW3 or HW4 because neither is capable of cleaning the camera lens--except for the in-windshield cameras. I can't count the number of times FSD has given up due to "occluded cameras" while driving on wet, dirty roads. Unless Robotaxi is only going to operate on dry roads.
 
Also, Dojo is dead. DOA. Or did it even arrive? Most of the team leads quit, and the thing doesn't scale. Turns out you can't build a super computer architecture that scales using power point. Musk has gone from pushing it as the solution to everything, to calling it a "long shot" in the latest quarterly call and ordering more stuff from Nvidia.
A "long shot" is not "dead." Even if it is, what's your point? If Tesla builds it's supercomputer from Nvidia chips instead of in-house Dojo chips, how does that affect End to End AI FSD? Perhaps delay it a bit, which I'm sure we all expect anyway... Either FSD will eventually work at an L3+ level or it won't; I don't see how training on Nvidia GPUs as opposed to Dojo chips really matters.
 
New Drive from Whole Mars Catalog

00:06 Engaging FSD from parking space.
00:45 Unprotected left
01:32 Respecting KEEP CLEAR marking on road
02:33 Hairpin right at start of highway on ramp.
04:36 Approaching toll booth. Excessive slowing on approach, accelerator-intervention at booth, speed-setting intervention on exit.
10:50 Disengagement upon encountering a bus lane on an exit ramp. (language warning)
15:22 Slowing on approach to green light intersection (22 to 8 mph)
15:48 Slowing slightly for car coming off curb. Car is signaling and angled to enter Tesla's lane.
15:54 End of drive, move to left side of lane because Tesla cannot get to curb. Left turn signal used.
 
  • Helpful
Reactions: Artful Dodger
How long does it take to verify a trained network's adherence to the 'specification'
At AI Day 2022, Ashok Elluswamy said they've accumulated hundreds of thousands of past failure examples accumulated over many years, and these work more as negative assertions rather than positive adherence. This set is useful in making sure FSD Beta doesn't do something known to be bad whereas there could be multiple good ways to say make a lane change, e.g., change now or wait longer or slow down. These should still be useful in evaluating whether 12.x is doing something it shouldn't be doing.

As networks are trained, they're already being evaluated on how accurate they are predicting the training data to adjust behavior to minimize error, and a similar thing happens for a set of examples excluded from training but evaluated in the same way. Additionally, Tesla can leverage the inference compute available from the whole fleet in deploying "minor fixes" that could include updated neural networks to see how they make predictions in real-world scenarios without changing the driving behavior.

Even with end-to-end, this fleet evaluation can happen when people are driving without Autopilot active so FSD Computer can run the neural networks and compare with human driver behavior, and if Tesla is looking for specific mismatched behaviors, that can result in video being sent back and/or statistics of how often they match or differ.
 
I disagree. Robotaxi can't work on HW3 or HW4 because neither is capable of cleaning the camera lens--except for the in-windshield cameras. I can't count the number of times FSD has given up due to "occluded cameras" while driving on wet, dirty roads. Unless Robotaxi is only going to operate on dry roads.

I'm sure at first, Tesla robotaxis will indeed operate only in good weather. But over time it will get more and more capable of peforming its robotaxi duties in worse and worse conditions.

We still don't know if HW3 or HW4 will be able to handle it though.
 
I disagree. Robotaxi can't work on HW3 or HW4 because neither is capable of cleaning the camera lens--except for the in-windshield cameras. I can't count the number of times FSD has given up due to "occluded cameras" while driving on wet, dirty roads. Unless Robotaxi is only going to operate on dry roads.
I will say yes to the possibility of this. However I have not encountered this yet in Texas.
 
Sorry guys but this is not a practical solution. The main problem with the training phase is not performing the calculation, it is moving the right data into the pipeline for each of the processors so that many operations can be executed in parallel. This is discussed in the Dojo presentations. In addition to this HW3/HW4 are built for inference, not for training. This is why Tesla created Dojo rather than just putting a couple of hundred thousand HW4 systems into a data centre.
I am not aware of the capabilities of the FSD computers in customer’s vehicles. That being said, crowd sourcing is not a new idea and sequencing it around the world is also not a new idea.
 
How exactly would that work given that it takes two days to drive coast to coast and rain is unpredictable?
Pick summer time to do the drive. You are telling me it wouldn't be possible for there to be a day in the year where you can map a coast to coast route that avoids rain? Nothing in the definition requires it to be "practical". And as pointed out, it can stop until the rain clears and continue.
Rain is just an example, it can also be fog, which is much more rare. If the car can't travel in fog that a human can, it's automatically disqualified from SAE L5, but plenty of people would still consider it L5.
Somehow you've concluded that even though Elon calls it L5 and has never described it in a way inconsistent with SAE L5 he actually has his own secret definition of L5.
No one asked him the details, people just assumed because he says L5 he means the same as SAE. As pointed out above, the definition for SAE has a ton of nuance that would disqualify a car from a certain level. And his reference to reliability levels also is inconsistent with SAE definitions (that's not a criteria in SAE's definition).
 
You may be right, but how do you know this?
As in what to look for? Easiest is probably AUTO MAX set speed with 12.x vs a number with 11.x. Other 11.x control visualizations (e.g., blue highlights) and messages (e.g., changing lanes to follow route) appear on the freeway too. If you pay attention to where it switches between 12.x and 11.x, you can sometimes find hand-off issues, e.g., 12.x performing a lane change getting onto the freeway then 11.x decides it wants to return to the original lane (to then show the message that it needs to follow route before changing lanes).