FSD v12.x (end to end AI)

[stopcrazypp]

What a strange post.

You know that, currently, sunglasses allow you to look at the screen or your phone as it just measures your head angle with them on. If you don't know that, there's videos showing it and it's really easy to test. That's the reason why with sunglasses the camera monitoring isn't sufficient in 12.4.

So what was the point of this response?

Right, doesn't it just fall back to steering nags when camera monitoring is deemed insufficient? There are some systems with no steering nag fall back (if it is unhappy with your sunglasses you are locked out), but I think most people prefer having the fallback.

As for the point about R&D, Apple have probably spent millions on Face ID, including having face scanner hardware, and even they need a "Require attention" toggle for cases where people use sunglasses because the system can't tell if the user is paying attention.

 

[stopcrazypp]

To highlight just how ridiculous this entire driver monitoring system is, and how utterly screwed Tesla is in the courts and with NHTSA, when they have no actual means of confirming the driver is paying attention. Wheel torque? Weights / COMMA.AI devices. Cabin camera? $2 sunglasses. Seat weight detection? Bowling ball. *sigh*

Tesla have successfully defended themselves based on wheel torque in the past. It's also a very common mechanism used for L2 (camera monitoring is relatively new to the game).

As people in other threads found, all camera systems out there have limitations with sunglass usage (mentioned in the manuals). If NHTSA deems that insufficient, there's no system out there that would be.

 

[uscbucsfan]

To highlight just how ridiculous this entire driver monitoring system is, and how utterly screwed Tesla is in the courts and with NHTSA, when they have no actual means of confirming the driver is paying attention. Wheel torque? Weights / COMMA.AI devices. Cabin camera? $2 sunglasses. Seat weight detection? Bowling ball. *sigh*

Elon addressed this at some point. At first there was no monitoring. They designed the car to be actually full-self driving. The camera was for Robotaxi.

People abused it so at first they did wheel torque, then they incorporated the camera, but neither were originally designed for that purpose. Tesla hasn't put a dedicated eye monitoring camera because, I would assume, they are still planning on not monitoring at some point and Elon doesn't like to spend money/development on crutches.

 

[zoomer0056]

Slow release and progress is a good indication of systemic issues

Maybe so, but slow release and progress by replacing the old is still moving forward. And tech will always do the same. Nothing is static!

 

[azred]

… I would assume, they are still planning on not monitoring at some point …

I am no expert on L2 vs L3 etc. but assume there is no monitoring under L3 or higher. I have an older car with FSD and no interior camera and a new Y of course with the camera. But I also live in the AZ desert where daytime driving without good sunglasses is ridiculous. So the hands-free “excitement” of 12.4.1 for my Model Y matters very little to me, but I assume L3 can’t be too many years away…maybe

 

[uscbucsfan]

I am no expert on L2 vs L3 etc. but assume there is no monitoring under L3 or higher. I have an older car with FSD and no interior camera and a new Y with the camera. But I also live in the AZ desert where daytime driving without sunglasses is ridiculous. So the hands-free excitement matters very little to me, but I assume L3 can’t be too many years away…maybe

L3 will revert down outside of the specific conditions, so monitoring would still be needed. L4 and L5 would not have monitoring.

 

[azred]

Maybe so, but slow release and progress by replacing the old is still moving forward. And tech will always do the same. Nothing is static!

In general, you are probably right. However, at times it seems like Tesla wastes time. Holiday releases are an example. And now this hands-free “solution” of 12.4.1 that doesn’t work with pre-2021 cars due to no interior camera plus no usage of sunglasses. I'd rather see them focus on getting L3 and skip bandaids and “fun’ stuff.

The encouraging news to me is that it seems Tesla is really focusing on FSD. I imagine that focus is mostly to get the much delayed robotaxi initiative moving, but all of us “mere customers” with FSD should benefit, too.

 

[JulienW]

L3 will revert down outside of the specific conditions, so monitoring would still be needed. L4 and L5 would not have monitoring.

SAE L3 doesn't require attention monitoring. It just requires "When the feature requests you must drive". So likely as long as someone is occupying the driver's seat it will function.

Mercedes says this about their system:

"...If the driver fails to take back control even after increasingly urgent prompting and expiration of the takeover time, the system brakes the vehicle to a standstill in a controlled manner while engaging the hazard warning lights...."

 

[azred]

L3 will revert down outside of the specific conditions, so monitoring would still be needed. L4 and L5 would not have monitoring.

L3 that requires driving without sunglasses? Well, that just proves I don’t know anything about L3 and above.

 

[Dewg]

SAE L3 doesn't require attention monitoring. It just requires "When the feature requests you must drive". So likely as long as someone is occupying the driver's seat it will function.

Mercedes says this about their system:

"...If the driver fails to take back control even after increasingly urgent prompting and expiration of the takeover time, the system brakes the vehicle to a standstill in a controlled manner while engaging the hazard warning lights...."

From Mercedes:

The user must be awake and ready to resume driving at all times when operating the vehicle. The vehicle is equipped with a driver monitoring camera in the driver’s display to ensure the customer is ready to respond to a takeover request.

 

[stopcrazypp]

SAE L3 doesn't require attention monitoring. It just requires "When the feature requests you must drive". So likely as long as someone is occupying the driver's seat it will function.

SAE L3 requires driver monitoring to ensure driver is not sleeping and is ready to take over within about 10 seconds (SAE says "several seconds" but the UN requirement is 10). As such, all L3 cars out there have driver monitoring.

Mercedes says this about their system:

"...If the driver fails to take back control even after increasingly urgent prompting and expiration of the takeover time, the system brakes the vehicle to a standstill in a controlled manner while engaging the hazard warning lights...."

That is not considered an official sufficiently reliable fallback (Tesla has similar for L2) because the requirement is still that the driver needs to be alert enough to take over within 10 seconds. If it was reliable enough, there would be no such requirement and it would be considered SAE L4.

"If the buttons in the steering wheel rim turn red, the vehicle requests the driver to retake control within ten seconds."

Will Mercedes jump to level 3 before Tesla? Looks like it.

Sleeping is not desired on 5 minute trips. But your design must still account for it (as well as for intermediate times like 30 minutes) if it explicitly allows sleeping. You can't rely on the "desire" of the owner. To me, a standby driver car is one that legally must leave its ODD while...

teslamotorsclub.com

 

[AndrewZ]

I'm not sure what the relevance to that is. Sure, the manual says that Autopilot isn't designed for city streets, but there is nothing to prevent you from using on them. (Lots of people do in fact use basic Autopilot on city streets.)

I refuse to believe anyone has basic AP now after all the free trials and such, everyone is surely at least subscribed to FSD.

Do basic AP and FSD have different driver monitoring processes? I haven’t kept up enough to know if the reduction in wheel torque was limited to just FSD.

 

[JulienW]

SAE L3 requires driver monitoring to ensure driver is not sleeping and is ready to take over within about 10 seconds (SAE says "several seconds" but the UN requirement is 10). As such, all L3 cars out there have driver monitoring...

I have read through the SEA PDF's before and don't remember any stipulation requiring a Driver Monitoring system. Can you post a link to that info?

 

[stopcrazypp]

I have read through the SEA PDF's before and don't remember any stipulation requiring a Driver Monitoring system. Can you post a link to that info?

To clarify, from memory SAE does not specifically require driver monitoring for anything (even L2 doesn't, for example Infiniti's early system has no driver monitoring at all, you don't even need to be in the seat). Rather it is the other requirements (the take over requirement which is immediate for L2 and "several seconds" for L3) that essentially forces automakers to need them indirectly.

 

[sleepydoc]

What a strange post.

You know that, currently, sunglasses allow you to look at the screen or your phone as it just measures your head angle with them on. If you don't know that, there's videos showing it and it's really easy to test. That's the reason why with sunglasses the camera monitoring isn't sufficient in 12.4.

So what was the point of this response?

Depending on the glasses, the camera and the specific wavelength of light IR systems may be able to track gaze despite sunglasses. Beyond that, the system does look at the angle of your face and if it can see a phone in your hand it notes that as well. The last I heard, perceived phone use results in an instant strike.

This discussion reminds me of an article I read in consumer reports a few years ago that panned Tesla’s attention monitoring checks because they could be circumvented. Such criticisms completely miss the point and purpose of the systems. if a balcony has a railing on it and someone climbs over the railing and falls is the railing defective? The purpose of these systems is to place reasonable guards to ensure safe use. If someone takes the effort to knowingly circumvent them then the fault is with the user.

 

[uscbucsfan]

Depending on the glasses, the camera and the specific wavelength of light IR systems may be able to track gaze despite sunglasses. Beyond that, the system does look at the angle of your face and if it can see a phone in your hand it notes that as well. The last I heard, perceived phone use results in an instant strike.

This discussion reminds me of an article I read in consumer reports a few years ago that panned Tesla’s attention monitoring checks because they could be circumvented. Such criticisms completely miss the point and purpose of the systems. if a balcony has a railing on it and someone climbs over the railing and falls is the railing defective? The purpose of these systems is to place reasonable guards to ensure safe use. If someone takes the effort to knowingly circumvent them then the fault is with the user.

Agreed on the last point, but it's pretty easy to keep your phone out of the camera's way while driving.

I don't think the IR in Teslas are in the proper position or the proper type to see through most polarized sunglasses. That's the big reason why "no nag" doesn't and will not work with them and why so many use sunglasses to not get strikes when driving currently.

 

[stopcrazypp]

I refuse to believe anyone has basic AP now after all the free trials and such, everyone is surely at least subscribed to FSD.

The trial is only 30 days, it has expired for plenty of people already. Also it requires you to explicitly activate FSDS. There are also other like me that are still on older versions prior to the trial update.

Do basic AP and FSD have different driver monitoring processes? I haven’t kept up enough to know if the reduction in wheel torque was limited to just FSD.

I don't know if it changed, but for AP I believe you can even tape the camera and it will still activate with steering alone (so even with camera equipped cars, the camera monitoring is 100% optional). With FSD, you can't tape the camera and activate, although it would fallback to steering if something interferes with camera attention detection while it is already activated.

 

[Yelobird]

In general, you are probably right. However, at times it seems like Tesla wastes time. Holiday releases are an example. And now this hands-free “solution” of 12.4.1 that doesn’t work with pre-2021 cars due to no interior camera plus no usage of sunglasses. I'd rather see them focus on getting L3 and skip bandaids and “fun’ stuff.

The encouraging news to me is that it seems Tesla is really focusing on FSD. I imagine that focus is mostly to get the much delayed robotaxi initiative moving, but all of us “mere customers” with FSD should benefit, too.

A waste of time based on Your needs. The 90% other users would argue you are wrong. Holiday releases etc are only a waste of time based on your expectations. We have no known understanding of what/if there are any limitations but to assume we/they are doomed based on a delay is a false assumption.

 

[sleepydoc]

Agreed on the last point, but it's pretty easy to keep your phone out of the camera's way while driving.

I don't think the IR in Teslas are in the proper position or the proper type to see through most polarized sunglasses. That's the big reason why "no nag" doesn't and will not work with them and why so many use sunglasses to not get strikes when driving currently.

yup. Apple designed FaceID from the ground up as a secure facial recognition system where as Tesla has added the gaze tracking capabilities along the way as their need became apparent. (Never underestimate the stupidity of the American Idiot.) Had Tesla designed them in from the beginning they would likely be more capable but that still doesn't change the point of my post - the primary responsibility is on the driver of the car to be responsibility, not on Tesla to make sure they are doing so.

 

[AndrewZ]

The trial is only 30 days, it has expired for plenty of people already. Also it requires you to explicitly activate FSDS. There are also other like me that are still on older versions prior to the trial update.

I don't know if it changed, but for AP I believe you can even tape the camera and it will still activate with steering alone (so even with camera equipped cars, the camera monitoring is 100% optional). With FSD, you can't tape the camera and activate, although it would fallback to steering if something interferes with camera attention detection while it is already activated.

People tend to think of organizations like the NHTSA as slow, technologically unsavvy, full of red tape etc etc so it seems like a bit of a stretch to believe they’d react at the level of detail here talking different version numbers or even which module was active when dealing with something like this, but who knows.

In my line of work that is also very safety sensitive, we do broad safety stand downs when a bad incident occurs. Incidents with self-driving tech and law enforcement have led to other specific action in the past.