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.
Looks like a V12 FSD video leaked on Twitter. Does not seem much better than (V11) as expected. Still makes some weed decisions. Turning seems a bit smoother but that's hard to tell over video

Hard to be certain, but the software version at the very beginning does sort of look like it states 'FSD Beta v12.1'.

Nice touch to use Elon's X to violate a Tesla NDA. Good view of the driver in the mirror, in case Tesla cares about such things.

Simple drive that performed well. But v11 would probably have also done well.
 
Hard to be certain, but the software version at the very beginning does sort of look like it states 'FSD Beta v12.1'.

Nice touch to use Elon's X to violate a Tesla NDA. Good view of the driver in the mirror, in case Tesla cares about such things.

Simple drive that performed well. But v11 would probably have also done well.

The small section in the parking lot looked good. I haven't had an FSD Beta version yet that can navigate a parking lot without the steering wheel twitching back and forth a lot.
 
Looks like a V12 FSD video leaked on Twitter. Does not seem much better than (V11) as expected. Still makes some weed decisions. Turning seems a bit smoother but that's hard to tell over video

There's not a whole lot to go off of here (short drive) and nothing in this drive was really challenging--so it's hard to really say that it's "not much better" than v11.

But I noticed a few things that appeared to be better:

1. Parking lot turns appeared to be less jerky.
2. Turn signals appear to go on sooner and more consistently.
3. Smooth turns (hard to tell how it compares to 11). Driver comments that it seems to stay in the lane better during the turn. (Surely as a Tesla employee--probably not for much longer!--he's driven that curve many times on v11).
4. Consistently slowing for speed bumps (though this could just be due to better map data in Tesla's backyard, so maybe not better than v11).
5. There don't appear to be any unnecessary braking events. (Again, hard to say if there would have been if this were v11 driving).
 
  • Like
Reactions: LowlyOilBurner
Looks like a V12 FSD video leaked on Twitter. Does not seem much better than (V11) as expected. Still makes some weed decisions. Turning seems a bit smoother but that's hard to tell over video


At the 1mn mark, the car took way too long to make the left at the stop sign. There was no traffic in either direction but it took the car 30 seconds to commit. I am guessing the big truck to the right was occluded the view.
 
  • Helpful
  • Like
Reactions: kabin and replicant
tOkxyoa.png
Gotta love Chuck trying to increase his sub count. :)

This might be it. Not much to the first video. The blue path line looks short and stubby. The second video shows some of the same crawling indecisiveness. Looks smooth otherwise. Might be slowing for speed bumps at the Tesla factory parking lot.

 
Weird how these people don’t know that the system is watching to make sure you have hands on the wheel! Bizarre. If you don’t want nags, hold the d**m wheel like a sane person.

The car can easily tell if you (likely) have your hands on the wheel. It does not need to be able to see your hands or the wheel to do so.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pilotSteve
On July 19, 1989, United Airlines flight 232 crash landed in Sioux City Iowa. 112 died, but 184 survived. 52 children were aboard, 4 of whom were "lap children" who sat in an adult's lap. 11 of the children died, including one of the lap children.

While the crew was heralded as heroes for having saved so many lives, a campaign was launched to save children from the unsafe policy of allowing infants to sit in a parent's lap. The proposed solution was to require an individual seat and restrain for each child.

In a remarkably rational review, the NTSB realized that such a policy would increase the cost for families to fly, which would cause many to drive instead, a much less safe alternative.

The FAA estimates that a regulation that all children must have a seat would equate, for every one child's life saved on an aircraft, to 60 people dying in highway accidents.

The proposed policy was scrapped, because rather than saving lives, it would have cost lives.

So, to this day, in the US, children under 2 can fly without their own seat.

An alternative would have been to require airlines to provide free seats and child seats for infants, but, well, that was not going to fly, so to speak.

Running stop signs at full speed is dangerous. Rolling past the limit line at 2 mph, no so much. I expect that Tesla's voluminous data will eventually provide actual evidence on which to base safety decisions, and perhaps regulators will follow the data. One can hope...


(Was O'Dowd's tech used during development of the oh-so-lethal Boeing 737 Max? Both were mentioned in the same issue of an avionics journal in 2020 Link.)
there are two parts to the question - the first is the law itself and the second is Tesla's implementation and the NHTSA's enforcement.

Regarding the law itself the problem of enforcement comes forward. Laws need to be written as to be enforceable. Requiring a complete stop, 0 MPH is a very clear, black and white definition that is understandable for both the driver and the police. Stopped is stopped. If you were to change it to 'slow down to a prudent speed' you've changed it from a clearly defined requirement to a much more ambiguous one that is open to interpretation. Even a specific speed like 3 MPH is impossible to enforce.

Now for the implementation part. If the law states the car must stop and NHTSA says 'well 2 mph' is ok then they are explicitly giving approval for Tesla to break the law. (and you have the issue of a federal agency saying it's ok to break state laws.) You can argue that they could make a carve out for self driving cars but that runs into enforceability issues.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pilotSteve
2 seconds is far too long to be fully stopped when no traffic at all is present - but as I've said (repeatedly now!), I think for this particular aspect of the complaint, we'll need to quantify with video evidence just what it is that is being talked about. It's too easy to talk past one another on this otherwise. I know for sure I've discussed it many times, but I don't have an actual timed number for the delay. I think it can exceed 2 seconds at times. I am certain it frequently exceeds 1 second. I'll grab some videos at some point in the new year when I'm back to my car, and then we can see. The delay is definitely variable - I'm not sure what affects it. I have a couple quick videos from the latest version and it looks to be about 2 seconds at times (but they don't show the screen so I'm not going to post them)

In any case I'm fairly confident this is a definite issue (excessive delay), because there seems to be broad agreement that this is a problem (and I'm not hearing any pushback on it here!).

The NHTSA requirement to stop may seem like a contributor to this problem, but I think that’s a clear distraction here from understanding what is happening at stop signs - it just masks the underlying issue and allows people to conveniently think that somehow it's the NHTSA requirement causing all of this!

It’s very strange to me that people seem to think the two are related - especially since this behavior clearly existed before the recall. There are many discussions about this prior to January 2022. They sound exactly the same. You just have to look them up!

As I've said, the NHTSA requirement simply masks some of the pre-existing hesitancy issues. Even without the actual stop, there were problems. Some of these problems have been solved, and some still exist, these are all from 2021:








End of 2021 complaints.

My recent complaint:

Again, coming back to the point - notice there are many complaints here!!!

- Using the brakes excessively above 1-2mph for no reason, stopping with too much jerk. (Old problem)
- Not slowing down fast enough. (Old problem)
- Not using the brakes to come to a complete stop promptly, below 1mph or so. (Not sure why they don't do this for NHTSA)
- Waiting around (I think probably for over 1-2 seconds at times), but this needs to be captured) after the stop for no apparent reason.
- I'd add that sometimes it stops twice (with latest version). (Old hesitancy problem, masked by stopping)

Anyway we can revisit this topic with video. Looking back at the old complaints has confirmed that this is not related to NHTSA (that just changed how it manifests). Now we just have to quantify the issue.
I actually timed how long FSD stops at stop signs last night - it's a bit difficult to get an exact time but as near as I can tell from the time you feel the jerk to the time it starts accelerating again is 0.7-0.8 seconds.
 
there are two parts to the question - the first is the law itself and the second is Tesla's implementation and the NHTSA's enforcement.

Regarding the law itself the problem of enforcement comes forward. Laws need to be written as to be enforceable. Requiring a complete stop, 0 MPH is a very clear, black and white definition that is understandable for both the driver and the police. Stopped is stopped. If you were to change it to 'slow down to a prudent speed' you've changed it from a clearly defined requirement to a much more ambiguous one that is open to interpretation. Even a specific speed like 3 MPH is impossible to enforce.

Now for the implementation part. If the law states the car must stop and NHTSA says 'well 2 mph' is ok then they are explicitly giving approval for Tesla to break the law. (and you have the issue of a federal agency saying it's ok to break state laws.) You can argue that they could make a carve out for self driving cars but that runs into enforceability issues.
There is a reasonable argument that many, if not most stop signs could be changed to yields with no loss of safety. While this may, or may not, be a good idea, the rules are unambiguous and a self driving car should make a full stop at a stop sign.

If the car stops too long, or you wish for it to roll the stop sign, an application of the accelerator will do the trick without disengaging FSD.
 
Now for the implementation part. If the law states the car must stop and NHTSA says 'well 2 mph' is ok then they are explicitly giving approval for Tesla to break the law.
On the stop sign thing, it is not clear to me that NHTSA needed to say anything. Their remit is safety, not law enforcement, and the FSD system is not subject to certification and testing.

I suspect that action was politically motivated, a response to complaints, not to accidents or injuries. At least it appears that O'Dowd's call to remove all Teslas from the roads is being largely ignored by the regulators.

But I'm OK with it anyway. A quick tap of the go-peddle absolves Tesla and NHTSA of any responsibility.

In the US, we kill over 40,000 people every year on our roads. Around half are single vehicle accidents, including running off the road and rollovers. Speed, inattention and alcohol are obvious contributors. Pedestrians and cyclists account for a substantial fraction, disturbing given that these people were not in cars at all, but were purely victims of others' poor driving.

WhenTesla's AutoPilot and FSD are engaged, they continuously look in all directions, know the map, slow for turns, stay in the lane, and do not drink. Given this and the nature of typical fatal crashes, FSD and AP would seem likely to vastly improve safety.

One problem for Tesla is statistical: those 40,000 deaths work out to only ~1.3 fatalities per 100 million miles traveled. To accurately measure improvements in this tiny fraction of fatalities per mile requires data from a huge number of miles of traveled. I suspect this is why Telsa released FSD 11.3.6 and 11.4.4 to their entire fleet last year, to collect data from enough miles drive to prove the safety in spite of a few widely publicized accidents.
 
The stop sign thing probably came from users who were wary about the system rolling stop signs and garnering them a ticket they would be liable for and then perhaps went a step further -- I remember at the time watching YouTube beta testers and a couple of them complaining on video about it

NHTSA relies heavily on issues reported through their complaint submission form
 
I don't know how you treat yield signs
I probably do what most people do if it's safe and not follow exactly what the law allows to be enforced. The most common traffic violations probably include speeding, using cell phone, not stopping/yielding, tailgating; and each of these can have laws written in ways that could allow law enforcement to pull you over, e.g., "no person shall drive a vehicle on a highway at a speed in excess of such maximum limits," "shall not drive a motor vehicle while using a wireless telephone." But practically people don't always follow even the handbook-recommended "full stop" stopping or "let any vehicle… pass before you proceed" yielding or "three-second rule" following, and similarly most of the time cops won't waste your time, so 12.x behaving like most people will similarly be usually fine.

I suppose there's even potential for end-to-end to learn that people do drive slower when highway patrol is nearby. Maybe these new speed camera map data are part of the inputs to control, and neural networks could pick up on that signal to behave differently.
 
The stop sign thing probably came from users who were wary about the system rolling stop signs and garnering them a ticket
Isn't it the case that the early versions of FSD beta actually had a toggle to select rolling stop vs. full stop? Which if it had been kept, would have solved said concern.

I believe also, that the rolling stop would execute only if there were no other cars present, and to @Mardak 's point, would have or could eventually have included awareness of law enforcement in the vicinity who might be watching.
On the stop sign thing, it is not clear to me that NHTSA needed to say anything. Their remit is safety, not law enforcement
Agreed and this is a great point.

I'm certainly not calling for reckless law-breaking by the AV, but I think it's a completely legitimate discussion in this kind of gray area of the rolling stop and the near universal violation of it (in sparse-traffic situations).

To me, one of the key points is that the multi-camera AV is much better equipped to handle a rolling stop safely, vs. a human who can't or won't pay constant attention, and easily develops bad habits in their daily drives through the familiar neighborhood. In that light, a situation where only software-controlled AVs are strictly enforcing stop-and-wait behavior, is an ironic inversion of the advantages that they can provide.