Sort of like this:
Seriously though, being able to detect people makes the problem worse not better. The driver sees the kid fall in front of the car and assumes that the car sees the kid and won't start moving.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
FSD very far away due to regulations?
- Thread starter Daniel in SD
- Start date
Seriously though, being able to detect people makes the problem worse not better. The driver sees the kid fall in front of the car and assumes that the car sees the kid and won't start moving.
chronopc
Active Member
I'm not sure why the censor/camera picking up people is a bad thing. If the car can detect people, then it's just simple programming to not run them over.
chronopc
Active Member
With current version of EAP, yes. But you got to start somewhere. Nothing is full proof. People get ran over by human drivers everyday. I trust EAP not to run me over a lot more than I trust a human.
It makes it worse if the driver is counting on it to detect the person. It's great as safety feature!
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
Cept when, like now, it only sees some of them, some of the time.
Can't really program around that. See again folks who've hit stuff using autopark because the car can't see low enough.
chronopc
Active Member
That all depends on how reliable it is. With how EAP is right now, I totally agree. But it will get better in the future.
chronopc
Active Member
I don't believe everything the car "sees" is displayed on the screen. The problem isn't that the car doesn't see things. The problem is that the car sees too many things and doesn't know what to focus on. That is something that software con solve.
I use autopark all the time and it's never hit anything. There have been occasions where people walked in front of the car and the car does recognize them and it will pause autopark.
chronopc
Active Member
I think that would be dangerous. If someone forgets to wear the beacon then the car would be unable to detect the person. They need to figure out how to get the car to independently recognize people in as many situations as possible.
That's my whole point. I don't think it will be released as a level 2 feature that requires the driver to take over control of vehicle when it fails.
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
No, the problem really is the car doesn't see things.
It's physically impossible for it to do so.
This is why there's no overhead 360 view available when parking. The cameras don't go down that low.
That's great for you.
Now do a search and see all the folks who have had it hit something the car didn't see- or the folks whose wheels got curbed because the car didn't see a low curb.
chronopc
Active Member
The person I responded to said beacon not yellow vest. And again it's better for the car to detect people regardless of what people are wearing.
JeffK
Well-Known Member
We should remember that we, as humans, also cannot always see such curbs or if a small child were directly in front or behind the car.
Curb rash existed long before automatic parking and kids have been hit in the road back when people got around on horses.
chronopc
Active Member
This is what all the cameras can see.
In addition to cameras the car also has sensors that would pick up a moving person.
Until it can read traffic signs and detect rain property like my 7y old BMW, FSD sounds like a joke.
Also I can't imagine a FSD system relaying on a camera system which gets enough rain drops on side/back cameras to creat such an image distortion not to distinguish the UFO from a bicycle.
P.S. hope one day my car would be able to restore seat memory to the correct position as well.
Also I can't imagine a FSD system relaying on a camera system which gets enough rain drops on side/back cameras to creat such an image distortion not to distinguish the UFO from a bicycle.
P.S. hope one day my car would be able to restore seat memory to the correct position as well.
Last edited:
The problem is that level 2 autonomy requires that the driver take over when the car makes a mistake. Having stop light and stop sign detection in a level 2 system would create situations where the average driver would not respond in time. Good luck convincing a jury that the driver should have hit the brakes in the fraction of a second that the car, accelerating from a stop, would take to hit someone in a crosswalk.
You can find plenty of videos of EAP not seeing trucks, gore points, etc. but in those cases there is enough time for the driver to take corrective action.
You can't program around that, but you can greatly limit it's capabilities. Lots of humans simply don't attempt tricky things because it's too much risk to their car.
The other problem is the rear view camera gets too wet/dirty to see anything. I can't even tell what's behind me when it gets bad, and this is with a Model 3 which should have most weather resistance rear camera.
After the fiasco that was the Navigate on Autopilot I'll be surprised if they even get that working in 2019 let alone anything else.
My predictions for 2019
Improved summons, and self park. But, it will still require human verification.
Improved Navigate on Autopilot, but still no lane change without user confirmation
HW3 computer upgrade
Speed sign reading only on HW3
The rain sensing will still not work whether it's HW2 or HW3.
Still no snake chargers
Huge arguments on TMC because Tesla will have better EAP functionality for FSD owners than EAP only owners. Things like improved neural nets that can differentiate more things, and has more accuracy.
Huge disappointment when Audi turns on L3 driving in Germany for the A8 even though it's limited to slow traffic speeds. People in cali rarely achieve higher speeds during commute hours.
At least Elon has moved onto talking about hovering cars.
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
Sure. But we can remember we just saw a kid and that if it vanished from our site by dropping down below our vision, it's probably still there.
Object permanence is something most humans learn by about age 1 or so.... Teslas aren't there yet.
Until the car is significantly safer than the human it's not going to be an acceptable substitute.
(10 times safer IIRC one of Elons comments on the matter)
That's great.
We were discussing a small, prone, not moving child.
Which the car wouldn't see.
Because the cameras don't see low enough very close to the car. Neither do the sonic sensors.
See, again, the folks hitting stuff when trying to autopark. Or the inability to deliver a 360 parking view overhead because the cameras don't see that low... or hell, just move near a low curb- notice how the car "loses" detection as you get close enough to it for the sensors to not be able to see it anymore.
chronopc
Active Member
There is no situation where a human would see a kid and the car wouldn't be able to see the kid. Right now Teslas doesn't use object permanence but there's nothing stopping them from being able to program the car to do that. The car has all of the information that it needs. It's only a matter of programming the car to use all the information it has to make the best decision.
Similar threads
