FSD very far away due to regulations?

[dondy]

Driverless Testing and Public Use Rules for Autonomous Vehicles Approved

did you read it, or you don't go beyond headlines? this provision was specially tuned to legalize small Google pet project.
EDIT. right in the quote you posted they state that the purpose of the new regulations

This second set of regulations for autonomous vehicles in California establishes rules for testing autonomous technology without a driver and how manufacturers can allow the public to use self-driving cars. The regulations become effective on April 2, 2018, and DMV can begin issuing permits on that date.

the so appealing second part is about using self-riding Google "trams" as taxis. Nothing more.

 

[Daniel in SD]

bingo. Google is responsible for it's actions.
btw.
The permission they got and subsequently legalized as "public use" states:
1) The manufacturer shall identify in the application the operational design domain in which the subject autonomous vehicles are designed to operate and certify that the vehicles are designed to be incapable of operating in the autonomous mode in areas outside of the disclosed operational design domain.

....(1) A communication link between the vehicle and the remote operator if any, to provide information on the vehicle’s location and status and allow two-way communication between the remote operator and any passengers, if applicable, should the vehicle experiences
any failures that would endanger the safety of the vehicle’s passengers or other road users while operating without a driver.

I'd be fine with those restrictions on my car while using FSD. I'm not sure what the problem is. Since in the Model 3 I would be sitting in the driver seat it would not need to be able to operated remotely.

If Tesla is waiting for a law that places liability on the passengers they will never release FSD. The manufacturer will be responsible for the operation of the vehicle while in FSD mode.

 

[Evbwcaer]

Can anybody speak to this thought: Car makers currently sell vehicles with the capability to do explicitly illegal things, and there is no problem. Such as, speeding. Couldn't Telsa ship the car with FSD and its basically up to the owner to know when to use it or to not get caught? Additionally, couldn't Tesla sell a car that does not have FSD, but just one small action by the owner would enable it? Similar to removing a governor, TPMS sensor, or installing a chip/tuner.

Beyond these specifics, the general status quo in the USA is that things are legal unless legislated otherwise, not the opposite.

 

[Daniel in SD]

Can anybody speak to this thought: Car makers currently sell vehicles with the capability to do explicitly illegal things, and there is no problem. Such as, speeding. Couldn't Telsa ship the car with FSD and its basically up to the owner to know when to use it or to not get caught? Additionally, couldn't Tesla sell a car that does not have FSD, but just one small action by the owner would enable it? Similar to removing a governor, TPMS sensor, or installing a chip/tuner.

Beyond these specifics, the general status quo in the USA is that things are legal unless legislated otherwise, not the opposite.

I guess so but there are regulations about FSD vehicles. It would not be a good idea for Tesla to try to circumvent those regulations.

 

[Evbwcaer]

FSD level 4 is illegal everywhere. Existing projects are covered by "testing" provision, and are always accompanied with special legal provision between respective companies and local authorities.
Here is a quote from NHTSA AV guidance:
https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/docs/AV policy guidance PDF.pdf

Existing legal constrains practically prohibit private ownership of 4,5 level FSD systems, or transfer of such vehicles to third persons. Google's way building driver-less taxis is pretty much the only way.
Current NTSA provisions define very clearly requirements for Level 2systems demanding all time driver awareness (see "nagging") therefore limiting possibilities for pitching FSD level 4,5 systems using EULA mechanisms. Level 3 which Tesla wants to sell actually falls in-between. Nobody knows how to legalize it.

As I was already writing a number of months ago there will be actual legal significant delay between well working level 3-4 hardware and legislation. There is no way you will see legal FSD lvl4 on roads before 2025.

Dondy, you seem to know your stuff, when you say that legal constrains practically prohibit private ownership of L4 and L5, what about the case of a Tesla where the vehicle can just be driven conventionally, in addition to being L4/L5? Do the laws say anything about that distinction?

 

[dlieu]

i am more dubious about it on technical grounds, not regulations.

I am familiar with the details of GoogLeNet, which is rumored to be the prototype for Tesla's AP networks. I am also somewhat familiar with autonomous flight work. And i am fairly confident both are too weak to be the FSD basis. The fuzzy nature of this technology makes it almost impossible to assert its accuracy in any given never before seen situation.

To add, I have even more doubts about society's readiness to accept FSDs even if it works (meaning it being safe and rational).

Even though my AP technically does nothing illegal, i can "feel" the situations when a driver next to me is going to be irritated by its action, so i take the car off of it. It simply does things human driver would rarely do exactly that way, and most humans are not conditioned to expect that. They expect other humans to cut corners, adjust safety margins depending on overall congestions etc. etc. If AP is to be safer than humans, it is bound to do things that human drivers do not expect a driver to do.

Note that neither Waymo, nor Tesla ever actually sent a car without a person at the wheel to the public roads. That happened only on private roads in a controlled traffic. Why is that? What are they more afraid of, that their vehicle fails to behave, or of how it will affect behavior of other drivers it shares the road with?

Waymo is already experiencing vandalism and hate issues even with their small fleet to-date, imagine what happens when FSD without a real steering wheel or person reaches even 10% penetration. Human road rage may become an issue, in which case i doubt the regulations would be able to stem it (unless humans are banned from driving entirely; but then we are looking at something like the `i,robot` reality with even more unforseen human response).

So it is possible that we will see regulation finalized. But will the manufacturers really ever dare to put out a car without steering controls on public road (or otherwise completely indemnify the user from being responsible for driving errors)?

On that note i want to say that I am happy to turn out to be wrong. It's just a long standing concern of possible problems, not a conviction (much less an attempt at prophesying).

 

[Daniel in SD]

Note that neither Waymo, nor Tesla ever actually sent a car without a person at the wheel to the public roads.

Waymo does have a permit in California to do so though. It's not regulations that are holding them back.
My point is that it's dishonest for Tesla to say that it is government regulation preventing them from releasing FSD. Unless they think that it should be passengers who have liability for accidents when FSD is enabled. In which case I would argue that the public will never accept a law that does that.

 

[dlieu]

Waymo does have a permit in California to do so though

My point exactly. Forget regulations. They (the manufacturers) will not let us have it any time soon, even if they are allowed to, unless they are ok with massive issues of the kind. At least not in the way of complete autonomy level 5 definition. (This is more a reply to the thread question)

My point is that it's dishonest for Tesla to say that it is government regulation that is preventing them from releasing FSD.

Right. Of all "optimistic" timelines that Tesla has promoted to date, this one beats everything else IMO.

 

[Knightshade]

FSD level 4 is illegal everywhere. .

I don't believe that is correct.


Automated Driving Motor Vehicles | Colorado General Assembly

That's a Colorado law (about 18 months since it was passed into law) that allows a person to use an automated driving system to drive or control a function of a motor vehicle if the system is capable of complying with every state and federal law that applies to the function that the system is operating.

So L4 is 100% legal in Colorado as long as the car is capable of complying with every relevant state and federal law just like a human driver would need to.


http://www.myfloridahouse.gov/Secti...ocumentType=Bill&BillNumber=7027&Session=2016

That's a Florida law from 2016 that explicitly allows a licensed driver to operate an autonomous vehicle in autonomous mode.

So L4 is 100% legal there too.

I suspect they're not the only states but don't feel like digging through the dozens of other states that have passed various laws on this.

 

[notAnExpert]

Waymo does have a permit in California to do so though. It's not regulations that are holding them back.
My point is that it's dishonest for Tesla to say that it is government regulation preventing them from releasing FSD.

I also find Tesla's claim disingenuous. Waymo has a permit to test driverless vehicles on CA public streets, but Tesla doesn't. A reasonable inference would be that Tesla doesn't have the tech working well enough to test, not that regulations are holding things up.

 

[Daniel in SD]

I also find Tesla's claim disingenuous. Waymo has a permit to test driverless vehicles on CA public streets, but Tesla doesn't. A reasonable inference would be that Tesla doesn't have the tech working well enough to test, not that regulations are holding things up.

They do have a permit to test with a backup driver in the car though, along with 50+ other companies.
Permit Holders
It's bizarre to me how many people on this forum think that the government is trying to hold back an industry that could be worth trillions of dollars.

 

[notAnExpert]

They do have a permit to test with a backup driver in the car though, along with 50+ other companies.
Permit Holders
It's bizarre to me how many people on this forum think that the government is trying to hold back an industry that could be worth trillions of dollars.

Yes. If they really felt it was ready for driverless operation on public streets, wouldn't they already have that driverless permit by now?

And, Tesla's reason that "ordering was too confusing" to take FSD off the order menu was a curious one too. Was it more confusing than their order page's emphasis on "Price After Savings" number rather than the actual price you pay?

 

[Johnny Mac]

I honestly feel bad for anyone that thought that this was coming anytime soon. if your goal was to keep this car until it dies and help Tesla with funding then I can understand why you would buy FSD but if you thought hey I’ll do it because in three years it will be available you were dreaming

 

[Tam]

...It's bizarre to me how many people on this forum think that the government is trying to hold back an industry that could be worth trillions of dollars.

Agreed.

"Regulatory" is only an excuse, not a reason for the absence of the implementation for Tesla Self Driving Capability.

The real reason is Tesla Self Driving Capability is so much in its infancy and unable to comply to basic traffic laws such as please do not crash into a concrete median and die.

If Tesla is capable, as others have cited, there are states that allow Autonomous Vehicles.

9/20/2016: FL:

"...nations’s first legislation to legalize fully autonomous vehicles on public roads without a driver behind the wheel. "

12/10/2016 MI:
"allow the sale of self-driving vehicles to the public once they are tested and certified, according to the state."

"Companies can now test self-driving cars on Michigan public roads without a driver or steering wheel under new laws that could push the state to the forefront of autonomous vehicle development."

5/11/2017 GA:

Self driving cars in Georgia: Deal signs bill into law

"On Monday, Gov. Nathan Deal signed a bill that would allow self-driving cars to operate on public roads."

6/1/2017 CO:
"If you’re thinking about developing an autonomous vehicle in Colorado, go ahead. It’s now legal, as long as you obey all of the existing rules of the road, according to legislation that Gov. John Hickenlooper signed into law Thursday."

Here's the map for Autonomous Vehicles Laws from last year:

So again, it's not the laws that are the problem, it's the immature technology that is the problem.

 

[chronopc]

So again, it's not the laws that are the problem, it's the immature technology that is the problem.

I guess the confusion comes from the disclaimer on the Tesla website: Please note that Self-Driving functionality is dependent upon extensive software validation and regulatory approval, which may vary widely by jurisdiction.

 

[e-FTW]

This is the least surprising news since news have existed.

There was never going to be any type of legislation or regulation that could adapt as fast as this technology is evolving. This is an order of magnitude of difference in speed.

 

[Az_Rael]

Particularly since this is coming from people at the sales level, this smells like “anti-selling” FSD until they get HW3 available. It’s just more retrofits to add to the list at a discount for every FSD software update they sell.

This is my personal theory. It seems like an odd turn for Tesla to suddenly be conservative about their estimates for anything.

I will bet FSD comes right back on the menu as soon as HW3 is in production.

 

[chronopc]

This is my personal theory. It seems like an odd turn for Tesla to suddenly be conservative about their estimates for anything.

I will bet FSD comes right back on the menu as soon as HW3 is in production.

I think the reason why Tesla pulled FSD is because they want to charge more for it. The last information I saw suggest that FSD will cost $8k.

 

[JeffK]

I think the reason why Tesla pulled FSD is because they want to charge more for it. The last information I saw suggest that FSD will cost $8k.

Sometimes the news quotes $8000 when they mean ($5000 + $3000)

 

[chronopc]

Sometimes the news quotes $8000 when they mean ($5000 + $3000)

In this email it says $8k for FSD but not sure if Elon is including the price of EAP in it. Makes sense if he is.