Getting more and more irritated FSD suite...

[qdeathstar]

If you have a gas pedal you're not driving a Tesla.

Must have been blue cruise then

 

[2101Guy]

If you have a gas pedal you're not driving a Tesla.

Tell that to this guy

 

[daniel]

I wouldn't go that far. He is just being 'loose with facts' when it comes to timelines. Remember he always makes 'impossible to late'.

Being "loose with facts" is just a polite way of saying "lying." Yes, Tesla has done remarkable things: Starting an electric car company and being successful, both making money and changing the entire public perception of electric cars from "golf cart" to "crazy-quick." SpaceX has also done remarkable things, though nobody ever said that landing a rocket was impossible, just that it was very difficult and required computing capability that did not exist until recently.

But promising that your car (not just some car someday, but the actual car you are buying) will be robotaxi-capable, long after it becomes clear that the task will take many years, that's just dishonest and taking people's money under false pretenses. I.e. fraud.

And worse: When Tesla recognized that FSD was not going to be available in today's cars, Elon Musk did not give a public apology (e.g. something like "We really thought we could do it and we were mistaken."). Instead Tesla quietly and without fanfare or explanation, changed the definition of "FSD" from "Robotaxi-capable" (i.e. level 5 autonomy) to "Can drive itself but needs constant driver supervision and intervention without notice," i.e. Level 2. This tells us that Musk knows he's lying when he keeps making the FSD promise. And it introduces a contradiction between what Musk is promising in public, and what you get in writing when you buy the car.

And then there's the whole "feature complete" business. Feature-complete apparently means that all the software modules are in place, they just don't work. And trying to suggest that his previous promises about when the cars would be robotaxi-capable are fulfilled when the software modules are done, even though every car with that software would crash if it were enabled as a robotaxi without a human driver to take full responsibility.

 

[jjrandorin]

This definitely needed a new thread, instead of one of the more than several current FSD threads, or, even another thread on FSD by the same OP.

Subscribed to FSD, Very disappointed...

So, I know this isn't the FSD Beta, but if there is a trickle down of software to the features that were available, I am incredibly disappointed. I just took a 1000 mile trip and there are so many errors and bugs that I just preferred to turn off NoAP and drive on my own. List of things I...

teslamotorsclub.com

 

[Electroman]

changed the definition of "FSD" from "Robotaxi-capable" (i.e. level 5 autonomy) to "Can drive itself but needs constant driver supervision and intervention without notice,"

What? Tesla did not change the definition. Tesla still claims that FSD (if and when it is available with regulators approval) will not require driver supervision. Tesla claims that FSDb sure is L2 and needs driver supervision. What we have today is FSDb. FSD will come one day.. some day

I think you are confusing between the restrictions and claims between FSDb and FSD.

 

[2101Guy]

Being "loose with facts" is just a polite way of saying "lying." Yes, Tesla has done remarkable things: Starting an electric car company and being successful, both making money and changing the entire public perception of electric cars from "golf cart" to "crazy-quick." SpaceX has also done remarkable things, though nobody ever said that landing a rocket was impossible, just that it was very difficult and required computing capability that did not exist until recently.

But promising that your car (not just some car someday, but the actual car you are buying) will be robotaxi-capable, long after it becomes clear that the task will take many years, that's just dishonest and taking people's money under false pretenses. I.e. fraud.

And worse: When Tesla recognized that FSD was not going to be available in today's cars, Elon Musk did not give a public apology (e.g. something like "We really thought we could do it and we were mistaken."). Instead Tesla quietly and without fanfare or explanation, changed the definition of "FSD" from "Robotaxi-capable" (i.e. level 5 autonomy) to "Can drive itself but needs constant driver supervision and intervention without notice," i.e. Level 2. This tells us that Musk knows he's lying when he keeps making the FSD promise. And it introduces a contradiction between what Musk is promising in public, and what you get in writing when you buy the car.

And then there's the whole "feature complete" business. Feature-complete apparently means that all the software modules are in place, they just don't work. And trying to suggest that his previous promises about when the cars would be robotaxi-capable are fulfilled when the software modules are done, even though every car with that software would crash if it were enabled as a robotaxi without a human driver to take full responsibility.

Agreed 100%.

 

[DblOSmith]

This definitely needed a new thread, instead of one of the more than several current FSD threads, or, even another thread on FSD by the same OP.

Subscribed to FSD, Very disappointed...

So, I know this isn't the FSD Beta, but if there is a trickle down of software to the features that were available, I am incredibly disappointed. I just took a 1000 mile trip and there are so many errors and bugs that I just preferred to turn off NoAP and drive on my own. List of things I...

teslamotorsclub.com

Thanks. I agree. Especially since the first was just my overview of some the initial failings and this one was specifically on the increased driver intervention/attention which is completely separate topic that wasn't even mentioned in the first post.

 

[daniel]

What? Tesla did not change the definition. Tesla still claims that FSD (if and when it is available with regulators approval) will not require driver supervision. Tesla claims that FSDb sure is L2 and needs driver supervision. What we have today is FSDb. FSD will come one day.. some day

I think you are confusing between the restrictions and claims between FSDb and FSD.

I was not referring to the definition most of us associate with the phrase "full self-driving" which any rational person would assume means that the car can drive itself without any input from a human. I was referring to the contractual promise that Tesla makes when someone buys the "FSD" package.

Previously that promise was that your car (not "some" car, but the actual car you were buying) would be capable of driving itself with nobody in it, or operating as a robotaxi (using the app that Tesla promised to make available) or take the kids to soccer practice, etc. This was on the website.

Tesla quietly and without fanfare changed that to say that if you bought the "FSD" package your car would have certain capabilities amounting to autopilot with navigation in the city but that it would be Level 2: It could not operate without a fully-aware driver ready to take over without notice.

Effectively, the promise was that the FSD package would be full self-driving, but now the promise is that the FSD package is merely Level 2 autopilot in the city, with NAV.

Nobody disputes that Tesla is trying very hard to develop an actual Level 4 or 5 car. The issue is that Tesla no longer promises that your car with "FSD" will ever actually BE FSD. Elon continues to say that it will be. But the website and contract no longer make that promise, as they once did.

And again I repeat: These are the best cars on the road. And AP/EAP are the best driver-assist systems available in any consumer car. Which makes it all the more mystifying that Elon insists on promising things he clearly cannot deliver.

 

[jebinc]

Being "loose with facts" is just a polite way of saying "lying." Yes, Tesla has done remarkable things: Starting an electric car company and being successful, both making money and changing the entire public perception of electric cars from "golf cart" to "crazy-quick." SpaceX has also done remarkable things, though nobody ever said that landing a rocket was impossible, just that it was very difficult and required computing capability that did not exist until recently.

But promising that your car (not just some car someday, but the actual car you are buying) will be robotaxi-capable, long after it becomes clear that the task will take many years, that's just dishonest and taking people's money under false pretenses. I.e. fraud.

And worse: When Tesla recognized that FSD was not going to be available in today's cars, Elon Musk did not give a public apology (e.g. something like "We really thought we could do it and we were mistaken."). Instead Tesla quietly and without fanfare or explanation, changed the definition of "FSD" from "Robotaxi-capable" (i.e. level 5 autonomy) to "Can drive itself but needs constant driver supervision and intervention without notice," i.e. Level 2. This tells us that Musk knows he's lying when he keeps making the FSD promise. And it introduces a contradiction between what Musk is promising in public, and what you get in writing when you buy the car.

And then there's the whole "feature complete" business. Feature-complete apparently means that all the software modules are in place, they just don't work. And trying to suggest that his previous promises about when the cars would be robotaxi-capable are fulfilled when the software modules are done, even though every car with that software would crash if it were enabled as a robotaxi without a human driver to take full responsibility.

Truth; save for “the best cars in the road” part. I would say my Rivian is better than my Tesla’s as it doesn’t vibrate like a MoFo or have an endless need for SC attention.