Safety Score

[EVNow]

So, auto wipers are in beta also. Does Tesla have the "right" to revoke those, and that they owe you nothing?

They can't revoke anything for which they have already recognized revenue.

The way to think about it is - Tesla is using "beta" just to make sure everyone understands, they should still monitor and are liable if something goes wrong. But the basic difference is between "early access" and "public" betas. The latter are not going to be revoked (unless in complete contravention of the monitoring rules, like trying to drive on freeway while sitting in the backseat) - the former ones are temporary and either revoked or converted to public "beta".

 

[Itsuo-DC]

4. Unsafe Following. This is measured much like Hard Braking and Aggressive Turning. Total Following time is measured by the time you spend within 3 seconds of the car in front of you while going over 50 mph. Unsafe following is measured as the time you spend within 1 second of the car in front of you while going over 50 mph. Score is relative to (Time spent within 1 second) / (Time spent within 3 seconds). Once again, there's a narrow window - follow too far back and you don't get credit for following time. Too close and you get dinged. Your best bet for recovering from dings here is to get on a rural Interstate, follow a truck, set AP for a following distance of 3-4, and drive for 100 miles.

I'm getting crushed by Unsafe Following this is very helpful in understanding why.

For clarity is time spent at a "safe following" distance while AP is engaged factored in to the Safety Score? (Tesla's website indicates "unsafe following" on AP is not factored into your Safety Score, but is silent on whether or not "safe following" is.) Are others reading the informal guidance above meant to say we should measure what AP at a distance of 3-4 looks like, and then replicate that distance to improve the Safety Score? Thanks!

 

[helvio]

Hi Troll! Long time no see.

So, auto wipers are in beta also. Does Tesla have the "right" to revoke those, and that they owe you nothing?

Sort of. They can revoke the Auto. But being a safety item, a car has to have functional wipers somehow. And giving me that, they owe me nothing.

City Streets Autosteer was advertised as "coming this year" in 2019, 2020, and 2021. You seriously want to argue that Tesla owes you nothing at the end of 2021?

Yes. We can go on on this like we did before, but they said contingent on software and regulatory validation. Their verbiage allowed for error and it happened. I'm not surprised.

At what point does Tesla owe people something? Can they just call CSA early access for 10 years and claim they owe nobody anything because it's "Early access?" This is a made up term.

I don't know, you tell me. If you think you're owed something from Tesla, I'm certainly not the right tree to bark up to. 10y of CSA early access? Sure, why not? Tell me where timelines were defined without room for error.

Can you point to a place where Tesla reliably calls this "Early access"? As far as I know, Elon is calling this FSD beta, and every single AP feature is in beta, including 2014 AP1, so beta is a meaningless term in terms of limiting access.

Well. You could have gone to bed without this one.

 

[n.one.one]

I'm getting crushed by Unsafe Following this is very helpful in understanding why.

For clarity is time spent at a "safe following" distance while AP is engaged factored in to the Safety Score? (Tesla's website indicates "unsafe following" on AP is not factored into your Safety Score, but is silent on whether or not "safe following" is.) Are others reading the informal guidance above meant to say we should measure what AP at a distance of 3-4 looks like, and then replicate that distance to improve the Safety Score? Thanks!

The general consensus as well as my personal tests indicate that Unsafe Following can't be corrected while on AP. Your best bet is to get on a highway over 50 MPH, then follow a truck/vehicle with a 1 to 3 second gap between you. I suggest a truck since they can't stop very quickly.

 

[Yedsla]

Radar or Vision?

Radar

 

[helvio]

So what exactly did you get for $10K if Tesla owes you nothing? Why no refunds if that's true?

Not sure I missed this one or if you edited. But read my post again and you'll see that it starts with

On the topic of having rights to the beta

 

[helvio]

Radar

Thanks for adding that information. I'm also on radar and drove over 700 miles and had no issues. I'm not bragging at all, just adding more information to the issue to see if others can corelate.

Model Y here. Yours?

 

[THXULTRA]

Has to be a bug…I have the same fcw number…ugh

The FCW number is avg for 1000 miles so on a short trip in your case 6 miles getting just one will show a super high percentage because if you continued to get them at this rate you would have 166.67 FCW's for 1000 miles. Getting a FCW on a day you drive few miles will kill your score for that day. Looks to me like the Safety Score system is working in your case...

 

[valem]

I honestly have no idea since I only see them after I park and bring up my safety score.

You need to change your FCW setting to "medium"; if you have it set to "late" you don't get the warning when they happen.

 

[gearchruncher]

Sort of. They can revoke the Auto. But being a safety item, a car has to have functional wipers somehow. And giving me that, they owe me nothing.

Auto wipers are in the manual and advertised as a feature of the car.
Heated seats, AC, roll down rear windows, radios, etc are not required by law. So they can just take those away? The only thing any car manufacturer owes you are safety items, everything else is something they can revoke, even if they advertised it?

Well. You could have gone to bed without this one.

Yeah, you showed a screen in the car that you can only see if you have already been granted access, which is pretty circular. Show me where they refer to it as "early access" to someone that is buying a car right now that might expect they will get it for the silly reason they paid $10K for it.

Yes. We can go on on this like we did before, but they said contingent on software and regulatory validation. Their verbiage allowed for error and it happened. I'm not surprised.

Ahh, the old regulatory argument. The one that Tesla is currently saying doesn't apply at all to CSA, since it's L2 and requires NO regulatory approval at all? The one where Fanboys laugh at NHTSA asking Tesla questions, saying that they have no jurisdiction because it's L2, and it's just a witch hunt paid for by "legacy" automakers?

Plus, there are multiple states that already allow for L4. There is no regulatory delay. It is not the reason CSA is super late, nor is it the rationale for "Early access." In fact, NHTSA is already poking at the "early access" system, wondering if it's actually contrary to public safety as it limits people reporting serious safety issues.

And as for "software availability"- you're saying you can say "this software is coming 2019", and then say "subject to software availability" and that just neutralizes any timeline you listed? Of course the product doesn't exist until the product exists, but Tesla is the one that advertised an availability date for that product. You don't get to say "well, it doesn't exist yet, what do you expect?"

 

[gearchruncher]

They can't revoke anything for which they have already recognized revenue.

The way to think about it is - Tesla is using "beta" just to make sure everyone understands, they should still monitor and are liable if something goes wrong. But the basic difference is between "early access" and "public" betas. The latter are not going to be revoked (unless in complete contravention of the monitoring rules, like trying to drive on freeway while sitting in the backseat) - the former ones are temporary and either revoked or converted to public "beta".

This is fascinating nuance. Can you show me where Tesla tells a prospective customer all of this? Auto wipers are "beta" but don't worry, we recognized revenue for those, so they can't go away. We just don't trust them enough to support it, and if it works really badly, well, it's beta, just turn it off. But it's done enough that we recognized the revenue for it, but it also needs to be beta. Super clear.

FSD beta? Whoa, we haven't recognized revenue for that, you should know that from looking at our filings. So you have no "right" to that beta.

Are you 100% sure they haven't recognized revenue for 1K FSD beta cars and that's the logic they use? Because Elon made it clear it can be revoked. What stops Tesla from only recognizing revenue for the cars it's delivered to, and continuing to say that any specific individual has no "right" to it because their $10K is in a escrow account instead of in the general fund, but sorry, no, it's impossible to get a refund even if we never deliver, that's not what escrow is for.

What other company behaves this way?

Also, you and @helvio need to align on Tesla's super clear logic for features you are owed vs not. He says auto wipers can be revoked because they're not required by safety regulation.

 

[EVNow]

This is fascinating nuance. Can you show me where Tesla tells a prospective customer all of this?

No.

The problem is - you are thinking about this too "legalistically". That is not how bleeding edge works. Clearly bleeding edge is not your cup of tea. You shouldn't have been an early adopter. You don't have the mindset for it.

 

[gearchruncher]

No.

Because it exists and you refuse to show it, or because it's made up and possibly not true at all, and Tesla actually doesn't have a defensible logic for why "FSD beta" is something that nobody has a "right" to even though they paid $10K for it with a "coming this year" promise in 2019, while auto wipers are a "right"?

 

[helvio]

Auto wipers are in the manual and advertised as a feature of the car.
Heated seats, AC, roll down rear windows, radios, etc are not required by law. So they can just take those away? The only thing any car manufacturer owes you are safety items, everything else is something they can revoke, even if they advertised it?

Here we go again.
No, they can't take those away. I mean, they could, but why would they? And, what is your point, anyways? Taking away something that you have is not equal to not giving you something that you don't have. And that they don't consider ready yet. What is your expected outcome from this? We're discussing apples and oranges here. On wipers (beta), specifically, if they realize that Auto is not safe and they're better off removed, I think they have basis for that. But I don't see that happening, so perhaps we should also speculate about Earth's polar inversion, too?

Yeah, you showed a screen in the car that you can only see if you have already been granted access, which is pretty circular. Show me where they refer to it as "early access" to someone that is buying a car right now that might expect they will get it for the silly reason they paid $10K for it.

Sorry, just no. You're whining because you've been proven wrong. Go find your answer from a salesperson. You pay for the current functionality and the promise that more will be delivered. You sound just like those forum newbies that complain about not having the latest firmware. At this pace I'll have waited more for Disney+ and Car Wash Mode than for FSD Beta on Early Access.

Ahh, the old regulatory argument. The one that Tesla is currently saying doesn't apply at all to CSA, since it's L2 and requires NO regulatory approval at all? The one where Fanboys laugh at NHTSA asking Tesla questions, saying that they have no jurisdiction because it's L2, and it's just a witch hunt paid for by "legacy" automakers?

I'm not sure if you chose to ignore my statement that SOFTWARE also has to be validated. I will ignore the rest of your words to give you the chance to respond to that part. I just included regulatory validation because it was part of Tesla's verbiage. Focus on Software validation, which is done by Tesla. Not you, not me, not our government.

And as for "software availability"- you're saying you can say "this software is coming 2019", and then say "subject to software availability" and that just neutralizes any timeline you listed? Of course the product doesn't exist until the product exists, but Tesla is the one that advertised an availability date for that product. You don't get to say "well, it doesn't exist yet, what do you expect?"

I'm not sure I said "software availability"? But I'll go with you. There's a term that's known as "LATE". It's kind of a synonym for an acronym known as "EM". So yeah, things happen, stuff gets delayed. It's nice that you're doing your part trying to push the company and I appreciate that. I just prefer to spend my energy elsewhere and not claim entitlement.

 

[gearchruncher]

The problem is - you are thinking about this too "legalistically". That is not how bleeding edge works. Clearly bleeding edge is not your cup of tea. You shouldn't have been an early adopter. You don't have the mindset for it.

Cool. Where does Tesla tell people that City Streets Autosteer is bleeding edge in 2019 and purchasing it makes you an early adopter? This sounds like an investment, not a purchase, and investments have very different rules.

You're right, I do think about this legalistically, because Tesla is one of the Earth's most valuable companies, and they made promises to their customers that they don't keep, and people defend that as if it's OK.

 

[helvio]

Also, you and @helvio need to align on Tesla's super clear logic for features you are owed vs not. He says auto wipers can be revoked because they're not required by safety regulation.

Why do we have to? I mostly agree with @EVNow but I think there's room for educated disagreement.

 

[gearchruncher]

I just prefer to spend my energy elsewhere and not claim entitlement.

I know, those damn entitled people. They paid money for something, and they actually expect to get it! How do you think the world works?

Kids these days. In my day, software never had to ship, and we were OK with that. All purchases we ever made were just donations to the cause. You never had any "right" to anything.

 

[helvio]

Cool. Where does Tesla tell people that City Streets Autosteer is bleeding edge in 2019 and purchasing it makes you an early adopter? This sounds like an investment, not a purchase, and investments have very different rules.

You're right, I do think about this legalistically, because Tesla is one of the Earth's most valuable companies, and they made promises to their customers that they don't keep, and people defend that as if it's OK.

You live in the sue-happiest country in the world. Go sue them if you strongly believe that! And I'm honestly telling you you'll have my support!

 

[THXULTRA]

No.

The problem is - you are thinking about this too "legalistically". That is not how bleeding edge works. Clearly bleeding edge is not your cup of tea. You shouldn't have been an early adopter. You don't have the mindset for it.

On the flip side though even back in 2017 when I bought my Model S (before the 3 I have now) Tesla had video's showing a model S appearing to drive on its own. Many people back in 2017 bought full self driving believing it would be available soon based on this advertising. Now 4 years later they haven't gotten anything for the extra money they spent over Enhanced Auto Pilot...

Second group are the people that were told by Tesla that their car shipped with all the hardware needed for Full Self driving and when they went to subscribe to Full Self driving found out they had to pay for a full self driving computer.

I wouldn't be surprised if Tesla has lawsuits...

 

[teknoprep]

Does the Safety Score for previous days change or is it locked?

I have a couple of days where I had a FCW and Unsafe Following. Since both of those are per 1000 miles, does it mean they’ll lower as I drive more (and my score on those days will improve)? Or is it just 1000 miles per day?