Nope, people put up with a lot of things when they are sleeping in the back seat. As long as you know the trip will take the length advertised.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Tesla, TSLA & the Investment World: the Perpetual Investors' Roundtable
- Thread starter AudubonB
- Start date
It’s tough to say if looking at just the raw numbers, FSD alone right now might produce about as many or fewer accidents than human drivers on average. But it’s still far too many, 1/10th the average is too many, it needs to be much much safer than humans because one bad accident where a company owns liability is a potential huge damages lawsuit etc.
Oh, this is good news if you have solar and EV. This time of year especially we have surplus Solar power. Even though we have 2 PWs (fill up by noonish), I'm having to adjust manually so that my SRP utility provider in Az doesn't get a single penny's worth of electricity. (No net metering, rip off).
“Plug in your vehicle at home during the day to charge using the excess clean energy generated by your solar system.”
and...
“Set your charge limits and location and tell your vehicle when and where to charge only from excess solar.”
driveteslacanada.ca
“Plug in your vehicle at home during the day to charge using the excess clean energy generated by your solar system.”
and...
“Set your charge limits and location and tell your vehicle when and where to charge only from excess solar.”
Tesla app feature allows owners charge with excess solar
Many Tesla owners are concerned about the environment. If they desire to charge their EVs with clean, renewable energy, Tesla is making their wishes come true. According to changes spotted in the Tesla app, there […]
driveteslacanada.ca
That was rather more complicated and ended out putting Aaron Burr and Alexander Hamilton on opposite sides. Before Jefferson made his statement, in 1799 Aaron Burr founded the Manhattan Company, ostensibly to supply water to New-York as it was styled then. He cleverly specified in the chapter that the company could take deposits, thus forming The Bank of the Manhattan company, which after countless mergers led to JPMorganChase of today.
The famous duel between Burr and Hamilton was mostly about divergent views on banking, although few accounts today describe that role. Jefferson was almost immediately drawn into the battle, sided with Hamilton, and so it went... Burr charged with murder.
In comparison the battles regarding Tesla are quite mild. OTOH, stock manipulation was there even in 1799 and before. These issues seem lost in history but are still continuing today in different form. Specifically the conflict over short selling goes back centuries. Tesla, involved in revolutionary technology as it is, is the very symbol of disdain by the same forces that advocated for the Electoral College composition to protect slave states.
When we seem surprised about all the misrepresentation and lies we should recall that such acts were there in the formation of the US and directly part of the creation of the Constitution of 1789. I assert that nobody who actually studied US Constitutional history would be surprised by the present state of play, including protecting short sellers and option writers while defeating manufacturers right to protect their own products. Seriously, the roots of our present Tesla travails are all the way back to the 1790's. exacerbated by the Industrial Revolution leading to the Sherman Anti-Trust act of 1890, which led us sequentially to the current warranty and parts disputes.
IMHO yes and no: They had a problem integrating radar with camera output, because radar didn´t know where things were vertically. So they got rid of that problem and saved some money. The high resolution radar that is coming now allows for better sensor fusion so it is worth the extra money.
snellenr
Member
Tesla broke down (to an extent) a similar tightening of restrictions in Michigan by filing a lawsuit and demanding *all* communications between the dealers, lobbyists, and state representatives in their discovery motions. After those fine people failed in their appeals attempts (which took a while), they brought forward a compromise which (a) worked for Tesla owners and (b) kept those communications secret.
Funny how that worked...
That is, unless SCOTUS majority objected to some State law or another so finds some arcane justification for interfering. the prototypical cases have some connection that allows some Federal impact. That is almost always possible if they really want to do something or stop something.
Yeah, a car that drives itself as bad as me would be pretty pointless.
It is interesting it was code-named Phoenix, which is what ARBE calls their latest radar. As interesting (to me) is ARBE's "Lynx" radar units that can be combined with their Phoenix radar to provide 360 radar around the vehicle per their diagram below. I'm not saying Tesla will pursue this model, but the door does appear to be "open" to it. If they are at all interested in this, then I could see new vehicles like the Cybertruck either including it from the get go or at least have the wiring in place. Regardless, hoping this pushes FSD (and even basic autopilot or PAARKING) to a new level and the stock price (ultimately) with it one day.
insaneoctane
Well-Known Member
Hmmmm. Statistically, if Tesla can provide data that shows FSD drives at an accident rate that is one order of magnitude superior to humans, then that seems like the correct basis to a winning defense against a lawsuit that would infer negligence. Assuming the data is general, accurate and representative -not unique or cherry picked, then NOT driving with FSD becomes negligent. But, I don't think Tesla has this general, accurate and representative data yet. While FSD is currently, statistically, safer, I think the current data is not a good representation of all roads, conditions, or situations, because our FSD drivers are choosing which roads, conditions, and situations they will engage the system, and thus limiting the data collection. This choice, IMO, excludes many dangerous roads, conditions, or situations from the dataset.
Once you have the dataset that stands up in court against negligence, then Tesla insurance cleans up....at 1/10 the accident rate, they could offer insurance for 50% reduction of premiums and still have a 5x reduction in liability/payouts!
Vision doesn't have to be any better than humans' vision. If it "sees" equally well (acuity and sensitivity to EMR spectrum) but:
- can see in 360 degrees (it can)
- is always paying attention (it is)
- can make better decisions (work in progress...)
- can make above decisions more quickly (should be able to once it learns how to make the best decisions)
Our roadways are designed for human vision and cognitive abilities. Not even perfect human vision as there's a fair amount of latitude as to how poor one's vision can get before one loses the privilege of driving. I see people arguing that there needs to be cameras on the front bumper to see around corners. Not true, the front cameras in the mirror console are already positioned more anteriorly than a driver's head. Seeing more into the IR/UV spectrum than a human can could maybe allow for earlier perception of wildlife at night for instance, but isn't necessary to be equally good as a human. Radar/lidar/ultrasonics could maybe add additional information that could make the autonomous vehicle better than a human, but aren't necessary to make it equally good.
While driving as good as a human may seem like a low bar, keep in mind that most accidents are not a result of the driver's vision (assuming they meet the standards for driving). Most accidents are from driver inattention, distractions, impairment, poor judgement, driving inappropriately for conditions, mechanical failure of the vehicle. None of these would be overcome with better vision.
The only failure I see for current camera positioning is there should be a forward facing camera on the driver's side of the vehicle to enable passing on 2-lane undivided highways - maybe the B-pillar cameras allow for this, I haven't seen enough footage from them to know one way or the other, but I'm skeptical. The other issue I can see with current cameras is a lack of dynamic range/sensitivity to glare when driving into the sun when it's near the horizon.
So the new vehicles will have radar again? What about those who bought vehicles without the new radar, does FSD still work with their cars? Why drop the previous radar? Logistics? Found something better?
How do you figure? I just see that I pay 4x the national average/kWh, and this will just make it worse as California tries to just throw more money at pge and allow them to gouge us further.Not sure if anyone here is tracking, but SF Bay Area is about to get really Tesla Energy friendly (even more than before):
PG&E says Tuesday was the worst single day for Bay Area outages in almost 3 decades
PG&E officials said Tuesday was the worst single day for Bay Area power outages since...www.sfchronicle.com
There's been power outages for 3-4 days already across the peninsula (e.g. Palo Alto)
Unless you forgot the /s
Motor Mouth
Member
It "feels" to me like this was somewhat the plan all along. Together with individualized, specific driver data, the underwriting could be tightened up considerably. In my experience, claims is often driven by a relative few individuals with a disproportionate impact on reserves, but underwriting is slow or unable to identify these greatly increased risks. If Tesla could find a way to exclude these high risk individuals from its coverage pool ... profit!
philw1776
Member
I have constant problems with my Model Y in this regard. Plus shadows early/late in the day causing braking. Worse than human vision.
Reduce the speed by 35% and vehicle fatality may go down to near zero.
This is the power of robotaxi, allowing the car to act way safer than any human can tolerate without any super vision or super sensors.
By doing so you also reduced the difficulty of the robotaxi problem, hence why waymo and cruise has these what seems to be unreasonable speed limit restrictions.
So what will people choose? Watch a movie or sleep, having no car payments and near zero chance of death but your travel time to work increase by 35%?. Or car payment, must be vigilant, still having the same chance of death but gets to work faster?
Just remember when you are home watching a movie or sleeping, you are going 0 mph to work.
Last edited:
Few reasons:
1. The affected areas host a lot of tech executives/VC's and their families (importance)
2. I've never seen the peninsula without widespread power ever (even more awareness of climate change)
Its similar to the Orange Day that happened with the wildfires. When a problem hits people on a unit economic or personal basis, they're more likely to internalize and enact change in the line of thought and/or habit.
I think it’s very easy to say if unsupervised FSD is currently better or worse than the average driver. Do you trust your (presumably average) Uber driver enough to sit on the back seat while they drive you to work? Do you trust FSD with the same?
Maybe they meant production vs deliveries, taking cues from Lucid.
They can still sell parts for 20 yrs - motors, transmissions, brakes... a sale is a sail.
Meanwhile... 4 pages of vision and radar debates has me concluding FSD is progressing quite well. Strong correlation (hunch) between the chatter here and FSD progress. This is just another one of those moments. Don't feed the trolls.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
