"Super Enhanced Cruise Control with Steering and Lane Changing" would work. Autopilot may be problematic given that the purpose of an Autopilot is to allow the crew to focus on other tasks. It doesn't mean they can completely ignore what the autopilot is doing but they don't need to be actively watching what's happening and be prepared to take over with a second's notice at any given point in time which is what Tesla's instructions are when you're using "FSD".
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Teslarati : "California passes law banning Tesla from calling software FSD"
- Thread starter EVNow
- Start date
Daniel in SD
(supervised)
They should just admit that FSD beta is the beta version of FSD and then there is no problem. 
Waymo and Cruise call their vehicles autonomous even when they have a safety driver.
Waymo and Cruise call their vehicles autonomous even when they have a safety driver.
Or the obvious: City Autopilot / City Streets Autopilot.
If it is government you're talking about, I'd be surprised if it contained anything else.
Someone suggested Co-Pilot … a much better name, I think.
And I’ll be watching the year with GLEE. Chickens are coming home to roost
With V11, the same code and neural networks will handle all environments, but the actual city navigation functionality (making turns) will still be enabled only for people who paid for the FSD feature:
- (Basic) Autopilot — lane keeping and traffic-aware cruise control
- Enhanced (highway) Autopilot — automatic lane changes, highway exits, autopark, summon, and smart summon
- FSD / City Autopilot — Traffic light support, stop sign support, city street turns
Its just a complicated hot mess ... in terms of naming.
We have to see what Tesla does .... will they retire NOA and call that FSD ?
I understood where you were coming from, but we are super nerds. Your average person thinks of autopilot as it sounds.... automatic pilot...IDK. I think the fundamental problem here was that Elon's prediction of when FSD would be ready was way off. I doubt having a PR department would have helped in this particular case. IMO Elon is currently behaving erratically and irrationally (lack of sleep?) so I have no idea if he will react to this situation as a grownup or a child. IMO they need someone he will listen to to tell him to shut the heck up more than they need a PR department.
I don't think being forced to rename FSD will be a crisis. Having what's written on the tin match the contents will be good for Tesla. It will reduce confusion and complaints. They are facing big challenges but renaming FSD is not one of them (unless they refuse to do so).
Fair enough. Some people have compared it to autopilot in airplanes and marine craft that does not replace human operators.
An autopilot is a system used to control the path of an aircraft, marine craft or spacecraft without requiring constant manual control by a human operator. Autopilots do not replace human operators. Instead, the autopilot assists the operator's control of the vehicle, allowing the operator to focus on broader aspects of operations (for example, monitoring the trajectory, weather and on-board systems).
This is why I said it was more of a gray area.
Tesla knew exactly what it was doing with the name.
I like the TADA suggestion from @Ramphex
Tesla Advanced Driver Assistance
Doubt they'll go for it though, whatever happens it will be interesting.
If its changed and the name is really sensible, then Elon is more focussed on Twitter.
If its crazy then he's still paying attention.
Tesla Advanced Driver Assistance
Doubt they'll go for it though, whatever happens it will be interesting.
If its changed and the name is really sensible, then Elon is more focussed on Twitter.
If its crazy then he's still paying attention.
Section B refers to all uses of the prohibited terms (not just marketing materials).
But it does make a difference because even the finished FSD product isn't really FSD...Since FSD is so close to being a fully finished product this really shouldn’t make much of a difference.
The law is meant to crack down on the use of FSD and autopilot. In CA, both of those are a no go.
BitJam
Active Member
Do you mean Tesla knew FSD was going to be much harder than they were saying publicly and they intentionally lied about it and misled people about it for some reason? That seems extremely farfetched to me. I don't see how they benefit from that.
Sometimes the simple, obvious explanation is the true explanation. Elon was (and continues to be) extremely over-optimistic about how soon they will solve FSD. They named it Full Self Driving because they thought they would achieve level 5 self driving suitable for robotaxis within two or three years.
If they had any inkling it was going to be this hard, they would have done things differently and named things differently. IIUC, most of the money they get from FSD goes into an escrow account or something and they don't get to use that money until they deliver on their promises.
My signature here used to contain the following Elon quote from the summer of 2021:
We need to make Full Self-Driving work in order for it to be a compelling value proposition.
He's optimistic they will make it work "real soon now" hence the $15K price tag but he also realizes they're not there yet.
BitJam
Active Member
But they don't get to use most of that money until they get FSD working. So this is a terrible reason. It's the worst of both worlds. Their customers forked over the bucks and expect to get what they paid for (full self driving) but Tesla doesn't even get to use the money.
Similar threads
- Article
