There will be NO HW4 upgrade for HW3 owners

[stopcrazypp]

Because it's a fiction created to satisfy regulators.
Chuck's left turn is a perfect example of why FSD beta is L5 and not L2. Doing an unprotected left turn there with a "driver assist" system will always be a horrible user experience. I guarantee you that Chuck is far more relaxed doing the turn manually. You can watch him and even when the car is not moving it's a high stress situation. Reducing the disengagement rate doesn't really improve the user experience as you still have to respond instantly when the system makes an error.

Except for the fact they made changes to the UI to make it more clear to the driver what the car is planning to do (creep lines and messages).

These UI elements are unnecessary if FSD Beta was an L4/L5 system. I remember one of the people doing video of Cruise rides asked for a more detailed display of what the vehicle was planning to do, and they said no. Will have dig it up when I have the time.

Edit here:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1603550801942781954

 

[AndrewZ]

Because it's a fiction created to satisfy regulators.
Chuck's left turn is a perfect example of why FSD beta is L5 and not L2. Doing an unprotected left turn there with a "driver assist" system will always be a horrible user experience. I guarantee you that Chuck is far more relaxed doing the turn manually. You can watch him and even when the car is not moving it's a high stress situation. Reducing the disengagement rate doesn't really improve the user experience as you still have to respond instantly when the system makes an error.

It is Level 2, and FSD on HW3 will remain Level 2. The data will feed into further iterative developments -- HW4, HW5, HW69, HW420 -- that will go through the same process with the goal of achieving something Level 3+.

But what we see currently on existing vehicles, that's not moving beyond Level 2. I'd love to be proven wrong, but I think this was the plan all along and HW3 will never mitigate sufficient risk to allow assumption of DDT liability that would unlock robotaxi functionality. There's not enough sensors, not enough redundancy, no pathway to resolving things like inclement weather, etc etc etc.

 

[Daniel in SD]

Yes, you are in agreement on those points actually. @Daniel in SD instead is arguing that FSD Beta in its current form is a L4 system under test (like Waymo for example) simply because Elon plans to eventually release a L3+ feature in the future on this hardware.

C'mon, my argument is stronger than that. Elon is pretty clear that FSD beta is FSD Robotaxi feature beta. His plan is to improve the reliability to the point where you can remove the driver, he's said it many times. I don't think you can find a single example of him talking about FSD beta as a driver assist system.

Except for the fact they made changes to the UI to make it more clear to the driver what the car is planning to do (creep lines and messages).

These UI elements are unnecessary if FSD Beta was an L4/L5 system. I remember one of the people doing video of Cruise rides asked for a more detailed display of what the vehicle was planning to do, and they said no. Will have dig it up when I have the time.

They make it easier to test the system and reduce the number of erroneous disengagements. I think a true driver assist system would hand over control to the driver but not allow them to go unless it was clear. That would be far safer and less stressful.

 

[2101Guy]

C'mon, my argument is stronger than that. Elon is pretty clear that FSD beta is FSD Robotaxi feature beta. His plan is to improve the reliability to the point where you can remove the driver, he's said it many times. I don't think you can find a single example of him talking about FSD beta as a driver assist system.

They make it easier to test the system and reduce the number of erroneous disengagements. I think a true driver assist system would hand over control to the driver but not allow them to go unless it was clear. That would be far safer and less stressful.

You are correct. Elon has NEVER EVER called FSD Beta ANY form of "assist". He has emphatically stated and/or implied, its goal is fully autonomous level 5 capabilities.

Then again, he also has said the Roadster will have rocket boosters that will allow it to hover, so theres that

 

[Daniel in SD]

It is Level 2, and FSD on HW3 will remain Level 2. The data will feed into further iterative developments -- HW4, HW5, HW69, HW420 -- that will go through the same process with the goal of achieving something Level 3+.

But what we see currently on existing vehicles, that's not moving beyond Level 2. I'd love to be proven wrong, but I think this was the plan all along and HW3 will never mitigate sufficient risk to allow assumption of DDT liability that would unlock robotaxi functionality. There's not enough sensors, not enough redundancy, no pathway to resolving things like inclement weather, etc etc etc.

I don't think that HW3 or HW4 will achieve the reliability necessary to achieve driverless operation or even an "eyes off" highway feature. It's not like anyone else does all their AV testing on the final platform either. I doubt Cruise or Waymo thought the first iteration of their hardware would be sufficient.

 

[AndrewZ]

I don't think that HW3 or HW4 will achieve the reliability necessary to achieve driverless operation or even an "eyes off" highway feature. It's not like anyone else does all their AV testing on the final platform either. I doubt Cruise or Waymo thought the first iteration of their hardware would be sufficient.

It sounds like we're on the same page then

I definitely agree FSD is a Level 4-5 system in training, and the training will be carried forward into further iterations that will work to add onto what was previously built. I've suspected more modules could be added: Autosteer on City Streets is one module. How about Autosteer on Rural Roads? Cybertruck could come with Autosteer in Farmers Fields where the system will be trained to identify cows and hay bales.

 

[stopcrazypp]

C'mon, my argument is stronger than that. Elon is pretty clear that FSD beta is FSD Robotaxi feature beta. His plan is to improve the reliability to the point where you can remove the driver, he's said it many times. I don't think you can find a single example of him talking about FSD beta as a driver assist system.

I don't think you can find him talking about AP as driver assist system either. He doesn't use that terminology. But Tesla is quite clear that FSD Beta is level 2, even directly in the UI.

They make it easier to test the system and reduce the number of erroneous disengagements. I think a true driver assist system would hand over control to the driver but not allow them to go unless it was clear. That would be far safer and less stressful.

Then your point about the UI is irrelevant if you dismiss any UI elements intended to make L2 a better experience as just a testing aid.

 

[DanCar]

I don't think that HW3 or HW4 will achieve the reliability necessary to achieve driverless operation or even an "eyes off" highway feature. ...

Does that include stop and go traffic? I think Tesla will do it when the competition arrives. It may not be great, in other words Tesla will have to pay out for some incidents, but it is a risk based decision.

 

[Daniel in SD]

I don't think you can find him talking about AP as driver assist system either. He doesn't use that terminology. But Tesla is quite clear that FSD Beta is level 2, even directly in the UI.

I didn’t mean literally saying “driver assist”, I meant talking about it as a driver assist and not a beta version of the Tesla robotaxi software.

Then your point about the UI is irrelevant if you dismiss any UI elements intended to make L2 a better experience as just a testing aid.

Obviously there is a grey area and I’m sure they do things to improve customer satisfaction, I just don’t think that’s the primary design intent of the system.

 

[Daniel in SD]

Does that include stop and go traffic? I think Tesla will do it when the competition arrives. It may not be great, in other words Tesla will have to pay out for some incidents, but it is a risk based decision.

We’ll see, I think even stop and go traffic is extremely difficult.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

We’ll see, I think even stop and go traffic is extremely difficult.

It’ll be so interesting to see how Drive Pilot does. Might take a while to get meaningful data though, unless it is very bad.

 

[DanCar]

It’ll be so interesting to see how Drive Pilot does. Might take a while to get meaningful data though, unless it is very bad.

If it is like all the rest before it it will be dead before it launches.

 

[JHCCAZ]

Cybertruck could come with Autosteer in Farmers Fields where the system will be trained to identify cows and hay bales.

So that's what all those "FF" cameras are for!

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

They make it easier to test the system and reduce the number of erroneous disengagements. I think a true driver assist system would hand over control to the driver but not allow them to go unless it was clear. That would be far safer and less stressful

I actually think you have convinced me that FSD beta is FSD Robotaxi feature beta.

Hard to conclude otherwise (public pronouncements by the company lawyers put aside of course).

I definitely am wishing the intent of the system was driver assist - it would be much more pleasant as you say.

 

[argon2018]

But it's not Tesla's lawyers classifying it as such, it's government agencies.

I just looked and NHTSA also explicitly says FSD Beta is a L2 feature, not that it is a test of a L4 feature:
"FSD Beta is an SAE Level 2 driver support feature that can provide steering and braking/acceleration support to the driver under certain operating limitations. With FSD Beta, as with all SAE Level 2 driver support features, the driver is responsible for operation of the vehicle whenever the feature is engaged and must constantly supervise the feature and intervene (e.g., steer, brake or accelerate) as needed to maintain safe operation of the vehicle."
https://static.nhtsa.gov/odi/rcl/2023/RCLRPT-23V085-3451.PDF

The definition of L2 or L3 ... is meaningless with Tesla. Elon Musk verbatim said that all cars currently produced (in 2019 autonomy day) are capable of robotaxi and they will have 1 millions robotaxi by next year.

Verbatim Elon said, "for sure, by the end of next year," and they showcased Tesla ridesharing network on the Tesla app. He then said how the value of Tesla cars would be an increasing asset and would be worth ....

Tesla's website never talks about L2-5 or whatever, so in the case of Tesla, it's meaningless to argue about it. Just watch the autonomy day and prior claims that were on their website that have now been removed.

That being said, I would still buy a Tesla because of the highway autopilot, but never the FSD for 15K.

Here is the clip starting at 3:13:38

Definitely worth watching

Tesla Autonomy Day

Tesla Autonomy Day is on Mon, April 22nd – watch the event livestream @11am PDT

www.youtube.com

 

[argon2018]

He does mention at the earlier part that these are forward-looking statements so I don't know if that would hold up in court. Maybe a lawyer here can comment

 

[argon2018]

I'm hoping the side cameras with wider angles can be retrofitted. I think it would make a big difference in driving, parking...

 

[stopcrazypp]

He does mention at the earlier part that these are forward-looking statements so I don't know if that would hold up in court. Maybe a lawyer here can comment

You just pointed out why that whole presentation likely won't matter at all from a contract/deliverable perspective. With that disclaimer, even a false advertising claim would be difficult and usually forward looking statements even escape SEC penalties. He's pretty clear the car you buy right at that moment didn't have the software for it yet. Maybe in the future with some other software iteration it might.

 

[ddeflyer]

He does mention at the earlier part that these are forward-looking statements so I don't know if that would hold up in court. Maybe a lawyer here can comment

Can you provide a timestamp for the forward looking statement part? I tried scanning through the video but I couldn't find it.

 

[stopcrazypp]

Can you provide a timestamp for the forward looking statement part? I tried scanning through the video but I couldn't find it.

Start at around 3:01:37.
From the subtitles (downloaded, but edited punctuation and capitalization for clarity, although I tried to keep all text the same as possible as the way he said it, even the filler and repeated words). Bold parts are my emphasis:

"So we've gone through the future of self-driving, where it's clear it's, it's hardware, it's vision, and then there's a lot of software and there's uh, the software problem here should not be minimized. It's a massive software problem that, that uh, yeah managing vast amounts of data, training against the data, how do you control the car based on the vision. It's a very difficult software problem.
So going after, going over just like Tesla, Tesla master plan. Obviously we've made a bunch of forward-looking statements as they call it, um, heh heh heh, um, and um, but let's go through some of our other forward-looking statements that we've made. You know way back when we created the company..."