Other people have mentioned that it sounds way better in the recent versions than it did prior, so I don't think it is your imagination.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Other people have mentioned that it sounds way better in the recent versions than it did prior, so I don't think it is your imagination.
rxlawdude
Active Member
You do realize that the only thing in the Autopilot suite that is geofenced to limit use on non-divided highway ONLY effects Auto-Steer? TACC will happily let you set any speed on any road without restriction.
So, you're having a snit over the safety feature that keeps nuts from using auto-steer at 70mph on two-lane highways?
I'm not seeing any logic, other than cutting off your nose to spite your face.
Since when did the car have any idea how many lanes were on a roadway, or what the speed limits are?
Tesla has no mechanism for correcting their many map errors, and I will not willingly add a restriction that did not exist before, and is based on known bad data with no mechanism for correction.
Tesla has no mechanism for correcting their many map errors, and I will not willingly add a restriction that did not exist before, and is based on known bad data with no mechanism for correction.
beeeerock
Active Member
Divided vs. non-divided. Since quite a few firmware revisions ago. I'm aware of this because my firmware is up to date. Funny how that works....
no, it CLAIMS to know, that's not the same as actually, and accurately knowing.
not auto pilot/steer related but they have corrected map errors in the navigation. I found 2 anomalies a couple/few years ago and have not seen the errors again. One was a mileage difference in real road vs google/nav so my numbers weren't matching up NB I-5 heading North from Sac and the other was a 'phantom' elevation change that made the estimated trip show a vertical drop of 2% at one point in one direction only
Meanwhile I, and many others, have reported several specific incorrect speed limits long before the last map update, and they are still not correct now. When asking Tesla what their process was for fixing this they said they'd send it to my local service centre, like they can fix the map database!
Either way, it's all irrelevant. Had Tesla not implemented the broken limitation in the first place, then it wouldn't matter how accurately it worked.
Apologizing by saying that the added restriction is only a problem a small percentage of the time doesn't change the fact that it is by definition still a problem infinitely more often than it was before it was implemented.
Apologizing by saying that the added restriction is only a problem a small percentage of the time doesn't change the fact that it is by definition still a problem infinitely more often than it was before it was implemented.
Canuck
Well-Known Member
It's probably because head on collisions with someone coming the other way are nearly impossible on divided highways. As someone who doesn't trust the current AP, I can live with others using it in front of me and behind me -- but coming the other way at me must remain off limits until there's more hardware and redundancy.
Last edited:
But that's not the case, even with 7.1. On 7.1 you're limited to +5mph on AP going on an undivided highway. So you could still have a head-on-collision with a car using AP, but instead of him going 70mph in a 55mph zone, he'll be limited to 60mph.
thecloud
As rhythm raced inside, the ship came alive
My stereo isn't described as beta. Autopilot is currently beta, and refinements to its behavior are part of that process. As a practical matter, Tesla can either make safety refinements or pull the feature. I think we'd all prefer they weren't forced to pull the feature by some regulatory agency, as was the case in Hong Kong (and as I recall in that case, owners weren't given a choice to refuse the change.)
rxlawdude
Active Member
Because it's simply not safe (NOR DESIGNED) to do so at greater than +7kph over the speed limit.
Are you gunning to be a headline Tesla crash, then blame Autopilot?
beeeerock
Active Member
As far as divided vs. undivided goes, I have yet to see it get that wrong (on current firmware). Speed limits are evidently tied to the Garmin portion of the navigation system and the accuracy is not within Tesla control and I've heard annual updates are the norm for Garmin. I don't know whether the divided/undivided information is also from Garmin, or from Google.
The autopilot experience has been getting better for me with every update. No more darting for exits or left turn bays. Smoother around the corners. Speed reductions in tight corners. Better follow behaviour. The original version was very clunky compared to what is out today. I actually can't remember what the 'unrestricted' version did that I'd actually trade for the overall improvements I enjoy today. Frankly, I'd be nervous if I had to go back to the early versions and probably wouldn't use it, now that I know what it CAN do.
Totally agree. The performance of the current AP is just so far beyond the first version. The early AP truly was the twitchy tech demo. My day-to-day use (which of course depends on where I use it I understand) is nearly flawless. Back in 7.0, same roads? Novel, but very unpredictable.
Welcome to capitalist technology in the 21st century. Ever owned an iphone?
They come out with new software which is more complex so it requires new hardware. If you don't want the new hardware and you like your phone the way it is, you can refuse to update, but they'll slowly start making your phone work worse and worse until you HAVE to update the software, which of course won't run on your old phone, so you have to buy the new phone.
The tech industry has us all on treadmills, with holes in our wallets just trying to keep up, and filling landfills with toxic waste in the process.
This techno-car subject actually raises another question - what are these cars going to be like in 10-20 years? I still see 30 year old honda civics and accords driving around. Is a 20 year old tesla going to be a paperweight because it'll have old unsupported software on an old unsupported computer?
Planned obsolescence - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"Planned obsolescence or built-in obsolescence in industrial design and economics is a policy of planning or designing a product with an artificially limited useful life, so it will become obsolete, that is, unfashionable or no longer functional after a certain period of time.[1] The rationale behind the strategy is to generate long-term sales volume by reducing the time between repeat purchases (referred to as "shortening the replacement cycle").[2]"
Not a conspiracy theory. An actual widespread manufacturing and design strategy.
Similar threads
