v9.0 speculation

[rnortman]

One possibility is the car will alert us slightly before it changes lanes so we can do a quick confirmation check before it actually does it. if we don't want it to we simply hold the steering wheel preventing it from moving over. But, I can see that leading to trusting it while not going through the normal checks.

IMO, to be safe it would need to get explicit acknowledgement from the driver to proceed, like a tap of the stalk or something. Boy would that be annoying. In heavier traffic it would usually mean missing the opportunity. It would be, essentially, completely useless as L2 -- basically it's like a navigation aid at that point prompting you to change lanes. This will only be useful if it's L3 and can truly do it unsupervised. And it looks like EAP is not going to be L3, and yet they promised supervised lane change, so.... ???

Maybe Elon can clarify what they intend EAP -- this product we have already bought and paid for -- to actually do with one of his always-elucidating tweets.

 

[rnortman]

That's the big question about all this. The instant you remove the human element, you basically move from the driver's car insurance to product liability insurance. If the vehicle gets into an accident because of an unassisted lane change error, it would be no different than releasing a defective tire. I suspect we'd have to get clarification from the insurance industry (and Tesla and our specific carriers) before using any of these features.

And if I get points against my license, plus increased insurance rates forever, for the car causing an accident with a bad lane change (because I'm legally responsible until Uncle Sam says otherwise), will Tesla fix that for me somehow? IANAL but that sounds tough.

Maybe Tesla will become our insurance company! Elon can do anything! Disrupt the insurance industry Elon, you can do it! I'm looking forward to receiving my insurance payouts in 3 months maybe, 6 months definitely.

No, I think this is exactly what Tesla is going to hide behind -- "regulatory approval". There is no regulatory framework for the car being responsible, so we the drivers remain legally responsible. Even if you paid for FSD. There is no process by which they could even seek regulatory approval for letting the car be responsible because there are no laws allowing the regulators to approve it.

 

[Mark_T]

No, I think this is exactly what Tesla is going to hide behind -- "regulatory approval". There is no regulatory framework for the car being responsible, so we the drivers remain legally responsible.

I don't think Tesla are going to 'hide behind' anything, it is a simple fact that the driver is going to remain responsible for what the car does for the foreseeable future...

We've had well tested and proved autopilots in aircraft for years now but the PIC is still liable for what happens.

It is a somewhat moot point until we hit level 5 anyway as the driver is still a requirement up to that point and I don't see legislation changing until level 5 is available and well proven, if it ever changes...

 

[rnortman]

It is a somewhat moot point until we hit level 5 anyway as the driver is still a requirement up to that point and I don't see legislation changing until level 5 is available and well proven, if it ever changes...

Drivers are not required in L4. The difference between L4 and L5 is that L4 has a limited operating envelope -- this can include geofencing, specified road types and speeds, and weather conditions. L4 vehicles do not even have to have steering wheels and pedals if they only need to operate within their defined envelope. L5 extends the operating envelope to all environments where a human driver can drive (e.g., offroad during a zombie apocalypse).

And drivers are not required to pay attention at all times in L3, which is the giant leap above L2 that I don't think Tesla is able to make, despite specifically promising L3-requiring features even in EAP (uninitiated lane change, Smart Summon), nevermind FSD (Park Seek Mode).

 

[Mark_T]

Drivers are not required in L4. The difference between L4 and L5 is that L4 has a limited operating envelope -- this can include geofencing, specified road types and speeds, and weather conditions. L4 vehicles do not even have to have steering wheels and pedals if they only need to operate within their defined envelope. L5 extends the operating envelope to all environments where a human driver can drive (e.g., offroad during a zombie apocalypse).

And drivers are not required to pay attention at all times in L3, which is the giant leap above L2 that I don't think Tesla is able to make, despite specifically promising L3-requiring features even in EAP (uninitiated lane change, Smart Summon), nevermind FSD (Park Seek Mode).

This is the difference between having the features of these levels and being able to use them with impunity...

Even if we have full level 3 capability it doesn't absolve the driver of liability when they don't pay attention to what is going on around them.

Personally I see the availability of for example level 3 or 4 as an increased safety aspect, not a replacement for the driver remaining liable for what goes on while he is in the vehicle.

Even with your description of level 4 I'd be very surprised if there is ever a vehicle produced that doesn't have at least a big red 'STOP' button in the cabin which clearly allows the liability for not pressing it to rest with the 'driver'

 

[BLKTSLA]

I believe v9 software will bring a slight UI change to all cars for FSD.

The FSD feature they will release will be Navigation-based on-ramp to off-ramp including auto-lane change. They will marry the hi-def maps, with nav routes, and neural net. This will require a clear hand-over of control from human to car and vice versa, this is what the UI change will be. They will also release Summon+ where summon can navigate turns instead of just forward and back.

Where I think they will have issues is for highways that are Toll roads not sure they have been testing those scenarios in California much.

 

[rnortman]

Even with your description of level 4 I'd be very surprised if there is ever a vehicle produced that doesn't have at least a big red 'STOP' button in the cabin which clearly allows the liability for not pressing it to rest with the 'driver'

L4 cars do have an emergency stop button but the riders are not responsible for pressing it. They can press it if they feel they need to but they will have no obligation to do so. Note that I described them as "riders" rather than "drivers" because L4 cars don't have drivers. Trains often have emergency stop levers that are reachable by riders, but has any rider ever been held responsible for not preventing a rail accident?

 

[rnortman]

The FSD feature they will release will be Navigation-based on-ramp to off-ramp including auto-lane change. They will marry the hi-def maps, with nav routes, and neural net. This will require a clear hand-over of control from human to car and vice versa, this is what the UI change will be. They will also release Summon+ where summon can navigate turns instead of just forward and back.

On-ramp to off-ramp is an EAP feature, not FSD. Musk recently confirmed that FSD features are not coming until HW3 is ready, which is next year if you believe him, which the historical record suggests you should not. So maybe we will get on-ramp to off-ramp, that would be awesome, but that will be an EAP feature.

 

[Mark_T]

L4 cars do have an emergency stop button but the riders are not responsible for pressing it. They can press it if they feel they need to but they will have no obligation to do so. Note that I described them as "riders" rather than "drivers" because L4 cars don't have drivers. Trains often have emergency stop levers that are reachable by riders, but has any rider ever been held responsible for not preventing a rail accident?

You are talking like all this is already worked out and in current legislation...

Let's be clear here, there is a big difference between a system that may qualify as L4 or L5 for that matter, which has been designed for 'riders' and a car like a Tesla for example that may eventually have the capability to be used in a L4 or L5 mode.

When I use the London Heathrow Pod system I ride in a fully autonomous vehicle which travels on its own private road network and has an emergency stop feature if I as a rider need it, but that is all. Nothing tricky or legally ambiguous about that at all.

On the other-hand when we get to the stage where we have cars which can be driven normally or if the driver elects, be put into an L4/L5 mode then it is not nearly as clear that the driver can escape liability merely by selecting the mode and closing their eyes...

 

[MarkS22]

You are talking like all this is already worked out and in current legislation...

Let's be clear here, there is a big difference between a system that may qualify as L4 or L5 for that matter, which has been designed for 'riders' and a car like a Tesla for example that may eventually have the capability to be used in a L4 or L5 mode.

When I use the London Heathrow Pod system I ride in a fully autonomous vehicle which travels on its own private road network and has an emergency stop feature if I as a rider need it, but that is all. Nothing tricky or legally ambiguous about that at all.

On the other-hand when we get to the stage where we have cars which can be driven normally or if the driver elects, be put into an L4/L5 mode then it is not nearly as clear that the driver can escape liability merely by selecting the mode and closing their eyes...

All that needs to happen is Tesla to clearly state: “When X feature is activated, Tesla is responsible. If it fails in any way, it’s our product liability insurance and not your car insurance.” From a regulatory standpoint, a FSD failure should be handled as if, for example, the steering controller failed. The driver has no liability if a component from a new car fails. Many (most?) of the car’s critical functions are “fly by wire” or computer controlled already.

 

[whitex]

All that needs to happen is Tesla to clearly state: “When X feature is activated, Tesla is responsible. If it fails in any way, it’s our product liability insurance and not your car insurance.” From a regulatory standpoint, a FSD failure should be handled as if, for example, the steering controller failed. The driver has no liability if a component from a new car fails. Many (most?) of the car’s critical functions are “fly by wire” or computer controlled already.

I don't think it's that simple. If you rear-end someone due to faulty brakes, is the manufacturer of the car who the insurance company will go after, or will it be your insurance and you can in turn go after the manufacturer? Say that the insurance company would in fact go after the manufacturer, how long would the manufacturer be liable, as long as the car is under warranty? For the entire life of the car? Or do you think we'll end up with aircraft like maintenance log requirement where every part has to be tracked for usage and after so many hours it has to be replaced no matter what - that would make the FSD cars really expensive to keep, like planes and helicopters today.

 

[Mark_T]

Or do you think we'll end up with aircraft like maintenance log requirement where every part has to be tracked for usage and after so many hours it has to be replaced no matter what - that would make the FSD cars really expensive to keep, like planes and helicopters today.

This is kind of where I was heading earlier in this thread.

I think that by the time we get to L5, or even L4 as a routine, reliable option we are going to be dealing with vehicles manufactured specifically to be L5 not 'normal' cars with a L5 option.

Expecting Tesla, or anyone else for that matter to just say '...it is all on us' without stringent maintenance and parts control is unrealistic.

People complain enough as it is about the limited parts availability for Tesla vehicles, but I don't see product liability taking over from your car insurance without major shifts in the various consumer rights laws with respect to the right to maintain etc.

 

[whitex]

This is kind of where I was heading earlier in this thread.

I think that by the time we get to L5, or even L4 as a routine, reliable option we are going to be dealing with vehicles manufactured specifically to be L5 not 'normal' cars with a L5 option.

Expecting Tesla, or anyone else for that matter to just say '...it is all on us' without stringent maintenance and parts control is unrealistic.

People complain enough as it is about the limited parts availability for Tesla vehicles, but I don't see product liability taking over from your car insurance without major shifts in the various consumer rights laws with respect to the right to maintain etc.

And this is why autonomous taxis make sense while autonomous private cars will be as common as private aircraft are today. Elon is a dreamer, but he either didn't think this one through (like FSD with only cameras and without any way to self clean themselves) or he just decided he's scamming people for the greater good, so it's ok.

 

[Mark_T]

I'm in the camp that believes there will be differences between EAP and FSD sooner rather than later, so for the marginal cost increase in my monthly payment it was a reasonable punt that will get me a few hardware upgrade when the first FSD specific features are ready...

... but I have zero expectation of achieving L4/L5 within the 4 year period that I will drive my current MS.

 

[thegruf]

@Mark_T - although we must remember that FSD feature release will be US centric.

ROW may be some way down the road and quite possibly significantly held up by regulators, who at least in the EU might be quite reticent to give approval especially with German manufacturing doing everything it can to frustrate Tesla agenda.

 

[Mark_T]

You are not wrong, but it does of course depend on what they actually release under the 'FSD only' side of things.

 

[conman]

ROW may be some way down the road and quite possibly significantly held up by regulators, who at least in the EU might be quite reticent to give approval especially with German manufacturing doing everything it can to frustrate Tesla agenda.

Australia doesn't even have an auto manufacturing industry anymore, but our regulations are so anal that they will hold us back equally too; no need for manufacturing pressure :\

 

[Creacker]

I have a software update available today! Could this be V9.0 ?? I have a MS 75D (Canada). I wont be at home / wifi until later today. So excited. Hope this it. Anyone else get update today??

 

[conman]

I have a software update available today! Could this be V9.0 ?? I have a MS 75D (Canada). I wont be at home / wifi until later today. So excited. Hope this it. Anyone else get update today??

No it won't be. Lots are getting 28.5 now. Minor bug fixes.

 

[israndy]

v9.0 is early SEPTEMBER for beta and late for general release, and that's on Elon time, so late October, November out here in the real world. Probably 3 or more neat features coming to v8.1 before 9.0, I would guess

-Randy