-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
What will happen within the next 6 1/2 weeks?
- Thread starter dckiwi
- Start date
Statistically speaking traffic congestion increases with lower cost. We've already seen this with ride sharing increasing city congestion due to more people choosing ride share over public transportation.
Secondly we already have a traffic congestion problem so I don't see why we wouldn't try to help alleviate the problem with autonomous cars.
This is actually an attempt at solving the responsibility problem. Right now no one is responsible for the accuracy, and the safety of the data for the maps people use to get around.
Part of the process of road construction should be updating one official map during, and after construction. The same way they would do due diligence in making sure to have good construction marking during the construction.
If they don't update this information they should be fined.
The other reason for this is construction zone information isn't always easy for human drivers to interpret. Like sometimes I'll encounter things like "the right two lanes are closed up ahead", but then the lane isn't closed or three lanes will closed.
What we need is a central repository of information that can flow out to things like Apple Maps, and Google Maps. Where the central navigation information was free, and was routinely kept up to date. Where it was similar to openstreetmaps, but had better versioning control and verification of the data.
The beautify of a car equipped with cameras like a Tesla is it can visually verify map data.
What is "Feature Complete" anyway? As I understand it, Feature Complete means that all the components of City Navigate on Autopilot are present in the software, but they are in "beta" form and cannot be trusted and the driver remains fully responsible for monitoring the car's operation constantly and intervening when any of the "features" is unable to operate properly. Or, to put it another way, the "features" are present but don't actually work reliably.
What Musk is calling "Feature Complete FSD" is so far from what any rational person would call FSD that it is bizarre.
Instead of making up terms that describe a failure to accomplish FSD, Tesla should just admit that the job was way more difficult than they expected, and admit that FSD is ten to twenty years away, and that what they're selling is not FSD, but is super-enhanced Autopilot, or EAP with additional BETA features operating at Level 2 (driver is fully responsible at all times) and that some day in the far future they will have a car that does not need a driver.
Lets not forget that when many people put down their $6,000 for FSD, Elon Musk was promising that their car would not need a driver. Period. "Feature Complete" means "Sorry. We failed."
diplomat33
Average guy who loves autonomous vehicles
Yes that is my understanding as well. Just one caveat: feature complete means that the features don't have to be perfect. But feature complete does not automatically mean that the features won't work reliably at all.
I can see why some people might think that, especially if you expect feature complete FSD to be what Waymo has. But considering that if Tesla can release City NOA with reliable traffic light and stop sign response, they will have a system that would be very close to hands free driving with supervision on both highways and local roads, at least in simple driving conditions, I don't think it is as far fetched as it sounds. For example, right now, I can go from my house to a friend's house that is 340 miles away, almost hands free thanks to NOA. Apart from a couple issues with NOA that cause a couple disengagements, the biggest missing feature that causes the most disengagements, is that AP won't stop at red lights or make turns at intersections yet. So yeah, if Tesla added traffic light and stop response and turning at intersections, that would eliminate most current disengagements that I have in my daily driving.
Bottom line: If Tesla could pull off highway NOA and City NOA to be hands free with supervision, I would certainly call that "feature complete FSD".
Except Tesla has made quite a lot of progress and does not think that they are 10-20 years away. They probably have a complete OEDR in their development software and they are close to releasing "city NOA". So why would they admit something that they don't think is true?
Feature complete does not mean that they failed. Feature complete is the first step towards not needing a driver. As I said before, Tesla can't go directly to not needing a driver. They have do feature complete first.
Nothing is ever perfect. I do not believe that Tesla is going to leap from the present system to something way beyond what Waymo currently has in one bound. It is my belief and opinion that if Tesla releases City NoA with stoplight and stop sign response and left turns across traffic at uncontrolled intersections it will be extremely unreliable. Which is why I don't think they will, any time soon.
I'm pretty sure you are not driving hands-free, ever, beyond maybe letting go of the wheel for a few moments at a time. I absolutely love autosteer and it reduces the stress of driving considerably, as I can maintain all my attention on keeping my eyes open for obstacles, pedestrians too close to the road, cars driving over the line, etc., while the car maintains its speed and keeps itself centered in the lane. But AP and EAP are hands-on driving at all times. Hands-free would be Level 3 or higher and we are nowhere near that yet.
Maybe I expressed myself poorly. "Feature Complete" with hands on the wheel, eyes on the road, and the driver is responsible at all times, to take over without any notice, is what Tesla is promising now, as its fallback position once it realized that it cannot fulfill its promise to "FSD" buyers:
Tesla promised that the car would not need a driver (Level 5 operation). When it realized it could not accomplish that, instead of apologizing to "FSD" buyers and refunding their money, Tesla just quietly and without fanfare, removed those claims from its web site and began promising "Features" that would still need a constantly-alert driver at all times, who will need to keep her or his hands on the wheel at all times, and who will be fully responsible for anything the car does, at all times and without warning. The fact that this may be one step along the road to driverless operation is irrelevant. Tesla took money for something it thought it could deliver, and when it realized it could not, it moved the goal posts and made no apologies to the people whose money it had taken.
I predict that when Tesla announces that "FSD" is "Feature Complete" it will say these are BETA features, just as years after its introduction, Tesla still says that autosteer is a BETA feature.
How is a feature "complete" if it's still in beta?
diplomat33
Average guy who loves autonomous vehicles
We have no idea how reliable or unreliable city NOA will be since we don't have it yet. But, if history is any indication, it may start off as semi reliable but improve over time until it eventually becomes very reliable.
Obviously, it is not true hands free yet since we are required by Tesla to keep our hands on the wheel. But I am looking at how many disengagements there were. In other words, if I had been allowed to go hands-free would AP have been able to perform all the driving tasks? Of course, it still requires driver supervision. But driver supervision and hands-on are 2 completely different things. If AP can perform the driving tasks without any disengagement then it is capable of hands-free even if driver supervision is still required.
You seem to think that Tesla's FSD page is an indication that Tesla has moved the goal posts on FSD. I don't see it that way. I think Tesla is still committed to the same end goal of "no driver" FSD.
Think of it this way: in 2016, Tesla started taking money for "college graduation". Now they are taking money for "freshman in college". The fact that they are taking money for "freshman in college" does not mean that they have given up on "college graduation".
Because "feature complete" refers to quantity, not quality. It refers to the number of features released, not to the initial reliability of each individual feature on release. Tesla is always working to improve the reliability of each feature as they go.
Last edited:
Barklikeadog
Active Member
If you had a driver, who knew nothing of Tesla, FSD etc
and you told them that Full self driving was now feature complete.
What would their expectation be?
diplomat33
Average guy who loves autonomous vehicles
Maybe that all the features listed on the website were now delivered to the car in a reasonable form?
So, deception? Yeah, that sounds about right for the Tesla community.
diplomat33
Average guy who loves autonomous vehicles
Feature Complete:
A feature complete version of a piece of software has all of its planned or primary features implemented but is not yet final due to bugs, performance or stability issues.[1] This occurs at the end of alpha testing of development.
Usually a feature complete software still has to undergo beta testing and bug fixing, as well as performance or stability enhancing before it can go to release candidate, and finally gold status.
Source: Feature complete - Wikipedia
Please note the bold parts for emphasis: feature complete takes place at the end of alpha. So feature complete actually is "beta". The main difference is that software companies usually do alpha, feature complete and beta internally and only release the software to the public after they finish beta and the software goes "gold" whereas Tesla releases features to the public when it is still beta.
diplomat33
Average guy who loves autonomous vehicles
Honestly, I don't there is any disagreement with the definition of feature complete. I just posted the definition above. I think we all agree that feature complete means that all features are done and you just need to do bug fixes. The issue is with what features should go into FSD "feature complete". Most of us, if we made our own list of FSD features, would say that Tesla is nowhere near feature complete. If we go by the feature list on the FSD page, it is either not an exhaustive list of every feature that Tesla has planned for FSD or it is an exhaustive list in which case Tesla's FSD won't be real FSD. That's really what the debate is.
Nope. Elon did not claim FSD feature complete.
He claimed Level 5 no geofence feature complete at the end of 2019 (expectation).
Both Level 5 and feature complete are well defined terms with specific meaning and context in the relevant realms.
There is nothing vague about this. The claim is very specific.
Because that is how SAE defines it.
Manufacturer declares which SAE Level their car is designed for, what the ODD is and so forth.
Regulators may add their own layer to this of course.
How many car buyers are automotive engineers who understand that "feature complete" means a beta software version that still needs extensive testing and probably considerable revision, and how many car buyers are going to hear Musk say that FSD is "feature complete" and think that means they can send the car off by itself to pick up the kids?
Especially since that was exactly what Musk was promising not all that long ago. The fact that they've taken that off the web site shows that they realize they cannot achieve that in a reasonable length of time and they want to cut down on the number of people who will sue them when their car reaches the end of its life and Elon's promise that "your car can go off by itself and pick up your kids" was never fulfilled.
Note that I'm all for what Tesla is doing and I love my Model 3 with EAP. I'm very optimistic about Tesla. I'm only talking about the extremely misleading promises Musk has made and is making. I believe in telling it like it is. And I don't feel that's what he's doing. I feel he's telling us his dreams, but it comes off as promises.
By the way, if your NoA requires one disengagement by the driver each week, that means it's not ready for Level 3. And that's still on the highway. We're talking about promises for this kind of operation in the city.
Especially since that was exactly what Musk was promising not all that long ago. The fact that they've taken that off the web site shows that they realize they cannot achieve that in a reasonable length of time and they want to cut down on the number of people who will sue them when their car reaches the end of its life and Elon's promise that "your car can go off by itself and pick up your kids" was never fulfilled.
Note that I'm all for what Tesla is doing and I love my Model 3 with EAP. I'm very optimistic about Tesla. I'm only talking about the extremely misleading promises Musk has made and is making. I believe in telling it like it is. And I don't feel that's what he's doing. I feel he's telling us his dreams, but it comes off as promises.
By the way, if your NoA requires one disengagement by the driver each week, that means it's not ready for Level 3. And that's still on the highway. We're talking about promises for this kind of operation in the city.
Which means that a car buyer cannot know what the car is capable of without reading and understanding the manufacturer's ODD disclosure, which is likely to be unintelligible. IOW, when a car is labelled L4, the buyer has no way of knowing if it's L4 from O'Hare airport to the Airport Marriott hotel and no place else, or whether it's L4 on freeways but not surface roads, or L4 on the majority of roads. "L4" could be effectively useless, or it could be almost driverless. The buyer does not know, because the SAE has defined the terms in such a way that the manufacturer can obfuscate them to the point of meaninglessness.
boonedocks
MS LR Blk/Blk 19”
Well considering we are all running features (most anyway) that have been “beta” from day one it won’t surprise me if Elon declares Feature Complete when there is mention of all of the features in the software working or not. :-/
diplomat33
Average guy who loves autonomous vehicles
This is nonsense. You really think that auto makers are going to sell cars as L4 and let customers guess wildly where the L4 actually works? Do you realize the lawsuits and massive problems that auto makers would have if they did? And why would Auto makers purposely make their ODD disclosure difficult to understand. Of course not. First of all, the ODD is not going to be that convoluted. It's not like L4 is only going to work at O'Hare airport but not work at the local mall. The ODD will be more general like "only highways". Look at GM's Supercruise. GM clearly advertised it as only highways. It was very clear what the ODD was. It's likely that Auto Makers will advertise the ODD in their car ads too. So the car ads will say something like "Enjoy hands free autonomous driving on all major highways!" So the ODD will very clear.
Similar threads
- Article
- Article
- Article
