Why does the UI miss so many oncoming vehicles?

[linkerc]

Yes. It is complicated. That’s why I try to simplify things in terms I can grasp With analogies.
I look at a computer as in 2 parts (for the context of this topic). Source code and data.
data can be input or output/decision.
the goal of training/learning in AI term is so we can tweak the source code to have a better result (output data/decisions) by injecting lots of input data. The development cycle has almost always been “training -> tweak code -> new release”.
In human(intelligent being) analogy, we learn by exposing to lots of input data so we can make better decisions(output data).
Notice tweaking source code is omitted, cuz a human is intelligent. No brain tweaking needed. Somebody might say we do modify our brain thru experience, which brings to my next point.
To get to true AI we need to be comfortable with self modifying code first, which is not even the norm today. Computer viruses is the example I can think of that self modifies but for nefarious reasons.

The practical “show me” side of me will be more convinced once we have reliable self driving buses. We cant even get vehicles on fixed route to drive itself, and you would put hope on random routes? Just seems too big of a leap for me.
Anyway, my main point is mixing computer with humans on the road in such fashion is more dangerous imo. If we have designated roads for FSD then I am less concerned.
It’s not to knock Tesla’s effort. It’s to expose marketing hypes. Hypes in technology do have a prolong negative impact in the field.

Peace.

 

[smatthew]

Please no FSD people. It's not ready.

Approximately 100K miles on Autopilot here (15K miles on FSD Beta) - and I'm very satisfied with the continual improvements. It is an amazing L2 drivers assistance system.

Yes. It is complicated. That’s why I try to simplify things in terms I can grasp With analogies.
I look at a computer as in 2 parts (for the context of this topic). Source code and data.
data can be input or output/decision.
the goal of training/learning in AI term is so we can tweak the source code to have a better result (output data/decisions) by injecting lots of input data. The development cycle has almost always been “training -> tweak code -> new release”.
In human(intelligent being) analogy, we learn by exposing to lots of input data so we can make better decisions(output data).
Notice tweaking source code is omitted, cuz a human is intelligent. No brain tweaking needed. Somebody might say we do modify our brain thru experience, which brings to my next point.
To get to true AI we need to be comfortable with self modifying code first, which is not even the norm today. Computer viruses is the example I can think of that self modifies but for nefarious reasons.

The practical “show me” side of me will be more convinced once we have reliable self driving buses. We cant even get vehicles on fixed route to drive itself, and you would put hope on random routes? Just seems too big of a leap for me.
Anyway, my main point is mixing computer with humans on the road in such fashion is more dangerous imo. If we have designated roads for FSD then I am less concerned.
It’s not to knock Tesla’s effort. It’s to expose marketing hypes. Hypes in technology do have a prolong negative impact in the field.

Peace.

am I correct in assuming you're not a Tesla owner? And you've never bothered to watch any of Tesla's AI day presentation?

 

[pbar]

I think almost every Model 3 and Y driver agrees with this. The huge, driver-side, always-showing AP/FSD visualization is a terrible waste of space on the single central display. It's by far the most annoying aspect of the car in daily driving.

I can only guess that Tesla views it as an advertisement for selling AP/EAP/FSD upgrades.

At the very least it should be moved to the passenger side, and put the actual useful information on the driver's side.
Plus... anything safety critical shouldn't require you to be able to point accurately at a the middle of a touchscreen in a bouncing/moving vehicle. (which is close to impossible, and requires you to take your eyes off the road)

 

[drtimhill]

To get to true AI we need to be comfortable with self modifying code first, which is not even the norm today. Computer viruses is the example I can think of that self modifies but for nefarious reasons.

Viruses (the computer type) dont self-modify .. they are fixed code that is functionally designed (by humans) to modify other code. Rarely, a virus is designed to disguise itself by mutating portions of the virus payload to evade detection, but again that is not self-modifying in that the core virus function is not changed.

 

[ShelJW]

I think almost every Model 3 and Y driver agrees with this. The huge, driver-side, always-showing AP/FSD visualization is a terrible waste of space on the single central display. It's by far the most annoying aspect of the car in daily driving.

I can only guess that Tesla views it as an advertisement for selling AP/EAP/FSD upgrades.

I don't agree, but maybe I'm in the minority.

I love being able to glance at the screen, prior to a lane change, and quickly see if there are other cars nearby, or a little farther back, in the lane to my left or right, prior to beginning to change lanes.

Yeah, I know I can use the blind spot monitor, but here on LA freeways, at times there are jerks who, as soon as they see you signaling to move into "their" lane, decide to floor it, and speed up to prevent you from merging....

Again, I can see how some people consider it a waste of space. I happen to like being able to have an overview of the traffic around me while on the freeway.

 

[drtimhill]

I think almost every Model 3 and Y driver agrees with this. The huge, driver-side, always-showing AP/FSD visualization is a terrible waste of space on the single central display. It's by far the most annoying aspect of the car in daily driving.

Nope, I use it all the time, and its an integral part of FSD beta. It's also good for double-checking blind spots, picking out lane lines in the dark when its raining (almost miraculous at this).

You can think what you like, of course, but dont try to project your own subjective likes/dislikes onto others.

 

[tm1v2]

Nope, I use it all the time, and its an integral part of FSD beta. It's also good for double-checking blind spots, picking out lane lines in the dark when its raining (almost miraculous at this).

You can think what you like, of course, but dont try to project your own subjective likes/dislikes onto others.

You seriously drive your car looking at the screen for lane placement?

For blind spot, there is a camera view, no need for the AP/FSD visualizations.

Now if you're saying you like seeing the visualizations while you're actually using FSD or AP...yeah that I agree with!

 

[MikeyC]

Whenever I take someone for a ride in the front passenger seat, they always marvel at the display so they are watching it more than I am. I've had two people now who were initially impressed that "it sees cars in the other lane too" only to follow that up with "But why didn't it see that one? Or that truck?" My only reply is "I dunno. It sees what it wants to see". Fortunately they get impressed again when I enter a construction zone and it renders all 20 out of 20 traffic cones... but somehow can't render cars consistently.

Doesn't affect me. It's more of a curiosity. I'd be happy if I could just explain it with something like "It only shows cars that are closer to the center line" but there's no rhyme or reason for it and speed doesn't seem to affect it: it'll do it at 30 MPH or 60 MPH.

Mike

 

[drtimhill]

You seriously drive your car looking at the screen for lane placement?

For blind spot, there is a camera view, no need for the AP/FSD visualizations.

Not for lane placement, but certainly for lane confirmation. Ever been driving at night in pouring rain with cars coming at you with blinding headlights? And noticed how hard it is to pick out lane markings with so much light reflected from the road? And noticed that the car still manages to pick them out amazingly well?

The camera view only comes on when you use the turn signals .. which you should not use until you think the lane is clear of cars. Or are you one of those people that puts your turn signal on and only then looks to see if the lane is clear?

 

[duanra]

Yes, you can turn your signal before the lane is free cause sometimes, another driver will have the courtesy to let you enter the lane.

 

[smatthew]

Yes, you can turn your signal before the lane is free cause sometimes, another driver will have the courtesy to let you enter the lane.

Plus, the car waits until the lane is free before entering. It's always good to signal your intentions BEFORE you move. EAP and FSD do that.

 

[drtimhill]

Plus, the car waits until the lane is free before entering. It's always good to signal your intentions BEFORE you move. EAP and FSD do that.

Yes, you can turn your signal before the lane is free cause sometimes, another driver will have the courtesy to let you enter the lane.

The point is, turn signals are used both as a request ("can I merge in please") and as a warning of intent ("I'm going to move into this lane"), and these uses vary based on circumstances. The correct sequence is of course "mirror, signal, mirror, maneuver", and this first mirror check is to determine safety before you signal, while the second is used to verify that its safe to commit to the maneuver. You should never blindly out on a turn signal without being aware of your surroundings.

And, imho, both EAP and FSD get it wrong at the moment, as they often tend to just put on the turn signal regardless if the maneuver is possible, and then try to figure out if they can move over. Often this results in the car driving significant distances with a turn signal on but the car making no attempt to maneuver .. something that can confuse other drivers, which is never good.

 

[OxBrew]

Not for lane placement, but certainly for lane confirmation. Ever been driving at night in pouring rain with cars coming at you with blinding headlights? And noticed how hard it is to pick out lane markings with so much light reflected from the road? And noticed that the car still manages to pick them out amazingly well?

The camera view only comes on when you use the turn signals .. which you should not use until you think the lane is clear of cars. Or are you one of those people that puts your turn signal on and only then looks to see if the lane is clear?

This saved us in Seattle in a downpour at night a couple months ago. Lanes totally obscured by glare, oncoming lights, and wipers not reacting to the deluge in time. 3 lanes jogged a full lane to the right in an complex intersection, all I had was the preview, only way we made it through.