Thorny_Insight @ Thorny_Insight @lemm.ee

---

Read more

Posts

41

Comments

1,874

Joined

2 yr. ago

Atleast Model S and X with hardware 4 do have radars in them.

Sure. Make then change the name to something different. I'm fine with that.

Though I still don't know what most people actually mean by full self driving and how it's different from what FSD can do right now.

Humans can drive just fine without lidar aswell. Road infrastructure is designed for vision. The car not being able to see is not the issue. It's teaching the car to understand what it sees and how to deal with it. Lidar doesn't help you solve this issue.

This is literally the only way we'll ever get self-driving cars. You have to test them in real life. Simulations and tests tracks can only take you so far. Yeah it'll probably cost the lifes of some number of people but this will be greatly outnumbered by the amount of lives saved when the technology actually starts working as intented. It's not like human driven vehicles are exactly safe for pedestrians either.

Also, when a self-driving vehicle fails it almost always means it ends up getting stuck somewhere or blocking the road. It's extremely rare for it to cause an accident, though that does happen aswell.

I'm generally the one defending Tesla in these threads but on Waymo's defence; the remote operators aren't actually controlling the car. Instead when faced with a challenging situation the car "calls home" for assistance basically asking a human to take a look at the situation and help it to decide what to do. This might be a car partially blocking the lane of traffic cones placed in a weird manner so the car justs asks for assurance that it's okay to proceed. In the most difficult situations the remote operator can suggest a route for the vehicle to take but the decision on what to do is ultimately on the vehicle itself.

My truck is -07 and it's the newest vehicle I've ever had. I'm not even especially interested about newer models because they just get more difficult to fix yourself and come with bunch of features that I prefer to live without. I prefer a work horse over fashion accessories tho mine is quite nice to look at aswell. Especially from distance.

It's misleading advertising for sure. At no point have I claimed otherwise.

The meaning of what qualifies as "full self driving" is still up for debate however. There are worse human drivers on the roads than what the current version of FSD is capable of. It's by no means flawless but it's much better than most people even realize. It's a vehicle capable of self driving even if not fully.

Yeah there's a wide range of ways to map the surroundings. Road infrastructure, however is designed for vision so I don't see why just cameras wouldn't be sufficient. The issue here is not that it's didn't see the train - it's on video, after all - but that it didn't know how to react to it.

ESP is not idiot proof either just to name one such feature that's been available for decades. It assists the driver but doesn't replace them.

Hell, cars themselves are not idiot proof.

Full Self Driving (Beta), nowdays Full Self Driving (Supervised)

Which of those names invokes trust to put your life in it's hands?

It's not in fine print. It's told to you when you purchase FSD and the vehicle reminds you of it every single time you enable the system. If you're looking at your phone it starts nagging at you eventually locking you out of the feature. Why would they put driver monitoring system in place if you're supposed to put blind faith into it?

That is such an old, beat up strawman argument. Yes, Elon has said it would be fully autonomous in a year or so which turned out to be a lie but nobody today is claiming it can be blindly trusted. That simply just is not true.

I agree. In fact I'm surprised the vehicle even lets you enable FSD in that kind of poor visibility and based on the video it seemed to be going quite fast aswell.

You can't see 50 meters ahead in that fog.

"Confidently incorrect"

Then proceeds to link over 2 year old article and even that aknowledges the existence of such system in the title.

It has an indoor camera that is constantly monitoring the driver and nags when they're not paying attention. That's a fact. Nothing what I said has been proven incorrect.

How Tesla's Driver Monitoring System Works

This fully autonomous argument is beat to death already. Every single Tesla owner knows you're supposed to pay attention and be ready to take over when necessary. That is such a strawman argument. Nobody blames the car when automatic braking fails to see the car infront of it. It might save your ass if you're distracted but ultimately it's always the driver whose responsible. FSD is no different.

Did you watch the video? It was insanely foggy there. It makes no difference how big the obstacle is if you can't even see 50 meters ahead of you.

Also, the car did see the train. It just clearly didn't understand what it was and how to react to it. That's why the car has a driver who does. I'm sure this exact edge case will be added to the training data so that this doesn't happen again. Stuff like this takes ages to iron out. FSD is not a finished product. It's under development and receives constant updates and keeps improving. That's why it's classified as level 2 and not level 5.

Yes. It's unreasonable to expect brand new technology to be able to deal with every possible scenario that a car can encounter on traffic. Just because the concept of train in a fog makes sense to you as a human doesn't mean it's obvious to the AI.

This same "think about the children" -argument is used when advocating for stuff such as banning encryption aswell which in it's current form enables the easy spreading of such content AI generated or not. I do not agree with that. It's a slippery slope despite the good intentions. We're not criminalizing fictional depictions of violence either. I don't see how this is any different. I don't care what people are jerking off to as long as they're not hurting anyone and I don't think you should either. Banning it haven't gotten rid of actual CSAM content and it sure wont work for AI generated stuff either. No one benefits from the police running after people creating/sharing fictional content.

Mercedes Drive Pilot is hilariously limited system. It for example needs a car in front of it that it can follow or else it wont work. It also only works on limited number of hand-picked highways in California and Nevada.

There's a video on YouTube comparing FSD to Mercedes' equivalent driver assistant software (not the level 3 one) and it's not even a competition. The Mercedes system is completely unusable.

You literally cannot buy FSD without being told that it needs driver supervision. It also tells you that every single time you enable it and it's constantly nagging to you when you take your hands off the wheel aswell as if you're looking at your phone etc. and given enough warnings the system locks you out of it.

Has Musk been dishonest/misleading about it's capabilities in the past? Yes. Is there a single Tesla owner with FSD who doesn't know the truth? No.

What makes them the leader? You can't even buy a car from them and I would be willing to bet that the number of kilometers driven on autopilot/FSD on Teslas is orders of magnitude greater than the competition and rapidly increasing each day. Even the most charitable view would place them on par with Tesla at best. Waymo/Cruze both have remote operators helping for when their vehicles get stuck. Even the MB Drive Pilot will ask for the driver to take over when needed. They're not fully functional self-driving vehicles no more than Teslas are.

It's a level 2 self driving system which by definition requires driver supervision. It's even stated in the name. What are the standards it doesn't meet?