3 ms·

> And yet it's literally in cars on the road. It is not. There is no real self-driving on the road, at least not in conventional vehicles. Teslas autopilot is

> And yet it's literally in cars on the road. It is not. There is no real self-driving on the road, at least not in conventional vehicles. Teslas autopilot is basically a collection of conventional assistive systems that work under specific circumstances. Granted, the circumstances where it works are much broader than the ones defined by the competition, but for a practical use-case its still very restricted. Self-driving systems can be affected by very minor changes in lighting, weather and other circumstances. While Teslas stats on x Million miles driven under Autopilot are impressive, they do not show the real capabilities of the self-driving system. For example, you can only enable the Autopilot under specific circumstance for example while driving on an Autobahn with clear weather. Under circumstances with for example limited sight the Autopilot won't turn on or will hand over to the driver, simply because it would fail. Of course, this is for passenger security, but these are situations real self-driving vehicles need to handle. Other leading projects like Waymo also test the vehicles under ideal circumstances with clear weather etc. We'll most likely see fully self-driving vehicles in the future, but this future is probably not as close as Tesla PR makes us think.

stephenr 7y ago
> There is no real self-driving on the road Emphasis on real. There is definitely something that most people would refer to as "self driving" in cars on the road. I'm not saying what is there is specifically good at what it does - I'm saying someone put it into use regardless of how fit for purpose it is. > but this future is probably not as close as Tesla PR makes us think Unless you're suggesting the PR team decided to make shit like "Summon" available to the public, then it's not just "PR spin".
- moooo99 7y ago
  > Emphasis on real. There is definitely something that most people would refer to as "self-driving" in cars on the road. Then you'd have to define what a self-driving car actually means. At least for me, self-driving means level 4 upwards. Everything below I'd consider assisted driving. > Unless you're suggesting the PR team decided to make shit like "Summon" available to the public, then it's not just "PR spin". As I said, this Smart Summon feature also only works under very specific circumstances with multiple restrictions (and from what I've seen on Twitter it received mixed feedback) Just because the car manages to navigate a parking lot with 5km/h relatively reliable, that doesn't mean that at the end of the year it'll be able to drive the car with 150 km/h on the Autobahn. Edit: Fixed my formatting
  - stephenr 7y ago
    > Then you'd have to define what a self-driving car actually means. I said "for most people". For most people I know, a car that will change lanes, navigate freeways and even exit freeways is "self driving". It may be completely unreliable but even a toaster that always burns the bread is called a toaster: no one says "you need to define what a toaster means to you". > At least for me, self-driving means level 4 upwards. I have literally zero clue what the first three "levels" are or what "level 4" means, and I'd wager 99% of people who buy cars wouldn't either. > that doesn't mean that at the end of the year it'll be able to drive the car with 150 km/h on the Autobahn. 30 seconds found me a video on youtube of some British guy using autopilot at 150kph on a German autobahn last June. Again: I'm not suggesting that it is a reliable "self driving car". I'm suggesting that it is sold and perceived as a car that can drive itself, in spite of a laundry list of caveats and restrictions.
    - aguyfromnb 7y ago
      >It may be completely unreliable but even a toaster that always burns the bread is called a toaster This argument is leaning toward the ridiculous. I think only you and Elon Musk consider a "greater than zero chance of making it to your destination without intervention" to be self-driving.
      - stephenr 7y ago
        And I think you're being ridiculously pedantic if you think that a list of caveats and asterisks in the fine print means that average Joe B. Motorist doesn't view the Autopilot/Summon/etc features as some degree of "self driving".
      - rootusrootus 7y ago
        Musk has good reason -- he's been selling an expensive "full self driving" package for a couple years and in order to deliver he needs to redefine the term. He's already working hard on that.
    - bluGill 7y ago

stephenr 7y ago

> There is no real self-driving on the road Emphasis on real. There is definitely something that most people would refer to as "self driving" in cars on the road. I'm not saying what is there is specifically good at what it does - I'm saying someone put it into use regardless of how fit for purpose it is. > but this future is probably not as close as Tesla PR makes us think Unless you're suggesting the PR team decided to make shit like "Summon" available to the public, then it's not just "PR spin".

moooo99 7y ago
> Emphasis on real. There is definitely something that most people would refer to as "self-driving" in cars on the road. Then you'd have to define what a self-driving car actually means. At least for me, self-driving means level 4 upwards. Everything below I'd consider assisted driving. > Unless you're suggesting the PR team decided to make shit like "Summon" available to the public, then it's not just "PR spin". As I said, this Smart Summon feature also only works under very specific circumstances with multiple restrictions (and from what I've seen on Twitter it received mixed feedback) Just because the car manages to navigate a parking lot with 5km/h relatively reliable, that doesn't mean that at the end of the year it'll be able to drive the car with 150 km/h on the Autobahn. Edit: Fixed my formatting
- stephenr 7y ago
  > Then you'd have to define what a self-driving car actually means. I said "for most people". For most people I know, a car that will change lanes, navigate freeways and even exit freeways is "self driving". It may be completely unreliable but even a toaster that always burns the bread is called a toaster: no one says "you need to define what a toaster means to you". > At least for me, self-driving means level 4 upwards. I have literally zero clue what the first three "levels" are or what "level 4" means, and I'd wager 99% of people who buy cars wouldn't either. > that doesn't mean that at the end of the year it'll be able to drive the car with 150 km/h on the Autobahn. 30 seconds found me a video on youtube of some British guy using autopilot at 150kph on a German autobahn last June. Again: I'm not suggesting that it is a reliable "self driving car". I'm suggesting that it is sold and perceived as a car that can drive itself, in spite of a laundry list of caveats and restrictions.
  - aguyfromnb 7y ago
    >It may be completely unreliable but even a toaster that always burns the bread is called a toaster This argument is leaning toward the ridiculous. I think only you and Elon Musk consider a "greater than zero chance of making it to your destination without intervention" to be self-driving.
    - stephenr 7y ago
      And I think you're being ridiculously pedantic if you think that a list of caveats and asterisks in the fine print means that average Joe B. Motorist doesn't view the Autopilot/Summon/etc features as some degree of "self driving".
    - rootusrootus 7y ago
      Musk has good reason -- he's been selling an expensive "full self driving" package for a couple years and in order to deliver he needs to redefine the term. He's already working hard on that.
  - bluGill 7y ago