3 ms·
That assumes that the human driver responds appropriately to the passive aids. But an electronic system that never gets tired or distracted may eventually perf
by tux1968 5y ago
That assumes that the human driver responds appropriately to the passive aids. But an electronic system that never gets tired or distracted may eventually perform much better and more consistently in this regard.
- BoorishBears 5y agoThat's the trick people keep falling for... Tesla FSD still requires a fully attentive driver, so it has almost nothing in common with the systems you're describing. It sounds like a small difference, but it completely upends 99% of the assumptions you can make about its performance. - For example you can't response to passive aids, you can't use FSD. Look at the video we just watched, would a tired or distracted driver have been able to make that correction? - Passive aids even handle tired drivers _better_ than FSD. Toyota's aids will warn the driver they are drowsy if the passive aids are intervening too often. They've done this for years now, even in their most basic cars. FSD is assuming computer control with human backup, so the human backup isn't being engaged enough to make calls that well. At best it can use proxies like wheel jiggling and gaze.