3 ms·
Precisely this. Whether the authors of the legislation intended it or not, this mandatory requirement for continual human input excludes a system from their ove
by simondotau 5y ago
Precisely this. Whether the authors of the legislation intended it or not, this mandatory requirement for continual human input excludes a system from their oversight.
”An autonomous test vehicle does not include vehicles equipped with one or more systems that provide driver assistance and/or enhance safety benefits but are not capable of, singularly or in combination, performing the dynamic driving task on a sustained basis without the constant control or active monitoring of a natural person.”
The FSD Beta, as it is supplied to end users, is not capable of performing the dynamic driving task on a sustained basis without the constant control or active monitoring of a natural person.
- bagacrap 5y agoThis interpretation of the law renders it totally useless, because tacking on the requirement for a human presence is trivially easy. As the author points out, the intent of the law is to enforce certain restrictions on any system that is intended to eventually become fully automated. And clearly Tesla is testing a system, and the system is supposed to be fully automated one day.
- simondotau 5y agoI don’t agree that it makes the law useless. An autonomous vehicle is of extremely limited incremental value if it requires persistent driver engagement at every moment. Technology like we’re seeing in FSD Beta is going to be the next big road safety revolution. Even if it never becomes an autonomous vehicle, repackaged as a passive safety suite, the technology is already good enough to be a collision avoidance system orders of magnitude better than any other on the market.