5 ms·

Just to clarify the current process of being able to use the Tesla FSD beta because I've seen a lot of comments by people thinking Tesla released this and cars

Just to clarify the current process of being able to use the Tesla FSD beta because I've seen a lot of comments by people thinking Tesla released this and cars are now just driving around without a human driver: 1. pay $12k or $200/mo 2. Opt-in for beta. Drive over 100-200 miles and maintain a 98%+ "safety score" until you're selected (could be months) 3. Manually activate FSD each time you want to use it 4. Keep hands on wheel while it's going on and prepare to take over (it beeps and deactivates if you don't) 5. Be continuously recorded by a camera while FSD is on

simion314 5y ago
Should this be legal? Some rich Tesla fanboy beta testing buggy software with a misleading name of autopilot or FSD ont he streets where your children walk? I am not aware of such laws but they shoudl exist, otherwise other companies can start alpha testing with random fanboys.
- jondwillis 5y ago
  As one of the “rich Tesla fanboys” you describe, no, probably it should not be legal. That being said, it has made me re-realize that humans are really terrible drivers as well, myself included, just less terrible on average, currently.
  - CultMember001 5y ago
  - CultMember009 5y ago
  - CultMember009 5y ago
    I respect your honesty and encourage you to try some remedial driving lessons to avoid being a “really terrible driver.” It can save your life and others also.
    - millzlane 5y ago
      All the remedial driving lessons in the world can't prevent you from making a mistake and killing someone.
      - travisporter 5y ago
        Yeah they can. If you practice defensive driving you are less likely to kill someone
      - jjav 5y ago
        If you mean prevent 100%, of course not since nothing is absolute. But driving skill training can most certainly greatly increase your skills and awareness and thus immensely reduce your risk of mistakes. Anyone who drives should take as many car control and accident avoidance clinics as they can and refresh up every few years (if not more). These should really be required by law but since they're not, you can increase your odds of living by being proactive about it. It's weird that this is somehow controversial for car driving. For e.g. airplane pilots there is a long and strict training and skill maintenance routine, because obviously this makes for safer pilots. You don't just get to read a booklet and go flying.
        vba616 5y ago
        Pilots spend a lot of time on simulators, I believe. Seems like there would be economies of scale if the federal government created some really realistic simulators programmed with all the common accident situations and then everybody could be required to pass a test every four years or something. I imagine it would be so much more enjoyable and hopefully more effective than the defensive driving classes that exist now.
    - jondwillis 5y ago
      I'm a great driver on a relative basis. The average is just that terrible.
      - scotty79 5y ago
  - lgvln 5y ago
    I’m curious how does a bad (terrible) “full self driving” car make you realise humans are “really terrible drivers”. I can see how some drivers can miscalculate and end up making a risky manoeuvre. It happens, intentionally or not, and most people can and are willing to react in a way that avoids an collision. A Tesla on the other hand is beyond bad or terrible. It is basically incompetent - driving into on-coming traffic, opposing lanes, deviating wildly from the lane, ignoring speed limits etc).
- throwaway894345 5y ago
  If it's safer on balance than average drivers (for some reasonable definition of "safer"), I think the answer is "yes". Do you want to expose your children to unnecessary risk? I don't posit that it is safer or that it should be legal, but we should frame the conversation in terms of actual safety metrics and not cherry-picked incidents. Of course, our media isn't equipped to facilitate these kinds of nuanced conversations, which is a bigger and broader problem. EDIT: Seems like my "data-driven decision making" advocacy really struck a nerve with the cherry-picked anecdotes and rhetoric crowd. :)
  - simion314 5y ago
    But HOW do we know is safer? We should not assume is safer by default and I see many problems with Tesla fanboys numbers 1 the count for the times drivers intervene to prevent a crash are secret, or are not counted at a crash. 2 I don't want on my village/city some american car that is safer then the american driver that included 16 year old drunk teens and people that don't even have to pass exams and medical tests. The self driving car should be compared with healthy drivers , I don't care that some state/country is incapable of stopping speeding or drunk driving. 3 updating this cars should invalidate previous approvals, as a software developer I know well how updates include bugs not only features. Anyway I am against companies deciding from themselves how is a capable alphya testers and how they should run alpha tests. If we want real metrics then incidents liek the ones in the video should be counted against Tesla, is MALICIOUS to show a stats of average driver using an average car versus an expensive car with a combo of human+computer and assign the good to the computer and ignore the many times the human had to save the computer ass. Fuck shit statistics and shit companies and fanboys using them. At best you can prove the computer might be a decent copilot versus no copilot.
    - throwaway894345 5y ago
      > But HOW do we know is safer? We measure. This requires transparency on the part of Tesla, but if we frame it as "if you want legal FSD, you have to comply with transparency". We regulate like this in all other industries so there's no reason to think we can't do it here. > We should not assume is safer by default No one is advocating "assume it is safer by default". > I see many problems with Tesla fanboys numbers Right, but by framing it with metrics rather than cherry-picked incidents, we can have a national conversation about which metrics are most appropriate. If Tesla fanboys bring numbers that you take issue with, you can debate them. As an aside, it's hilarious that my earlier comment was being downvoted for advocating a debate based on data rather than cherry picked anecdotes, but I should know my audience better :) > the count for the times drivers intervene to prevent a crash are secret, or are not counted at a crash. See my transparency remarks above. > I don't want on my village/city some american car that is safer then the american driver that included 16 year old drunk teens and people that don't even have to pass exams and medical tests. Ignoring the obvious barbs at Americans, if we quantify the safety of any given FSD system, we can compare that against local safety and prohibit FSD systems which score worse than the local average such that FSD will only ever be a boon. > updating this cars should invalidate previous approvals, as a software developer I know well how updates include bugs not only features. Seems reasonable to me. > Anyway I am against companies deciding from themselves how is a capable alphya testers and how they should run alpha tests. In this case, I agree. > Fuck shit statistics and shit companies and fanboys using them. I love these kinds of constructive comments. Keep 'em coming.
- npace12 5y ago
  I drive a tesla with FSD in an urban area and based on what I've seen it do, I am 1000x more scared of some rich boy driving his new lambo around hitting a pedestrian than my Tesla while on FSD even with noone in it (if that were possible)
  - pessimizer 5y ago
    You're right, we probably shouldn't make reckless driving legal either.
    - npace12 5y ago
      That's technically not the correct analogue to what I said
      - simion314 5y ago
        You should probably demand rich dudes get proportional fines, that would solve the problem partially. Probably same irresponsible teen is also alpha testing a Tesla while his watching Netflix on the dashboard so no win if you move him from a Lambo in an Tesla.
        piaste 5y ago
        I would hope to whatever God is left on this accursed Earth that Tesla dashboards will refuse to play video while the car is in motion? Or that they have that mirror trick where the video is only viewable from the shotgun seat.
      - vba616 5y ago
        A Tesla vs. a Lamborghini is a peculiar comparison. What self-respecting Tesla fan would keep quiet how their Model S does 0-60 quicker? Seriously: 2021 Lamborghini Aventador: 2.8 seconds 2020 Tesla Model S Performance: 2.4 seconds (Car & Driver figures)
  - jacquesm 5y ago
    Yes, but how does it compare to a normal responsible driver? Because that is the use case here, not the idiot with an exotic they can't handle.
- yakz 5y ago
  Why shouldn't it? Anyone can buy 500, 700, 1100hp, etc. RWD production cars and YouTube is covered in videos of people using them to cause destruction of property and injuries because they don't know what the car is going to do. These muscle cars, supercars, and hypercars require control inputs that are not necessarily intuitive and could be very surprising. At least Tesla is forcing people to go through a safety test first. These cars can be operated safely. If and when there is sufficient evidence that they can't, I expect things to change.
  - simion314 5y ago
    You can't drive illegal for public road cars, so my point is why should a car that can randomly drive you into a child should be legal for public roads? Let's assume Elon and Tesla are perfect, you still need the law for less perfect CEOs and companies right? This less perfect ones might do bad things.
    - npace12 5y ago
      Can't any car with a drive-by-wire technically just randomly drive into a child? Yeah, the fact that more unpredictable software is involved definitely increases the risk, but where exactly would the line be?
      - simion314 5y ago
        The line would be here IMO, let me know why you think different Step 1: you get some independent persons from the government (Tesla or Google, etc pays for this so no need to cry taxes) Step 2: you drive the cars in the area where you want to approve it for testing/production , you record all mistakes and times the car ahd to intervene Step 3: drive all year around, all weather conditions, all traffic conditions Step 4: you analyze the data, see how many times you had to intervene and compute the damages that would have occurred. Get some real statisticins that could put bounds around the damages. Using the data from 4 you ask the population to vote what is the correct value they are comfortable with. What Tesla is doing now do not match because: 1 the tests are not transparent, we don't know or we can't trust Tesla for the number of mistakes the AI is doing 2 updates invalidate previous tests and stats 3 the computer will not drive in all conditions and is differing harder parts of the road to the human so this also is screwing the stats, if you let the AI to drive the easy part and the human the hard part then for sure the AI has a good record. Even if Tesla is perfect you need this laws for the imperfect companies that would move fast... so think about this as laws that will protect you from the evil Google car or some Chinese brand
- rmbyrro 5y ago
  Or selected paidboys
- ASalazarMX 5y ago
  Oh no, the children! 2025: Elon announces BabyX, in vitro baby factory, claims he's cloning any baby killed by a Tesla vehicle, for free.
  - JaimeThompson 5y ago
    If you remove the last two words it reads much more like an elon tweet.
  - simion314 5y ago
    >Oh no, the children! Yeah dude, not sure where you are from but there are special traffic rules related to children , like how to drive around schools, school buses and children, because children are doing stupid things and schools are marked with special signs so the driver knows to pay more attention in this area.
    - scotty79 5y ago
      Adults do plenty of stupid things too. Kids just have on average larger speeds and accelerations.
      - simion314 5y ago
        Sure, but I was a kid and I remember what stupid things I did, like driving a bike on a big hill , off road, Now I can't imagine me doing this, not even if you pay me a lot of money - so is clear that kids and teens will do a lot of stupid things because for some reason they are blind to some risk categories.
- jjav 5y ago
  > Should this be legal? It should not be legal, to do testing on public streets with unwilling participants. Tesla should be required to be able to enable this only in closed areas where access is limited to those participating in the testing.
- mancerayder 5y ago
  OK, but do you have a lot of faith in human drivers, a huge percentage of whom are talking on their phones with other people for work or play, some of which I've witnessed holding up the video with one hand so their faces can be seen? Forget FSD - whether it's Tesla or others, an automation in the car that stops when a living being is detected in front seems like an advance, while human drivers talking in a sales meeting while wearing wireless AirPods appear to be an increasing threat to pedestrians.
karaterobot 5y ago
Why would anybody ever use it then? If you have to monitor it and it does a bad job (in situations documented in that video), what is the value? I recognize that it does better in other situations, like open highways, but if you have to keep your hands on the wheel anyway, what is the benefit to the driver compared to older technology like assisted cruise control?
- notreallyserio 5y ago
  It's only for as long as the software is in beta testing (if we can really call it beta).
- ajmurmann 5y ago
  I wonder how this compares to more limited abilities like lane-keeping. I did a few 10hr drives between Oregon and California during the pandemic and the lane-keeping made this easier similarly to cruise control. I still has to watch it all the time, but it somehow made it more relaxed.
  - amanaplanacanal 5y ago
    More relaxed might make for a happier driver, but I’m not sure it makes for a safer driver.
lamontcg 5y ago
It is amazing that they crowdsourced their QA department and got people to pay $12k for the privilege of doing the work.

simion314 5y ago

Should this be legal? Some rich Tesla fanboy beta testing buggy software with a misleading name of autopilot or FSD ont he streets where your children walk? I am not aware of such laws but they shoudl exist, otherwise other companies can start alpha testing with random fanboys.

jondwillis 5y ago
As one of the “rich Tesla fanboys” you describe, no, probably it should not be legal. That being said, it has made me re-realize that humans are really terrible drivers as well, myself included, just less terrible on average, currently.
- CultMember001 5y ago
- CultMember009 5y ago
- CultMember009 5y ago
  I respect your honesty and encourage you to try some remedial driving lessons to avoid being a “really terrible driver.” It can save your life and others also.
  - millzlane 5y ago
    All the remedial driving lessons in the world can't prevent you from making a mistake and killing someone.
    - travisporter 5y ago
      Yeah they can. If you practice defensive driving you are less likely to kill someone
    - jjav 5y ago
      If you mean prevent 100%, of course not since nothing is absolute. But driving skill training can most certainly greatly increase your skills and awareness and thus immensely reduce your risk of mistakes. Anyone who drives should take as many car control and accident avoidance clinics as they can and refresh up every few years (if not more). These should really be required by law but since they're not, you can increase your odds of living by being proactive about it. It's weird that this is somehow controversial for car driving. For e.g. airplane pilots there is a long and strict training and skill maintenance routine, because obviously this makes for safer pilots. You don't just get to read a booklet and go flying.
      - vba616 5y ago
        Pilots spend a lot of time on simulators, I believe. Seems like there would be economies of scale if the federal government created some really realistic simulators programmed with all the common accident situations and then everybody could be required to pass a test every four years or something. I imagine it would be so much more enjoyable and hopefully more effective than the defensive driving classes that exist now.
  - jondwillis 5y ago
    I'm a great driver on a relative basis. The average is just that terrible.
    - scotty79 5y ago
- lgvln 5y ago
  I’m curious how does a bad (terrible) “full self driving” car make you realise humans are “really terrible drivers”. I can see how some drivers can miscalculate and end up making a risky manoeuvre. It happens, intentionally or not, and most people can and are willing to react in a way that avoids an collision. A Tesla on the other hand is beyond bad or terrible. It is basically incompetent - driving into on-coming traffic, opposing lanes, deviating wildly from the lane, ignoring speed limits etc).
throwaway894345 5y ago
If it's safer on balance than average drivers (for some reasonable definition of "safer"), I think the answer is "yes". Do you want to expose your children to unnecessary risk? I don't posit that it is safer or that it should be legal, but we should frame the conversation in terms of actual safety metrics and not cherry-picked incidents. Of course, our media isn't equipped to facilitate these kinds of nuanced conversations, which is a bigger and broader problem. EDIT: Seems like my "data-driven decision making" advocacy really struck a nerve with the cherry-picked anecdotes and rhetoric crowd. :)
- simion314 5y ago
  But HOW do we know is safer? We should not assume is safer by default and I see many problems with Tesla fanboys numbers 1 the count for the times drivers intervene to prevent a crash are secret, or are not counted at a crash. 2 I don't want on my village/city some american car that is safer then the american driver that included 16 year old drunk teens and people that don't even have to pass exams and medical tests. The self driving car should be compared with healthy drivers , I don't care that some state/country is incapable of stopping speeding or drunk driving. 3 updating this cars should invalidate previous approvals, as a software developer I know well how updates include bugs not only features. Anyway I am against companies deciding from themselves how is a capable alphya testers and how they should run alpha tests. If we want real metrics then incidents liek the ones in the video should be counted against Tesla, is MALICIOUS to show a stats of average driver using an average car versus an expensive car with a combo of human+computer and assign the good to the computer and ignore the many times the human had to save the computer ass. Fuck shit statistics and shit companies and fanboys using them. At best you can prove the computer might be a decent copilot versus no copilot.
  - throwaway894345 5y ago
    > But HOW do we know is safer? We measure. This requires transparency on the part of Tesla, but if we frame it as "if you want legal FSD, you have to comply with transparency". We regulate like this in all other industries so there's no reason to think we can't do it here. > We should not assume is safer by default No one is advocating "assume it is safer by default". > I see many problems with Tesla fanboys numbers Right, but by framing it with metrics rather than cherry-picked incidents, we can have a national conversation about which metrics are most appropriate. If Tesla fanboys bring numbers that you take issue with, you can debate them. As an aside, it's hilarious that my earlier comment was being downvoted for advocating a debate based on data rather than cherry picked anecdotes, but I should know my audience better :) > the count for the times drivers intervene to prevent a crash are secret, or are not counted at a crash. See my transparency remarks above. > I don't want on my village/city some american car that is safer then the american driver that included 16 year old drunk teens and people that don't even have to pass exams and medical tests. Ignoring the obvious barbs at Americans, if we quantify the safety of any given FSD system, we can compare that against local safety and prohibit FSD systems which score worse than the local average such that FSD will only ever be a boon. > updating this cars should invalidate previous approvals, as a software developer I know well how updates include bugs not only features. Seems reasonable to me. > Anyway I am against companies deciding from themselves how is a capable alphya testers and how they should run alpha tests. In this case, I agree. > Fuck shit statistics and shit companies and fanboys using them. I love these kinds of constructive comments. Keep 'em coming.
npace12 5y ago
I drive a tesla with FSD in an urban area and based on what I've seen it do, I am 1000x more scared of some rich boy driving his new lambo around hitting a pedestrian than my Tesla while on FSD even with noone in it (if that were possible)
- pessimizer 5y ago
  You're right, we probably shouldn't make reckless driving legal either.
  - npace12 5y ago
    That's technically not the correct analogue to what I said
    - simion314 5y ago
      You should probably demand rich dudes get proportional fines, that would solve the problem partially. Probably same irresponsible teen is also alpha testing a Tesla while his watching Netflix on the dashboard so no win if you move him from a Lambo in an Tesla.
      - piaste 5y ago
        I would hope to whatever God is left on this accursed Earth that Tesla dashboards will refuse to play video while the car is in motion? Or that they have that mirror trick where the video is only viewable from the shotgun seat.
    - vba616 5y ago
      A Tesla vs. a Lamborghini is a peculiar comparison. What self-respecting Tesla fan would keep quiet how their Model S does 0-60 quicker? Seriously: 2021 Lamborghini Aventador: 2.8 seconds 2020 Tesla Model S Performance: 2.4 seconds (Car & Driver figures)
- jacquesm 5y ago
  Yes, but how does it compare to a normal responsible driver? Because that is the use case here, not the idiot with an exotic they can't handle.
yakz 5y ago
Why shouldn't it? Anyone can buy 500, 700, 1100hp, etc. RWD production cars and YouTube is covered in videos of people using them to cause destruction of property and injuries because they don't know what the car is going to do. These muscle cars, supercars, and hypercars require control inputs that are not necessarily intuitive and could be very surprising. At least Tesla is forcing people to go through a safety test first. These cars can be operated safely. If and when there is sufficient evidence that they can't, I expect things to change.
- simion314 5y ago
  You can't drive illegal for public road cars, so my point is why should a car that can randomly drive you into a child should be legal for public roads? Let's assume Elon and Tesla are perfect, you still need the law for less perfect CEOs and companies right? This less perfect ones might do bad things.
  - npace12 5y ago
    Can't any car with a drive-by-wire technically just randomly drive into a child? Yeah, the fact that more unpredictable software is involved definitely increases the risk, but where exactly would the line be?
    - simion314 5y ago
      The line would be here IMO, let me know why you think different Step 1: you get some independent persons from the government (Tesla or Google, etc pays for this so no need to cry taxes) Step 2: you drive the cars in the area where you want to approve it for testing/production , you record all mistakes and times the car ahd to intervene Step 3: drive all year around, all weather conditions, all traffic conditions Step 4: you analyze the data, see how many times you had to intervene and compute the damages that would have occurred. Get some real statisticins that could put bounds around the damages. Using the data from 4 you ask the population to vote what is the correct value they are comfortable with. What Tesla is doing now do not match because: 1 the tests are not transparent, we don't know or we can't trust Tesla for the number of mistakes the AI is doing 2 updates invalidate previous tests and stats 3 the computer will not drive in all conditions and is differing harder parts of the road to the human so this also is screwing the stats, if you let the AI to drive the easy part and the human the hard part then for sure the AI has a good record. Even if Tesla is perfect you need this laws for the imperfect companies that would move fast... so think about this as laws that will protect you from the evil Google car or some Chinese brand
rmbyrro 5y ago
Or selected paidboys
ASalazarMX 5y ago
Oh no, the children! 2025: Elon announces BabyX, in vitro baby factory, claims he's cloning any baby killed by a Tesla vehicle, for free.
- JaimeThompson 5y ago
  If you remove the last two words it reads much more like an elon tweet.
- simion314 5y ago
  >Oh no, the children! Yeah dude, not sure where you are from but there are special traffic rules related to children , like how to drive around schools, school buses and children, because children are doing stupid things and schools are marked with special signs so the driver knows to pay more attention in this area.
  - scotty79 5y ago
    Adults do plenty of stupid things too. Kids just have on average larger speeds and accelerations.
    - simion314 5y ago
      Sure, but I was a kid and I remember what stupid things I did, like driving a bike on a big hill , off road, Now I can't imagine me doing this, not even if you pay me a lot of money - so is clear that kids and teens will do a lot of stupid things because for some reason they are blind to some risk categories.
jjav 5y ago
> Should this be legal? It should not be legal, to do testing on public streets with unwilling participants. Tesla should be required to be able to enable this only in closed areas where access is limited to those participating in the testing.
mancerayder 5y ago
OK, but do you have a lot of faith in human drivers, a huge percentage of whom are talking on their phones with other people for work or play, some of which I've witnessed holding up the video with one hand so their faces can be seen? Forget FSD - whether it's Tesla or others, an automation in the car that stops when a living being is detected in front seems like an advance, while human drivers talking in a sales meeting while wearing wireless AirPods appear to be an increasing threat to pedestrians.

karaterobot 5y ago

Why would anybody ever use it then? If you have to monitor it and it does a bad job (in situations documented in that video), what is the value? I recognize that it does better in other situations, like open highways, but if you have to keep your hands on the wheel anyway, what is the benefit to the driver compared to older technology like assisted cruise control?

notreallyserio 5y ago
It's only for as long as the software is in beta testing (if we can really call it beta).
ajmurmann 5y ago
I wonder how this compares to more limited abilities like lane-keeping. I did a few 10hr drives between Oregon and California during the pandemic and the lane-keeping made this easier similarly to cruise control. I still has to watch it all the time, but it somehow made it more relaxed.
- amanaplanacanal 5y ago
  More relaxed might make for a happier driver, but I’m not sure it makes for a safer driver.

lamontcg 5y ago

It is amazing that they crowdsourced their QA department and got people to pay $12k for the privilege of doing the work.