4 ms·

> They've set an expectation that the car is capable of _assessing_ every situation when it's clearly not. How did they do that ? The materials that new Tesla

> They've set an expectation that the car is capable of _assessing_ every situation when it's clearly not. How did they do that ? The materials that new Tesla owners receive are specifying that the driver needs to pay attention in all circumstances. From the https://www.tesla.com/support/autopilot https://www.tesla.com/support/autopilot page: > Autopilot and Full Self-Driving Capability are intended for use with a fully attentive driver, who has their hands on the wheel and is prepared to take over at any moment. While these features are designed to become more capable over time, the currently enabled features do not make the vehicle autonomous.

jjulius 5y ago
>The materials that new Tesla owners receive are specifying that the driver needs to pay attention in all circumstances. Can you please provide an example of material that owners actually receive that states as much? It's safe to assume that we can't expect everyone to read a support page on a website, just like how it's safe to assume that most people don't read the owner's manual when they buy a new ICE vehicle. >How did they do that? It's in how they promote it publicly. It's in how Musk constantly says it's "a year away". It's in the fucking name - "autopilot" has certain connotations within society writ large that Tesla can't just handwave away with legalese.
- mariusor 5y ago
  You are right, I can't give you an example as I don't own a Tesla. Yet I find it hard to believe that when someone is purchasing 45K+ of hardware and 10K+ of beta software they can't be arsed to read the support page for any of it. I hope that people that pay these sums are responsible adults that don't go out there putting everyone in danger because "autopilot" is right there in the name, and of course it's a totally different thing than when the word is used for airplanes.
- llampx 5y ago
  The irony is that to anyone who takes 2 minutes to read a wikipedia article, Autopilot is like cruise control or cruise control + lane assist. It is not "full self-flying" at all. However, too many people believe that a Tesla is years ahead of the rest of the pack when it comes to "full self-driving." That's marketing for ya.
- mariusor 5y ago
  I found the example in the end, but I bet you'll think it's also part of those documents that you can't expect anyone to read. The subscription agreement[1] when buying a subscription to Tesla's FSM contains the following in the "Responsibility" section (sixth paragraph): > Active Supervision; Responsibility. Full Self-Driving capability features require active driver supervision and do not make the vehicle autonomous.[...] [1] https://www.tesla.com/legal/additional-resources#full-self-driving-capability-subscription-agreement https://www.tesla.com/legal/additional-resources#full-self-d...
lotsofpulp 5y ago
> How did they do that ? By going out of their way to call something FULL self driving that is, by their own admission in your quoted text, not full self driving.
- mariusor 5y ago
  You are right of course, but a lot of things in this world are named for the things that they will become, not the things that they are. If I was a Tesla client I would make sure what they mean by it before I took a nap in the driver's seat.
  - llampx 5y ago
    You can't call a skateboard a car because it may become one.
    - mariusor 5y ago
      Can we agree that the name of FSD was selected before it actually was capable of anything? And if that's the case how should they have named it: "someday it might be full self driving"? I totally understand your point, and I also agree with it, but I also can understand the point of view of someone as ambitious and driven as Musk that saw an idea, and then committed to it by choosing a name that reflects what they intend it to become, not what it's capable of doing at the moment. You can see this very pattern if you watch Shawn Murray's first interviews about No Man's Sky. He shows the game as being capable of doing all these wonderful things that were proven to be bullshit when it was first released, yet over the years the game was built almost into the state that he first wanted it as. Was that an intentional way of cheating people, or was it just an ambitious person telling you about what they see at the end of road for their project? In my opinion it's the later, but people that bought into the hype at launch day, I bet they felt pretty angry. So my advice (and apologies if it sounds patronizing), if anyone is in the market for buying a product which sounds too good to be true, maybe research the fine print and the owner's manual before putting your life and others' in danger by trusting the marketing team's selection of a name.
SkyPuncher 5y ago
For many things, Owners manuals tell users not do to certain things while clearly designing a product to be capable of doing such things. Actions speak louder than words. * Tesla has had multiple events highlight the "full self-driving capabilities". * Their marketing indicates "full" self-driving while tucking the nuance away (for the owners manual). * Their UI is specifically designed to highlight all of the things a Tesla is identifying. From what I've seen, it really doesn't indicate what a Tesla is confused by. * Their driver engagement check systems clearly allow drives to be distracted and not paying attention. * They've had multiple situations where accidents with stationary objects have occurred. This indicates a pattern of drivers believing these vehicles are more capable than they are.

jjulius 5y ago

>The materials that new Tesla owners receive are specifying that the driver needs to pay attention in all circumstances. Can you please provide an example of material that owners actually receive that states as much? It's safe to assume that we can't expect everyone to read a support page on a website, just like how it's safe to assume that most people don't read the owner's manual when they buy a new ICE vehicle. >How did they do that? It's in how they promote it publicly. It's in how Musk constantly says it's "a year away". It's in the fucking name - "autopilot" has certain connotations within society writ large that Tesla can't just handwave away with legalese.

mariusor 5y ago
You are right, I can't give you an example as I don't own a Tesla. Yet I find it hard to believe that when someone is purchasing 45K+ of hardware and 10K+ of beta software they can't be arsed to read the support page for any of it. I hope that people that pay these sums are responsible adults that don't go out there putting everyone in danger because "autopilot" is right there in the name, and of course it's a totally different thing than when the word is used for airplanes.
llampx 5y ago
The irony is that to anyone who takes 2 minutes to read a wikipedia article, Autopilot is like cruise control or cruise control + lane assist. It is not "full self-flying" at all. However, too many people believe that a Tesla is years ahead of the rest of the pack when it comes to "full self-driving." That's marketing for ya.
mariusor 5y ago
I found the example in the end, but I bet you'll think it's also part of those documents that you can't expect anyone to read. The subscription agreement[1] when buying a subscription to Tesla's FSM contains the following in the "Responsibility" section (sixth paragraph): > Active Supervision; Responsibility. Full Self-Driving capability features require active driver supervision and do not make the vehicle autonomous.[...] [1] https://www.tesla.com/legal/additional-resources#full-self-driving-capability-subscription-agreement https://www.tesla.com/legal/additional-resources#full-self-d...

lotsofpulp 5y ago

> How did they do that ? By going out of their way to call something FULL self driving that is, by their own admission in your quoted text, not full self driving.

mariusor 5y ago
You are right of course, but a lot of things in this world are named for the things that they will become, not the things that they are. If I was a Tesla client I would make sure what they mean by it before I took a nap in the driver's seat.
- llampx 5y ago
  You can't call a skateboard a car because it may become one.
  - mariusor 5y ago
    Can we agree that the name of FSD was selected before it actually was capable of anything? And if that's the case how should they have named it: "someday it might be full self driving"? I totally understand your point, and I also agree with it, but I also can understand the point of view of someone as ambitious and driven as Musk that saw an idea, and then committed to it by choosing a name that reflects what they intend it to become, not what it's capable of doing at the moment. You can see this very pattern if you watch Shawn Murray's first interviews about No Man's Sky. He shows the game as being capable of doing all these wonderful things that were proven to be bullshit when it was first released, yet over the years the game was built almost into the state that he first wanted it as. Was that an intentional way of cheating people, or was it just an ambitious person telling you about what they see at the end of road for their project? In my opinion it's the later, but people that bought into the hype at launch day, I bet they felt pretty angry. So my advice (and apologies if it sounds patronizing), if anyone is in the market for buying a product which sounds too good to be true, maybe research the fine print and the owner's manual before putting your life and others' in danger by trusting the marketing team's selection of a name.

SkyPuncher 5y ago

For many things, Owners manuals tell users not do to certain things while clearly designing a product to be capable of doing such things. Actions speak louder than words. * Tesla has had multiple events highlight the "full self-driving capabilities". * Their marketing indicates "full" self-driving while tucking the nuance away (for the owners manual). * Their UI is specifically designed to highlight all of the things a Tesla is identifying. From what I've seen, it really doesn't indicate what a Tesla is confused by. * Their driver engagement check systems clearly allow drives to be distracted and not paying attention. * They've had multiple situations where accidents with stationary objects have occurred. This indicates a pattern of drivers believing these vehicles are more capable than they are.