14 ms·

I think one of Tesla's biggest problems with any of their autonomous systems is the names they give those systems. They confuse regulators, reporters, and consu

I think one of Tesla's biggest problems with any of their autonomous systems is the names they give those systems. They confuse regulators, reporters, and consumers. Most reporters seem to confuse "autopilot" with "full self driving" or vice versa. It's not uncommon to see sentences like "Autopilot, a feature that costs $10k, is still in beta." Autopilot is cruise control that keeps you within a lane when it can. That's it. Other cars have it, and they're equally effective or ineffective. Full self driving, aside from being terrifying, does it all, and I suspect it's usually what regulators and reporters mean when they say "Autopilot." I think if Tesla had used "lane aware cruise control" as the name for "Autopilot", it'd have helped reduce the number of times people confuse the two. Frankly, as an owner of a Tesla that has both features, I wouldn't mind at all if both were pulled from the software. FSD is absolutely terrifying. I'd rather let my teenage son drive me than have FSD do it. Autopilot feels like a novelty. Given how frequently the car yells at you when you're not holding the wheel, it's hardly better than simple cruise control.

lenkite 4y ago
They need to rename Autopilot to Deadpilot now. More accurate.
- mbushey 4y ago
  Or Livepilot as my Model Y saved my wife's life.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
wpietri 4y ago
I agree with what you say, but part of the reason Tesla is even around to have these problems is Musk's dubious talents as a relentless hype man. Musk himself says they were at the brink of bankruptcy at least twice: https://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-tesla-bankruptcy-model-3-electric-vehicle-ev-production-2020-11 https://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-tesla-bankruptcy-m... Personally, I think if we had better laws Musk would be looking at charges of criminal negligence for encouraging people to think they have things like actual "autopilot" and "full self driving". But as it is, he lied his way to the top of the world's richest list. So Tesla's problems here are just the consequences of his actions.
- javajosh 4y ago
  He strikes me more as a physicist arguing from first principles. Once you have drive-by-wire and a sensor array, self-driving is a pure software problem. You should be able to get 99% of the way there in simulation with a team of 4 really smart coders and an endless supply of Redbull and a year, tops. Also, the world's energy problems are trivial when you consider how cheap and efficient solar power is, and how little surface area is required. Clean water is just a matter of filtration at best or desalination at worst, which just devolves into an energy problem. And so on. I do it myself sometimes, but at least I recognize how annoying and inaccurate it is. It is kind of nice to have someone arguing these positions and even better to act on them, and I for one wish that these analyses held (the world would be a better place if they did). But the real world just doesn't care about your first principles, and even simple ideas present obstacles you never imagined. Musk knows this, but willfully leaves it out during his pep talks, which is dishonest. But sometimes I get the uncomfortable feeling he's deceiving himself, which is quite chilling considering the amount of real power he's amassed (being able to launch large things into space is about as real as real power gets.)
  - jsjohnst 4y ago
    > You should be able to get 99% of the way there in simulation with a team of 4 really smart coders and an endless supply of Redbull and a year, tops. I can say this about a lot of things, but man, it scares me that there’s people in the world who are crazy enough to think that’s true. Even Elon Musk isn’t that delusional.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - onion2k 4y ago
xvector 4y ago
Tesla fans will say "Autopilot in planes isn't much more than glorified cruise control," but they miss the point. What matters is what people think when they hear "autopilot," and Tesla AP or even NoA is nowhere close to that perception.
- l33t2328 4y ago
  Autopilot can land and take off, so it _is_ more than glorified cruise control.
  - labcomputer 4y ago
    sigh No. It can't. There are no aircraft autopilots which are permitted to be used for takeoff. None. Zero. Nada. Full stop. There are no aircraft autopilots which can be used for a fully hands-off landing. Doing that would require a "Category IIIc" certified autopilot and IIIc precision approach. The FAA recently (a few months ago) removed the definition of IIIc. Why? Because, 30 years after being defined, there are ZERO autopilots certified to do that and ZERO IIIc approaches for them to use. Among those autopilots with a low decision height (when the pilot takes over), all require a so-called "precision approach". That, in turn, requires a specialized radio beacon at the end of the runway (GPS is not sufficient). Additionally, there is exactly one type of airplane in the world, no longer in production, (the Airbus A380) that can automatically take evasive action if it detects another airplane on a collision course. It's well beyond time to admit that, whatever you feel about Tesla, their "autopilot" is no less sophisticated than an aircraft autopilot.
    - figers 4y ago
      Auto land exists https://www.planeandpilotmag.com/article/garmin-autoland-this-changes-everything/ https://www.planeandpilotmag.com/article/garmin-autoland-thi... I would think auto take off would be easier to automate
      - robonerd 4y ago
        In 1947 the Air Force supposedly flew a Douglas C-54 across the Atlantic Ocean fully under autopilot, including landing and takeoff. https://www.nytimes.com/1947/09/23/archives/robotpiloted-plane-makes-safe-crossing-of-atlantic-no-hand-on.html https://www.nytimes.com/1947/09/23/archives/robotpiloted-pla... Partial article text: https://www.rarenewspapers.com/view/623884 https://www.rarenewspapers.com/view/623884
heavyset_go 4y ago
It doesn't help that Tesla's own marketing confuses the two features. For example, their marketing material for Autopilot sure sounds like it's describing a feature called "Full Self-Driving"[1]: > The person in the driver’s seat is only there for legal reasons. He is not doing anything. The car is driving itself. That very same embedded video from Tesla has the title "Autopilot Full Self-Driving Hardware"[2], as well, further confusing the two. [1] https://www.tesla.com/videos/autopilot-self-driving-hardware-neighborhood-long https://www.tesla.com/videos/autopilot-self-driving-hardware... [2] https://vimeo.com/192179727?embedded=true&source=vimeo_logo&owner=128712855 https://vimeo.com/192179727?embedded=true&source=vimeo_logo&...
- arka2147483647 4y ago
  To me it seems that Teslas goal was to get to ”full self driving” by now. If Musks moonshot had been successfull, we would not be having this discussion now. But it was not, and now Tesla is in trouble because they can’t deliver what people think they were promised.
  - tsimionescu 4y ago
    > they can’t deliver what people think they were promised. [emphasis mine] Tesla isn't delivering what people not only were promised, but were actually sold for real money. Musk very explicitly claimed in consumer shows that FSD would allow your Tesla not just to safely drive you around, but allow you to use it as a robotaxi, making money for you while you're at your own job.
    - chihuahua 4y ago
      What a great idea. When I buy a $70,000 car, I would like to use it as a robotaxi so that random people can use it as a bathroom or a diaper changing station, and test the sharpness of their EDC knives on the seats. Perhaps Elon can add some AI feature that detects vandalism and responds with a bleating noise. I would find this very rewarding and lucrative.
Closi 4y ago
Tesla use Autopilot to refer to FSD too, for instance take the below statement from the Tesla website: > Many of our Autopilot features, like Autosteer, Navigate on Autopilot and Summon, are disabled by default. So I don’t think it’s fair to say that Autopilot just refers to cruise control - that’s certainly not how Tesla use the word.
- jsjohnst 4y ago
  Tesla “Autopilot” is otherwise known as the combination of “lane keeping assistance” and “adaptive cruise control” for virtually every other manufacturer. Sure, Tesla’s version is better than many of their competitors, but it still doesn’t make the marketing Tesla insists on doing any less misleading.
  - notatoad 4y ago
    real autopilot on an airplane is just keeping it in a straight line and constant speed - much less advanced than tesla's autopilot features. autopilot is notoriously stupid, that's why "operating on autopilot" is a metaphor for the mindset that causes careless mistakes. as a name, it's a pretty good descriptor for what the system actually does. the misleading part is all the other marketing telsa does around it, and the muddying of the line between autopilot and full self-driving.
    - beckingz 4y ago
      Modern autopilots can autoland a plane. The systems have enough limitations that they are usually not used except in extreme low visibility situations.
    - mulmen 4y ago
      > real autopilot on an airplane is just keeping it in a straight line and constant speed - much less advanced than tesla's autopilot features The fact you think this is exactly why Tesla’s naming choice is so dangerous. Even antiquated general aviation autopilots can intercept headings and change elevation. This is capability that has existed for decades. GA planes are getting the capability to land now. Airliners have been able to land themselves for decades.
tejohnso 4y ago
> Given how frequently the car yells at you when you're not holding the wheel, it's hardly better than simple cruise control. I tried that in a Hyundai Sonata traveling at highway speeds. The car stayed in the lane, turning the wheel on its own as it was supposed to. My hands were off the wheel, but at no point did I feel comfortable enough to look elsewhere, or move my hands further than a couple of inches away from the wheel. It's completely pointless to me, and actually worse than that, it gives me one more thing to worry about. I suppose if all of the vehicles were 100% autonomous, and the entire highway infrastructure was set up with that expectation, I could go ahead and fully relax while the car drives itself completely. But this 10% automation is like an uncanny valley. Well, valley of terror is more like it. Cruise control on the other hand seems fine, because my foot is basically in the same position with or without it. The automation just saves me from having to modulate the thing with my foot, and it's not making changes that have very fast, significant consequences.
- pooper 4y ago
  > Cruise control on the other hand seems fine, because my foot is basically in the same position with or without it. The automation just saves me from having to modulate the thing with my foot, and it's not making changes that have very fast, significant consequences. Maybe I am just living in the past with my 2007 Toyota Camry but cars have come a long way in just fifteen years. Just look at adaptive cruise control or lane assist. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=smf1uop7HoY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=smf1uop7HoY Maybe I am just in awe because I don't own a new car and don't feel the pain of things like replacing a broken windshield (holy smokes these new things are expensive to calibrate) but it is nice when these things work. However, when I drive someone else's new car I can totally see myself going fora new car if I could somehow justify it financially.
  - sircastor 4y ago
    >because I don't own a new car and don't feel the pain of things like replacing a broken windshield I’m having my Land Rovers windshield (with heated filaments and collision avoidance) replaced in a week. It’s a $50 deductible and they said a $50 calibration charge, but that wasn’t on the final bill. Given that these windshields are $500-$1500, I’m pretty happy with the cost.
api 4y ago
I have a Nissan Leaf with lane following and adaptive cruise. It’s nice on road trips but it’s not something you can set and ignore. It’s just better cruise control that lets you relax a bit more. If FSD is anything like the many videos I’ve seen I don’t want it and don’t think it’s ready for general use. FSD seems like one of those problems where getting 80% of the way there takes 20% of the effort and getting the remaining 20% takes 80% of the effort. There is a truly massive chasm between adaptive cruise with lane following and FSD.
- sircastor 4y ago
  I drove a rented Nissan Murano and I found the lane keeping and adaptive cruise control to be excellent. If the auto supply was in better shape, I’d have seriously considered buying one.
  - numpad0 4y ago
    It’s such an irony that Nissan features are almost entirely development in spite of Tesla, but they’re far better at actually sciencing it and shipping it to be delivered today.
    - smokelegend 4y ago
      Sciencing? Is that like engineering or designing? Just curious as to word choice here, does engineering not include the design of technology?
      - numpad0 4y ago
        It's of course not a real word, but my mental definition I was thinking was problem discovery/definition is science and clarifying/solving is engineering. Nissan is shipping NoA and demoing dynamic obstacle avoidance, latter of which I thought is towards discovery.
stefan_ 4y ago
No one is confusing anything. It's obvious that they intend these things to do much more than they are currently capable of. Why are you making excuses for a company that some 8 years in has only ever doubled down on the naming and the connotations? If anyone is confused, it's intentional.
- buffington 4y ago
  > No one is confusing anything. > If anyone is confused, it's intentional. I guess you're right. I've never read a more confusing comment on HN.
elif 4y ago
If your Tesla is "yelling at you when you're not holding the wheel" "frequently" you are admittedly misusing the level 2 assist. Contrarily, I use autopilot responsibly and appreciate that statistically it is reducing my odds of death. As such I WOULD mind that a political decision like buttieg's appointment, is being made to endanger me.
- elif 4y ago
  Im downvoted for using level 2 with my hands? Or for recognizing its safety value? Or for agreeing with the authors assesment of buttieg's appointment?
- Gordonjcp 4y ago
  > I use autopilot responsibly and appreciate that statistically it is reducing my odds of death I don't think it really does, does it? I thought that "Autopilot" basically only worked on highways in fairly unsurprising conditions?
  - elif 4y ago
    Autopilot crash statistics for last quarter were one crash per 4.97M miles driven. National average crash statistics for that quarter were one crash per 484K miles driven. Even if you consider that accidents are 3x less likely to occur on highways and boost that to 1.5M, that is still a multi-times safety factor. A lot of accidents on highways occur because of aggressive or negligent driving. It's really not hard to beat humans so this shouldn't be a shocking find. I'm not sure what you mean by "in unsurprising conditions" I turn on autopilot on the entry ramp, and disable it on the exit ramp. I would instead characterize that as "all highway conditions"
    - Gordonjcp 4y ago
      Okay, but that 3x should be 3000x, because people don't get in crashes in the conditions in which "Autopilot" actually works. It's easy to avoid crashes if you're travelling on a perfectly straight road at the same speed as everyone around you with no changes in speed or lane, which is all that Autopilot does.
pmorici 4y ago
“Autopilot feels like a novelty” No way are you for real? Autopilot is incredible, for me it substantially reduces fatigue on long highway drives and decreases my stress when commuting in stop and go traffic. The difference between autopilot and simple cruise control is substantial. I wouldn’t buy a car that didn’t have Autopilot at this point.
- buffington 4y ago
  You couldn't pay me to use it in stop and go traffic. My stress would be through the roof. I was using Autopilot once on one of the straightest stretches of highway in America (I-80 as it passes through Bonneville Salt Flats in Utah). With no cars on the road, and perfectly clear conditions, Autopilot decided that the lane I was in was ending (it wasn't) and began merging on to the shoulder. I've never used Autopilot without it doing something clearly stupid. That is not a recipe for "stress free." Are you sure we're talking about the same thing here?
  - MikeTheRocker 4y ago
    This does not reflect my experience with autopilot. I've found it to be incredibly reliable and convenient.
  - pmorici 4y ago
    Autopilot doesn’t merge or change lanes on it’s own. That only happens with “Navigate on autopilot” which is a FSD feature not part of basic autopilot.
    - deelowe 4y ago
      Jfc people make a ton of excuses for Tesla. This doesn’t invalidate what they were saying in any way. If lane changes are this buggy, why should they trust the auto braking?
      - pmorici 4y ago
        Because one is fully baked, the other is explicitly billed as under development not yet complete Beta software. Also there are a lot of people that just make up lies about Tesla people deserve to hear the truth.
hamburglar 4y ago
I recently drove a BMW 750i with lane-following on a long trip and then he lane-following feature was terrifying. It seemed like it was doing the most brain dead line-following algorithm that made it “bounce” back and forth between the left and right sides of the lane. I couldn’t stop worrying that it was freaking out the other cars around me by careening towards them and yanking back in the other direction at the last moment. I sure hope Tesla autopilot is better than that.
- reedt 4y ago
  VW/Audi lane assist also "bounces" you off the side of the lane, but it doesn't send you so far to the other side that you bounce back. Overall the combination of lane assist + adaptive cruise does an okay approximation of FSD on highways.
- chipotle_coyote 4y ago
  It feels like different systems are better and worse at that. On my 2019 Honda Insight, it's actually pretty smooth and does a good job of staying in the center of the lane, but it won't turn the wheel too much -- if you're taking all but the gentlest curves, you're going to be turning the wheel. On my mom's 2018 Subaru Outback, it's exactly what you're describing -- it's fine in a straight line, but it doesn't really seem to judge the curve of the lanes as much as simulate a pinball. (I don't think I ever tried to let it take a turn on its own!) I've only ridden in Teslas, not driven one, but it seems like it's probably got the best following/lane-keep system on the market, although the last time I rode in one -- admittedly about two years ago -- it was markedly jankier when the driver engaged more "self-driving" features, e.g., have it change lanes, take exits based on its own GPS guidance, etc. It was impressive that it could do it, to be sure, but it was the self-driving version of your reckless friend in high school you do your best never to ride with.
- tommiegannert 4y ago
  My Mercedes E-class has a setting where you can change between strict och relaxed (whatever the names were.) In strict, it very closely keeps in the middle of the lane. That's not how I normally drives, so it feels scary. I usually bias away from oncoming traffic. It's probably fine on a wide highway, so this is more about me not feeling in control. However, in relaxed mode, it seems to have the issue you're describing where there's too much slack, and it looks like it's playing pong between the lane dividers. Have the exact same worry about what this looks like to others...
a_square_peg 4y ago
Software in general has a naming problem - they all tend to be aspirational metaphors. From 'AI', 'ML', 'Cryptocurrency', 'Agile process' to 'self-driving', the confusion they create is really frustrating and harmful at times.
- frumper 4y ago
  A Big Mac isn’t a big burger. I’m sure many shoe names don’t reflect well on the increased abilities they sound like. Naming is a big part of marketing hype. It always has been, it’s not just software.
  - tr1ll10nb1ll 4y ago
    Indeed. However, Big Mac does not cost you $10,000. In contrast, something like Comma.ai is open-source and even the complete kit that's compatible with almost any car is like $2k and they don't claim to be "Full Self Driving", by any means. Funny enough, they perform with just a kit that goes where your rear mirror is almost as good as FSD beta that Tesla has.
brandonagr2 4y ago
> Given how frequently the car yells at you when you're not holding the wheel What? You claim to own a Tesla but don't know that you must keep your hand on the wheel at all times?
- buffington 4y ago
  The car will yell at you even when your hand is on the wheel. If it doesn't feel resistance, it assumes you're not paying attention.
WheatM 4y ago
martin_a 4y ago
> Autopilot is cruise control that keeps you within a lane when it can. That's it. Other cars have it, and they're equally effective or ineffective. But "Autopilot" obviously sounds cooler. So you can pay 10k and feel good, while that feature costs 1.300 Euro in my Hyundai (where it also comes with heated seats and steering wheel in the package). The more I read and see from Tesla, the more it look likes some kind of A/B test on how much money people are willing to spend on a beta software/car-test.
- buffington 4y ago
  Tesla's Autopilot feature is standard. The thing that costs $10k is Full Self Driving. Which is an example of what I mean when I say "Tesla's biggest problems with any of their autonomous systems is the names they give those systems. They confuse regulators, reporters, and consumers."
  - martin_a 4y ago
    But isn't FSD at this moment just that lane holding assistant? Anyway... Confusion at its best. :-D
    - buffington 4y ago
      Nope. FSD is the nightmare inducing beta software that does a pretty good job of actually driving for you. This includes stopping at stop signs, making turns, changing lanes. It also sometimes does very dangerous and stupid things, like stopping as it makes a left hand turn, then deciding to start driving against the flow of traffic as a group of cars heads your way. AKA, nightmare inducing.
wfhordie 4y ago
It’s confusing until you use it, then it’s capabilities and limitations become clear. So I don’t see this as a reason to pull it.
- buffington 4y ago
  I think the number of comments in this thread where people confuse Autopilot with FSD is reason enough to at least rebrand the names of the two distinctly different features.
andsoitis 4y ago
I won't dispute that the branding is hyperbolic (isn't all/most branding?). Do you think Tesla's support page describing Autopilot and Autopilot with Full Self Driving is clear enough? https://www.tesla.com/support/autopilot https://www.tesla.com/support/autopilot For instance, there's this paragraph: "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."
- lolinder 4y ago
  The problem is that this technical writing runs counter to all the flashy marketing, and the flashy marketing sticks in people's minds more thoroughly.

lenkite 4y ago

They need to rename Autopilot to Deadpilot now. More accurate.

mbushey 4y ago
Or Livepilot as my Model Y saved my wife's life.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

wpietri 4y ago

I agree with what you say, but part of the reason Tesla is even around to have these problems is Musk's dubious talents as a relentless hype man. Musk himself says they were at the brink of bankruptcy at least twice: https://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-tesla-bankruptcy-model-3-electric-vehicle-ev-production-2020-11 https://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-tesla-bankruptcy-m... Personally, I think if we had better laws Musk would be looking at charges of criminal negligence for encouraging people to think they have things like actual "autopilot" and "full self driving". But as it is, he lied his way to the top of the world's richest list. So Tesla's problems here are just the consequences of his actions.

javajosh 4y ago
He strikes me more as a physicist arguing from first principles. Once you have drive-by-wire and a sensor array, self-driving is a pure software problem. You should be able to get 99% of the way there in simulation with a team of 4 really smart coders and an endless supply of Redbull and a year, tops. Also, the world's energy problems are trivial when you consider how cheap and efficient solar power is, and how little surface area is required. Clean water is just a matter of filtration at best or desalination at worst, which just devolves into an energy problem. And so on. I do it myself sometimes, but at least I recognize how annoying and inaccurate it is. It is kind of nice to have someone arguing these positions and even better to act on them, and I for one wish that these analyses held (the world would be a better place if they did). But the real world just doesn't care about your first principles, and even simple ideas present obstacles you never imagined. Musk knows this, but willfully leaves it out during his pep talks, which is dishonest. But sometimes I get the uncomfortable feeling he's deceiving himself, which is quite chilling considering the amount of real power he's amassed (being able to launch large things into space is about as real as real power gets.)
- jsjohnst 4y ago
  > You should be able to get 99% of the way there in simulation with a team of 4 really smart coders and an endless supply of Redbull and a year, tops. I can say this about a lot of things, but man, it scares me that there’s people in the world who are crazy enough to think that’s true. Even Elon Musk isn’t that delusional.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- onion2k 4y ago

xvector 4y ago

Tesla fans will say "Autopilot in planes isn't much more than glorified cruise control," but they miss the point. What matters is what people think when they hear "autopilot," and Tesla AP or even NoA is nowhere close to that perception.

l33t2328 4y ago
Autopilot can land and take off, so it _is_ more than glorified cruise control.
- labcomputer 4y ago
  sigh No. It can't. There are no aircraft autopilots which are permitted to be used for takeoff. None. Zero. Nada. Full stop. There are no aircraft autopilots which can be used for a fully hands-off landing. Doing that would require a "Category IIIc" certified autopilot and IIIc precision approach. The FAA recently (a few months ago) removed the definition of IIIc. Why? Because, 30 years after being defined, there are ZERO autopilots certified to do that and ZERO IIIc approaches for them to use. Among those autopilots with a low decision height (when the pilot takes over), all require a so-called "precision approach". That, in turn, requires a specialized radio beacon at the end of the runway (GPS is not sufficient). Additionally, there is exactly one type of airplane in the world, no longer in production, (the Airbus A380) that can automatically take evasive action if it detects another airplane on a collision course. It's well beyond time to admit that, whatever you feel about Tesla, their "autopilot" is no less sophisticated than an aircraft autopilot.
  - figers 4y ago
    Auto land exists https://www.planeandpilotmag.com/article/garmin-autoland-this-changes-everything/ https://www.planeandpilotmag.com/article/garmin-autoland-thi... I would think auto take off would be easier to automate
    - robonerd 4y ago
      In 1947 the Air Force supposedly flew a Douglas C-54 across the Atlantic Ocean fully under autopilot, including landing and takeoff. https://www.nytimes.com/1947/09/23/archives/robotpiloted-plane-makes-safe-crossing-of-atlantic-no-hand-on.html https://www.nytimes.com/1947/09/23/archives/robotpiloted-pla... Partial article text: https://www.rarenewspapers.com/view/623884 https://www.rarenewspapers.com/view/623884

heavyset_go 4y ago

It doesn't help that Tesla's own marketing confuses the two features. For example, their marketing material for Autopilot sure sounds like it's describing a feature called "Full Self-Driving"[1]: > The person in the driver’s seat is only there for legal reasons. He is not doing anything. The car is driving itself. That very same embedded video from Tesla has the title "Autopilot Full Self-Driving Hardware"[2], as well, further confusing the two. [1] https://www.tesla.com/videos/autopilot-self-driving-hardware-neighborhood-long https://www.tesla.com/videos/autopilot-self-driving-hardware... [2] https://vimeo.com/192179727?embedded=true&source=vimeo_logo&owner=128712855 https://vimeo.com/192179727?embedded=true&source=vimeo_logo&...

arka2147483647 4y ago
To me it seems that Teslas goal was to get to ”full self driving” by now. If Musks moonshot had been successfull, we would not be having this discussion now. But it was not, and now Tesla is in trouble because they can’t deliver what people think they were promised.
- tsimionescu 4y ago
  > they can’t deliver what people think they were promised. [emphasis mine] Tesla isn't delivering what people not only were promised, but were actually sold for real money. Musk very explicitly claimed in consumer shows that FSD would allow your Tesla not just to safely drive you around, but allow you to use it as a robotaxi, making money for you while you're at your own job.
  - chihuahua 4y ago
    What a great idea. When I buy a $70,000 car, I would like to use it as a robotaxi so that random people can use it as a bathroom or a diaper changing station, and test the sharpness of their EDC knives on the seats. Perhaps Elon can add some AI feature that detects vandalism and responds with a bleating noise. I would find this very rewarding and lucrative.

Closi 4y ago

Tesla use Autopilot to refer to FSD too, for instance take the below statement from the Tesla website: > Many of our Autopilot features, like Autosteer, Navigate on Autopilot and Summon, are disabled by default. So I don’t think it’s fair to say that Autopilot just refers to cruise control - that’s certainly not how Tesla use the word.

jsjohnst 4y ago
Tesla “Autopilot” is otherwise known as the combination of “lane keeping assistance” and “adaptive cruise control” for virtually every other manufacturer. Sure, Tesla’s version is better than many of their competitors, but it still doesn’t make the marketing Tesla insists on doing any less misleading.
- notatoad 4y ago
  real autopilot on an airplane is just keeping it in a straight line and constant speed - much less advanced than tesla's autopilot features. autopilot is notoriously stupid, that's why "operating on autopilot" is a metaphor for the mindset that causes careless mistakes. as a name, it's a pretty good descriptor for what the system actually does. the misleading part is all the other marketing telsa does around it, and the muddying of the line between autopilot and full self-driving.
  - beckingz 4y ago
    Modern autopilots can autoland a plane. The systems have enough limitations that they are usually not used except in extreme low visibility situations.
  - mulmen 4y ago
    > real autopilot on an airplane is just keeping it in a straight line and constant speed - much less advanced than tesla's autopilot features The fact you think this is exactly why Tesla’s naming choice is so dangerous. Even antiquated general aviation autopilots can intercept headings and change elevation. This is capability that has existed for decades. GA planes are getting the capability to land now. Airliners have been able to land themselves for decades.

tejohnso 4y ago

> Given how frequently the car yells at you when you're not holding the wheel, it's hardly better than simple cruise control. I tried that in a Hyundai Sonata traveling at highway speeds. The car stayed in the lane, turning the wheel on its own as it was supposed to. My hands were off the wheel, but at no point did I feel comfortable enough to look elsewhere, or move my hands further than a couple of inches away from the wheel. It's completely pointless to me, and actually worse than that, it gives me one more thing to worry about. I suppose if all of the vehicles were 100% autonomous, and the entire highway infrastructure was set up with that expectation, I could go ahead and fully relax while the car drives itself completely. But this 10% automation is like an uncanny valley. Well, valley of terror is more like it. Cruise control on the other hand seems fine, because my foot is basically in the same position with or without it. The automation just saves me from having to modulate the thing with my foot, and it's not making changes that have very fast, significant consequences.

pooper 4y ago
> Cruise control on the other hand seems fine, because my foot is basically in the same position with or without it. The automation just saves me from having to modulate the thing with my foot, and it's not making changes that have very fast, significant consequences. Maybe I am just living in the past with my 2007 Toyota Camry but cars have come a long way in just fifteen years. Just look at adaptive cruise control or lane assist. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=smf1uop7HoY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=smf1uop7HoY Maybe I am just in awe because I don't own a new car and don't feel the pain of things like replacing a broken windshield (holy smokes these new things are expensive to calibrate) but it is nice when these things work. However, when I drive someone else's new car I can totally see myself going fora new car if I could somehow justify it financially.
- sircastor 4y ago
  >because I don't own a new car and don't feel the pain of things like replacing a broken windshield I’m having my Land Rovers windshield (with heated filaments and collision avoidance) replaced in a week. It’s a $50 deductible and they said a $50 calibration charge, but that wasn’t on the final bill. Given that these windshields are $500-$1500, I’m pretty happy with the cost.

api 4y ago

I have a Nissan Leaf with lane following and adaptive cruise. It’s nice on road trips but it’s not something you can set and ignore. It’s just better cruise control that lets you relax a bit more. If FSD is anything like the many videos I’ve seen I don’t want it and don’t think it’s ready for general use. FSD seems like one of those problems where getting 80% of the way there takes 20% of the effort and getting the remaining 20% takes 80% of the effort. There is a truly massive chasm between adaptive cruise with lane following and FSD.

sircastor 4y ago
I drove a rented Nissan Murano and I found the lane keeping and adaptive cruise control to be excellent. If the auto supply was in better shape, I’d have seriously considered buying one.
- numpad0 4y ago
  It’s such an irony that Nissan features are almost entirely development in spite of Tesla, but they’re far better at actually sciencing it and shipping it to be delivered today.
  - smokelegend 4y ago
    Sciencing? Is that like engineering or designing? Just curious as to word choice here, does engineering not include the design of technology?
    - numpad0 4y ago
      It's of course not a real word, but my mental definition I was thinking was problem discovery/definition is science and clarifying/solving is engineering. Nissan is shipping NoA and demoing dynamic obstacle avoidance, latter of which I thought is towards discovery.

stefan_ 4y ago

No one is confusing anything. It's obvious that they intend these things to do much more than they are currently capable of. Why are you making excuses for a company that some 8 years in has only ever doubled down on the naming and the connotations? If anyone is confused, it's intentional.

buffington 4y ago
> No one is confusing anything. > If anyone is confused, it's intentional. I guess you're right. I've never read a more confusing comment on HN.

elif 4y ago

If your Tesla is "yelling at you when you're not holding the wheel" "frequently" you are admittedly misusing the level 2 assist. Contrarily, I use autopilot responsibly and appreciate that statistically it is reducing my odds of death. As such I WOULD mind that a political decision like buttieg's appointment, is being made to endanger me.

elif 4y ago
Im downvoted for using level 2 with my hands? Or for recognizing its safety value? Or for agreeing with the authors assesment of buttieg's appointment?
Gordonjcp 4y ago
> I use autopilot responsibly and appreciate that statistically it is reducing my odds of death I don't think it really does, does it? I thought that "Autopilot" basically only worked on highways in fairly unsurprising conditions?
- elif 4y ago
  Autopilot crash statistics for last quarter were one crash per 4.97M miles driven. National average crash statistics for that quarter were one crash per 484K miles driven. Even if you consider that accidents are 3x less likely to occur on highways and boost that to 1.5M, that is still a multi-times safety factor. A lot of accidents on highways occur because of aggressive or negligent driving. It's really not hard to beat humans so this shouldn't be a shocking find. I'm not sure what you mean by "in unsurprising conditions" I turn on autopilot on the entry ramp, and disable it on the exit ramp. I would instead characterize that as "all highway conditions"
  - Gordonjcp 4y ago
    Okay, but that 3x should be 3000x, because people don't get in crashes in the conditions in which "Autopilot" actually works. It's easy to avoid crashes if you're travelling on a perfectly straight road at the same speed as everyone around you with no changes in speed or lane, which is all that Autopilot does.

pmorici 4y ago

“Autopilot feels like a novelty” No way are you for real? Autopilot is incredible, for me it substantially reduces fatigue on long highway drives and decreases my stress when commuting in stop and go traffic. The difference between autopilot and simple cruise control is substantial. I wouldn’t buy a car that didn’t have Autopilot at this point.

buffington 4y ago
You couldn't pay me to use it in stop and go traffic. My stress would be through the roof. I was using Autopilot once on one of the straightest stretches of highway in America (I-80 as it passes through Bonneville Salt Flats in Utah). With no cars on the road, and perfectly clear conditions, Autopilot decided that the lane I was in was ending (it wasn't) and began merging on to the shoulder. I've never used Autopilot without it doing something clearly stupid. That is not a recipe for "stress free." Are you sure we're talking about the same thing here?
- MikeTheRocker 4y ago
  This does not reflect my experience with autopilot. I've found it to be incredibly reliable and convenient.
- pmorici 4y ago
  Autopilot doesn’t merge or change lanes on it’s own. That only happens with “Navigate on autopilot” which is a FSD feature not part of basic autopilot.
  - deelowe 4y ago
    Jfc people make a ton of excuses for Tesla. This doesn’t invalidate what they were saying in any way. If lane changes are this buggy, why should they trust the auto braking?
    - pmorici 4y ago
      Because one is fully baked, the other is explicitly billed as under development not yet complete Beta software. Also there are a lot of people that just make up lies about Tesla people deserve to hear the truth.

hamburglar 4y ago

I recently drove a BMW 750i with lane-following on a long trip and then he lane-following feature was terrifying. It seemed like it was doing the most brain dead line-following algorithm that made it “bounce” back and forth between the left and right sides of the lane. I couldn’t stop worrying that it was freaking out the other cars around me by careening towards them and yanking back in the other direction at the last moment. I sure hope Tesla autopilot is better than that.

reedt 4y ago
VW/Audi lane assist also "bounces" you off the side of the lane, but it doesn't send you so far to the other side that you bounce back. Overall the combination of lane assist + adaptive cruise does an okay approximation of FSD on highways.
chipotle_coyote 4y ago
It feels like different systems are better and worse at that. On my 2019 Honda Insight, it's actually pretty smooth and does a good job of staying in the center of the lane, but it won't turn the wheel too much -- if you're taking all but the gentlest curves, you're going to be turning the wheel. On my mom's 2018 Subaru Outback, it's exactly what you're describing -- it's fine in a straight line, but it doesn't really seem to judge the curve of the lanes as much as simulate a pinball. (I don't think I ever tried to let it take a turn on its own!) I've only ridden in Teslas, not driven one, but it seems like it's probably got the best following/lane-keep system on the market, although the last time I rode in one -- admittedly about two years ago -- it was markedly jankier when the driver engaged more "self-driving" features, e.g., have it change lanes, take exits based on its own GPS guidance, etc. It was impressive that it could do it, to be sure, but it was the self-driving version of your reckless friend in high school you do your best never to ride with.
tommiegannert 4y ago
My Mercedes E-class has a setting where you can change between strict och relaxed (whatever the names were.) In strict, it very closely keeps in the middle of the lane. That's not how I normally drives, so it feels scary. I usually bias away from oncoming traffic. It's probably fine on a wide highway, so this is more about me not feeling in control. However, in relaxed mode, it seems to have the issue you're describing where there's too much slack, and it looks like it's playing pong between the lane dividers. Have the exact same worry about what this looks like to others...

a_square_peg 4y ago

Software in general has a naming problem - they all tend to be aspirational metaphors. From 'AI', 'ML', 'Cryptocurrency', 'Agile process' to 'self-driving', the confusion they create is really frustrating and harmful at times.

frumper 4y ago
A Big Mac isn’t a big burger. I’m sure many shoe names don’t reflect well on the increased abilities they sound like. Naming is a big part of marketing hype. It always has been, it’s not just software.
- tr1ll10nb1ll 4y ago
  Indeed. However, Big Mac does not cost you $10,000. In contrast, something like Comma.ai is open-source and even the complete kit that's compatible with almost any car is like $2k and they don't claim to be "Full Self Driving", by any means. Funny enough, they perform with just a kit that goes where your rear mirror is almost as good as FSD beta that Tesla has.

brandonagr2 4y ago

> Given how frequently the car yells at you when you're not holding the wheel What? You claim to own a Tesla but don't know that you must keep your hand on the wheel at all times?

buffington 4y ago
The car will yell at you even when your hand is on the wheel. If it doesn't feel resistance, it assumes you're not paying attention.

WheatM 4y ago

martin_a 4y ago

> Autopilot is cruise control that keeps you within a lane when it can. That's it. Other cars have it, and they're equally effective or ineffective. But "Autopilot" obviously sounds cooler. So you can pay 10k and feel good, while that feature costs 1.300 Euro in my Hyundai (where it also comes with heated seats and steering wheel in the package). The more I read and see from Tesla, the more it look likes some kind of A/B test on how much money people are willing to spend on a beta software/car-test.

buffington 4y ago
Tesla's Autopilot feature is standard. The thing that costs $10k is Full Self Driving. Which is an example of what I mean when I say "Tesla's biggest problems with any of their autonomous systems is the names they give those systems. They confuse regulators, reporters, and consumers."
- martin_a 4y ago
  But isn't FSD at this moment just that lane holding assistant? Anyway... Confusion at its best. :-D
  - buffington 4y ago
    Nope. FSD is the nightmare inducing beta software that does a pretty good job of actually driving for you. This includes stopping at stop signs, making turns, changing lanes. It also sometimes does very dangerous and stupid things, like stopping as it makes a left hand turn, then deciding to start driving against the flow of traffic as a group of cars heads your way. AKA, nightmare inducing.

wfhordie 4y ago

It’s confusing until you use it, then it’s capabilities and limitations become clear. So I don’t see this as a reason to pull it.

buffington 4y ago
I think the number of comments in this thread where people confuse Autopilot with FSD is reason enough to at least rebrand the names of the two distinctly different features.

andsoitis 4y ago

I won't dispute that the branding is hyperbolic (isn't all/most branding?). Do you think Tesla's support page describing Autopilot and Autopilot with Full Self Driving is clear enough? https://www.tesla.com/support/autopilot https://www.tesla.com/support/autopilot For instance, there's this paragraph: "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."

lolinder 4y ago
The problem is that this technical writing runs counter to all the flashy marketing, and the flashy marketing sticks in people's minds more thoroughly.