22 ms·
California passes law banning Tesla from calling software FSD
- api 4y agoHow much could the recent Musk meltdown be related to FSD just not arriving? It seems like we have reached a point after many years of FSD being “next year” when it’s becoming clear that it’s further away than anyone thought. I’ve thought the difficulty was being vastly underestimated for a while. A reusable Lunar and Mars shuttle system is probably a lot easier than actual FSD.
- kevingadd 4y agoIf only because you're probably doing two dozen moon missions a year TOPS - probably far less than that - but FSD needs to handle millions of trips flawlessly. But yeah, at some point he should have wised up and stopped saying that FSD was gonna be ready Any Day Now.
- api 4y agoThe hard thing about FSD is related to the scale. It’s the long tail of situations it has to deal with, many of which require some kind of model or understanding of the world outside the car. It’s the worst sort of problem, one where 10% of the work gets you 90% of the way there and the other 90% of the work is needed to get you the other 10%. Problems like this are really bad for creating this mirage that you’ve almost got it when in reality you are far from the end.
- ajross 4y agoI dinged you for this in a different comment too, but it's clearer here: you're doing exactly the conflation of "Full Self Driving" the product with "Full Autonomy" the concept that the linked law is trying to prevent! The former has value and people will buy it even if the latter can't be delivered in totality. Making Tesla rename their product does not mean their cars magically stop driving themselves, and especially does not mean that there isn't a market for people (that's me, hi!) who want cars that can drive themselves.
- spookie 4y agoI'm sorry, but there's no other way to interpret "full self driving". It means, intuitively, that self driving has mastered all aspects of driving. It doesn't leave space for interpretation in which only specific parts of driving are possible. At least in my mind.
- dundarious 4y agoHe went so far as to say that it was financially irresponsible to not buy a Tesla, as it was the only car that was fully hardware capable, and that had FSD software coming in about a year. We are very far from the touted fleets of Tesla robotaxis, independently-operated or otherwise.
- recuter 4y agoHe also went as far as saying the stock is too high. People just hear whatever they want to hear.
- cactusplant7374 4y agoWhy is he so against short sellers and Bill Gates in particular?
- ajross 4y agoFWIW, as far as "will the car drive itself?", FSD is already here. Call a friend and get a ride. The beta lets people in relatively rapidly now, and there are hundreds of thousands of enabled cars on the roads. It's pretty amazing. Now, it's absolutely true that it's not at a 100% supervision-free level. It's still timid, it has trouble with lane selection in some areas and misses turns, etc... But for months and months intervention-free drives in my area have been the rule and not the exception. My car, for sure, drives me around. It's pretty amazing. But that's not regulatory approval, and coverage of the issue tends to conflate the two. So you have people like you who read this stuff, but don't get rides from friends, who think somehow it's a disaster and a failure. But it's an actual product people are buying and using. Add that to all the folks who have a vested interest[1] in Tesla failing, and... the discourse around this subject is pretty toxic. All I can say is, again, call a friend and get a ride. There's a lot of hate to push through, but the cars are amazing. [1] Because, to be fair, the CEO is an asshole burning Twitter to the ground as we write.
- birdyrooster 4y agoFSD was never real. TSLA was the product the whole time. Just like solar roof and tesla semi and tesla bot… if it gets an idiot futurologist wet then it will lift the TSLA price. Schadenfreude, long over due comeuppance, etc, etc.
- onlyrealcuzzo 4y agoI think 6 or 7 years ago, many people thought we would at least have something like Waymo's self-driving taxis in Phoenix in several cities, more publicly available, really starting to change transportation. We're not too far behind on that estimate. My guess is in less than 3 years - Waymo will be publicly available in large parts of Phoenix and probably another major metro - and within 10 years most of the south west. But a lot of uninformed people thought we might have FSD everywhere by now. I think there's just less uninformed people now.
- onlyrealcuzzo 4y agoMy guess is Tesla won't have anything resembling FSD to cover the entire US within 15 years. Though Musk and Tesla fans have shown that FSD is subjective, and they seem to think they already have it now, so I guarantee in 15 years they'll be arguing even louder... If they change everything about their approach, and/or lease tech from Cruise or Waymo - then maybe they'll have something resembling FSD in large parts of the southwest. Predicting 5 years into the future is tough - 15 years is almost impossible. Anyway, the pendulum seems to have swung the other way now. Since FSD is so far behind Elon the marketing-hype-stock-pump-Charlatan / the louder voice in the room - now the mainstream idea is - we're never going to have FSD. This is ironic, since we basically already have it in a few large metros. It seems like the newspapers famously publishing that we might have manned space flight within 10,000,000 years - literally the day before the Wright brothers first flight... People thought the car would never catch on, because cities were designed for people and bikes and horses. The car was so useful, we redesigned cities. Self-driving will be the same way. Once it takes off in some places and the value is realized, cities will redesign to make it work more broadly. It might take a long time, but it will happen... Unless the nature of transit changes and individual vehicles are phased out for whatever reason first - though I don't see that happening without FSD busses / street cars.
- bushbaba 4y agoSelf driving isn’t nearly as evolutionary as going from horse to car, or boat to flight. We aren’t likely to redesign entire cities for self driving. We might see self driving only highway lanes with faster speeds but that’s all I’d envision over next few decades.
- n0tth3dro1ds 4y ago>it’s further away than anyone thought I worked full time in a computer vision company (non-automotive) for several years prior to 2018. I joined an automotive company (not Tesla) in 2018 and very intentionally steered clear of the autonomous efforts going on there. Not because my skillset wasn’t best applied there, but because I didn’t believe the roadmaps the industry was laying out at the time. “Level 3 by next year, Level 4 by 2020, Level 5 by 2022” is what they were saying back then. I called bullshit (silently) and worked on viable software instead. Lots of people were doing the same. This isn’t surprising to a whole bunch of people that work in the non-automotive computer vision/ML space and realize how absurd it is to think the these models will converge any time soon.
- KaiserPro 4y ago> that it’s further away than anyone thought. No no, only musk was stupid enough to imply level 5 autonomy within x years. Everyone know how hard it is, realtime accurate position, machine perception of roads, & accurate prediction of cars/lorries/other are all very difficult problems. Then to hobble your team by saying "blah blah blah no lidars" because they are expensive and someone from the ML team convinced you that they could estimate depth reliably, was the clincher. Level 4/5 self driving is more of a matter of scale. if you have a 99.5% safe rating, then a lot of people over a country the size of the states are going to have a bad day.
- v0idzer0 4y agoLet’s not pretend Apple, Uber, Google and countless others weren’t spending billions trying to make this a reality. They didn’t burn that money because they were smart enough to know it wasn’t going to happen. Everyone thought it was imminent. Many still do.
- JumpinJack_Cash 4y agoBillions of dollars for Apple and Google are within the realm of no-nonsense moonshots given that their core business is very solid. Tesla had to use all their weapons including fraud, exagerations and lies because their core business is the worst business in the world: manufacturing automobiles. So they have essentially nothing to fall back on if FSD fails.
- nullc 4y agoI'm still mystified that tesla isn't mired in lawsuits over this: Some tesla dealers were telling customers that within a few years their self driving tesla would earn back its purchase price from acting as a robotaxi.
- foobiekr 4y agoThe dealers were? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5cFTlx68itk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5cFTlx68itk
- cinntaile 4y agoWhen Andrej Karpathy left earlier this year you knew FSD wasn't happening anytime soon.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- thdespou 4y agoTake that Elon...
- woofyman 4y agoFSD = Future Self Driving
- nicd 4y agoFull Self Driving, I believe.
- warning26 4y agowhoosh
- steveBK123 4y agoFull Scary Driving edit*
- fortran77 4y agoIs this what Hacker News us about? Mocking mental illness?
- steveBK123 4y agofair, edited
- xdavidliu 4y agowhat did it say before the edit? Schizophrenic?
- steveBK123 4y agoshort version of that yes
- ClassyJacket 4y agoHow is that mocking? It was merely a descriptive term.
- candiddevmike 4y ago
- endisneigh 4y agoMainstream full self driving would just create massive traffic and gridlock - pointless in the end. The induced demand would outweigh the benefits. States are better off acknowledging that sprawling car dependent cities are not sustainable. High frequency busses in the interim with rail transit is the real solution. Current self driving technology plus some key infrastructure changes with dedicated bus lanes and prioritization is already good enough to have automated busses cart people around. Just think about it - what happens when everyone has a self driving car? All of those cars that are otherwise parked are now on the road. Traffic. Same thing that happened pre-COVID with "ridesharing". (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41893-020-00678-z https://www.nature.com/articles/s41893-020-00678-z) > The role of transportation network companies (TNCs) in the urban transport system is under intense debate. In this study, we systematically assess three aspects of the net impacts of TNCs on urban mobility in the United States—road congestion, transit ridership and private vehicle ownership—and examine how these impacts have evolved over time. Based on a set of fixed-effect panel models estimated using metropolitan statistical area level data, we find that the entrance of TNCs led to increased road congestion in terms of both intensity (by 0.9%) and duration (by 4.5%), an 8.9% decline in transit ridership and an insignificant change in vehicle ownership. Despite the ideal of providing a sustainable mobility solution by promoting large-scale car sharing, our analysis suggests that TNCs have intensified urban transport challenges since their debut in the United States. Or we can continue burning tens of billions on self driving personal vehicles.
- valine 4y agoThe roads will be so gridlocked no one will drive on them anymore /s. Seriously though there are ways of reducing traffic on the roads like increased registration taxes, raising the price of tolls, gas price hikes (or equivalent dc fast charging price hikes). Gridlock won’t be a problem. DC fast charging price hikes will be especially effective at reducing robotaxi usage as unlike privately owned EVs, robotaxis will primarily rely on fast charging. Also don’t forget about how much traffic flow will improve because self driving cars don’t get impatient and tailgate.
- endisneigh 4y ago
- mythhouse 4y agohttps://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billHistoryClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220SB1398 https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billHistoryClient.x... Wow introduced end of feb this year and passed by end of this year. Looking from outside, I am Amazed by the speed of American democracy .
- kube-system 4y agoCalifornia is a bit of an outlier in that regard.
- bushbaba 4y agoCalifornia has a slow regulatory body. Other states can act even quicker here. For example just see how quickly abortion regulation was made post Supreme Court ruling.
- kube-system 4y agoOther states maybe can react quicker but they choose not to. California is quick to have the political will to act. California’s regulations on health, safety, and consumer protections are usually a good preview of what other states (or the feds) may consider in coming decade(s).
- lotsofpulp 4y agoThe fact that it took California passing a specific law is ridiculous. https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/topics/truth-advertising/protecting-consumers https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/topics/truth-advertising/pro... This was as easy as it gets for the federal government to tell Tesla to drop it, but for some reason neither Dem or Repub administrations are acting on it.
- hericium 4y ago> for some reason Maybe they will act now as their $TSLA shares are worth 70% less than a year ago ;-)
- newaccount2021 4y ago[dead]
- dpiers 4y agoFSD = fraudulent sales and disappointment I can’t believe Tesla has gotten away with selling a feature that doesn’t exist, and will never be delivered, on so many cars for so long. Tesla began selling “full self-driving” in October, 2016 and a month later marketed it with (now known to be heavily controlled) video of a car driving itself for two minutes. Owners of those initial cars have probably paid them off by now and still don’t have a feature they were sold.
- ghaff 4y agoIn fairness I know people with "FSD" who went into it well aware that it's not really FSD and they still like it. That said, the marketing is clearly fraudulent.
- berkle4455 4y agoA lot of people knowingly buy into ponzi schemes too.
- ghaff 4y agoYou can not buy into all of a manufacturer's marketing puffery and still like a product on balance.
- Retric 4y agoPuffery has specific meaning here and making objective statements doesn’t qualify. You can’t call a 3’ log 5’ and say it’s just puffery.
- rafael09ed 4y agoYou can call a 1.5" by 3.5" plank a 2x4
- Retric 4y agoI don’t think Tesla can round up from 0 and say you can make money with a self driving Taxi service.
- option 4y agoLet that sink in. And you know what is not arriving anytime soon? Even “cat-level” AGI is just not going to happen within next 20 years at least.
- theCrowing 4y ago20 years ago, the Linux kernel version was 2.5, we had the Intel Pentium III, Apple just released the Lamp, Nickelback was Top 1 with "How you remind me?" for over 16 weeks, Warcraft 3 got released and I bought my first Palm Tungsten. This reads like another world because it was and I suspect the world will change even faster in the next 20. We will have cat like AGI before 2042.
- ElfinTrousers 4y ago> This reads like another world because it was So...another world with a slightly different taste in music and less advanced consumer electronics? Pretty picayune difference.
- theCrowing 4y agoEver gone out in a small town or village? Not much changed in the last 20 years, it was mostly at home. Take away the flatscreens, smartphones, tablets and calendars (doh) and nobody could tell you if it's the 00s, 10s or 20s.
- ElfinTrousers 4y agoUh, yes, that's my point. Now I'm not sure which side of this question you're on.
- theCrowing 4y agoThe one that says that despite almost everything staying the same everything changed. We can go into socioeconomics if you really want...
- remorses 4y agoThe ministry of truth in action
- ElfinTrousers 4y agoAww, are you mad that they won't let Tesla lie to the public anymore?
- rsynnott 4y agoI mean, I assume you’re trying to be sarcastic, but, yes, truth in advertising is usually considered to be desirable. It’s mildly absurd that they need a specific law for this, but if the relevant regulators won’t act…
- Kiro 4y agoHow times have changed since Tesla was untouchable here. What happened and why does everyone talk like they've always hated Tesla (and Elon)? Surely it's mostly the same crowd as when Tesla was loved and Elon a superstar.
- drno123 4y agoMusk bought Twitter and fired 50% od the staff without Twitter crashing, which exposed how overstaffed and overpayed thise guys were
- petee 4y agoOr just how well they designed it
- mikeyouse 4y agoImagine thinking that firing 50% of the staff that built an enormously complicated piece of software, and having the service stay up and running means that the people who built it were overpaid or overstaffed.
- BaseballPhysics 4y ago"We don't need firefighters. No one has died in a fire in years!"
- drstewart 4y ago"We don't need the TSA. No one has died in a hijacking in years!"
- drstewart 4y agoAnd if it did fall over you'd be saying the same exact thing. So by your own logic, it's impossible for a company to be overpaid or overstaffed.
- cp9 4y agoFSD has been a dangerous fraud this whole time
- psychphysic 4y agoWhat's FSD mean?
- speedgoose 4y agoFull Self Driving.
- tommek4077 4y agoFull self driving
- samwillis 4y agoFSD is a Boondoggle. (Collision/accident avoidance and driver assist systems are not) I don't think we will see a legitimate L5 automation in our lifetimes. Take my 1.5 mile journey to do the morning school run, in a small UK town: - Getting off the driveway, there is a wall that creates a blind spot behind it, often other parents are walking small kids who are shorter than that wall. I can't see behind it. I check down the street as I get into the car, watch for subtle reflections, and aware that an adult further down the road may have a kid closer by on a small bike. - Turning out the end of the road, there are parked cars blocking my view, it's safer to stop slightly further back as you can see slightly better. - Another turning onto a busy road, at rush hour you can't get out without a considerate driver pausing and waving you out. - Cross roads that is slightly out of alignment. The collision avoidance on my Audi often incorrectly triggers braking thinking that we are going to have a head on crash. - Delivery vans blocking a lane, heavy on coming traffic. Considerate delivers on the other side flashing to let you around. - A right hand turn (uk driving on left). It's better to pull slightly across the centre line letting people going straight on pass on the left, while you wait for a gap across the road. Plenty of space even for the largest trucks on the other side when you do this. Keeps traffic moving and everyone happy. - Another right turn, no road markings and 4! different exits off the road in under 8m. Often blocked by cars so have to go further forward by a car length and double back. - School car park! Children walking everywhere, large cars, teenagers who have just passed their driving test, parents dropping their kids out in the middle of a moving queue. I just don't think it's possible for AI FSD to understand the nuance of all that. (Yes, a 1.5 mile journey to school, we should be walking)
- orlp 4y ago> (Yes, a 1.5 mile journey to school, we should be walking) You should be cycling.
- samwillis 4y agoI agree, we have two choices, cycle on the busy roads with the 4+8yo or on a footpath through a park and down the pedestrianised road. Second option sounds perfect right? No, there are big signs saying "no cycling" because I live in an F-ing stupid Tory middle England town where that sort of thing is not aloud... Once the 4yo is a little bigger we will be breaking that stupid rule.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- stuart78 4y agoI don’t understand why this requires a California law to address? Why hasn’t the FTC intervened? A quick search reveals that it is ‘on their radar’ as of this past June, but as other commenters have pointed out, the claim has been used for more than 5 years. Perhaps they need a more sensitive radar. https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/tesla-autopilot-concerns-are-us-agencys-radar-chair-says-2022-06-09/ https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/tesla-...
- coffeeblack 4y ago[flagged]
- calgarymicro 4y agoBeing "pretty clear" in the fine print doesn't help when your product is called "Full Self Driving". > But Musk bought Twitter. The bill was introduced in mid-February and was presumably drafted over the preceding months. Musk made his very first Tweet about buying Twitter in mid-April. Not sure what connection you're trying to make here.
- dmix 4y ago> Being "pretty clear" in the fine print doesn't help when your product is called "Full Self Driving". The likely chose the FSD branding with good intentions. Tesla just had some over-optimistic projections of what it will be in the near future and they weren't the only ones being optimistic in 2015-2016 when it launched (you can find plenty of Youtube interviews from other car companies at the time projecting <=2025). The plan was to always call it in "beta" and an early ~$2-10k(?) investment for the future offering that wasn't yet ready. The only problem is when those projections turned out to be heavily optimistic after ~2-3yrs in they should have rebranded it... but chose to stick with it for whatever reason.
- pnt12 4y agoThat's a very charitable interpretation. Another, which I find more likely when there's lots of money involved, is that there was deception to feed the hype machine which caused profits of millions.
- LightG 4y agoGood. Back when I believed in Tesla and its owner, this excited me. But the more you look into it, the more you experience it, the more you know about it and its delays, it's clear we'll be lucky to have actual FSD in 10-20 years. I think even that's optimistic. I'm glad this is being recognised at legislative level. Objective people on the ground have known this for at least 5 years ... One regret is that, while Tesla have forged a place for EV's in the world market, the waste of talent and time spent on FSD (and competitors trying to immitate and catch up on the promise of FSD specifically) has been tragic. I can only hope the secondary outcomes of that time are worth it. Honestly, decent auto stop-start in very slow traffic and excellent lane-holding cruise control would have been enough for me ... and that's been available for a decade.
- rsynnott 4y agoHonestly, I’m amazed they (largely, I think Germany already told them to knock it off) got away with this framing for so long.
- ElfinTrousers 4y agoI live in Boston. You know all those stereotypes about Boston drivers and Boston traffic? Largely accurate. If they ever do succeed in creating an AI powerful enough to drive a car safely in this Commonwealth, I want that AI curing cancer and inventing time travel, not bothering with trifles like driving.
- cactusplant7374 4y agoI believe Taylor Ogan did a drive with FSD through Boston with the results that you would expect.
- ElfinTrousers 4y agoI will have to look that up, thanks for the tip.
- ElfinTrousers 4y agoWhat strikes me about this is that the area he's driving has to be the easiest area to drive within like 20 miles. I'd like to see what happens if someone tries FSD say, around Powder House Square rotary in Somerville in the evening rush hour on a November night with rain pouring down. But I wouldn't like to be in the vehicle in question.
- redox99 4y agoA lot of comments here seem to be extremely pessimistic of self driving (not just Tesla, but in general), claiming that it's "decades away". As someone who has been following fairly closely the advances in self driving, I think most people are underestimating the current state and rate of improvement of these systems. For Tesla, it's currently "L2+". Here's an example[1] of how good or bad it currently is, in a fairly easy environment. Just a year ago it was an absolute mess, even though it still has a long way to go, the improvement rate is really good. In places like Manhattan it's a mess, but I don't think FSD needs to be able to handle Manhattan to be useful, because not everybody lives in Manhattan. For Waymo, it's currently L4 (operating without driver), however available only in very select locations. Here's an example[2] Regarding vision vs lidar, anybody in the field knows that both approaches are viable for self driving[3], it's just a matter of which can get you there sooner (and LIDAR is basically agreed upon to be an easier but more expensive approach). I used to think Tesla FSD was doomed to fail, computer vision good enough for self driving was more than a decade away, but I've changed my mind since. I now think vision based is viable, and really important because it will enable self driving for mainstream cars (not just expensive robotaxis) From what I've seen, Tesla's FSD perception is quite good already, and the majority of the times FSD messes up it's because of it's planner, not because of perception. And that's considering it's cameras and computers are quite old already, when they decide to upgrade them it will lead to a pretty large improvement to perception. My current estimate is that Tesla will achieve L3 in 2 years, and L4 in 4 years. It will require a HW upgrade (cameras and computer). [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tRqW9LJZaWY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tRqW9LJZaWY [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L6mmjqJeDw0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L6mmjqJeDw0 [3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gbyY2AQ_hdc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gbyY2AQ_hdc Edit: Instead of just downvoting, I'd appreciate if you left a comment pointing out what you disagree with. I'm very interested in this technology and other people's thoughts.
- bilsbie 4y agoThe latest self driving videos are looking really impressive. Maybe we’re getting close.
- bilsbie 4y agoWow what did I say. Guess I’m not hating the right things?
- redox99 4y agoI also got downvoted for giving my opinion on self driving, so I guess that's the reason.
- bhauer 4y agoIt is very much against the prevailing HN narrative to have an optimistic view on autonomy in general, and Tesla's efforts in that space in particular. The approved HN narrative is that autonomous driving is far too complex for computers and cameras, and Tesla's FSD is endlessly crashing into everything. Oh and it's somehow more dangerous to be near a Tesla on FSD than any other driver on the road, data be damned.
- PeterStuer 4y agoI fully support this. I also would like they banned misleading car ads that pretend there is zero traffic on the roads.
- Animats 4y agoCalifornia was the first state to take autonomous vehicles seriously.[1] DMV licenses them. There's three levels of license. The "learner's permit" is testing with a safety driver. The autonomous license is testing with no safety driver. Deployment is carrying real customers for money. Waymo and Cruise have deployment licenses, which requires testing and evaluation by DMV. You can see their cars running around San Francisco with nobody in the driver's seat. That's self-driving. Tesla has never been able to get beyond the learner's permit. So, they can't sell a fake self driving product. It's that simple. [1] https://california.public.law/codes/ca_veh_code_section_38750 https://california.public.law/codes/ca_veh_code_section_3875...
- 93po 4y agoWaymo and Cruise deploy in extremely limited public situations, including only in the middle of the night, and have been in the news a lot recently for a serious of crashes and software failures, some of which caused a pile up of around a dozen autonomous vehicles just blocking the road that had to be removed with tow trucks and employees. The scope of what Tesla is doing is vastly larger, more future proof, more reliable, and much more difficult to achieve. Additionally, Tesla's model right now is to have a driver in the seat. They aren't trying to deploy a car without anyone in the driver seat. There's no need for them to have any license other than the one they have.
- clouddrover 4y ago> Additionally, Tesla's model right now is to have a driver in the seat. So then it's not full self-driving? I don't understand. Elon has been promising full self-driving for years: https://jalopnik.com/elon-musk-promises-full-self-driving-next-year-for-th-1848432496 https://jalopnik.com/elon-musk-promises-full-self-driving-ne... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5cFTlx68itk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5cFTlx68itk
- simondotau 4y agoUber predicted it was just a few years away in 2016.[1] Google's Sergey Brin predicted driverless cars by 2017.[2] BMW predicted we'd have driverless cars by 2020.[3] Supposedly sober industry analysts predicted 2019.[4] It's also worth pointing out that many of Elon's predictions were not predictions of a finished product, but rather predicting when Tesla would have a system "capable" of self driving, not necessarily a system capable of driving consistently and reliably. (In much the same way, I am capable of hitting a target with a crossbow, but not consistently and reliably.) To be clear, I'm not defending Musk's predictions, only pointing out that such predictions were widespread and Musk was just one of many, many, many people who turned out to be wrong. [1] https://www.businessinsider.com/travis-kalanick-interview-on-self-driving-cars-future-driver-jobs-2016-8 https://www.businessinsider.com/travis-kalanick-interview-on... [2] https://www.theregister.com/2012/09/25/google_automatic_cars_legal/ https://www.theregister.com/2012/09/25/google_automatic_cars... [3] https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/sep/13/self-driving-cars-bmw-google-2020-driving https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/sep/13/self-driv... [4] https://www.businessinsider.com/report-10-million-self-driving-cars-will-be-on-the-road-by-2020-2015-5-6 https://www.businessinsider.com/report-10-million-self-drivi...
- dreamcompiler 4y agoShould have happened sooner. I love my Model Y. It's the most fun car I've ever owned. It's also the most comfortable on long road trips and I can sleep in it in climate-controlled comfort without generating a gas that could kill me. I leave the house every morning with a full tank and never have to stop at a gas station. And my cost per mile is 1/4 what it was with an ICE car. I just wish Tesla would focus on this stuff without hyping an AI feature that can never happen. It's like what if somebody invented the world's greatest backpack? It's bigger on the inside than the outside, and it incorporates negative gravity so anything you put in it becomes 50 lbs lighter. And all that was true; it actually worked? But for an extra $10k, the company will add on the "anti-grizzly bear" feature which makes you invulnerable to grizzly bears while you're wearing the backpack. Except most of the people who buy the anti-grizzly bear feature end up getting eaten by grizzly bears. Whoops! Just quietly stop advertising the anti-grizzly bear feature and you'll still have a great product.
- nzealand 4y ago> It's also the most comfortable on long road trips and I can sleep in it in climate-controlled comfort without generating a gas that could kill me. Why are you sleeping in your car for long trips? :)
- dreamcompiler 4y agoI know you're kidding but it's a good question. I don't do it while the car is moving obviously. I like to camp in the car at RV spots at lakes, state parks, and other pleasant places while on a long road trip. Plug in the car, sleep in the back, and wake to a full charge.
- frosted-flakes 4y agoBecause hotels can be expensive, and when you want to bomb from one side of the country to the other driving 16 hours a day, it's just easier to sleep in the car. I've done it many times in a 20-year-old Jetta, very comfortably.
- 4y ago
- 93po 4y ago[flagged]
- FatActor 4y agoColor me shocked that you're completely ignoring the merit of the post. Stay on target, Red 5. This is about Tesla selling dangerously flawed software and misnaming it. This doesn't fall under what lawsuits would refer to as "puffery" (world's greatest coffee!). Tesla is literally misleading customers in a way that can lead to death.
- paulmendoza 4y agoI can’t tell if you are joking or not
- 93po 4y agoHe isn't. It's Elon derangement syndrome.
- misiti3780 4y agoHaha! I love that term, totally going to use it going forward! It really is a thing.
- FatActor 4y agoThe idea of describing an opposing view as derangement is disingenuous because it implies you know the mental state of the person, and it also completely avoids having to discuss the merit of the argument by derailing it. It is also questionable because your post history is full of dozens of pro-Tesla/Elon posts which are mostly trolls or memes. That makes me wonder what you mean by "derangement" because I consider doing that on a discussion forum that seeks knowledge as antithetical to its existence. But since people aware of news coverage for the past decade, this is a term that was popularized in the US during the 2016 election cycle, it has been used to shut down any rational debate. It is effectively name calling. Which is the opposite of the purpose of HN and makes me wonder why you are even here. To troll or to learn or to help people learn. Again from your history, it seems to be the first option. Whether or not someone took donations from an opposing industry, and using that to dismiss their argument is one of the classic fallacies of reasoning. To me, naming a deadly product something it is not seems worthy of regulation, because it is lying. If you prima facie consider me deranged because of that, I do not understand your world view and would like to understand it better. Also, I'm not a he.
- emodendroket 4y agoIt seems very California to crack down on misleading labeling but not go after the unsafe product at all.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- remote_phone 4y agoIt’s already changed. It’s called “Enhanced Autopilot” now.
- dawnerd 4y agoNo it's not. That a different product. FSD is still what they call the "full autonomous" mode. Enhanced Autopilot is just the highway auto lane change and some other minor gimmicks.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- afrcnc 4y agoThis company and everything Musk touches is just a pack of lies.
- dawnerd 4y agoGood. I love the features they have but you can't say it's not false advertising. Most people I know assume my car drives itself, which is not true, even when I was on the beta.
- kemayo 4y ago> Although Tesla has never claimed that FSD was fully autonomous ...this seems like a weird argument, insofar as the very name "Full Self-Driving" is making that claim in plain language. You can do a lot with an asterisk after a marketing claim, but "Full Self-Driving: is not yet fully self-driving" seems like a stretch.
- iandanforth 4y agoWhat a windfall for Tesla! They get to walk back their absurd claims while pinning the blame on someone else. They're still probably going to face massive lawsuits when they fail to ever deliver full self driving, but this might at least limit the size of the class.
- danielodievich 4y agoWe were in San Mateo recently and took a Lyft to a restauraunt. It was a gull wing model Y, which was curious to see in operation, and also curious to see as a Lyft car. Anyhow, we got in, and were pulling out of hotel parking lot when the driver unprovoked said "I love my Tesla, check out its self-driving!" and takes hands off the wheel, right before a 90 degree turn near the hotel. It did it, but it did it weirdly, not like real driver. My wife and I were both really freaked out and later agreed that that wasn't what we got a driver for and we wished he kept his hands on the wheel.
- charcircuit 4y agoFrom YouTube videos I've seen Telsa's already can drive autonomously. You can give it a destination and it will drive there.
- diebeforei485 4y agoYeah, if it isn't actually "full self driving" then it shouldn't be called that. This is different than "Autopilot" which is a perfectly valid name.
- Barrin92 4y agoeven that's misleading honestly and Tesla is battling in courts over that label here in Germany. In my opinion the correct label in both the technical sense and informing the average consumer correctly is 'driving assistance'. A system that requires you to have the hands on the wheel at all times and be fully alert and ready to intercept on average every few miles is not an autopilot either.