3 ms·

> If I attempt to drive my own car into a brick wall, the on-board computer will defy my instructions as best it can too. By your definition, I'm not in control

by ra7 3y ago

> If I attempt to drive my own car into a brick wall, the on-board computer will defy my instructions as best it can too. By your definition, I'm not in control of my car just like Waymo operators aren't. Terrible analogy. You are sitting in the driver's seat with your hands on the wheel. If your car is about to hit someone, you can prevent it because you are the driver. This is what FSD is — ultimately driver is in control. No such luxury for Waymo/Cruise as their remote operators cannot do any safety critical interventions like preventing crashes. All they can do is non-safety critical interventions by way of passing indirect commands. A Waymo is in control of itself at all times and is fully responsible for its own safety. You can play with words like "control" all you want, but this is the definition of SAE Level 4 autonomy. If anything, calling FSD "autonomous" is highly misleading because drivers are preventing mistakes and thereby hiding its real safety outcome.

simondotau 3y ago
> Terrible analogy. I agree, it's a terrible analogy if I was attempting to make the argument you thought I was trying to make, per your explanation for why it's a terrible analogy. My point is that it's invalid to say that Waymo operators don't have "control" of the vehicle because it can refuse to perform some tasks. Because my car can refuse to perform some tasks too. The deeper point is that the difference between "in control" and "not in control" isn't binary. It's all points along a continuum. If a Waymo operator controls a vehicle remotely, it's not the same level of control as a human holding the steering wheel. But it's still control in the larger sense. If the operator wants the car to stop, it will stop. Period. If they want the car to perform some action that isn't stupid or dangerous (such as colliding with a pedestrian) it will perform that action. > If anything, calling FSD "autonomous" is highly misleading I agree. Which is why I didn't. In most situations FSD beta can handle the "full" task of driving. By "full", they mean it's not intended to be limited to a strict subset of task, e.g. only on highways. It can "fully self drive" the car competently at least ~99.9% of the time, as evidenced by the fact that it can routinely drive most roads reliably. Drives shown on YouTube are mostly owners intentionally looking for roads which flummox it, as that's how they show improvements as software updates are released. The challenges which preclude FSD from being a system capable of autonomy — the 0.1% of remaining error — isn't errors in spatial awareness or control surface failure. It's stuff like path planning and road sign interpretation, neither of which involve sensors that Tesla vehicles lack.

by ra7 3y ago

simondotau 3y ago

> Terrible analogy. I agree, it's a terrible analogy if I was attempting to make the argument you thought I was trying to make, per your explanation for why it's a terrible analogy. My point is that it's invalid to say that Waymo operators don't have "control" of the vehicle because it can refuse to perform some tasks. Because my car can refuse to perform some tasks too. The deeper point is that the difference between "in control" and "not in control" isn't binary. It's all points along a continuum. If a Waymo operator controls a vehicle remotely, it's not the same level of control as a human holding the steering wheel. But it's still control in the larger sense. If the operator wants the car to stop, it will stop. Period. If they want the car to perform some action that isn't stupid or dangerous (such as colliding with a pedestrian) it will perform that action. > If anything, calling FSD "autonomous" is highly misleading I agree. Which is why I didn't. In most situations FSD beta can handle the "full" task of driving. By "full", they mean it's not intended to be limited to a strict subset of task, e.g. only on highways. It can "fully self drive" the car competently at least ~99.9% of the time, as evidenced by the fact that it can routinely drive most roads reliably. Drives shown on YouTube are mostly owners intentionally looking for roads which flummox it, as that's how they show improvements as software updates are released. The challenges which preclude FSD from being a system capable of autonomy — the 0.1% of remaining error — isn't errors in spatial awareness or control surface failure. It's stuff like path planning and road sign interpretation, neither of which involve sensors that Tesla vehicles lack.