5 ms·

Wait until you realize Tesla is behind on self driving compared to the major manufacturers. I drove a Volvo rental that was a couple of years old that had leve

Wait until you realize Tesla is behind on self driving compared to the major manufacturers. I drove a Volvo rental that was a couple of years old that had level 3 self driving that vastly outperformed any Tesla self driving. And that wasn't even the latest tech from Volvo. Tesla are behind on self driving and they charge extra for it!

nradov 3y ago
Volvo has never shipped level 3 autonomous driving. At most they are level 2. https://www.sae.org/blog/sae-j3016-update https://www.sae.org/blog/sae-j3016-update The current market leader in terms of shipping products that are available for consumers to purchase is probably Mercedes-Benz Drive Pilot. They are legitimately at level 3 and significantly ahead of Tesla in most (but not all) respects. https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/a45326503/mercedes-benz-drive-pilot-review/ https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/a45326503/mercedes-benz...
martindbp 3y ago
Wow, since Tesla is so behind I guess my Volvo must be able to drive me through LA? https://youtu.be/0kvK_20mNuo?si=ooQj7S98GyCMAJEI https://youtu.be/0kvK_20mNuo?si=ooQj7S98GyCMAJEI No? No unprotected lefts, no roundabouts? Not even turning? Sounds very advanced, Tesla must be in a panic they're so far behind...
- isityouyesitsme 3y ago
  This is the same type of thinking that prevents most developers from working in safety-critical fields. The presence of a feature, or even its impressive capabilities, is/are not what constitutes "performance." It's also the same type of thinking that gets Tesla drivers decapitated or slammed into an abutment.
  - martindbp 3y ago
    That would have an acceptable point to make if FSD was not capable of safely doing what all other ADAS systems can do, but it obviously can. It's just that Tesla has no interest in restricting its features and get L3 approval for such a small subset of driving. If today you claim FSD V12 is "behind" the lane keeping assist of other manufacturers, that is just delusion, I don't know what to tell you.
    - isityouyesitsme 3y ago
      I'm truthfully not understanding whether you've missed the point or if you're so interested in defending Tesla that you choose to look past it. I'm not making a claim about relative feature capabilities (yes, having replied in this specific thread makes that confusing, but that's where your comment was). I'm making a claim that the vast majority of developers do not know how to judge a system's safety. As an example of this from you, and for a more critical view of Tesla from me, I'll say that when I look at Tesla's capabilities, I could not make a claim that it does anything safely. Safety implies that the system knows its limits and refuses to operate outside of them. This is definitely not Tesla's way. Else it would be impossible, for example, to have sun blind spots make it not "see" a semi.
      - martindbp 3y ago
        https://www.youtube.com/shorts/dhxK4OKHhOw https://www.youtube.com/shorts/dhxK4OKHhOw My point stands: just because Tesla chooses to make FSD an L2 system at the moment doesn't mean that it's unable to act safely in the same scenarios as for instance Mercedes L3. So concluding that FSD is behind Mercedes is delusional. If you actually look at evidence available, (the thousands of videos available for FSD, and the ... tens available for other brands), and still claim FSD is behind, that is delusional. I'm defending Tesla because these comments are just insanity, and it points to an extreme anti-Tesla or Elon bias, which is very common these days. If you can't impartially evaluate a piece of technology that is clearly more advanced in every possible way, you really need to reflect.
        isityouyesitsme 3y ago
        I don't quite understand how anyone could actually compare systems from different vendors. The failure modes aren't something the vendors have been able to identify in advance of a cataclysmic event. So I agree with your "delusional" statement, and also consider your remarks of the same caliber. You cannot determine a system's safety by watching videos. Think how many videos there would be by now of the 737max taking off, flying, and landing if airplanes were as hip and new as robotic drivers.

nradov 3y ago

Volvo has never shipped level 3 autonomous driving. At most they are level 2. https://www.sae.org/blog/sae-j3016-update https://www.sae.org/blog/sae-j3016-update The current market leader in terms of shipping products that are available for consumers to purchase is probably Mercedes-Benz Drive Pilot. They are legitimately at level 3 and significantly ahead of Tesla in most (but not all) respects. https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/a45326503/mercedes-benz-drive-pilot-review/ https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/a45326503/mercedes-benz...

martindbp 3y ago

Wow, since Tesla is so behind I guess my Volvo must be able to drive me through LA? https://youtu.be/0kvK_20mNuo?si=ooQj7S98GyCMAJEI https://youtu.be/0kvK_20mNuo?si=ooQj7S98GyCMAJEI No? No unprotected lefts, no roundabouts? Not even turning? Sounds very advanced, Tesla must be in a panic they're so far behind...

isityouyesitsme 3y ago
This is the same type of thinking that prevents most developers from working in safety-critical fields. The presence of a feature, or even its impressive capabilities, is/are not what constitutes "performance." It's also the same type of thinking that gets Tesla drivers decapitated or slammed into an abutment.
- martindbp 3y ago
  That would have an acceptable point to make if FSD was not capable of safely doing what all other ADAS systems can do, but it obviously can. It's just that Tesla has no interest in restricting its features and get L3 approval for such a small subset of driving. If today you claim FSD V12 is "behind" the lane keeping assist of other manufacturers, that is just delusion, I don't know what to tell you.
  - isityouyesitsme 3y ago
    I'm truthfully not understanding whether you've missed the point or if you're so interested in defending Tesla that you choose to look past it. I'm not making a claim about relative feature capabilities (yes, having replied in this specific thread makes that confusing, but that's where your comment was). I'm making a claim that the vast majority of developers do not know how to judge a system's safety. As an example of this from you, and for a more critical view of Tesla from me, I'll say that when I look at Tesla's capabilities, I could not make a claim that it does anything safely. Safety implies that the system knows its limits and refuses to operate outside of them. This is definitely not Tesla's way. Else it would be impossible, for example, to have sun blind spots make it not "see" a semi.
    - martindbp 3y ago
      https://www.youtube.com/shorts/dhxK4OKHhOw https://www.youtube.com/shorts/dhxK4OKHhOw My point stands: just because Tesla chooses to make FSD an L2 system at the moment doesn't mean that it's unable to act safely in the same scenarios as for instance Mercedes L3. So concluding that FSD is behind Mercedes is delusional. If you actually look at evidence available, (the thousands of videos available for FSD, and the ... tens available for other brands), and still claim FSD is behind, that is delusional. I'm defending Tesla because these comments are just insanity, and it points to an extreme anti-Tesla or Elon bias, which is very common these days. If you can't impartially evaluate a piece of technology that is clearly more advanced in every possible way, you really need to reflect.
      - isityouyesitsme 3y ago
        I don't quite understand how anyone could actually compare systems from different vendors. The failure modes aren't something the vendors have been able to identify in advance of a cataclysmic event. So I agree with your "delusional" statement, and also consider your remarks of the same caliber. You cannot determine a system's safety by watching videos. Think how many videos there would be by now of the 737max taking off, flying, and landing if airplanes were as hip and new as robotic drivers.