4 ms·

It seems to me that there are 10s of millions of "L2 driver assist" as defined by synopsys that have zero driver supervising checks such as most cars out there

It seems to me that there are 10s of millions of "L2 driver assist" as defined by synopsys that have zero driver supervising checks such as most cars out there with lane-keep and cruise control.

jeffbee 3y ago
And you believe that federal regulators have simply never heard of these other systems? A more likely explanation is that the driver attention monitoring in a Honda or Cadillac or whatever works better than Tesla's.
- bangaladore 3y ago
  You seem to have misunderstood me. I'm talking about vehicles without attention monitoring systems. Most cars sold in the past ten years technically have "Level-2" driving features but with no driver monitoring systems. Tesla autopilot / FSD is immensely more capable than 99% of LKAS systems, so maybe that's why regulators care more. But from a pure attentiveness standpoint, 1000 other car models have grossly worse safety in this regard. However, my argument is that your original claim that the "L2 driver assist system must ensure that the driver is always actively supervising" is demonstrably false, given that, by pure numbers, "Level-2" capable cars, by large, do not have driver monitoring features. However, the government continues to focus solely on Tesla.
  - jeffbee 3y ago
    Can you name such a vehicle? My personal car with lane keeping and TACC insists that you keep your hands on the wheel.
    - bangaladore 3y ago
      I might be mistaken about cars requiring no input, but isn't just steering sensing a problem? The car does not know if it is you or a weight on the steering wheel. Or if you are on your phone touching the wheel with your knee. According to the NHTSA, Tesla was forced to enable driver monitoring via a camera because sensing driver steering input was insufficient. So, without a doubt, 10s of millions of cars have "insufficient" driver monitoring while having "level 2" capability. Should those cars not be recalled and the feature be disabled (or updated to more aggressive monitoring if appropriate hardware exists)? To be clear, I fully support driver monitoring for ADAS to whatever extent regulations require. But picking and choosing who to enforce the rules suggests they aren't working for the general public's best interest.
      - jeffbee 3y ago
        The NHTSA insisted that Tesla switch to camera monitoring because Tesla repeatedly monkeyed with the nag interval via OTA software pushes. All the other manufacturers, except Tesla, complied with NHTSA's 2017 rule on the issue.

It seems to me that there are 10s of millions of "L2 driver assist" as defined by synopsys that have zero driver supervising checks such as most cars out there with lane-keep and cruise control.

jeffbee 3y ago

And you believe that federal regulators have simply never heard of these other systems? A more likely explanation is that the driver attention monitoring in a Honda or Cadillac or whatever works better than Tesla's.

bangaladore 3y ago
You seem to have misunderstood me. I'm talking about vehicles without attention monitoring systems. Most cars sold in the past ten years technically have "Level-2" driving features but with no driver monitoring systems. Tesla autopilot / FSD is immensely more capable than 99% of LKAS systems, so maybe that's why regulators care more. But from a pure attentiveness standpoint, 1000 other car models have grossly worse safety in this regard. However, my argument is that your original claim that the "L2 driver assist system must ensure that the driver is always actively supervising" is demonstrably false, given that, by pure numbers, "Level-2" capable cars, by large, do not have driver monitoring features. However, the government continues to focus solely on Tesla.
- jeffbee 3y ago
  Can you name such a vehicle? My personal car with lane keeping and TACC insists that you keep your hands on the wheel.
  - bangaladore 3y ago
    I might be mistaken about cars requiring no input, but isn't just steering sensing a problem? The car does not know if it is you or a weight on the steering wheel. Or if you are on your phone touching the wheel with your knee. According to the NHTSA, Tesla was forced to enable driver monitoring via a camera because sensing driver steering input was insufficient. So, without a doubt, 10s of millions of cars have "insufficient" driver monitoring while having "level 2" capability. Should those cars not be recalled and the feature be disabled (or updated to more aggressive monitoring if appropriate hardware exists)? To be clear, I fully support driver monitoring for ADAS to whatever extent regulations require. But picking and choosing who to enforce the rules suggests they aren't working for the general public's best interest.
    - jeffbee 3y ago
      The NHTSA insisted that Tesla switch to camera monitoring because Tesla repeatedly monkeyed with the nag interval via OTA software pushes. All the other manufacturers, except Tesla, complied with NHTSA's 2017 rule on the issue.