3 ms·

Why would FSD be any more capable? Like why would anyone expect that? I get how this could happen, but this isn't advanced navigation it's basic collision avoid

by XorNot 2y ago

Why would FSD be any more capable? Like why would anyone expect that? I get how this could happen, but this isn't advanced navigation it's basic collision avoidance of things in front of the car, something I'd expect autopilot to do at a bare minimum.

iknowstuff 2y ago
Entirely different software stack.
- XorNot 2y ago
  Like I said, I get how this could happen. But it is wild for a company proposing they've "almost" solved FSD to not be able to execute basic collision avoidance - a core, fundamental capability of FSD - to not have deployed that capability into the hardware of a car they claim is completely capable of FSD with that hardware.
  - iknowstuff 2y ago
    No, collision avoidance has to put a greater degree of trust in the actual driver of the vehicle, the human, and only step in if it’s absolutely certain the human is about to hit something they did not intend to hit. For example, when Tesla detects that you are about to accelerate into a human or a wall, they slow down the acceleration so that you have time to react, but they don’t stop it altogether. That’s very different from FSD’s decision-making process.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- Prickle 2y ago
  That should also be entirely irrelevant. It's emergency breaking. There shouldn't be differing results on whether you paid an extra $8000 usd or not. FSD does not advertise better emergency breaking as a feature. (Last I checked anyway.)
  - iknowstuff 2y ago
    The title shouldn't say self driving car then should it. Most if not all vehicles for sale will plow right through a styrofoam wall like that regardless of whats painted on it.
    - Prickle 2y ago
      No car advertising lane keeping or emergency breaking, would punch through that wall. Regardless of whether it's a simple poster, or a Styrofoam wall. Because emergency breaking should just work, regardless of mode.
      - iknowstuff 2y ago
        Oh please do me a favor and run your car into a wall to prove me wrong
hokumguru 2y ago
They use completely different machine learning models for each of the two features
- nickthegreek 2y ago
  So braking that won’t hit children is soft locked behind a paywall? I don’t think that is a great argument for the perspective buyer.
losvedir 2y ago
For a while, FSD was a totally different system from Autopilot. FSD was the giant new neural net training approach from end to end for all kinds of driving, while Autopilot was the massive explicitly tuned C++ code base for highway driving from the early days. The goal was to merge them, but I haven't followed it closely lately, so I don't know if they ever did.
jiggawatts 2y ago
It has better depth-from-vision estimation that not only uses stereo vision, but can combine multiple frames. In theory, it can handle the painting on a wall scenario. In theory. I’d like to see it tested! This wasn’t it.

by XorNot 2y ago

iknowstuff 2y ago

Entirely different software stack.

XorNot 2y ago
Like I said, I get how this could happen. But it is wild for a company proposing they've "almost" solved FSD to not be able to execute basic collision avoidance - a core, fundamental capability of FSD - to not have deployed that capability into the hardware of a car they claim is completely capable of FSD with that hardware.
- iknowstuff 2y ago
  No, collision avoidance has to put a greater degree of trust in the actual driver of the vehicle, the human, and only step in if it’s absolutely certain the human is about to hit something they did not intend to hit. For example, when Tesla detects that you are about to accelerate into a human or a wall, they slow down the acceleration so that you have time to react, but they don’t stop it altogether. That’s very different from FSD’s decision-making process.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
Prickle 2y ago
That should also be entirely irrelevant. It's emergency breaking. There shouldn't be differing results on whether you paid an extra $8000 usd or not. FSD does not advertise better emergency breaking as a feature. (Last I checked anyway.)
- iknowstuff 2y ago
  The title shouldn't say self driving car then should it. Most if not all vehicles for sale will plow right through a styrofoam wall like that regardless of whats painted on it.
  - Prickle 2y ago
    No car advertising lane keeping or emergency breaking, would punch through that wall. Regardless of whether it's a simple poster, or a Styrofoam wall. Because emergency breaking should just work, regardless of mode.
    - iknowstuff 2y ago
      Oh please do me a favor and run your car into a wall to prove me wrong

hokumguru 2y ago

They use completely different machine learning models for each of the two features

nickthegreek 2y ago
So braking that won’t hit children is soft locked behind a paywall? I don’t think that is a great argument for the perspective buyer.

losvedir 2y ago

For a while, FSD was a totally different system from Autopilot. FSD was the giant new neural net training approach from end to end for all kinds of driving, while Autopilot was the massive explicitly tuned C++ code base for highway driving from the early days. The goal was to merge them, but I haven't followed it closely lately, so I don't know if they ever did.

jiggawatts 2y ago

It has better depth-from-vision estimation that not only uses stereo vision, but can combine multiple frames. In theory, it can handle the painting on a wall scenario. In theory. I’d like to see it tested! This wasn’t it.