5 ms·
>I honestly did not get the hype until this specific HW4/v12 combination which didn't exist until last summer or so. It's the first time FSD felt like a safety
by tw04 1y ago
>I honestly did not get the hype until this specific HW4/v12 combination which didn't exist until last summer or so. It's the first time FSD felt like a safety feature for just $99 a month.
That's exactly the problem. It's great right until it isn't, at which point it's likely to make a decision that will kill you or someone else if you aren't lucky.
(most) Humans are REALLY good at paying attention to something that will actively kill them at any moment - you don't see a lot of people running a chainsaw while sending a text to their friend about drinks later in the day.
Humans are REALLY bad at stopping something they trust (IMO foolishly), with less than a half a second of notice, from killing them or someone else. It is completely natural to get lulled into a sense of security when something mostly works exactly as you'd expect.
Meanwhile Tesla wants to act as if it's the driver's fault anytime there's a crash without acknowledging they are actively perpetuating the myth of: "this thing drives itself". It's literally called "Full Self Driving" and Telsa expects the average person to look at that name and think: you need to be vigilant anytime you turn this on because it is a beta feature that may drive into oncoming traffic at any moment.
- cowlby 1y agoAgreed, but you can't not pay attention with the new Vision Attention Monitoring. Not sure if it's HW4/v12 specific but it watches your eyesight specifically. So for example, if I look at the screen, my phone, or start day-dreaming for even a few seconds, it'll beep and quickly strike me out from using FSD. "FSD (supervised)" is how it shows up in the UI too at least giving some expectation of it not being autonomous. So in practice, I'm picturing the right driving inputs and watching what it's doing.
- thejazzman 1y agoPut on a hat or sunglasses and it falls back to periodic steering wheel nags I haven't tested it but I assume the same is true if you put tape over the camera
- zaptrem 1y agoTaping over the camera causes it to lock out (it can tell the difference between that and night time).
- mhss 1y agoQuite frankly sounds super boring. I prefer driving than supervising. Only true unsupervised autonomous driving would be interesting for me (e.g Waymo).
- SoftTalker 1y agoBut doesn’t Waymo autonomous driving only work in certain areas with hyper accurate maps?
- tw04 1y agoCorrect, because that combined with about $30k in sensors is the only true safe way to do it today.
- fastball 1y ago> the only true safe way An unsubstantiated claim given that there are many, many safe human drivers who have neither LIDAR sensors nor hyper-accurate pre-mapping at their disposal.
- Dylan16807 1y agoQuote the rest of the line please.
- fastball 1y ago"today"? Are there not humans on the road today? There have been a number of safety issues with Waymos, certainly too many to describe them as the one true safe option, today. Entertaining a No True Scotsmen is a bit of a silly exercise anyway, but this semantic game is extra silly.
- alwa 1y agoI took "it" to imply "autonomous driving." But I very much agree this is extra silly.
- JumpCrisscross 1y ago> you can't not pay attention with the new Vision Attention Monitoring Polarised sunglasses. Works on my Subaru. Works on my buddy’s Tesla.
- elgenie 1y agoWhen the words are actually spelled out the sheer ridiculousness of "Full Self Driving" having a "(Supervised)" postscript becomes rather readily apparent. Tesla can't help but know that the supposed non-driver getting constantly nagged to be vigilant as if actively driving destroys most of the value proposition of FSD. Vision Attention Monitoring has quite a bit of potential to be very useful … precisely in situations in which vehicles are not driving themselves.
- Gareth321 1y ago> That's exactly the problem. It's great right until it isn't, at which point it's likely to make a decision that will kill you or someone else if you aren't lucky. This should be weighed against the fallibility of human drivers, surely? Our point of comparison is not "perfect", it's "human." Inasmuch, with millions of miles driven, FSD appears to be many times safer than humans: https://www.notebookcheck.net/Tesla-Autopilot-and-FSD-are-now-6x-safer-than-human-drivers-who-turn-them-off-to-text-from-their-phones.955050.0.html https://www.notebookcheck.net/Tesla-Autopilot-and-FSD-are-no... Not perfect, and there will be crashes, but much better, and I think that's the yard stick we should be using, because no system will ever be perfect.
- watwut 1y agoTesla comes across safer when you compare the performance under completely different conditions and then shift blame on humans for not reacting in a second when Tesla suddenly disengage.
- Gareth321 1y agoTesla records all FSD accidents when it has been engaged 10 seconds prior to the crash. I don't think your claim is accurate but if you have a source I would be glad to read it.
- enragedcacti 1y agoThose are numbers for Autopilot, not FSD. Autopilot is driving mostly highway miles which have much lower crash rates than the highway/city combined stat Tesla compares against. More importantly, those statistics describe the safety of a supervised system and can't be used to infer the safety of the system on it's own. Tesla refuses to disclose the industry standard "miles per disengagement" for FSD but crowdsourced data puts them at 456, pitiful compared to humans and other self-driving projects. [1] Also to note, FSD disengagements are probably common enough to still be on the left hand side of the "Valley of Degraded Supervision"[2], where mistakes are common enough that users stay viligant. As mi/de increases to 5,000 or 50,000, the quality of the supervision could degrade to the point that the supervised system is less safe than an unaided driver. [1] https://teslafsdtracker.com/Main https://teslafsdtracker.com/Main [2] https://users.ece.cmu.edu/~koopman/pubs/koopman19_TestingSafetyCase_SAEWCX.pdf https://users.ece.cmu.edu/~koopman/pubs/koopman19_TestingSaf...