3 ms·

What I don't understand about this is that to my experience being driven around in friends teslas, its already there. It really seems like legalese vs technical

by asdff 1y ago

What I don't understand about this is that to my experience being driven around in friends teslas, its already there. It really seems like legalese vs technical capability. The damn thing can drive with no input and even find a parking spot and park itself. I mean where are we even moving the goalpost at this point? Because there's been some accidents its not valid? The question is how that compares to the accident rate of human drivers not that there should be an expectation of zero accidents ever.

breve 1y ago
Tesla set their own goal posts. In 2016 Tesla claimed every Tesla car being produced had "the hardware needed for full self-driving capability at a safety level substantially greater than that of a human driver": https://web.archive.org/web/20161020091022/https://tesla.com/blog/all-tesla-cars-being-produced-now-have-full-self-driving-hardware https://web.archive.org/web/20161020091022/https://tesla.com... It was a lie then and remains a lie now.
- asdff 1y ago
  That recent bloomburg report showed tesla fsd was an order of magnitude safer than human drivers in the U.S. People on reddit tried to discount it because "fsd is not actually fsd because you have to tap the wheel every now and then so those miles don't count" but really that is just a regulatory constraint not some real technical issue. The car drives itself and its drivers don't pay attention at all and its getting these numbers.
  - breve 1y ago
    > The car drives itself and its drivers don't pay attention at all Sure. Does Tesla take responsibility and accept liability for the vehicle's driving?
AlotOfReading 1y ago
The word "driving" has multiple, partially overlapping meanings. You're using it in a very informal sense to mean "I don't have to touch the controls much". Power to you for using whatever definitions you feel like. Other people, most importantly your local driving laws, use driving as a technical term to refer to tasks done by the entity that's ultimately responsible for the safety of the entire system. The human remains the driver in this definition, even if they've engaged FSD. They are not in a Waymo. If you're interested in specific technical verbiage, you should look at SAE J3016 (the infamous "levels" standard), which many vehicle codes incorporate. One of the critical differences between your informal definition is whether you can stop paying attention to the road and remain safe. With your definition, it's possible have a system where you're not "driving", but you still have a responsibility to react instantaneously to dangerous road events after hours of of inaction. Very few humans can reliably do that. It's not a great way to communicate the responsibilities people have in a safety-critical task they do every day.
- asdff 1y ago
  >The human remains the driver in this definition I don't understand why that is. They literally do nothing. The car drives itself. Parks itself. Does everything itself. The fact you have to engage with the wheel every now and then is because of regulation not because the tech isn't there imo. Really to me there is zero difference between the waymo and tesla experience save for regulatory decisions that prevent the tesla from being truly hands free eyes shut.
  - diebeforei485 1y ago
    The difference is liability. If you're riding a Waymo, you are not at all liable for what the vehicle does. If there is a collision, you don't need to exchange your insurance info or name or anything else (regardless of who is at fault). You are not allowed to be in the drivers seat. Tesla has chosen to not (yet) assume that liability, and leave that liability to the driver and requires a driver in the drivers seat. But someone in the drivers seat can override the steering wheel accidentally and cause a collision, so they likely will require the drivers seat to be empty to assume liability (or disable all controls, which is only possible on a steer by wire vehicle, and the only such vehicle in the world is Cybertruck). Tesla has not asked for regulatory approval for level 4 or 5. When they do, it'll be interesting to see how governments react.
    - asdff 1y ago
      It makes sense why they wouldn't from a game theory standpoint. Why not shift liability? Waymo would too if they could set up such a structure in a way that makes sense. It is a little different for a cab where a 13 year old could call one on moms cellphone vs a car you buy outright and is registered to a licensed driver who pays for the insurance on it. Still, my point is all this has nothing to do with the tech. It is all regulatory/legal checkers.
      - diebeforei485 1y ago
        > Why not shift liability? Because being a passenger in a driverless vehicle is a much better user experience than being a driver. You can be on a zoom call, sleep, watch a movie or TV show or scroll TikTok, get some work done on your computer, wear a VR headset and be in a different world, etc etc. Tesla would make a lot more money, and could charge a lot more for FSD. They aren't doing that yet because they aren't ready yet. It's why they still have humans in the robotaxi service. There are no doubts in my mind that they will do it probably next year. The latest version of FSD on the new cars is very, very impressive.

by asdff 1y ago

breve 1y ago

Tesla set their own goal posts. In 2016 Tesla claimed every Tesla car being produced had "the hardware needed for full self-driving capability at a safety level substantially greater than that of a human driver": https://web.archive.org/web/20161020091022/https://tesla.com/blog/all-tesla-cars-being-produced-now-have-full-self-driving-hardware https://web.archive.org/web/20161020091022/https://tesla.com... It was a lie then and remains a lie now.

asdff 1y ago
That recent bloomburg report showed tesla fsd was an order of magnitude safer than human drivers in the U.S. People on reddit tried to discount it because "fsd is not actually fsd because you have to tap the wheel every now and then so those miles don't count" but really that is just a regulatory constraint not some real technical issue. The car drives itself and its drivers don't pay attention at all and its getting these numbers.
- breve 1y ago
  > The car drives itself and its drivers don't pay attention at all Sure. Does Tesla take responsibility and accept liability for the vehicle's driving?

AlotOfReading 1y ago

The word "driving" has multiple, partially overlapping meanings. You're using it in a very informal sense to mean "I don't have to touch the controls much". Power to you for using whatever definitions you feel like. Other people, most importantly your local driving laws, use driving as a technical term to refer to tasks done by the entity that's ultimately responsible for the safety of the entire system. The human remains the driver in this definition, even if they've engaged FSD. They are not in a Waymo. If you're interested in specific technical verbiage, you should look at SAE J3016 (the infamous "levels" standard), which many vehicle codes incorporate. One of the critical differences between your informal definition is whether you can stop paying attention to the road and remain safe. With your definition, it's possible have a system where you're not "driving", but you still have a responsibility to react instantaneously to dangerous road events after hours of of inaction. Very few humans can reliably do that. It's not a great way to communicate the responsibilities people have in a safety-critical task they do every day.

asdff 1y ago
>The human remains the driver in this definition I don't understand why that is. They literally do nothing. The car drives itself. Parks itself. Does everything itself. The fact you have to engage with the wheel every now and then is because of regulation not because the tech isn't there imo. Really to me there is zero difference between the waymo and tesla experience save for regulatory decisions that prevent the tesla from being truly hands free eyes shut.
- diebeforei485 1y ago
  The difference is liability. If you're riding a Waymo, you are not at all liable for what the vehicle does. If there is a collision, you don't need to exchange your insurance info or name or anything else (regardless of who is at fault). You are not allowed to be in the drivers seat. Tesla has chosen to not (yet) assume that liability, and leave that liability to the driver and requires a driver in the drivers seat. But someone in the drivers seat can override the steering wheel accidentally and cause a collision, so they likely will require the drivers seat to be empty to assume liability (or disable all controls, which is only possible on a steer by wire vehicle, and the only such vehicle in the world is Cybertruck). Tesla has not asked for regulatory approval for level 4 or 5. When they do, it'll be interesting to see how governments react.
  - asdff 1y ago
    It makes sense why they wouldn't from a game theory standpoint. Why not shift liability? Waymo would too if they could set up such a structure in a way that makes sense. It is a little different for a cab where a 13 year old could call one on moms cellphone vs a car you buy outright and is registered to a licensed driver who pays for the insurance on it. Still, my point is all this has nothing to do with the tech. It is all regulatory/legal checkers.
    - diebeforei485 1y ago
      > Why not shift liability? Because being a passenger in a driverless vehicle is a much better user experience than being a driver. You can be on a zoom call, sleep, watch a movie or TV show or scroll TikTok, get some work done on your computer, wear a VR headset and be in a different world, etc etc. Tesla would make a lot more money, and could charge a lot more for FSD. They aren't doing that yet because they aren't ready yet. It's why they still have humans in the robotaxi service. There are no doubts in my mind that they will do it probably next year. The latest version of FSD on the new cars is very, very impressive.