Live data from Hacker News

California passes law banning Tesla from calling software FSD

teslarati.com

331–340 of 672 posts

Re: California passes law banning Tesla from calling software FSD

#331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Brains aren’t neural nets and eyes aren’t cameras.

Why? The whole idea of neural nets is based on mimicking the brain. It's even in the name: neural (for neuron).

Neural networks as used in AI are inspired by the brain in much the same way that OOP was inspired by the way cells work--neither one is an attempt to faithfully recreate the actual operations of an extremely complex (and only partially understood!) biological system.

Re: California passes law banning Tesla from calling software FSD

#332

Mainstream full self driving would just create massive traffic and gridlock - pointless in the end. The induced demand would outweigh the benefits. States are better off acknowledging that sprawling car dependent cities are not sustainable. High frequency busses in the interim with rail transit is the real solution. Current self driving technology plus some key infrastructure changes with dedicated bus lanes and prio…

Traffic is _people_. "Induced demand" just means that more people are able to get around in a presumably less miserable way, rather than you (who are presumably already driving if gridlock is a problem to you) getting a better experience. And no, buses or rail won't provide a good experience until they're so frequent and have so many stops that they basically end up being ridiculously overbuilt taxis in all but the h…

10-minute bus service is totally achievable in pretty much every city. Toronto does it. And Toronto is not a dense city.

Re: California passes law banning Tesla from calling software FSD

#333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The sale page is pretty explicit about what you’re buying and has this note: > The currently enabled features require active driver supervision and do not make the vehicle autonomous. The activation and use of these features are dependent on achieving reliability far in excess of human drivers as demonstrated by billions of miles of experience, as well as regulatory approval, which may take longer in some jurisdictio…

Somehow we got used to companies selling products named "Definitely Does Thing [X]!" and then adding fine print that says "this product absolutely does not do thing [X]." I think it would be much better if we stopped accepting that practice.

The stuff above this says exactly what the FSD package is. All this fine print is adding is that you will get new features as they are released. In 12/2022 this is a very good description of what the package does (and, IMO, it undersells the capability: autosteer on city streets works really well for me with the new FSD package)

> Full Self-Driving Capability $15,000

> All functionality of Basic Autopilot and Enhanced Autopilot

> Traffic Light and Stop Sign Control

> Coming Soon

> Autosteer on city streets

Re: California passes law banning Tesla from calling software FSD

#334

Mainstream full self driving would just create massive traffic and gridlock - pointless in the end. The induced demand would outweigh the benefits. States are better off acknowledging that sprawling car dependent cities are not sustainable. High frequency busses in the interim with rail transit is the real solution. Current self driving technology plus some key infrastructure changes with dedicated bus lanes and prio…

What makes you think that the self driving technology being developed (by, you claim, "burning tens of billions") is only for "personal vehicles"? The same technology is what can enable the large fleets of self-driving minivans that are necessary for what you describe. Cities can impose a charge per mile driven (that fluctuates depending on current traffic) and people can then decide whether they wish to use a "personal" vehicle or order a self-driving Uber/Waymo minivan pooled ride.

Re: California passes law banning Tesla from calling software FSD

#335
post #305

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The sorts of Driving behaviors you mention are not a significant cause of traffic congestion. Traffic congestion is caused by there being too many cars on the road with limited space for cars. Anything that will increase the amount of cars will quickly dominate inefficient driving behaviors, and self driving cars will massively increase the amount of cars on the road, as it would drive down the cost of driving and en…

> "Traffic congestion is caused by there being too many cars on the road with limited space for cars." I mean in some sense this is always going to be true, and removing cars will always help alleviate traffic. But it's not true that driving behaviour is not a significant cause of traffic congestion: it's the cause in most cases. [1] For an extreme illustration, there's a well-known phenomenon where adding extra lane…

Yes these are real phenomenons that exist, but focusing on this marginal issue is fiddling at the edges of the real core problem.

Roads are fixed in size, cars are very big and take up too much space.

Fundamentally baked into the design this is an inefficient way to move people around and there's no fix to be found working within a car oriented framework. The only solution is in removing cars from the road. This is why self driving cannot fix traffic as it will only add more cars.

Self driving buses, now that would be an improvement, but self driving cars no.

Re: California passes law banning Tesla from calling software FSD

#336

Should have happened sooner. I love my Model Y. It's the most fun car I've ever owned. It's also the most comfortable on long road trips and I can sleep in it in climate-controlled comfort without generating a gas that could kill me. I leave the house every morning with a full tank and never have to stop at a gas station. And my cost per mile is 1/4 what it was with an ICE car. I just wish Tesla would focus on this s…

> It's also the most comfortable on long road trips and I can sleep in it in climate-controlled comfort without generating a gas that could kill me. Why are you sleeping in your car for long trips? :)

Because hotels can be expensive, and when you want to bomb from one side of the country to the other driving 16 hours a day, it's just easier to sleep in the car. I've done it many times in a 20-year-old Jetta, very comfortably.

Re: California passes law banning Tesla from calling software FSD

#337

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Somehow we got used to companies selling products named "Definitely Does Thing [X]!" and then adding fine print that says "this product absolutely does not do thing [X]." I think it would be much better if we stopped accepting that practice.

The stuff above this says exactly what the FSD package is. All this fine print is adding is that you will get new features as they are released. In 12/2022 this is a very good description of what the package does (and, IMO, it undersells the capability: autosteer on city streets works really well for me with the new FSD package) > Full Self-Driving Capability $15,000 > All functionality of Basic Autopilot and Enhance…

Again, to repeat my point (which I didn't think was very confusing), the things described in the small-point text are all fine. But they cannot in any reasonable world be summarized by the product name "Full Self Driving." Insofar as California is encouraging Tesla to name their products more accurately, that seems like an absolute good.

This point holds even if I don't go into the fact that both autosteer/autopilot (phantom braking problems) and FSD-beta (requires active driver control, disengagements every < 1 mile) are both kind of a mess. Or that the claims from Musk regarding capabilities and timing have been completely inaccurate.

Re: California passes law banning Tesla from calling software FSD

#338
post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think claiming it "will never be delivered" is probably wrong as well.

The feature is impossible to implement with the sensor suite that comes with the car.

It is plenty possible to implement with the sensor suite that comes with the car.

Re: California passes law banning Tesla from calling software FSD

#339
post #122
post #34

FSD = fraudulent sales and disappointment I can’t believe Tesla has gotten away with selling a feature that doesn’t exist, and will never be delivered, on so many cars for so long. Tesla began selling “full self-driving” in October, 2016 and a month later marketed it with (now known to be heavily controlled) video of a car driving itself for two minutes. Owners of those initial cars have probably paid them off by now…

It’s still up in all its fraudulent glory: https://www.tesla.com/videos/full-self-driving-hardware-all-...

The title of this is "Full Self Driving Hardware on All Teslas". The hardware is in fact on all Teslas. What part of that is fraud? Nothing about this video was misleading and the car did in fact drive itself through that route.

Re: California passes law banning Tesla from calling software FSD

#340
post #34

FSD = fraudulent sales and disappointment I can’t believe Tesla has gotten away with selling a feature that doesn’t exist, and will never be delivered, on so many cars for so long. Tesla began selling “full self-driving” in October, 2016 and a month later marketed it with (now known to be heavily controlled) video of a car driving itself for two minutes. Owners of those initial cars have probably paid them off by now…

FSD beta is literally deployed to all Teslas that have purchased it.
Post reply on HN