# First look at new FSD features coming soon: stopping at lights and stop signs



## TrevP (Oct 20, 2015)

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1243292982444425217


----------



## John (Apr 16, 2016)




----------



## IPv6Freely (Aug 8, 2017)

HW3 only?


----------



## FRC (Aug 4, 2018)

IPv6Freely said:


> HW3 only?


Yes!


----------



## IPv6Freely (Aug 8, 2017)

So officially the first feature for FSD that I don't already have! haha


----------



## 2Kap (Jan 29, 2018)

What software version are they running?


----------



## DocScott (Mar 6, 2019)

I'm really, really curious what happens when someone with HW3 and AP, but no FSD, gets this firmware (or the wide release ones that have this feature).

If it doesn't stop on AP when it sees a red light, that's an unnecessary safety hazard--Tesla doesn't usually make you pay more to unlock _safety_ features, such as ELDA.

But if it does stop on AP when it sees a red light, then that reduces the value of FSD.

I think probably what should happen is people with AP but not FSD will be able to have it automatically stop, but won't have it start again on its own, while people with FSD will have it able to start again on its own. Once automatic turning is finally implemented, that would be FSD only. But we'll see...


----------



## IPv6Freely (Aug 8, 2017)

DocScott said:


> I'm really, really curious what happens when someone with HW3 and AP, but no FSD, gets this firmware (or the wide release ones that have this feature).
> 
> If it doesn't stop on AP when it sees a red light, that's an unnecessary safety hazard--Tesla doesn't usually make you pay more to unlock _safety_ features, such as ELDA.
> 
> ...


I was told by Tesla that if you don't have FSD you're not eligible for a HW3 upgrade anyway. Which is kind of weird since the newer cars will have HW3 regardless of whether you paid for FSD or not.


----------



## TheeCatzMeow (Feb 8, 2019)

DocScott said:


> I'm really, really curious what happens when someone with HW3 and AP, but no FSD, gets this firmware (or the wide release ones that have this feature).
> 
> If it doesn't stop on AP when it sees a red light, that's an unnecessary safety hazard--Tesla doesn't usually make you pay more to unlock _safety_ features, such as ELDA.
> 
> ...


I think the limiting agent is FSD computer. If people who haven't received FSD get it I think it will be year + in the future when it's no longer beta. (Keep in mind Summon, regular forward and back Summon, is still beta.)


----------



## TheeCatzMeow (Feb 8, 2019)

IPv6Freely said:


> I was told by Tesla that if you don't have FSD you're not eligible for a HW3 upgrade anyway. Which is kind of weird since the newer cars will have HW3 regardless of whether you paid for FSD or not.


Not werid... it's expensive. Cost to Tesla to upgrade is probably around $1000 (their cost, not retail price.) Reason people get it now is FSD computer (HW3) is actually cheaper than HW2.5.


----------



## TrevP (Oct 20, 2015)

IPv6Freely said:


> I was told by Tesla that if you don't have FSD you're not eligible for a HW3 upgrade anyway. Which is kind of weird since the newer cars will have HW3 regardless of whether you paid for FSD or not.


That's the because the FSD computer is included in the cost of FSD if your car doesn't come with it and needs the upgrade. Bottom line, anyone who wants FSD needs to have a HW3 equipped car to get the full feature suite and the end-game.

Having the new visuals in all cars with HW3 (FSD purchase not required) is an ad to get people to upgrade.


----------



## FRC (Aug 4, 2018)

DocScott said:


> I'm really, really curious what happens when someone with HW3 and AP, but no FSD, gets this firmware (or the wide release ones that have this feature).
> 
> If it doesn't stop on AP when it sees a red light, that's an unnecessary safety hazard--Tesla doesn't usually make you pay more to unlock _safety_ features, such as ELDA.
> 
> ...


This sounds like the beginning of an argument that I've been expecting for quite some time. Basically, I expect many to say "I didn't pay for FSD, but I want certain FSD features for free because they increase safety" or "because they should be included in the autopilot Package". Preposterous! Tesla told us up front what features TACC, EAP, FSD, and AP would include. Only FSD was promised to include future features, safety or otherwise. Yes, at times Tesla has unlocked additional features that THEY decided were in the best interest of the fleet. Now, as new FSD features begin to slowly appear(much, much later than Elon indicated), those who didn't pony up many months ago are going to start complaining that they should have FSD features they chose not to pay for. And they're gonna grab any excuse they can think of for why they should be included.
I expect Tesla to(rightly) respond something like this: You were offered FSD when you purchased your vehicle and at any time subsequent to purchase. If you believe that you would like FSD features now, you can purchase them at any time. However, please be aware, as the number and quality of FSD features increase, so might their price.


----------



## TheeCatzMeow (Feb 8, 2019)

FRC said:


> so might their price


Correction, "so WILL their price", Elon has been very clear on this.


----------



## FRC (Aug 4, 2018)

TheeCatzMeow said:


> Correction, "so WILL their price", Elon has been very clear on this.


Yeah, I specifically chose the word "might" because Elon has been clear as mud on a lot of things!


----------



## DocScott (Mar 6, 2019)

FRC said:


> This sounds like the beginning of an argument that I've been expecting for quite some time. Basically, I expect many to say "I didn't pay for FSD, but I want certain FSD features for free because they increase safety" or "because they should be included in the autopilot Package". Preposterous! Tesla told us up front what features TACC, EAP, FSD, and AP would include. Only FSD was promised to include future features, safety or otherwise. Yes, at times Tesla has unlocked additional features that THEY decided were in the best interest of the fleet. Now, as new FSD features begin to slowly appear(much, much later than Elon indicated), those who didn't pony up many months ago are going to start complaining that they should have FSD features they chose not to pay for. And they're gonna grab any excuse they can think of for why they should be included.
> I expect Tesla to(rightly) respond something like this: You were offered FSD when you purchased your vehicle and at any time subsequent to purchase. If you believe that you would like FSD features now, you can purchase them at any time. However, please be aware, as the number and quality of FSD features increase, so might their price.


Do you think that's what I'm doing?

I have HW 2.5. I _know_ I won't get that feature. And I'm not saying that I should have that feature--I shouldn't.

In fact, what I think _actually_ should happen is that Tesla should take features _away_ from me: they should not allow me to use AP for off-label cases like city streets. The manual says it's not supposed to be used in those circumstances.

But Tesla is creating a problem for itself by letting people use AP in cases where they're not supposed to be using AP. They need to come to grips with the ramifications of that, one way or the other.

If they do the right thing, which is to limit my AP to the circumstances specified in the manual, I won't complain. In fact, I'll be impressed.

If they give people with HW3 and AP features I don't have, I won't complain, although I might be willing to pay for an a la carte upgrade to HW3.

I'm just very curious what they're going to do, because so far they keep having features leak in to AP that weren't part of the promise. For example, at some point I got the ability to dial TACC all the way down to 0 mph. That's only useful in urban driving, which I'm not supposed to be doing with TACC. So why did I get the feature? It's unfair to people who have ponied up for FSD, but Tesla seems to have a hard time resisting disseminating their features more widely than they promised. Another example was giving Smart Summon to people with EAP. Why? If anything counts as self-driving, it should be the car navigating without anyone in it.

We'll see if Tesla can be more disciplined in the future, and this is a big test...


----------



## DocScott (Mar 6, 2019)

TheeCatzMeow said:


> I think the limiting agent is FSD computer. If people who haven't received FSD get it I think it will be year + in the future when it's no longer beta. (Keep in mind Summon, regular forward and back Summon, is still beta.)


But that's my question. If they have the "FSD computer" but didn't pay for FSD, which will be the case for a _lot_ of cars purchased in the past year (all of which came with HW3 aka the FSD computer), then will it stop for stoplights on its own? Or at least beep at you or something like that?

And no, I'm not one of those people. I'm just curious.


----------



## shareef777 (Mar 10, 2019)

DocScott said:


> I'm really, really curious what happens when someone with HW3 and AP, but no FSD, gets this firmware (or the wide release ones that have this feature).
> 
> If it doesn't stop on AP when it sees a red light, that's an unnecessary safety hazard--Tesla doesn't usually make you pay more to unlock _safety_ features, such as ELDA.
> 
> ...


No more a safety hazard as every single AP on every single Tesla (not just 3) on the road today. Or even any car in the last few decades that has cruise control. Cars aren't designed to stop on their own for signs/lights.

This feature (even when it improves safety) is what FSD buyers are paying for. Any 3 owner can have it (for a cost).

Logically speaking, FSD will be the greatest safety feature on a car EVER. Tesla's not going to give that away either.


----------



## TheeCatzMeow (Feb 8, 2019)

DocScott said:


> But that's my question. If they have the "FSD computer" but didn't pay for FSD, which will be the case for a _lot_ of cars purchased in the past year (all of which came with HW3 aka the FSD computer), then will it stop for stoplights on its own? Or at least beep at you or something like that?
> 
> And no, I'm not one of those people. I'm just curious.


Does your car beep at you now? Mine did before FSD Retrofit. If yours doesn't now I certainly wouldn't expect it.
Additionally, for what it's worth regardless of safety I do not think they should give it to you. With your current car you're 3.4 times safer without any of your current safety features on or 4.3 times safer with your current safety features. Many of us paid for FSD and that's a major part.


----------



## SoFlaModel3 (Apr 15, 2017)

DocScott said:


> I'm really, really curious what happens when someone with HW3 and AP, but no FSD, gets this firmware (or the wide release ones that have this feature).
> 
> If it doesn't stop on AP when it sees a red light, that's an unnecessary safety hazard--Tesla doesn't usually make you pay more to unlock _safety_ features, such as ELDA.
> 
> ...


This isn't a safety feature, rather a convenience feature. You can stop the car yourself at red lights and stop signs, thus making this a convenience feature.

Safety features are things like automatic emergency braking, forward collision detection, etc.

Don't set yourself up for disappointment, your car is only stopping at a red light and stop sign if you paid for FSD and have HW3.


----------



## IPv6Freely (Aug 8, 2017)

TrevP said:


> That's the because the FSD computer is included in the cost of FSD if your car doesn't come with it and needs the upgrade. Bottom line, anyone who wants FSD needs to have a HW3 equipped car to get the full feature suite and the end-game.
> 
> Having the new visuals in all cars with HW3 (FSD purchase not required) is an ad to get people to upgrade.


Exactly.


----------



## DocScott (Mar 6, 2019)

TheeCatzMeow said:


> Does your car beep at you now? Mine did before FSD Retrofit. If yours doesn't now I certainly wouldn't expect it.
> Additionally, for what it's worth regardless of safety I do not think they should give it to you.





SoFlaModel3 said:


> Don't set yourself up for disappointment,


Sheesh!

Even though I've said that I'm not in the category I'm asking about, people keep thinking I'm asking about what _I_ will get! I will not be disappointed when I don't get this feature, and not only do I not think they should give it to me, I think they should take away features that I have.

One more time: I don't have HW3. Therefore I will not get this feature. End of story.

I'm _asking_ about people who have HW3 but not FSD. I'm not one of them, but there are a lot of them.


----------



## FRC (Aug 4, 2018)

DocScott said:


> I'm _asking_ about people who have HW3 but not FSD. I'm not one of them, but there are a lot of them.


I got ya @DocScott! My wife is in this category, she currently sees lights and stop signs. When my FSD car begins reacting to lights and signs, I'll let you know if her's does too(It won't).


----------



## TrevP (Oct 20, 2015)

DocScott said:


> But that's my question. If they have the "FSD computer" but didn't pay for FSD, which will be the case for a _lot_ of cars purchased in the past year (all of which came with HW3 aka the FSD computer), then will it stop for stoplights on its own? Or at least beep at you or something like that?
> 
> And no, I'm not one of those people. I'm just curious.


if you have the FSD computer and you didn't pay for FSD you get the visuals but nothing more (the car will not act on anything) Period.
You get TACC and autosteer and that's it because that's basic autopilot now.


----------



## NOGA$4ME (Sep 30, 2016)

It certainly is an interesting philosophical debate. 

Logically you could take it all the way to enabling FSD on all hardware capable cars for free as a "safety feature" because presumably cars running FSD will be safer than those not. Unless you are in the camp that yes, that absolutely should be done, I think that opens up the possibility that somewhere in the continuum between completely passive and mostly-passive safety features (i.e. red light warnings and AEB) and full autonomy, that even though it is only a matter of installed software, or even software licenses, that there is a line at which the additional safety provided by automation should be a paid option, even though technically the car you are sitting in has all the hardware necessary implement additional safety features.

For me, the resolution to this debate is to draw the line at AEB-like functionality. I.e. With an FSD license the car will gradually decelerate as it approaches a red light or stop sign, similar to how TACC will gradually slow down as it approaches a car from behind. Without FSD, however, the car will not react until the last possible moment, and then it will slam on the brakes in an AEB-like fashion. Safety is provided, but certainly not in a way anyone who paid for FSD would be upset that people that didn't pay for FSD were getting some kind of benefit that they didn't pay for.


----------



## GDN (Oct 30, 2017)

NOGA$4ME said:


> It certainly is an interesting philosophical debate.
> 
> Logically you could take it all the way to enabling FSD on all hardware capable cars for free as a "safety feature" because presumably cars running FSD will be safer than those not. Unless you are in the camp that yes, that absolutely should be done, I think that opens up the possibility that somewhere in the continuum between completely passive and mostly-passive safety features (i.e. red light warnings and AEB) and full autonomy, that even though it is only a matter of installed software, or even software licenses, that there is a line at which the additional safety provided by automation should be a paid option, even though technically the car you are sitting in has all the hardware necessary implement additional safety features.
> 
> For me, the resolution to this debate is to draw the line at AEB-like functionality. I.e. With an FSD license the car will gradually decelerate as it approaches a red light or stop sign, similar to how TACC will gradually slow down as it approaches a car from behind. Without FSD, however, the car will not react until the last possible moment, and then it will slam on the brakes in an AEB-like fashion. Safety is provided, but certainly not in a way anyone who paid for FSD would be upset that people that didn't pay for FSD were getting some kind of benefit that they didn't pay for.


The key here is the feature sets and lines have already been drawn. Maybe not where you see them, but they are drawn. Just because a car sees and paints something on the GUI has nothting to do with whether it will react or if it is safety or not. It may be a great safety feature, but Tesla has decided that you will pay extra to get that safety.


----------



## Chris350 (Aug 8, 2017)

and yet... no firmware version posted yet...


----------



## SoFlaModel3 (Apr 15, 2017)

Chris350 said:


> and yet... no firmware version posted yet...


That's because its in early access program right now.


----------



## GDN (Oct 30, 2017)

This is more likely an insider of some sort. Maybe an employee. No SW detected by Teslafi at all - and way too many beta testers have their car connected there, we would see it show up if it was released Beta. This is more likely an Alpha candidate with very very limited distribution.


----------



## StromTrooperM3 (Mar 27, 2019)

SoFlaModel3 said:


> This isn't a safety feature, rather a convenience feature


This rationale can be applied to every AP and FSD feature. We've been driving for 70 years without a lane keep assist. Every feature of a Tesla is about convenience


----------



## M3OC Rules (Nov 18, 2016)

GDN said:


> The key here is the feature sets and lines have already been drawn. Maybe not where you see them, but they are drawn. Just because a car sees and paints something on the GUI has nothting to do with whether it will react or if it is safety or not. It may be a great safety feature, but Tesla has decided that you will pay extra to get that safety.


Yes and Tesla reserves the right to redraw the lines when they please.


----------



## M3OC Rules (Nov 18, 2016)

I'm curious if they are rewriting the wording on the Autopilot warnings. Are they getting rid of things like "Warning: Do not use Traffic-Aware Cruise Control on city streets or on roads where traffic conditions are constantly changing." from the manual or adding separate FSD wording? Or "Warning: Autosteer is intended for use only on highways and limited-access roads with a fully attentive driver." I assume they will otherwise talk about mixed messages. In a sense, this implies a lot more than "now we stop at stop signs/lights" but in reality do we really think anything else is really changing? Will they change the warnings for only people with FSD?


----------



## 2Kap (Jan 29, 2018)

Even when the Early Access Program was in full swing last year the BETA firmware versions would still be posted here and online. It was secret but not THAT secret.


----------



## GDN (Oct 30, 2017)

2Kap said:


> Even when the Early Access Program was in full swing last year the BETA firmware versions would still be posted here and online. It was secret but not THAT secret.


I went back and read the article that posted this. It notes Eric was not in his car, but a car he had access to they didn't disclose. I'm not going back to the video of the investor day last April, now approaching a full year, but I'm not sure this was truly anything much different than what we saw then. It's really starting to just look like a real person may have just gotten a ride in a Tesla insider Alpha/testing car.

It was very controlled as someone notes they only turned on / engaged AP just before getting to the light. There were places during the drive that AP/EAP/FSD whatever you want to call it wasn't even available as the icon disappears more than once during that drive. What would be impressive if that drive were started again and it be engaged at the beginning of the drive. How would the car handle those places that maybe line markings, etc. aren't the best.


----------



## TheeCatzMeow (Feb 8, 2019)

GDN said:


> I went back and read the article that posted this. It notes Eric was not in his car, but a car he had access to they didn't disclose. I'm not going back to the video of the investor day last April, now approaching a full year, but I'm not sure this was truly anything much different than what we saw then. It's really starting to just look like a real person may have just gotten a ride in a Tesla insider Alpha/testing car.
> 
> It was very controlled as someone notes they only turned on / engaged AP just before getting to the light. There were places during the drive that AP/EAP/FSD whatever you want to call it wasn't even available as the icon disappears more than once during that drive. What would be impressive if that drive were started again and it be engaged at the beginning of the drive. How would the car handle those places that maybe line markings, etc. aren't the best.


Fair, though in the Investor day video it didn't have number of feet count down. So this is at least something newer prepping for release. (Of course no surprise they are prepping for release, we've known that.)


----------



## M3OC Rules (Nov 18, 2016)

GDN said:


> What would be impressive if that drive were started again and it be engaged at the beginning of the drive. How would the car handle those places that maybe line markings, etc. aren't the best.


My guess is its not much different than Autopilot now and it didn't look too different than what I would expect although its hard to see the road in the video. Once you start autopilot it generally will do just fine going without lines for a bit like through an intersection but it won't let you engage autosteer when it loses the lines. The place it struggles the most is when there is a loss of lines going around a corner.

Here's what I think is going on. They are transitioning to doing more in neural nets. The problem with that is it becomes more unpredictable, requires lots of training data, etc. In the meantime, they continue to tweak the current code. So we see small changes with each update, maybe just training updates from more data and bug fixes. With the new HW3 they were able to add a bunch of object detection without messing up the other code. They did that and now are confident enough in the performance they are acting on it. Everything else remains the same. Also just a guess but based on info from employees, ping-ponging is related to calibration so its coming and going seemingly randomly for people with various updates.

Now I'm just wondering if I'm going to get pulled over driving my car around for no reason because I miss it.


----------



## TrevP (Oct 20, 2015)

Photo of the user manual detailing the feature has emerged from @greentheonly on Twitter


----------



## shareef777 (Mar 10, 2019)

Really exciting


----------



## Enginerd (Aug 28, 2017)

TrevP said:


> Photo of the user manual detailing the feature has emerged from @greentheonly on Twitter
> 
> View attachment 32989


This would be so much cooler if I could read it!


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

The support for narrow but long images is lacking. 
Let's see if I can just post sections of the image.


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)




----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)




----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)




----------



## iChris93 (Feb 3, 2017)

And now with white background 


http://imgur.com/a/hY94ijY


----------



## NOGA$4ME (Sep 30, 2016)

Oh, thank you @iChris93 for posting a readable version!

What do you guys make of the statement that this feature "works best on roads that are frequently driven by Tesla vehicles"?

Do you think this is simply saying that Tesla will have received more training video from those locations, or do you think there might be some kind of more dynamic information sharing going on among the fleet?


----------



## iChris93 (Feb 3, 2017)

NOGA$4ME said:


> Do you think this is simply saying that Tesla will have received more training video from those locations, or do you think there might be some kind of more dynamic information sharing going on among the fleet?


I think it just probably means they have it mapped in the gps data better.


----------



## NOGA$4ME (Sep 30, 2016)

iChris93 said:


> I think it just probably means they have it mapped in the gps data better.


There has to be more to it than that...otherwise why would it specifically mention *Tesla* vehicles? Or vehicles at all?


----------



## StromTrooperM3 (Mar 27, 2019)

NOGA$4ME said:


> What do you guys make of the statement that this feature "works best on roads that are frequently driven by Tesla vehicles"?


I think that stop signs and traffic control devices are "marked" in the 2020.12 map data.

When a member of the fleet identities that there is a traffic control at gps location X is flagged and added or compared to the map data.

erik did a video on it a while back where it saw the stop sign. Then they removed the stop sign and backed up and the car still displayed it even though it wasn't there. Then they drove past where it "thought" it was and backed up again and then it disappeared. It's definitely comparing the environment in real time to pre determined data


----------



## iChris93 (Feb 3, 2017)

NOGA$4ME said:


> There has to be more to it than that...otherwise why would it specifically mention *Tesla* vehicles? Or vehicles at all?


Because Tesla vehicles are the ones reporting to update the map data.


----------



## nonStopSwagger (May 7, 2018)

Stopping at traffic lights feels like low hanging fruit, after watching the investor day videos from April 2019.

I'm more interested in seeing it stop and then make a turn at a traffic light, similar to what was shown a year ago. I predict lots of broken thumbs as people continue to follow instructions to"keep their hands on the wheel". 😀


----------



## M3OC Rules (Nov 18, 2016)

nonStopSwagger said:


> Stopping at traffic lights feels like low hanging fruit, after watching the investor day videos from April 2019.
> 
> I'm more interested in seeing it stop and then make a turn at a traffic light, similar to what was shown a year ago. I predict lots of broken thumbs as people continue to follow instructions to"keep their hands on the wheel". 😀


That's the problem with demos. This low hanging fruit dates back to 2016. https://www.tesla.com/blog/all-tesla-cars-being-produced-now-have-full-self-driving-hardware 
Also note the massive amounts of warnings, beta label, and the fact it actually stops at green lights(is that safer?).

That being said I can't wait to try it.  Progress.


----------



## GDN (Oct 30, 2017)

I think this is all about starting to train the NN. It is using cameras and map data to detect stop lights and stop signs, but after reading how the car will respond to such and the acknowledgement of this working best on roads frequented by Tesla's, I think this is all about the NN being trained and updated. About how we drive and respond to the items it detects by camera and existing map database, but is learning and improving every mile we drive with this feature enabled.


----------



## sduck (Nov 23, 2017)

I can't help but be worried by all the warnings and caveats in tesla's documentation. There's enough of them that the average joe youtuber is going to go TL,dr and crash their car into something and then blame tesla.


----------



## GDN (Oct 30, 2017)

sduck said:


> I can't help but be worried by all the warnings and caveats in tesla's documentation. There's enough of them that the average joe youtuber is going to go TL,dr and crash their car into something and then blame tesla.


It seemed to be a lot, and it describes several situations, but I think it boils down to a simple overview for most all of the situations. If the car detects a stop sign or stop light, it will paint the red bar and slow and then stop, even if the light is green. If you believe it to be safe to proceed you tell the car to do so by pressing down on the stalk or the accelerator and it will. If the car determines it to not be safe or the light changes to red, it may stop anyway. You must take over if you wish to proceed. This is simply for stops, no turns. If a turn is involved you take over which will disengage any autopilot.

This is not intended to be complete, rely on their documentation, but most situations boil down to that.


----------



## DocScott (Mar 6, 2019)

GDN said:


> It seemed to be a lot, and it describes several situations, but I think it boils down to a simple overview for most all of the situations. If the car detects a stop sign or stop light, it will paint the red bar and slow and then stop, even if the light is green. If you believe it to be safe to proceed you tell the car to do so by pressing down on the stalk or the accelerator and it will. If the car determines it to not be safe or the light changes to red, it may stop anyway. You must take over if you wish to proceed. This is simply for stops, no turns. If a turn is involved you take over which will disengage any autopilot.
> 
> This is not intended to be complete, rely on their documentation, but most situations boil down to that.


At the risk of having rotten tomatoes thrown at me, this sounds like behavior that might be expected as a safety feature for TACC that would apply regardless of whether you have FSD. (Of course, it would _not_ apply to HW2.5 cars like mine, because they simply lack the processing power to do this.)

Notice that, if so, this would take an ability _away_ from current AP owners who have HW3. Before this feature is distributed, a current HW3 owner can cruise through a green light on TACC without having to do anything (except occasional torque on the wheel). With this, they would also have to tap on the accelerator or gear lever. Thus, the car is becoming _less_ self-driving than it was before.

I fully expect that, even if the feature described here is for all Model 3's and Y's with HW3 and TACC, that the eventual feature that will allow it to restart itself when a light turns green, or even to just cruise through a green light without intervention, will be limited to those who have paid for FSD. But this? It sounds more like a safety feature than a convenience feature to me, even though it lays the groundwork for future convenience features.


----------



## GDN (Oct 30, 2017)

DocScott said:


> At the risk of having rotten tomatoes thrown at me, this sounds like behavior that might be expected as a safety feature for TACC that would apply regardless of whether you have FSD. (Of course, it would _not_ apply to HW2.5 cars like mine, because they simply lack the processing power to do this.)
> 
> Notice that, if so, this would take an ability _away_ from current AP owners who have HW3. Before this feature is distributed, a current HW3 owner can cruise through a green light on TACC without having to do anything (except occasional torque on the wheel). With this, they would also have to tap on the accelerator or gear lever. Thus, the car is becoming _less_ self-driving than it was before.
> 
> I fully expect that, even if the feature described here is for all Model 3's and Y's with HW3 and TACC, that the eventual feature that will allow it to restart itself when a light turns green, or even to just cruise through a green light without intervention, will be limited to those who have paid for FSD. But this? It sounds more like a safety feature than a convenience feature to me, even though it lays the groundwork for future convenience features.


Time will tell, but those that have HW3 and not paid for FSD, I think they will simply get the visualizations, nothing more and no response or change from the car.


----------



## StromTrooperM3 (Mar 27, 2019)

DocScott said:


> a current HW3 owner can cruise through a green light on TACC without having to do anything (except occasional torque on the wheel). With this, they would also have to tap on the accelerator or gear lever


The document posted explains that you have to turn on the Traffic Light recognition.

I agree that having to input for EVERY light is a step backwards and if given the option, the way the current design is, I'd opt out until it could automatically proceed through green lights


----------



## MarkB (Mar 19, 2017)

StromTrooperM3 said:


> The document posted explains that you have to turn on the Traffic Light recognition.
> 
> I agree that having to input for EVERY light is a step backwards and if given the option, the way the current design is, I'd opt out until it could automatically proceed through green lights


This is all to help train the Neural Net.

Not much differ than the first versions of NOA.


----------



## shareef777 (Mar 10, 2019)

Hmm, if it indeed slows down at a green light then not only is this a downgrade, but adds safety risk. I’d be worried about being rear ended if my 3 decides to slow down when approaching a green light.


----------



## Nom (Oct 30, 2018)

I want to thank all of you that are going to turn this on and use it in a very careful way. It is in beta and clearly is in the phase where it needs patient and attentive people to help it learn. You are helping it more than it is helping you.

Seems like a reasonable phase. Albeit a hassle if you don’t have the mindset of being a helpful beta tester. I’m sure many of you will be happy to oblige. Which is awesome. (I don’t have FSD, otherwise I’d take car trips for the sheer purpose of helping it learn!)


----------



## FF35 (Jul 13, 2018)

Sure would be nice to get the FSD computer so I can use this stuff. It has been about a year since Tesla took my money.🤷🏻‍♂️


----------



## StromTrooperM3 (Mar 27, 2019)

FF35 said:


> Sure would be nice to get the FSD computer so I can use this stuff. It has been about a year since Tesla took my money.🤷🏻‍♂️


We only have one video of this so far.

Rumor has it that those who paid 8-10k for FSD back in 2016 2017 were offered an early access program to try to make good on the cost and delay. This MIGHT be that however those versions used to show up on teslafi and this isntm. This might be an internal tester.

I'm still waiting for hw3 too, but you're not going to see this feature after they retrofit you for a long time


----------



## Klaus-rf (Mar 6, 2019)

Nom said:


> It is in beta and clearly is in the phase where it needs patient


 ALL OF AP IS ßETA software. 100% of it is ßETA. Still.


----------



## Nom (Oct 30, 2018)

Sure, but this is beta beta. 😉


----------



## JWardell (May 9, 2016)

This is in firmware 2020.12.1 as first shown by Green:


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1243641644932648964
It will only appear to those with developer access (normally, Tesla employees)


----------



## Ksb466 (Oct 22, 2018)

How practical is it to release this where it slows for every green light? Thats fine for Alpha testing for incremental progress, but doesn’t seem worth even early access/beta testing. Surely they need this to get to the level of continuing through a green without input before wide release. I‘ve adopted all of their software feature, but that sounds less than useful. Guess I’ll assume they know what they’re doing here.


----------



## M3OC Rules (Nov 18, 2016)

Ksb466 said:


> How practical is it to release this where it slows for every green light? That's fine for Alpha testing for incremental progress, but doesn't seem worth even early access/beta testing. Surely they need this to get to the level of continuing through a green without input before wide release. I've adopted all of their software feature, but that sounds less than useful. Guess I'll assume they know what they're doing here.


I'm sure pressure from the NTSB is a factor in decision making. It also doesn't help to demo it a year ago and say it's going to be done 3 months ago with nothing to show but visualizations. Mix together legal, marketing, and engineering and stopping at green lights is apparently the outcome.

We'll see if it's worth using. I'm not too worried about having to press the throttle although I agree it seems like a step backwards. I'm more worried about if it stops gracefully. I have many cases where there is a stopped car in front and it waits way too long to slow down forcing heavy braking. With one-pedal driving, I rarely need the brakes and its great.


----------



## MarkB (Mar 19, 2017)

Ksb466 said:


> How practical is it to release this where it slows for every green light? Thats fine for Alpha testing for incremental progress, but doesn't seem worth even early access/beta testing. Surely they need this to get to the level of continuing through a green without input before wide release. I've adopted all of their software feature, but that sounds less than useful. Guess I'll assume they know what they're doing here.


IMO, part of the "requiring input" to proceed normally through a green light is to provide feedback (confirmation) to the Neural Network that the software has it right.

It's millions of these confirmations (and looking at the aborts as well) that will eventually allow the "without input" version.

And until the "without input" version comes, it's also an added method to ensure the driver is in charge. There's a lot more ramifications of the car improperly dealing with intersections. They have to get each piece right before going to the next.

This is already moving much faster than I expected.


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

Ksb466 said:


> How practical is it to release this where it slows for every green light?


It's definitely not a helpful driving aid. Most people shouldn't bother activating this. I probably won't (if it's ever offered to the general public).

This is meant more for the people who are interested in "playing" with the feature, to see how well it works. And to report issues back to Tesla.


----------



## TheeCatzMeow (Feb 8, 2019)

garsh said:


> It's definitely not a helpful driving aid. Most people shouldn't bother activating this. I probably won't (if it's ever offered to the general public).
> 
> This is meant more for the people who are interested in "playing" with the feature, to see how well it works. And to report issues back to Tesla.


I hear ya, but I believe you're thinking about this completely wrong. This is being done so the system can learn. If everyone just decides "I"ll turn it off till it's ready for primetime" then it will take us a long time to get there. 
I totally get if you don't want to be annoyed by it or essentially be working for Tesla without getting paid (cause both are true) but this is needed to move us to the next step forward.

What it's actually doing is at every light it will stop if you do nothing, but in the background it makes a decision "go or stop" by you telling it to "go" means it made a good decision. If you do nothing those all get looked at and they figure out why, maybe it was red (even though the system saw green), maybe there was a car stopping in front of you, maybe it seemed to risky. It's probably 99% correct right now but if 1% of Tesla's are running red lights that's not going to go over well. We need to get to 99.9999% accurate. (Aka less running of red lights than a human 3.2 red lights run per light per hour, according to IIHS.)

Again, totally your choice to not use, just saying the more that use it the faster we get to the end goal.


----------



## GDN (Oct 30, 2017)

I too believe we will need to use it to help it learn. I'm trying to think outside the box. First if the car does slow down, I figure it would be gradual at first and give you time to react and be able to let the car know it is safe to proceed. Or possibly even better. Set your driving speed 10 mph below the speed limit and then you use the accelerator to drive the speed limit. When the car sees a light that is green, it might think it is time to slow or stop, but guess what you are already giving it the signal it is safe to proceed - no one around you knows any difference. If indeed the light is changing or red, then you let off the accelerator the car realizes it should stop even though you originally had your foot on the accelerator, so it stops. If it got confused because you had your foot on the accelerator then it is up to you to brake and take control. The NN will learn what it should do from all of those scenarios.


----------



## TheeCatzMeow (Feb 8, 2019)

GDN said:


> I too believe we will need to use it to help it learn. I'm trying to think outside the box. First if the car does slow down, I figure it would be gradual at first and give you time to react and be able to let the car know it is safe to proceed. Or possibly even better. Set your driving speed 10 mph below the speed limit and then you use the accelerator to drive the speed limit. When the car sees a light that is green, it might think it is time to slow or stop, but guess what you are already giving it the signal it is safe to proceed - no one around you knows any difference. If indeed the light is changing or red, then you let off the accelerator the car realizes it should stop even though you originally had your foot on the accelerator, so it stops. If it got confused because you had your foot on the accelerator then it is up to you to brake and take control. The NN will learn what it should do from all of those scenarios.


Watch the video again, it warns on screen before the car brakes (noted by the acceleration/regen braking line.) In fact you can see him pressing the pedal. 
It appears it doesn't brake or slow if you do it early enough.


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

TheeCatzMeow said:


> This is being done so the system can learn.


Only in the sense that Tesla will keep a record of when you override the car's action, and examine that data to see if you have actually uncovered a scenario that they hadn't considered. In which case more examples of that scenario will be added to the training set for a future version of the neural net.


----------



## TheeCatzMeow (Feb 8, 2019)

garsh said:


> Only in the sense that Tesla will keep a record of when you override the car's action, and examine that data to see if you have actually uncovered a scenario that they hadn't considered. In which case more examples of that scenario will be added to the training set for a future version of the neural net.


Correct but that's the point. And remember it isn't about getting to "Go or Stop" its about a percent chance you're correct. As an example, for a particular scenario it might be "Go" - 97.12457% and "Stop" 10.2314% it's about slightly updating to get Go or Stop to have more 0 or 100% and less middle %s.

Sorry getting a little Data Scientist on ya.


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

For those of us who want to help Tesla to train the net to keep getting better, and don't mind the effort involved, activate the feature and to your part to help make FSD a reality. 

But for the majority of people, it's going to be better if they keep this feature off. They'll do more harm than good if they can't be bothered to read and fully comprehend the limitations of this beta feature. I worry about all of the posts and articles we're going to end up seeing about how the feature isn't "working" according to people who can't be bothered to read about how it works.


----------



## GDN (Oct 30, 2017)

I get it this is a something that has to be used carfully, but the more miles driven the faster it will learn.


----------



## SkipperOFMO (Mar 15, 2019)

Has anyone determined which software update this is part of?


----------



## SkipperOFMO (Mar 15, 2019)

FF35 said:


> Sure would be nice to get the FSD computer so I can use this stuff. It has been about a year since Tesla took my money.🤷🏻‍♂️


Have you contacted your service center?


----------



## iChris93 (Feb 3, 2017)

SkipperOFMO said:


> Has anyone determined which software update this is part of?





JWardell said:


> This is in firmware 2020.12.1 as first shown by Green:
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1243641644932648964
> It will only appear to those with developer access (normally, Tesla employees)


----------



## NOGA$4ME (Sep 30, 2016)

FF35 said:


> Sure would be nice to get the FSD computer so I can use this stuff. It has been about a year since Tesla took my money.🤷🏻‍♂️


Well as of right now, other than being able to see the visualizations for traffic cones and stop lights/signs, you aren't missing anything. And hopefully you understood full well that you were going to have to wait awhile for any real FSD features to be released. I still don't think we're going to see anything significant for another year or two minimum, but there have been small, incremental improvements along the way, and there will continue to be those.


----------



## SkipperOFMO (Mar 15, 2019)

It's not on 12.1 that I can see.


----------



## TheeCatzMeow (Feb 8, 2019)

SkipperOFMO said:


> It's not on 12.1 that I can see.


You have to have the "Developer Flag" checked to "Yes" for it to be available in 2020.12.1. That's my understanding... PS this flag is set by Tesla,m not something you can do.


----------



## RichEV (Sep 21, 2017)

garsh said:


> For those of us who want to help Tesla to train the net to keep getting better, and don't mind the effort involved, activate the feature and to your part to help make FSD a reality.
> 
> But for the majority of people, it's going to be better if they keep this feature off. They'll do more harm than good if they can't be bothered to read and fully comprehend the limitations of this beta feature. I worry about all of the posts and articles we're going to end up seeing about how the feature isn't "working" according to people who can't be bothered to read about how it works.


Yes, When this feature is eventually released widely I would like to see a thread just for "Complaints About Stopping at Traffic Lights and Stop Signs slowing down for green lights". And a separate thread for useful feedback about the feature that doesn't involve complaining about slowing down for green lights.


----------



## RichEV (Sep 21, 2017)

I would also like it if Tesla would add this functionality to the visualization without including the ability to activate the automatic stopping behavior. That way we can all get comfortable with the way it will behave before it gets activated. And it would be really cool to see it in action!


----------



## DocScott (Mar 6, 2019)

I don't understand the argument that slowing for green lights unless the driver overrides will help Tesla improve the system.

Why not just have it operate completely in shadow mode? It then makes the decision, when it sees a light, whether it would stop or not. If it thinks "stop" and the driver doesn't stop, then it can note it as an instance of being wrong. What possible testing purpose does the rigamarole of having the driver affirmatively indicate they want to maintain speed (as opposed to simply maintaining speed in shadow mode) serve?


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

DocScott said:


> What possible testing purpose does the rigamarole of having the driver affirmatively indicate they want to maintain speed (as opposed to simply maintaining speed in shadow mode) serve?


All I can come up with is: "CYA" during early testing. If the car were to incorrectly go through a red light with this feature turned on, that would be very bad. So this might be more of a "certification" feature release, and they'll remove that particular annoyance once the software has been subjected to more situations and proves that it reliably identifies red lights in the real world.

There are some confusing real-world traffic lights out there.


----------



## FRC (Aug 4, 2018)

garsh said:


> All I can come up with is: "CYA" during early testing. If the car were to incorrectly go through a red light with this feature turned on, that would be very bad. So this might be more of a "certification" feature release, and they'll remove that particular annoyance once the software has been subjected to more situations and proves that it reliably identifies red lights in the real world.
> 
> There are some confusing real-world traffic lights out there.
> View attachment 33108
> View attachment 33109


 I agree, Garsh, I don't think the "stop at green lights" part of the function will ever see the light of day in wide release. It just doesn't make sense.


----------



## TheeCatzMeow (Feb 8, 2019)

garsh said:


> All I can come up with is: "CYA" during early testing. If the car were to incorrectly go through a red light with this feature turned on, that would be very bad. So this might be more of a "certification" feature release, and they'll remove that particular annoyance once the software has been subjected to more situations and proves that it reliably identifies red lights in the real world.
> 
> There are some confusing real-world traffic lights out there.
> View attachment 33108
> View attachment 33109


I'm confused why you think there is risk? The default will be to stop at every light, red, yellow, or green. You have to acknowledge you want to proceed. Or maybe I'm reading it wrong and you merely mean check and double check before you acknowledge.


----------



## TrevP (Oct 20, 2015)

DocScott said:


> I don't understand the argument that slowing for green lights unless the driver overrides will help Tesla improve the system.
> 
> Why not just have it operate completely in shadow mode? It then makes the decision, when it sees a light, whether it would stop or not. If it thinks "stop" and the driver doesn't stop, then it can note it as an instance of being wrong. What possible testing purpose does the rigamarole of having the driver affirmatively indicate they want to maintain speed (as opposed to simply maintaining speed in shadow mode) serve?


At this stage I think making sure that their algorithm is being opaque in seeking truth from the users with its actions. Long-term game is to be able to have enough data including false-positives to improve their system and show regulators that it's safe. Keeping everything in shadow mode and not exposing what decisions it's making can be dangerous. I like the fact that they're seeking user input in order to proceed instead of just assuming it's safe to proceed. It's super important that they seek input to validate or invalidate behaviors


----------



## StromTrooperM3 (Mar 27, 2019)

TrevP said:


> At this stage I think is making sure that their algorithm is being opaque in seeking truth from the users with its actions.


Completely agree.

This is just basic data validation and training of the NN. For this to pass regulations it will need hundreds of thousands if not millions of validated tests...done by us. Think about how many lights you go through in a day, I bet we all do a minimum of 50 a day. Should be easy to get those numbers up there

1,000,000 / 50 lights per car = 20,000 people. Considering the number of cars on the road this can be done in a day

This is what we all signed up for and now it seems everyone forgot that 😂


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

TheeCatzMeow said:


> I'm confused why you think there is risk? The default will be to stop at every light, red, yellow, or green. You have to acknowledge you want to proceed. Or maybe I'm reading it wrong and you merely mean check and double check before you acknowledge.


I think you just misunderstood my comment.

The question I was answering was "why does Tesla have it stop at green lights"?
I answered that "Tesla wants to validate that it's seeing the light colors correctly at this point in time, and doesn't want to risk driving through a red light by mistake".


----------



## NOGA$4ME (Sep 30, 2016)

StromTrooperM3 said:


> Think about how many lights you go through in a day, I bet we all do a minimum of 50 a day.


On a normal day I can tell you how many lights I encounter:

7 on the way to work, but two of them I make a turn at, so Autopilot wouldn't be engaged, and the last 4 are not what I would call typical because they are all right in a row and backed up enough that I pretty much have to disengage autopilot then anyway because it's stop and go and I usually have to wait for the cars ahead to clear before I can go through the light, even when it's green.

On the way home, only 6 lights, although I could get fairly reasonable data for all but the first. The first light is always a nightmare getting out onto the main road. I couldn't rely on autopilot for this to safely get me out onto the road even if it could make a turn. One of the other lights I am also making a turn at, so AP wouldn't be engaged here.

So I think my daily total would be 6 altogether.


----------



## TheeCatzMeow (Feb 8, 2019)

NOGA$4ME said:


> On a normal day I can tell you how many lights I encounter:
> 
> 7 on the way to work, but two of them I make a turn at, so Autopilot wouldn't be engaged, and the last 4 are not what I would call typical because they are all right in a row and backed up enough that I pretty much have to disengage autopilot then anyway because it's stop and go and I usually have to wait for the cars ahead to clear before I can go through the light, even when it's green.
> 
> ...


By my math you'll just need to go to and from work ~250,000,000 times and you'll validate stop lights for us and the federal government.


----------



## GDN (Oct 30, 2017)

TheeCatzMeow said:


> By my math you'll just need to go to and from work ~250,000,000 times and you'll validate stop lights for us and the federal government.


The good news is that he now has at least 100,000 good friends to help out. I honestly don't know how many buy FSD, but a conservative 25% of 400,000 cars. More cars than that are on the road however.


----------



## StromTrooperM3 (Mar 27, 2019)

NOGA$4ME said:


> 7 on the way to work, but two of them I make a turn at, so Autopilot wouldn't be engaged, and the last 4 are not what I would call typical because they are all right in a row and backed up enough that I pretty much have to disengage autopilot


The video seems to be showing them 400+ feet away. Seems like even the lights you're mentioning would still be candidates for a quick "yes that's green"

I have EAP so maybe I'm misunderstanding but my favorite feature of it is using it in stop and go traffic with a follow distance of 2. Seems it would likely see those lights as well and benefit.

You're saying you only drive directly to and from work every day? And no where else, ever?


----------



## StromTrooperM3 (Mar 27, 2019)

TheeCatzMeow said:


> you'll validate stop lights for us and the federal government.


Honestly I didn't think of that, just think of the map data Tesla could sell to Garmin, Google maps, Waze, Audi the list goes on and on. Brilliant


----------



## NOGA$4ME (Sep 30, 2016)

StromTrooperM3 said:


> The video seems to be showing them 400+ feet away. Seems like even the lights you're mentioning would still be candidates for a quick "yes that's green"


My point is that I don't engage AP for those 4 lights, because AP would bring me out into the middle of the intersection, blocking oncoming cars from turning left, and potentially leaving me hanging out in the middle of the intersection if the light changes while I am stuck. If I don't have AP on, I'm not going to have an opportunity to "confirm" the light is green.



StromTrooperM3 said:


> You're saying you only drive directly to and from work every day? And no where else, ever?


During the work week, yes, pretty much that.

If I go to the grocery store, there's only 2 lights, one of which is a turn, so bump it up by 2 lights round trip every few days.

We go to hockey games a few times a week during the season. Believe it or not, there is only 2 lights that are not turns on the way (even though the arena is much farther away), and 2 lights on the way back that aren't turns.

On the weekend I go to church which only has one "light" on the way, but it's a four way flasher, so there isn't even a green light there at all!

So in a given week I might have 30 to/from work, 4 for two trips to the store, and on a busy hockey week another 12. So 46/week not counting any special errands or trips, and yes, there are some. But I am WELL below the 50/day that you estimate!


----------



## StromTrooperM3 (Mar 27, 2019)

NOGA$4ME said:


> But I am WELL below the 50/day that you estimate!


I'm envious of the small town you live in.


----------



## John (Apr 16, 2016)

I think the "stop at green lights" is more of a user conditioning phase—"you are still the driver with this new functionality"—than anything to do with neural net training.

By ensuring that action needs to be taken during normal use in almost any trip, complacency can be avoided. Had they left it free to pass through green lights with no action, after a few perfect runs people might start relaxing too much. Most accidents happen in the regime this update is intended for (near home). The accidents would be minor, but they would quickly pile up if people treated city Autopilot like they do highway Autopilot.


----------



## NOGA$4ME (Sep 30, 2016)

StromTrooperM3 said:


> I'm envious of the small town you live in.


Not a small town by any means...just picked the right place to live which is convenient to work, shopping, and fortunate that our hockey arena is located with convenient access to highways (although the new owner of the Hurricanes wants to see it moved to downtown Raleigh, which would be oh so inconvenient--but significantly increase the number of lights I would have to go through).


----------



## StromTrooperM3 (Mar 27, 2019)

NOGA$4ME said:


> --but significantly increase the number of lights I would have to go through).


Whatever it takes to improve FSD! That is our mission! 😉


----------



## Klaus-rf (Mar 6, 2019)

StromTrooperM3 said:


> You're saying you only drive directly to and from work every day? And no where else, ever?


 I'm not allowed just now to drive to work. State is on "stay at home" lockdown. So Sad. Although golf is considered "essential" so if I carry a golf club in the trunk ...".

So green light testing, for me, will have to wait.


----------



## iChris93 (Feb 3, 2017)

Klaus-rf said:


> Although golf is considered "essential" so if I carry a golf club in the trunk ...".


Is this true?


----------



## M3OC Rules (Nov 18, 2016)

This article on Forbes is so disappointing. The author clearly doesn't know what they are planning on releasing (or maybe what leaked is a better way to put it.) Is journalism dead?

TLDR: He apparently thinks its 100% vision-based which it's not and has no idea they adding the stopping on green safety measure. And of course, if he knew how it worked his arguments wouldn't hold.


----------



## Klaus-rf (Mar 6, 2019)

iChris93 said:


> Is this true?


Sad, but true. Thanks, Arizona:

*Arizona mayors slam governor's edict keeping golf courses open*
Five different mayors in Arizona sent a letter to Gov. Doug Ducey Tuesday cover his decision to classify some businesses like golf courses as "essential" during the coronavirus pandemic.

The mayors, including of the cities of Tucson and Flagstaff, sent the Republican governor a letter saying his executive order should not have included golf courses and payday lenders in the definition of "essential services" that cannot be shut down in response to the outbreak. They also requested a statewide moratorium on evictions and foreclosures.

Ducey has agreed to pause evictions for 120 days for renters who are quarantining or struggling from the economic fallout.

https://www.nbcnews.com/health/heal...-plan-u-s-n1168156/ncrd1168411#liveBlogHeader


----------



## iChris93 (Feb 3, 2017)

Klaus-rf said:


> Sad, but true. Thanks, Arizona:
> 
> *Arizona mayors slam governor's edict keeping golf courses open*
> Five different mayors in Arizona sent a letter to Gov. Doug Ducey Tuesday cover his decision to classify some businesses like golf courses as "essential" during the coronavirus pandemic.
> ...


😨


----------



## StromTrooperM3 (Mar 27, 2019)

Klaus-rf said:


> I'm not allowed just now to drive to work. State is on "stay at home" lockdown.


I think you guys are taking this a tad too serious.

#1. I meant outside of this temporary current state we're in, the number of green lights we will be able to "ok" will be a ton in a short time span.

#2. Going for a drive alone is not only completely safe I see no harm in doing so. I'm actually pulling one car out of winter storage right now and will take it for a rip.

#3. You're not allowed to go anywhere? What if you need to buy groceries?


----------



## TesLou (Aug 20, 2016)

FRC said:


> I agree, Garsh, I don't think the "stop at green lights" part of the function will ever see the light of day in wide release. It just doesn't make sense.


Around the area I live, never mind the green lights, you'll get rear-ended for stopping at a yellow or "fresh" red light.


----------



## Klaus-rf (Mar 6, 2019)

StromTrooperM3 said:


> I think you guys are taking this a tad too serious.
> ...
> #3. You're not allowed to go anywhere? What if you need to buy groceries?


 I was being a bit sarcastic. We're "asked" to be restricted to residence except for essential stuff. With no one asking for proof of what is essential. With Golf and gun stores automatically added to the essential list which most of us think is redonkulous.

I go to dialysis three times a week and Monday they passed out notorized letters in anticipation of any of us being stopped while travelling to and fro treatments. And, of course, the governor says you can't be arrested "just for being out". Sure made me feel better.


----------



## M3OC Rules (Nov 18, 2016)

TesLou said:


> Around the area I live, never mind the green lights, you'll get rear-ended for stopping at a yellow or "fresh" red light.


They are incorporating heavy braking at green lights to also remove the rust from the brake rotors.


----------



## TrevP (Oct 20, 2015)

Guys, please stay on-topic, I know it's easy to get into the weeds but please think of the other members who are here for relevant information. Thanks


----------



## tivoboy (Mar 24, 2017)

I have to say, I have been going for drives 1-2 times a week. Just up and down 280 along the reservoir and onen space. Driving in the M3 is just such a wonderful blissful break from working at home (which I do most of the time anyway, but there is something about being required to stay at home) and not being able to go out and patronize any establishments. I don’t come into contact with anyone while out driving and some days (usually early in the morning) I might see about 20-30 cars on a 20-30 minute drive.

I guess, were I to get into an accident I might be taking resources away from other Covid related needs, but I see thaT risk as extremely extremely low.


----------

