# Autonomous car tech thread



## HanSolo

Do you guys really need autopilot? I am one of those people who will NEVER let a computer drive the car for me. Too many things can go wrong. If Autopilot requires you to constantly be vigilant and be ready to grab the steering wheel at a moment's notice, it is not autopilot to me. If you do a lot of highway driving, that is a possibility but I would be concerned that I might doze off or something by mistake and miss something vital. Ford has a system upcoming in their 2017 lineup that I would be much more likely to trust that will accelerate and brake for you, but requires you to do all of the steering.


----------



## Blackout

HanSolo said:


> Do you guys really need autopilot? I am one of those people who will NEVER let a computer drive the car for me. Too many things can go wrong. If Autopilot requires you to constantly be vigilant and be ready to grab the steering wheel at a moment's notice, it is not autopilot to me. If you do a lot of highway driving, that is a possibility but I would be concerned that I might doze off or something by mistake and miss something vital. Ford has a system upcoming in their 2017 lineup that I would be much more likely to trust that will accelerate and brake for you, but requires you to do all of the steering.


Do I need autopilot? No, But I don't need heated seats either... It's certainly a nice to have and worth paying more to have it, same thing for autopilot...
You can turn auto steer off while still having auto stop and go... And trust me their system is better than Mercedes which come 2nd and certainly better than what Ford or Honda can offer...
Do you fly? Because if you do you probably relying on a pilot that will let a computer fly its plane... Down to auto landing (how many thing can go wrong letting a plane land itself) ... They are just there if something goes wrong or out of the ordinary, but the can have the entire flight after take off automated if they desired... The reaction time in the air is much slower than driving but it's still efficient... Ohhh and by the way they do intentionally doze off every once in a while...
As for Tesla autopilot feature it evolves 1st by software updates 2nd by the driving experience from other Tesla cars in auto pilot all around the world so it constantly improving and getting better at driving... There are couple videos online where the car would avoid accident by itself or auto break when someone cut you off and stop... They legally have to tell you to stay aware and get ready to drive because the car is not listed as a full autonomous car and they want to put the responsibility on you... But when you cruze you don't sleep and if u did in the tesla the chime would let you know when something is wrong so you can take control back... There have been test done where the driver refuse to take control and the car basically pulled itself off the road and stop... What more can you ask? lol and that's just the first generation of autopilot... Wait t'il you see it with a LiDAR sensor...
I understand you point of view but to me it is based out of fear of the unknown... Computer are slowly taking control of every aspect of our lives and sooner or letter you'll have to start trusting them...


----------



## MelindaV

HanSolo said:


> Ford has a system upcoming in their 2017 lineup that I would be much more likely to trust that will accelerate and brake for you, but requires you to do all of the steering.


Tesla's adaptive cruise control is this exactly. So you keep it between the lines and the cruise keeps your speed until the car you are following slows or stops, then it will keep a set distance (that you pick from a range)


----------



## Stephane Lamarche

Guys,
I think we are getting way OFF TOPIC here with Auto-pilot.


----------



## HanSolo

Stephane Lamarche said:


> Guys,
> I think we are getting way OFF TOPIC here with Auto-pilot.


What else is there to talk about? We are here on a forum talking about a car that is still 2 years away or so. We can only re-hash the same information enough times before we have to talk about something else.


----------



## TrevP

Thought I'd start a thread for general tech on car autonomy. Tesla is not the only car maker doing this. They're just ahead of the game in putting the hardware into production.

Here's a video of Carnegie Mellon doing a 33 mile drive in a Cadillac SRX. No idea what hardware they're using though.


----------



## garsh

FYI, Uber hired pretty much the entire Carnegie Mellon autonomous driving department to kick-start their self-driving initiative in 2015.

Keep that in mind if you were planning on attending CMU to study autonomous driving - the department was gutted, and I don't know if it has recovered yet.

Carnegie Mellon Reels After Uber Lures Away Researchers


----------



## MelindaV

I thought I'd seen something come out from Mobileye in the last few weeks that they were working on something with Cadillac... looking all I can find is statements from GM earlier this year saying they are Mobileye's largest customer


----------



## Highbeam

looking forward to level 5.


----------



## Michael Russo

Recent news article just written by my buddy Gene @ Teslarati on a deal signed with Samsung! Interesting...

Samsung lands deal with Tesla to supply chips for self-driving system
http://www.teslarati.com/samsung-lands-deal-tesla-supply-chips-self-driving-system/


----------



## Michael Russo

And yet another very interesting Teslarati article about a recent study on the impact of self-driving on humans... I find it great that this actually being researched... Shows how close we are! 

Stanford studies human impact when self-driving car returns control to driver
http://www.teslarati.com/stanford-study-handoff-self-driving-car-control-human/


----------



## Badback

I can see some point in the future when we are so used to autonomous cars that we lose the ability to drive.

I think that under certain conditions it would be wise for the AI to brake to a slower speed during the handover.


----------



## Michael Russo

California paving the way for legislative changes on self-driving (tweet is in French but links to article in English )

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/807518576190046208


----------



## Michael Russo

And similar new opening in Michigan, just reported in the Washington Post:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/busi...d8da64-be29-11e6-ae79-bec72d34f8c9_story.html


----------



## Michael Russo

So Mary Barra feels GM is well positioned..?! Where... in the back of the bus?? 
Mary Barra sees GM well-positioned for self-driving car era
http://www.seekingalpha.com/news/3229909
Come to think if it, I believe that Seeking Alpha must be ('secretly'...) funded by GM!


----------



## garsh

Michael Russo said:


> So Mary Barra feels GM is well positioned..?!


Compared to every auto company not named Tesla, they are. I'm still upset that Nissan dropped the ball and lost its first-mover advantage.


----------



## Michael Russo

garsh said:


> Compared to every auto company not named Tesla, they are. I'm still upset that Nissan dropped the ball and lost its first-mover advantage.


Yeah, understand how you feel... You really bet on Nissan a while back! And what about the Germans, Daimler in particular? What do you think, @garsh ?
Have a great Pittsburgh day!


----------



## garsh

Michael Russo said:


> Yeah, understand how you feel... You really bet on Nissan a while back! And what about the Germans, Daimler in particular?


It sounds like the Germans (Daimler & VW) *could* leapfrog GM, based on the announcements they're making. But they're not there yet. GM is a year ahead of everyone else (not named Tesla).

BUT... that might be more of an advantage for LG Chem than GM - I'm not sure exactly how that partnership works, and how much of that technology LG Chem can use outside of their business with GM.


----------



## Michael Russo

@garsh , does the year ahead in your mind really concern self-driving, or mainly EV...? Is this view driven by the Cadillac drive based on the Carnegie Mellon experiment per Trev's pasted video at the start of this thread...
Interesting to note that when I saw this on YouTube, one of the first suggested video was this one of the self-driving Mercedes SL500 in California last year... Funny as I did not even know that when I mentioned Daimler above (less confident about VW-Audi before they really show us they truly walk the talk...)


----------



## garsh

Oh, yeah. Sorry, I wasn't paying attention to which thread I was posting in.


----------



## Michael Russo

garsh said:


> Oh, yeah. Sorry, I wasn't paying attention to which thread I was posting in.


Well, no issues, my Pittsburgh friend!  This can happen when we have more and more threads on TOO... Trev's success child!! 
So you did mean for EVs, right? Though I must admit that watching the Cadillac (2013...?!) made me hesitate... pretty cool too, no? Though I'll plead guilty to only have watched the first 20' out of 45... without sound it's getting spooky after a while...


----------



## garsh

Michael Russo said:


> So you did mean for EVs, right?


Yes I did.

For self-driving, I think Google is by far the front-runner, but it doesn't really matter since they aren't planning to sell a car, and they haven't announced any partnerships for their technology. Given Tesla's commitment to getting this technology on the road, they will quickly (within 1-2 years) overtake Google's technology. Uber is in third place. It's not clear to me what they will end up doing with the technology though.

All other manufacturers are just dabbling. They'll be too worried about lawsuits to be willing to take chances with the technology. We'll be lucky if they introduce capabilities comparable to Autopilot 1.0 within the next few years.


----------



## Michael Russo

@garsh , funny we were just exchanging about that...! 
http://www.theverge.com/2016/12/13/13933140/google-self-driving-car-fiat-chrysler-partnership


----------



## garsh

I certainly hope Google figures out some way to get their technology out into the world. It's such a waste to keep perfecting it without making it available to society.


----------



## garsh

Google's self-driving car unit spins out as Waymo


----------



## Michael Russo

I don't need to challenge the technological experience and likely leadership that Google had accumulated in self driving over the years, and for that they should be praised...
Yet I will plead guilty to feeling puzzled when I look at the design of this car which we know now they will not attempt to sell (and probably never planned to, certainly not in this form...).
Hope I am not offending anyone...  Don't mean too... Must be too old


----------



## garsh

Michael Russo said:


> Yet I will plead guilty to feeling puzzled when I look at the design of this car which we know now they will not attempt to sell


They figured that many people would be afraid of the first batch of self-driving cars. So they wanted a design that looked non-threatening. I think they achieved that in spades. People would never want to *own* a non-threatening car, but they won't be as opposed to sharing the road with a self-driving, non-threatening vehicle.


----------



## Michael Russo

This is an encouraging sign in Germany! Click on the little arrow under the pic to access the article in Der Spiegel, if you read the language of Goethe... 

__
https://www.reddit.com/r/path%3D%252Fr%252Fteslamotors%252Fcomments%252F5ij7e4%252F


----------



## MichelT3

Michael Russo said:


> This is an encouraging sign in Germany! Click on the little arrow under the pic to access the article in Der Spiegel, if you read the language of Goethe...
> 
> __
> https://www.reddit.com/r/path%3D%252Fr%252Fteslamotors%252Fcomments%252F5ij7e4%252F


Signs alongside the road to keep a self driving car on track is about the same as putting it on railroad tracks... cars should be able to recognise the road edges by themselves.


----------



## Michael Russo

MichelT3 said:


> Signs alongside the road to keep a self driving car on track is about the same as putting it on railroad tracks... cars should be able to recognise the road edges by themselves.


Pretty sure the intent is different, @MichelT3 ...  Bet this is most likely to advise drivers of all the _*other*_ cars, who still need to keep their hands on the wheel & their eyes on the road, that they may encounter self-driving vehicles and therefore should not stress if they don't see anyone on the _relevant_ front seat (to our UK & Irish friends, the italicised word is for you..!)... What do y'all think? 
What I liked about it was the recognition by German authorities that this happening!


----------



## MichelT3

Michael Russo said:


> Pretty sure the intent is different, @MichelT3 ...  Bet this is most likely to advise drivers of all the _*other*_ cars, who still need to keep their hands on the wheel & their eyes on the road, that they may encounter self-driving vehicles and therefore should not stress if they don't see anyone on the _relevant_ front seat (to our UK & Irish friends, the italicised word is for you..!)... What do y'all think?
> What I liked about it was the recognition by German authorities that this happening!


The last sentence I agree completely with @Michael Russo.
But it doesn't seem logical to me to put up a sign which is incomprehensible for humans. We apes need a pictogram to understand. A computer can 'read' any abstract sign, as long as it has learned to recognise it.


----------



## Michael Russo

Bolt to put on horns to take on self hike in Michigan... 
http://insideevs.com/autonomous-chevrolet-bolts-tested-michigan-public-roads/


----------



## Badback

I predict that the first one will run over Governor Snyder as he is crossing the street.


----------



## Michael Russo

The T≡SLA lead towards Level 4 & 5 is all about data... and that is a heck of a lot of data!! Keep on warming up to letting go of the wheel at times!! 
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-12-20/the-tesla-advantage-1-3-billion-miles-of-data


----------



## Michael Russo

Every time I see the name Uber, I am reminded of the fact that 'Über' in German means 'above'...
Well, now it seems like when it comes to autonomous drive, relative to T≡SLA, Uber should really be renamed 'Under'!! 
http://uk.businessinsider.com/why-u...ing-cars-to-tesla-autopilot-2016-12?r=US&IR=T


----------



## MichelT3

Michael Russo said:


> Bolt to put on horns to take on self hike in Michigan...
> http://insideevs.com/autonomous-chevrolet-bolts-tested-michigan-public-roads/


By which GM is actually saying that Tesla is right. And that they are now struggling not too fall behind much further. Damaging their own ICE and non-autonomous core-production. Telling the whole world that ICE cars are worthless.


----------



## MelindaV

http://reut.rs/2i2essx (reuters video that isn't embeddable)
a short video talking about insurance and autonomous vehicles


----------



## Red Sage

Badback said:


> I can see some point in the future when we are so used to autonomous cars that we lose the ability to drive.
> 
> I think that under certain conditions it would be wise for the AI to brake to a slower speed during the handover.


Wouldn't that be sort of like someone getting so used to AUTOAIM while playing Counterstrike that they forget how to fire an AR-15?


----------



## Red Sage

garsh said:


> Compared to every auto company not named Tesla, they are. I'm still upset that Nissan dropped the ball and lost its first-mover advantage.


C'mon... How could they have possibly known that GM, of all companies, would be there to pick it up? Nissan/Renault was pretty well positioned ahead of every else _(not named Tesla)_ as well. I think their rumored _'200 mile LEAF'_ caused GM to redouble their efforts.


----------



## Michael Russo

MelindaV said:


> http://reut.rs/2i2essx (reuters video that isn't embeddable)
> a short video talking about insurance and autonomous vehicles


Thank you, @MelindaV . Interesting! 
While it reasonable to assume that, in the long run, insurance premia to the drivers will go down, I would expect that actual cost to us may stay similar at least for some years (5-10?) as from the point of significant adoption/penetration of 'driverless' as it would combine a lower fee to the insurance company for the driver portion of the liability (if she/he still 'drives' occasionally...) together with the premium paid by the carmaker for the driverless car-related liability, which the driver would pay at the time of car purchase or on an ongoing basis...
Of course, at some point, the 'boldest' insurance companies may offer some really low rates, when risks have been established as drastically reduced.... and will win market position!


----------



## Shogun

MelindaV said:


> http://reut.rs/2i2essx (reuters video that isn't embeddable)
> a short video talking about insurance and autonomous vehicles


I think Insurance Companies have this all figured out. They will be slow to adapt lower rates for safety features, but quick to adapt rate hikes for costs of repair and/or replacement. Net, net, they will still make a ton of money.

In the short term, as long as the manufacturers of driverless tech stay on top of safety concerns, it would be hard to shift liability to them if the driver engages the system and is still able to override. As for full autonomy, Attorneys will always try to figure out a way to rake in the big bucks even if it's at the cost of allowing the tech to develop. A couple large class action suits will grind the development of driverless tech to a halt.


----------



## MichelT3

Shogun said:


> I think Insurance Companies have this all figured out. They will be slow to adapt lower rates for safety features, but quick to adapt rate hikes for costs of repair and/or replacement. Net, net, they will still make a ton of money.
> 
> In the short term, as long as the manufacturers of driverless tech stay on top of safety concerns, it would be hard to shift liability to them if the driver engages the system and is still able to override. As for full autonomy, Attorneys will always try to figure out a way to rake in the big bucks even if it's at the cost of allowing the tech to develop. A couple large class action suits will grind the development of driverless tech to a halt.


The first part I agree with. Insurance is good at cashing in, but very reluctant at paying up.
The second is too negative, I think. At least European lawmaking doesn't work like this.


----------



## Dan Detweiler

HanSolo said:


> Do you guys really need autopilot? I am one of those people who will NEVER let a computer drive the car for me. Too many things can go wrong. If Autopilot requires you to constantly be vigilant and be ready to grab the steering wheel at a moment's notice, it is not autopilot to me. If you do a lot of highway driving, that is a possibility but I would be concerned that I might doze off or something by mistake and miss something vital. Ford has a system upcoming in their 2017 lineup that I would be much more likely to trust that will accelerate and brake for you, but requires you to do all of the steering.


Think of what this technology can do for people that can't safely drive themselves anymore...or those that due to some disability have never had the independence that others take for granted. For me, I look forward to being able to use it when circumstances make it more enjoyable or practical or safer for me to travel (long trips, times when fatigue becomes a concern to safe transportation, etc.). I also look forward to driving the crap out of my Tesla manually while knowing that the technology is looking out for things I can't see or don't recognize as a threat to my safety. That's the beauty of this system to me. Full autonomy when I need it...always having my back when I don't.

Dan


----------



## MichelT3

Dan Detweiler said:


> Think of what this technology can do for people that can't safely drive themselves anymore...or those that due to some disability have never had the independence that others take for granted. For me, I look forward to being able to use it when circumstances make it more enjoyable or practical or safer for me to travel (long trips, times when fatigue becomes a concern to safe transportation, etc.). I also look forward to driving the crap out of my Tesla manually while knowing that the technology is looking out for things I can't see or don't recognize as a threat to my safety. That's the beauty of this system to me. Full autonomy when I need it...always having my back when I don't.
> 
> Dan


Agree, but I also love tech. And congested traffic in my country is getting very boring and a waste of time for me after 40 years of driving cars. So, I would love to have such a system. And I would love to use autonomous drive at times when driving is no fun at all. Which is often in everyday traffic I think.
So, I love getting autonomous.

In my opinion Tesla's autonomous drive function is one of the terrains on which Tesla distinguishes itself and stands at the base of the current transition.


----------



## Michael Russo

Very good analysis on the key reason why T≡SLA & other carmakers pursuing autonomous driving won't stop at Level 3...: we are! 
https://www.wired.com/2017/01/human-problem-blocking-path-self-driving-cars/


----------



## MichelT3

It might be a true handicap. But why just one superficial mention of Tesla, the carmaker that's by far the furthest in this field?


----------



## Michael Russo

MichelT3 said:


> It might be a true handicap. But why just one superficial mention of Tesla, the carmaker that's by far the furthest in this field?


True. But really the article was intended to be generic, @MichelT3, though clearly T≡SLA is paving the way...


----------



## Red Sage

Michael Russo said:


> Very good analysis on the key reason why T≡SLA & other carmakers pursuing autonomous driving won't stop at Level 3...: we are!
> https://www.wired.com/2017/01/human-problem-blocking-path-self-driving-cars/


Yes! That was a very good article! I really liked the perspective. Thanks for sharing it.


----------



## Dan Detweiler

...and another one. This is getting almost commonplace with NVIDIA.


----------



## garsh

Did you notice that NVIDIA is also calling it autopilot?
At the end of that video, the driver says "disengage autopilot".


----------



## Badback

I would like to propose an addition to autopilot: a text crawler mounted at the top of the rear window to communicate to the driver behind, such things as 'autopilot engaged', 'you are following too close', and alerts about what is in front. 
Maybe you have some other suggestions about what should be communicated?


----------



## garsh

Badback said:


> I would like to propose an addition to autopilot: a text crawler mounted at the top of the rear window to communicate to the driver behind, such things as 'autopilot engaged', 'you are following too close', and alerts about what is in front.
> Maybe you have some other suggestions about what should be communicated?


http://odditymall.com/car-message-sender-led-display


----------



## MelindaV

Dan Detweiler said:


> ...and another one. This is getting almost commonplace with NVIDIA.


maybe I'm just a more conservative driver, but I would rather it had a little more room before changing lanes in front of another car (like at :57 and 1:28), especially since it looked like there was plenty of space in that lane to have sped up a little first.
Otherwise, pretty impressive


----------



## MichelT3

garsh said:


> http://odditymall.com/car-message-sender-led-display


If you want to increase road rage, this will be a good means ... please don't!


----------



## MichelT3

MelindaV said:


> maybe I'm just a more conservative driver, but I would rather it had a little more room before changing lanes in front of another car (like at :57 and 1:28), especially since it looked like there was plenty of space in that lane to have sped up a little first.
> Otherwise, pretty impressive


I'd love to agree, but compared to rush hour traffic in my country, these are wide margins. And in cities like Paris (France) there would be at least one other car in between. 
Which raises the question whether AutoPilot's behaviour may differ per country / region / traffic situation. Or even differ per driver.


----------



## MelindaV

MichelT3 said:


> I'd love to agree, but compared to rush hour traffic in my country, these are wide margins. And in cities like Paris (France) there would be at least one other car in between.
> Which raises the question whether AutoPilot's behaviour may differ per country / region / traffic situation. Or even differ per driver.


i was thinking strictly based on the amount of traffic there was in the video (fairly light) and there was room to change lanes further up the road without cutting off the car they pulled in front of.


----------



## Michael Russo

MichelT3 said:


> I'd love to agree, but compared to rush hour traffic in my country, these are wide margins. And in cities like Paris (France) there would be at least one other car in between.
> Which raises the question whether AutoPilot's behaviour may differ per country / region / traffic situation. Or even differ per driver.


I don't know this for a fact, @MichelT3 , yet if I understood right, AP is based on billions of miles already driven by current owners of cars equipped, therefore it would undeed be based on all these conditions. Don't remember the impact of the individual driver but sure Trev or others can comment 


MelindaV said:


> i was thinking strictly based on the amount of traffic there was in the video (fairly light) and there was room to change lanes further up the road without cutting off the car they pulled in front of.


I agree with you, @MelindaV , the lighter the traffic, the more proactively safe AP should be programmed. Actually maybe in all situations. Proactive safety is good.


----------



## MichelT3

I don't know either @MelindaV and @Michael Russo, but I think it should allow for specific different circumstances. 
For instance: Slow behaviour on the Péripherique of Paris will be seen as rude in a more rural circumstances. We all know this. If you're proactive on the Péripherique other cars will continuously cut in front of you, while others blow their horn at such a 'lazy bastard'. (I love driving the Péripherique and inner Paris, but I just look ahead, not in my rearview mirrors. There is no time!)


----------



## Michael Russo

MichelT3 said:


> (...) I love driving the Péripherique and inner Paris, but I just look ahead, not in my rearview mirrors. There is no time!)


Me too!  I can't wait to drive Midnight S≡R≡NITY there... I wonder how the Autopilot would handle the Rd.-Point de l'Etoile (for those who don't know, the yuuge roundabout around the Arch of Triumph ('Arc du Triomphe'), a true no go today if you're not an assertive driver!!


----------



## MichelT3

Hell yeah! That one always gives me a kick to negotiate.


----------



## Red Sage

Dan Detweiler said:


> ...and another one. This is getting almost commonplace with NVIDIA.


That was awesome! I watched it three times!

_"A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools." 
― Douglas Adams, 'Mostly Harmless'_​


----------



## Red Sage

Badback said:


> I would like to propose an addition to autopilot: a text crawler mounted at the top of the rear window to communicate to the driver behind, such things as 'autopilot engaged', 'you are following too close', and alerts about what is in front.
> Maybe you have some other suggestions about what should be communicated?


That makes far too much sense for a civilized society wherein it would immediately be hacked so that people could instead tie it to their twitter feed, or list random verses from The BIBLE instead.


----------



## Badback

Red Sage said:


> That makes far too much sense for a civilized society wherein it would immediately be hacked so that people could instead tie it to their twitter feed, or list random verses from The BIBLE instead.


I am proposing that the AI generate the messages, not the driver. Anything can be hacked, but that doesn't stop us from using computers everyday.


----------



## Dan Detweiler

Another piece to the autonomous puzzle. HERE and NVIDIA...a partnership that might find its way into our cars. 10-20 centimeter accuracy? DAMN!






Dan


----------



## Red Sage

I really like it when smart people can explain things to me in a way that I can understand.


----------



## MichelT3

Badback said:


> I would like to propose an addition to autopilot: a text crawler mounted at the top of the rear window to communicate to the driver behind, such things as 'autopilot engaged', 'you are following too close', and alerts about what is in front.
> Maybe you have some other suggestions about what should be communicated?


It's meant well, but I'm afraid this will only lead to more roadrage. People don't like to be told how to behave or be commented upon.


----------



## garsh

There have been a few times where I wish I could display the message "Please turn on your lights".
And also, "Please turn off your high beams".


----------



## MelindaV

garsh said:


> There have been a few times where I wish I could display the message "Please turn on your lights".
> And also, "Please turn off your high beams".


Or "your rear pax tire is low". Not all communication to fellow drivers needs to be hostile, but can be helpful


----------



## Steve C

I find it super interesting that Elon has basically invented a better Lidar with Radar and no one has really noticed. All the cars I have seen suggesting they will be autonomous are using expensive Lidar.

This is a huge breakthrough that isn't getting near enough attention. This is one patent I hope he doesn't give away.


----------



## Topher

Badback said:


> I would like to propose an addition to autopilot: a text crawler mounted at the top of the rear window to communicate to the driver behind, such things as 'autopilot engaged', 'you are following too close', and alerts about what is in front.
> Maybe you have some other suggestions about what should be communicated?


Tons.

And there should be a similar text screen on the front.

Thank you kindly.


----------



## james connolly

I see Chris Lattner left Apple to do autonomous driving software at Tesla. That's the reason he gave.
Does that give us any insight into Apples car program. He could have done the same job there , no ?

http://www.macrumors.com/2017/01/17/chris-lattner-says-tesla-irresistible/


----------



## Michael Russo

a rare bit of positive, actually very encouraging article from SeekingAlpha...
That's why I have not totally written them off yet... 
http://seekingalpha.com/article/4037418-self-driving-cars-will-succeed


----------



## MelindaV

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/822107750075367425from the wreck last May with Joshua Brown cut off by a truck driven by Frank Baressi. A NHTSA is to hold a briefing at 12p Eastern. I expect following that briefing, this will be taking up most Tesla news for the next week or so.

ETA - corrected time from 9a to 12p - my habit of automatically translating eastern to pacific got carried away


----------



## MichelT3

MelindaV said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/822107750075367425from the wreck last May with Joshua Brown cut off by a truck driven by Frank Baressi. A NHTSA is to hold a briefing at 12p Eastern. I expect following that briefing, this will be taking up most Tesla news for the next week or so.
> 
> ETA - corrected time from 9a to 12p - my habit of automatically translating eastern to pacific got carried away


The results seem to be very favourable for Tesla.
https://techcrunch.com/2017/01/19/n...eslas-autopilot-shows-40-crash-rate-reduction


----------



## Michael Russo

More on Panasonic's desire to intensify their partnership with T≡SLA,with focus on self-driving :

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/824678321833345024


----------



## TrevP

One of the neat things that came out of CES this year at NVIDIA's keynote was their integration of high res maps. Basically they're partnering with a company that has a fleet of cars equipped with LIDAR that map roads. This data is then used to create 3D LIDAR maps of the world that are downloaded to the cars...

That would explain why Tesla is not going to bother with LIDAR, they get the data for free as part of the NVIDIA DriveWorks software stack


----------



## cfickett

I am very much looking forward to my Model 3 and taking advantage of autopilot and fully autonomous driving. But, in my commute each day, I pass through a school zone where there is multiple traffic persons stopping/starting and directing traffic flow. I am curious as to how a fully autonomous vehicle will be able to handle this situation since each traffic person might use different gestures to direct the traffic.


----------



## Steve C

cfickett said:


> I am very much looking forward to my Model 3 and taking advantage of autopilot and fully autonomous driving. But, in my commute each day, I pass through a school zone where there is multiple traffic persons stopping/starting and directing traffic flow. I am curious as to how a fully autonomous vehicle will be able to handle this situation since each traffic person might use different gestures to direct the traffic.


Agreed. It should be interesting. Mostly as the person with the stop sign stops in the middle of the road, stop sign by their side, jaw on the floor and this driverless car waits for them to get the hell out of the way!  Should be worth a few YouTube videos of reactions.


----------



## Dan Detweiler

These are all things that the "hive mind" neural network that NVIDIA is putting into the Teslas will quickly learn to deal with.

Dan


----------



## garsh

cfickett said:


> in my commute each day, I pass through a school zone where there is multiple traffic persons stopping/starting and directing traffic flow. I am curious as to how a fully autonomous vehicle will be able to handle this situation since each traffic person might use different gestures to direct the traffic.


If you're able to figure out what these different gestures mean, then machine learning will be able to figure it out as well. It may take a few months or years to handle these situations consistently well, but it will get there.


----------



## Topher

garsh said:


> If you're able to figure out what these different gestures mean, then machine learning will be able to figure it out as well. It may take a few months or years to handle these situations consistently well, but it will get there.


1) Autonomous cars will start with the assumption that there is a person out in the road, and do the safe thing, stop.

2) Interpreting gestures make take a while.

3) Also possible, is that autonomous car makers, safety organizations, and traffic controllers will get together and make an easily interpret-able system to replace those hand gestures. Readable signs; gloves with transponders; police to autonomous car remote controls; who knows. Subsidizing such things might be the cheapest, most comforting to citizens, option for the car makers.

Thank you kindly.


----------



## MichelT3

Sounds complicated @Topher. 
What you all seem to forget is that the 'neural network' also learns in shadow mode when human drivers are at the wheel. So, AP learns how people interpret these signs and gestures. And then AP just copies those human interpretations.
I also suppose that as long as the neural system hasn't learned to interpret some extreme situations, the AP will sound an alarm for a human to take over.


----------



## Topher

MichelT3 said:


> Sounds complicated @Topher.


Perhaps, but do you think governments aren't going to want some method of control over autonomous cars?

Neural nets can't just copy human interpretations until it has its attention drawn to the relevant bits. The difference between someone waving to a friend and a police officer waving you over is subtle without know that police officers require special attention.

Thank you kindly.


----------



## MichelT3

Of course I don't have all the answers. Police control is a new subject. The question was about traffic control around a school. 
Police control obviously needs to be solved before a car can drive completely by itself. The power of the neural network is that it will develop simultaneously based on information of real live drivers


----------



## garsh

Topher said:


> Neural nets can't just copy human interpretations until it has its attention drawn to the relevant bits. The difference between someone waving to a friend and a police officer waving you over is subtle without know that police officers require special attention.


This is the type of problem that machine learning has conquered quite well in the last several years. I don't think it will take long at all to get this part working. You just need a lot of training data, and Tesla is obtaining all sorts of training data by including autopilot hardware in every car.


----------



## Topher

MichelT3 said:


> Police control is a new subject. The question was about traffic control around a school.


Well since solving the former solves the latter, I figured that was one way of answering the question.

Thank you kindly.


----------



## Badback

Don't forget that the car will know when it is in a school zone.


----------



## MichelT3

Badback said:


> Don't forget that the car will know when it is in a school zone.


That depends. In the US school zones may be well defined physically and by law. Is that the case in all States? It certainly isn't in all countries. In my country we don't have them...
Learning different situations and different actions depending on the exact location where the car is, needs to be incorporated into the network. 
Congested small scaled European cities, with in my country a lot of erratic cyclists added to that, makes up for a much more difficult task than some people waving in a school zone... Not to speak of totally chaotic driving in counties like India. 
The system will need to learn a lot and prove itself. But I have the fullest confidence that it will at some point. 
Maybe the operability in different areas will develop in steps? Hopefully from the end of 2018 onwards.


----------



## MelindaV

MichelT3 said:


> That depends. In the US school zones may be well defined physically and by law. Is that the case in all States?



even here, they vary wildly from city to city. Some have reduced speeds (most 20mph-25mph) all school day long, some just morning and afternoon, some when lights flash, some when children are present... so in other words, you have to read the school zone sign. 
Something Tesla should be able to do, but the 'when children are present' situation could be more tricky - would it slow to 20mph if it noticed any people? can it tell a child (or multiple children) apart from pedestrian adults in the area?


----------



## Topher

Badback said:


> Don't forget that the car will know when it is in a school zone.


Do the children magically disappear once they are out of the school zone?

Thank you kindly.


----------



## Badback

The car can know when it is near a school because they are on maps. School crossings are near schools. There are signs for school crossings that the car can read. Pedestrian crossings are everywhere but they don't have crossing guards waving their hands. None of these problems are beyond the capabilities of the AI.

Most people are very good at finding problems.

Most people are very bad at finding solutions.


----------



## Dan Detweiler

People seem to forget that the AI Tesla is using is based on visual references. This is just like the way we see, except that the camera/sensor/RADAR combination will be able to "see" better than any human could dream. With the neural network constantly learning and adapting to different situations it will only get smarter, smoother, and better at maneuvering through any of these problematic cases.

Dan


----------



## Steve C

I believe high resolution GPS maps will also help.


----------



## MichelT3

Dan Detweiler said:


> People seem to forget that the AI Tesla is using is based on visual references. This is just like the way we see, except that the camera/sensor/RADAR combination will be able to "see" better than any human could dream. With the neural network constantly learning and adapting to different situations it will only get smarter, smoother, and better at maneuvering through any of these problematic cases.
> Dan


I agree, but I tried to explain that there are gradients of difficult, from not very to extremely. That schoolzones are more on the easy side than on the chaotic. 
It's possible that AP needs more time to learn more difficult situations, and that the AP-system will take steps to become increasingly more able to drive autonomous.


----------



## Michael Russo

The fears of Ford's CEO Mark Fields... no Level 3 for them...
In the meantime, T≡SLA is accumulating real life data, this experience with its cars driving hundreds of miles every day, paving the way for a better, potential sooner Level 4 upgrade, no? 
http://www.businessinsider.com/ford-ceo-driverless-car-fear-2017-2?r=UK&IR=T


----------



## Michael Russo

This (seemingly) fresh news only concerns the US yet provides an illustration that shaping the legislative framework is underway. That feels like a good thing. The sooner they start, the sooner will know. 
https://www.wired.com/2017/02/congress-give-self-driving-cars-happen-ruin-everything/


----------



## Michael Russo

The debate on liability for self-driving cars is ongoing... a clear illustration of the ineluctable nature of this progress...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...09d946-f97a-11e6-9845-576c69081518_story.html


----------



## Red Sage

From a conversation elsewhere:

I suspect that Tesla absolutely wants to convince insurance companies that Autopilot and Autonomous systems can be made 'right'. Once insurance companies were convinced that supplemental restraint systems (SRS) improved safety, they lobbied to make them standard. Once insurance companies were convinced that anti-lock braking systems (ABS) improved safety, they lobbied to make them standard. Once insurance companies were convinced automatic emergency braking systems (AEB) improved safety, *they lobbied to make them standard*.

Tesla would like to accelerate the adoption of Level 5 Autonomy in vehicles, and the best way to do so is by providing data to insurance companies that shows how risk of property damage and injury or death is mitigated by the safety systems in their cars. But yeah, if the insurance companies dig in their heels and refuse to take a greatly minimized risk, Tesla may well do so themselves, by attempting to form their own insurance company -- one that only insures vehicles that are Level 5 capable. Though really, ordinary insurance companies would have to be rather stupid to not insure vehicles that were proven to be 90% less likely to have accidents, as is Elon's goal.


----------



## Badback

Michael Russo said:


> The debate on liability for self-driving cars is ongoing... a clear illustration of the ineluctable nature of this progress...
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...09d946-f97a-11e6-9845-576c69081518_story.html


The scenario presented in the article is a false dichotomy. There is always more than two choices. The road is always wider than a woman and baby carriage. And, the premise that the car can't stop is not demonstrated, nor is the assertion that striking a tree will kill the passenger.


----------



## Red Sage

Badback said:


> The scenario presented in the article is a false dichotomy. There is always more than two choices. The road is always wider than a woman and baby carriage. And, the premise that the car can't stop is not demonstrated, nor is the assertion that striking a tree will kill the passenger.


Indeed, as with Captain James Tiberius Kirk's assessment of the *Kobayashi Maru Scenario*, I do not believe in the _'no-win situation'_ either.


----------



## John Edighoffer

The scenario is a false representation of the choices. In any such scenario, that was an instance before then when it was still possible to steer, or brake or otherwise avoid the said situation. This is always true. The failure then is not reacting sooner, whether it is due limited sensor range, coverage, decision speed, false object recognition or other. Whatever this is, this is fixable with improvements. There is never a need for impossible choices.


----------



## Michael Russo

Can't remember if this was posted elsewhere before... _Courtesy of Teslarati_: Germany is GR4M3*! 
Or, in Goethe'a language: '_Deutschland vorbereitet sich auf Model ≡!_'

Tesla Full Self-Driving could soon be allowed in Germany, gov approves legislation aimed at autonomous driving
http://www.teslarati.com/german-government-approves-legislation-allow-autonomous-driving/

*for those who did not read the excellent book by Roger Pressmann @ Evannex = 'Getting Ready For Model ≡'...


----------



## MelindaV

tl:dr
We had a birthday lunch in the office today (office of about a dozen people) and one of the guys in my office (who I know is petrified by autonomous tech) brought up car autonomy (He does seem to be warming up to Tesla though and even sends me links when he comes across something on them now). Started by stating something like: 
"not that far from now most cars are going to be autonomous", I pointed out what is already out there in partial autonomous...
"you know they are not going to let us drive when that happens, it'll be illegal". 
This then proceeded to: 
"and it's going to start with semi-trucks". 
I mentioned Otto already has autonomous trucks on the road, but he wasn't done.... 
Then: "I don't want to be on the road with a bunch of robots that will kill me"
I pointed out the improved wreck rates under autonomous cars, even the current partially autonomous (L2-L3) cars.
That prompted: "You will be more likely to be run over by an autonomous car/truck than in a car wreck today"
(and this is where the entire conversation exploded) someone pointed out that's not true and the likelihood of being accidentally (or intentionally) shot is greatly higher than being run over by an autonomous car/truck (prompted by the OH shooting)
The one that started the autonomous conversation said it is imperative anyone can own any type of weapon, but it is absolutely irresponsible to allow autonomous cars to be on public streets because "that one guy's Tesla in Florida crashed into the side of a truck". there was some mention of the tyranny of the English and every citizen should be weaponized because that's what the founding fathers intended (our ex-military guy about had an aneurysm at that). Followed by a very passionate conversation I will save you all from...

Its always interesting to learn what your co-workers really think on any particular topic - like autonomous cars, robots (there is a robotics business in our building), the English tyrants (our English guy was not in the room) or guns...


----------



## Dan Detweiler

MelindaV said:


> tl:dr
> We had a birthday lunch in the office today (office of about a dozen people) and one of the guys in my office (who I know is petrified by autonomous tech) brought up car autonomy (He does seem to be warming up to Tesla though and even sends me links when he comes across something on them now). Started by stating something like:
> "not that far from now most cars are going to be autonomous", I pointed out what is already out there in partial autonomous...
> "you know they are not going to let us drive when that happens, it'll be illegal".
> This then proceeded to:
> "and it's going to start with semi-trucks".
> I mentioned Otto already has autonomous trucks on the road, but he wasn't done....
> Then: "I don't want to be on the road with a bunch of robots that will kill me"
> I pointed out the improved wreck rates under autonomous cars, even the current partially autonomous (L2-L3) cars.
> That prompted: "You will be more likely to be run over by an autonomous car/truck than in a car wreck today"
> (and this is where the entire conversation exploded) someone pointed out that's not true and the likelihood of being accidentally (or intentionally) shot is greatly higher than being run over by an autonomous car/truck (prompted by the OH shooting)
> The one that started the autonomous conversation said it is imperative anyone can own any type of weapon, but it is absolutely irresponsible to allow autonomous cars to be on public streets because "that one guy's Tesla in Florida crashed into the side of a truck". there was some mention of the tyranny of the English and every citizen should be weaponized because that's what the founding fathers intended (our ex-military guy about had an aneurysm at that). Followed by a very passionate conversation I will save you all from...
> 
> Its always interesting to learn what your co-workers really think on any particular topic - like autonomous cars, robots (there is a robotics business in our building), the English tyrants (our English guy was not in the room) or guns...


Just for kicks you should have said something about autonomous guns just to see where the conversation went from there. 

Dan


----------



## MelindaV

Dan Detweiler said:


> Just for kicks you should have said something about autonomous guns just to see where the conversation went from there.
> 
> Dan


He probably would have been conflicted, everyone else in the room would be saying they would be safer than people operated guns


----------



## Red Sage

MelindaV said:


> He probably would have been conflicted, everyone else in the room would be saying they would be safer than people operated guns


Howzabout autonomous robot drones with machine guns and cruise missiles? SkyNET would be proud!


----------



## Michael Russo

Latest on Apple and their self-driving ambitions : iMove or iDon't? 

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/857345813302960129


----------



## Michael Russo

And the same for Daimler: German connection with Bosch...:

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/857323515036540930


----------



## Red Sage

Michael Russo said:


> Latest on Apple and their self-driving ambitions : iMove or iDon't?
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/857345813302960129


That's a fascinating mouse design. I wonder how form fitting it is? May be rather comfortable...


----------



## Badback

Red Sage said:


> That's a fascinating mouse design. I wonder how form fitting it is? May be rather comfortable...


I know people that would pay good money NOT to be seen in the iTwit.


----------



## Dan Detweiler

So, with all of the Model 3 sightings lately all the buzz has been centered (rightly so) on those. I wonder however, where we are standing in relation to auto pilot, enhanced auto pilot and full self driving. Not much out there lately on progress on those fronts. I am really hoping that this takes off before the end of the year for sure and hopefully before Model 3 deliveries start. This is going to be one of the huge differences between Tesla and its competitors in my eyes.

Anyone have any recent scoop on this front?

Dan


----------



## MelindaV

Elon was part of the TED Talk yesterday and there were some written quotes posted (on... can't even remember where now). One that I thought was 'interesting' (in a OMGWTF sorta way) was the Model 3 will be able to use just vision (cameras) and sonar but will not need sensors like the lidar or radar (paraphrased). I searched around a bit but couldn't find any other reference to the Model 3 not having radar.

He also reconfirmed the xcountry autonomous drive will happen this year.


----------



## KennethK

MelindaV said:


> Elon was part of the TED Talk yesterday and there were some written quotes posted (on... can't even remember where now). One that I thought was 'interesting' (in a OMGWTF sorta way) was the Model 3 will be able to use just vision (cameras) and sonar but will not need sensors like the lidar or radar (paraphrased). I searched around a bit but couldn't find any other reference to the Model 3 not having radar.
> 
> He also reconfirmed the xcountry autonomous drive will happen this year.


Here you go... http://blog.ted.com/what-will-the-future-look-like-elon-musk-speaks-at-ted2017/


----------



## MelindaV

KennethK said:


> Here you go... http://blog.ted.com/what-will-the-future-look-like-elon-musk-speaks-at-ted2017/


and the quote I'd seen last night was this plus omitting radar so would read like:


> Tesla Model 3 is coming in July, Musk says, and it'll have a special feature: autopilot. Using only passive optical cameras and GPS, (_*"no RADAR,"*_) no LIDAR, the Model 3 will be capable of autonomous driving. "Once you solve cameras for vision, autonomy is solved; if you don't solve vision, it's not solved … You can absolutely be superhuman with just cameras."


----------



## Topher

"We’re mistaken when we think technology automatically improves. It only improves if a lot of people work very hard to make it better.”

-- Elon Musk

So many people miss this vital point. Sometimes it even goes backwards. We had computers that calculated the orbits of the Sun, Moon, and 5 planets back in 87 BC.

Thank you kindly


----------



## TrevP

I think people are misquoting Elon from the talk or misinterpreting what he said. Model 3 will have sonar sensors just like Model S and a radar. The production candidates are all sporting sonar sensors and those are final designs. You don't change your mind at the last second on things like this.


----------



## Rick59

TrevP said:


> I think people are misquoting Elon from the talk or misinterpreting what he said. Model 3 will have sonar sensors just like Model S and a radar. The production candidates are all sporting sonar sensors and those are final designs. You don't change your mind at the last second on things like this.


Has anyone clearly seen the radar sensor in any of the production cars?


----------



## MelindaV

I've not seen anyone saying there would not be sonar, but the TED Talk quote I'd seen yesterday did list no radar.


----------



## Badback

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. The radar unit is behind the front bumper and is not visible from the outside.


----------



## Rick59

Badback said:


> Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. The radar unit is behind the front bumper and is not visible from the outside.


I'm not sure if you're right on that one. Hope someone gets a physical confirmation or an official statement from Elon or Tesla. Trev, you may have to check that out for us.


----------



## MelindaV

so after watching the TED Talk video last night, the comment Elon made regarding radar was the demo video they released at the end of last year only used vision (cameras) and no radar. and he expects vision alone _can_ be 10x improvement over driving by human eyeball vision (paraphrasing, of course  )
However, wondering if EAP/FSD doesn't kick in the radar unless at freeway speed/conditions. I'm pretty sure Tesla has said elsewhere the radar is used to detect the car ahead of the one you are following in order to anticipate slowdowns that can not visibly be seen.


----------



## Steve C

Radar will also be required when vision is reduced. Great TED talk. Have to watch it again.


----------



## RickDeckard

1- Do they have any plans to place *side looking camera's close to the front and rear bumpers*? ...for situations when you want to move into a perpendicular road when there are no incoming cars, but that an obstacle prevents you from seeing one or both sides of the road before you are on the road? Like there's a parked truck/Snow bank or something blocking vision and to see whether its safe to move in or not you have to move halfway in to see. In such cases side viewing cameras at the front/back(when you back up) are much, much safer than cameras that are further towards the centre of the vehicle.

2- How does an Autonomous car detect that the car/truck in front is parked for good instead of a car that's just stopped while waiting for cars in front to move on? Could the absence of rear lights be used to know the truck/car is not running?


----------



## Dan Detweiler

RickDeckard said:


> 1- Do they have any plans to place *side looking camera's close to the front and rear bumpers*? ...for situations when you want to move into a perpendicular road when there are no incoming cars, but that an obstacle prevents you from seeing one or both sides of the road before you are on the road? Like there's a parked truck/Snow bank or something blocking vision and to see whether its safe to move in or not you have to move halfway in to see. In such cases side viewing cameras at the front/back(when you back up) are much, much safer than cameras that are further towards the centre of the vehicle.
> 
> 2- How does an Autonomous car detect that the car/truck in front is parked for good instead of a car that's just stopped while waiting for cars in front to move on? Could the absence of rear lights be used to know the truck/car is not running?


To answer your questions...

1- The cameras, when all are active, give 360 degree vision around the car as it is. No other cameras are needed.

2- How do *YOU* detect that a car/truck in front is parked for good instead of a car that's just stopped while waiting for cars in front to move? You respond to visual stimuli and interpret the proper response based on experience. The cameras and sensor suite will learn to do the same thing...faster.

Dan


----------



## RickDeckard

side cameras on the outer edges would allow the car to detect incoming cars around an obstacle *before* cameras located near the mid sections would, not only does the mid section side camera not detect the incoming car but when it detects it its too late your car is in the way (and you are popping in front of that incoming car or truck unexpectedly because you are popping beyond an obstacle and getting halfway in front of it before you see if its there).

(imo 360 is good, like having a chair with 4 legs is stable, but if the four legs are all right in the center below the chair its not as stable as if each leg is on each corner.)


----------



## MelindaV

RickDeckard said:


> side cameras on the outer edges would allow the car to detect incoming cars around an obstacle *before* cameras located near the mid sections would, not only does the mid section side camera not detect the incoming car but when it detects it its too late your car is in the way (and you are popping in front of that incoming car or truck unexpectedly because you are popping beyond an obstacle and getting halfway in front of it before you see if its there).
> 
> (imo 360 is good, like having a chair with 4 legs is stable, but if the four legs are all right in the center below the chair its not as stable as if each leg is on each corner.)


agree, as my office is in an area with narrow streets that have parking on both sides all the way up to the corners. My car has such a long hood and is low to the ground, I have to be half way across the intersection to be able to see if any traffic is coming.


----------



## Michael Russo

MelindaV said:


> (...) My car has such a long hood and is low to the ground, I have to be half way across the intersection to be able to see if any traffic is coming.


.... and to make sure incoming drivers are not blinded by that _shiny yellow_ of yours...!


----------



## EVfusion

*There is a gap in knowing how and when humans should interact with autonomous vehicle technology - and when humans should regain control.*
A $US 1 million 2-year trial using face-tracking technology will study the moment where drivers of autonomous cars must take full control again. The face-tracking technology is widely used in the trucking and mining industries to improve driver safety.
The trial aims to get data to improve technology making driverless cars safer. It will be done under existing road laws in Canberra, ACT and used in formulating laws governing the use of driverless cars. A Tesla Model X will be used in the trial, which is funded by the government of the Australian Capital Territory (analogous to the District of Colombia).
http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act...ology-in-driverless-cars-20170519-gw8ve6.html
http://www.anu.edu.au/news/all-news/anu-partnership-for-research-on-autonomous-cars


----------



## Michael Russo

Bjørn Nyland has done a good job with this one: interesting test of current AP2 capabilities (in a Model S) on Norway roads, including some curvy ones on which it does take guts to try it. A few glitches still (particularly when road markings are bad) yet overall quite impressive demonstration of where this is going!


----------



## EVfusion

Michael Russo said:


> Bjørn Nyland has done a good job with this one: interesting test of current AP2 capabilities (in a Model S) on Norway roads, including some curvy ones on which it does take guts to try it. A few glitches still (particularly when road markings are bad) yet overall quite impressive demonstration of where this is going!


 Thanks Michael. An excellent video - found the discussion of the capabilities and current limitations of AP2 very informative and useful.


----------



## RickDeckard

Yesterday I took one for the team and was in the passenger seat, and the person driving (I wont point fingers) scrapped the front passenger side mag and tire on the curb (slow speed but nonetheless really hard SkkkKKkkKKkrRrrRUnCHHhHhhH ), and I thought "hey the autonomous option just might pay for itself after all" (Either that or have the car surrounded 360 on all sides by fully inflated external air bags so someone else can "drive by feeling" the obstacles along the way . Come to think of it I would almost like external rear-bumper air bags, I have been rear ended several times, including twice by another car that was itself fully stopped but was itself rear ended hard by someone not paying attention at all in one case[expressway traffic coming to a full stop], and another by someone not driving for winter conditions[red traffic light everyone's waiting and someone comes in from the rear sliding fast like a bowling ball down the alley for a strike] )

Btw, I just thought about it, some humans are able to notice that there is something unusual when they see many cars crashed (or parked much "closer together" than is usual) , or a flood/landslide/land collapse, I wonder how long before autonomous vehicles can also figure out somethings unusual and what the will do about it


----------



## Michael Russo

Ok, Apple needs T≡SLA... yet, does T≡SLA needs Apple?... 


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/875474779691597824


----------



## M3OC Rules

I'm really torn on the FSD. I fully believe Elon thinks these cars are going to be capable of FSD and the laws will change soon. He wouldn't be saying things like that and they wouldn't be charging thousands for the option. But as much as I drive people crazy talking about how awesome FSD is going to be, part of me thinks it could really drag out and take a long time. Then I start to wonder what Tesla is going to do if this happens. I am willing to pay for it and want it right away when it comes out but would they really leave people high and dry if it never does(or in the next 1-2 years) and they paid for it?

What do the Tesla sales people say? Purchase at your own risk?


----------



## Michael Russo

Latest on AI & AP vision, courtesy of Teslarati


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/882702409029570560


----------



## Badback

DC Rules said:


> I'm really torn on the FSD. I fully believe Elon thinks these cars are going to be capable of FSD and the laws will change soon. He wouldn't be saying things like that and they wouldn't be charging thousands for the option. But as much as I drive people crazy talking about how awesome FSD is going to be, part of me thinks it could really drag out and take a long time. Then I start to wonder what Tesla is going to do if this happens. I am willing to pay for it and want it right away when it comes out but would they really leave people high and dry if it never does(or in the next 1-2 years) and they paid for it?
> 
> What do the Tesla sales people say? Purchase at your own risk?


So, don't buy it with the car. You can always get it later when you are satisfied that it is real.


----------



## M3OC Rules

Badback said:


> So, don't buy it with the car. You can always get it later when you are satisfied that it is real.


Presumably then I'll pay more and I know I want it. Hopefully their demo goes well later this year. Curious to see if the option is the same price as it is on the S and X.


----------



## Michael Russo

Good news from a current owner (Elon liked the tweet )


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/883751720580468736


----------



## Michael Russo

Cool update... 

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/884066386158465024


----------



## Michael Russo

Nissan's really trying... Though they are not T≡SLA, that deserves a kudo...


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/888247900391735296


----------



## Ninja

Question:

Looking through the packages of the Model 3, I see Enhanced Autopilot, and Fully Self-Driving Capability. I am deciding my budget for the Model 3, and am wondering if I should buy the Fully Self-Driving Capability feature. My question is, will I be able to enable the Fully Self Driving feature in that package and use it right away? Is the Fully Self-Driving Capability package worth to buy right away? I want to let go of the wheel (but I will pay attention to the road, and cautiously be vigilant) and let the car do its thing. Will Fully Self-Driving Capability do that?


----------



## KennethK

Kriffic said:


> Question:
> 
> Looking through the packages of the Model 3, I see Enhanced Autopilot, and Fully Self-Driving Capability. I am deciding my budget for the Model 3, and am wondering if I should buy the Fully Self-Driving Capability feature. My question is, will I be able to enable the Fully Self Driving feature in that package and use it right away? Is the Fully Self-Driving Capability package worth to buy right away? I want to let go of the wheel (but I will pay attention to the road, and cautiously be vigilant) and let the car do its thing. Will Fully Self-Driving Capability do that?


FSD is not currently working. Personally I will wait for the time when the feature is available (+$1000 extra) since it may be some time before that happens.


----------



## Brokedoc

I found a very interesting article from April in Forbes that clarifies a little about Tesla's AEB algorithm and also brings up several general self driving ethical dilemmas for which all car manufacturers need to consider.

Here's How Tesla Solves A Self-Driving Crash Dilemma

A quick summary:
Ethical Dilemma - Do you remember that day when you lost your mind? You aimed your car at five random people down the road. By the time you realized what you were doing, it was too late to brake. Thankfully, your autonomous car saved their lives by grabbing the wheel from you and swerving to the right. Too bad for the one unlucky person standing on that path, struck and killed by your car. Did your robot car make the right decision?

Tesla's answer - the driver's actions always override the vehicle's automatic/emergency programming.

Tesla confirmed that when it stated that Automatic Emergency Braking will operates only when driving between 5 mph (8 km/h) and 85 mph (140 km/h) but that the vehicle will not automatically apply the brakes, or will stop applying the brakes, "in situations where you are taking action to avoid a potential collision. For example:

* • *You turn the steering wheel sharply.
* • *You press the accelerator pedal.
* • *You press and release the brake pedal.
* • *A vehicle, motorcycle, bicycle, or pedestrian, is no longer detected ahead."

So if a suicidal driver wants to drive into a cement wall, AEB will not activate because the driver is pressing on the accelerator. Alternatively, if a driver is texting while driving and has their foot on the accelerator, presumably, AEB may still not activate and a collision will still occur. Also, if a confused elderly driver steps on the gas instead of the brake, an accident can still occur.

My biggest discovery from this article is that if AEB ever kicks in, the first instinct will likely be to slam on the brakes too. YOU MUST REMEMBER TO NOT LIFT YOUR FOOT OFF THE BRAKE UNTIL FULLY STOPPED because then AEB will disengage. Most likely, 99% of people will continue to slam on the brake until the vehicle is fully stopped but do not over think the situation and believe that AEB has activated and you can therefore lift your foot off the brake!


----------



## jtdiddy

So, I'm looking into CPO model S, so is it true that pre-2016 versions are not capable to be outfitted for full autonomous driving features? 

I wondering because it seems there's a big price break between say a 2016 and 2015 Model S


----------



## Ninja

jtdiddy said:


> So, I'm looking into CPO model S, so is it true that pre-2016 versions are not capable to be outfitted for full autonomous driving features?
> 
> I wondering because it seems there's a big price break between say a 2016 and 2015 Model S


I dislike CPO cars. If I were to buy a car, I would save up the money and have it new. You could get a car with 20-30k miles and it could be needing major repairs.

I usually keep my cars for 10-12 years. I only drive 3 miles to the train station every day, and 3 miles back home. Sometimes I will do a 400 mi roadtrip for work. So, I would rather just get a car with all the latest technology, and specs, than be penny-wise-dollar-foolish, and regret it in 2 years.


----------



## jtdiddy

Kriffic said:


> I dislike CPO cars. If I were to buy a car, I would save up the money and have it new. You could get a car with 20-30k miles and it could be needing major repairs.
> 
> I usually keep my cars for 10-12 years. I only drive 3 miles to the train station every day, and 3 miles back home. Sometimes I will do a 400 mi roadtrip for work. So, I would rather just get a car with all the latest technology, and specs, than be penny-wise-dollar-foolish, and regret it in 2 years.


So is it true that pre 2016 model s cannot be fully autonomous driving?


----------



## Brokedoc

jtdiddy said:


> So, I'm looking into CPO model S, so is it true that pre-2016 versions are not capable to be outfitted for full autonomous driving features?
> 
> I wondering because it seems there's a big price break between say a 2016 and 2015 Model S


Currently there are 3 levels of Tesla s in terms of AP hardware. Early Teslas before Fall 2014 had NO AP. AP1 based on Mobileye technology theoretically cannot do FSD. Starting Fall 2016 Tesla switched to AP2 which has theoretical FSD capability but the software is far from ready in it's current form and the laws are not close to being enacted.


----------



## Model34mePlease

Brokedoc said:


> Currently there are 3 levels of Tesla s in terms of AP hardware. Early Teslas before Fall 2014 had NO AP. AP1 based on Mobileye technology theoretically cannot do FSD. Starting Fall 2016 Tesla switched to AP2 which has theoretical FSD capability but the software is far from ready in it's current form and the laws are not close to being enacted.


Who knows if the current hardware will be capable of FSD? Roll those dice.


----------



## JWardell

jtdiddy said:


> So, I'm looking into CPO model S, so is it true that pre-2016 versions are not capable to be outfitted for full autonomous driving features?
> 
> I wondering because it seems there's a big price break between say a 2016 and 2015 Model S


From what I've read, many highly recommend only looking at Autopilot 1 capable CPO cars (after Fall 2014). Not only for the autopilot ability, but because there was a significant jump in build quality across the whole car. Unfortunately those start around $70 grand. Full self driving will only be obtainable in the Autopilot 2 hardware that only started shipping in fall 2016, so I doubt any of those are available used yet. Much more reasonable to get it in a Model 3.


----------



## jtdiddy

When will the full autonomous driving feature be activated?


----------



## Michael Russo

I am Semi-intrigued by what will come out of this news... 


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/895873843016810496


----------



## Kizzy

jtdiddy said:


> When will the full autonomous driving feature be activated?


When it's ready and regulatory approval happens.

So, basically, we don't know.


----------



## Ronf

Model34mePlease said:


> Who knows if the current hardware will be capable of FSD? Roll those dice.


Personally i think paying 3000.00 US on top of the 5000.00 already paid for a feature that does not yet work 
It is always expensive to buy brand new technology. I personnally believe that FSD will become a commodity so the price will drop tremendously. Due to competition as every auto manufacturer will offer this feature
Since all is reuqired for the feature is a software update. It may very well pay to wait. Only my opinion


----------



## M3OC Rules

Ronf said:


> Personally i think paying 3000.00 US on top of the 5000.00 already paid for a feature that does not yet work
> It is always expensive to buy brand new technology. I personnally believe that FSD will become a commodity so the price will drop tremendously. Due to competition as every auto manufacturer will offer this feature
> Since all is reuqired for the feature is a software update. It may very well pay to wait. Only my opinion


Yeah. Not owning a car will be much more economical once FSD is available. But how cool would it be to have your car driving you around while you're in the back seat when almost no one else has that! Although I probably won't do that on the first trip.


----------



## Ronf

DC Rules said:


> Yeah. Not owning a car will be much more economical once FSD is available. But how cool would it be to have your car driving you around while you're in the back seat when almost no one else has that! Although I probably won't do that on the first trip.


I know it would certainly be cool


----------



## ng0

I can't wait for autonomous driving. I'm excited about finally driving a fun car with crazy acceleration, but I'd much rather sit back and let the car do the driving. The faster there's widespread adoption of these technologies, the faster the traffic congestion will get reduced. Most of traffic accidents and congestion are caused by human error/stupidity. By eliminating that factor, there should be a very steady flow of traffic. 

I'm still torn on whether I want to spend the $8k to get the feature that doesn't exist yet. I'm really hoping the price of this software update will decrease over time.


----------



## Michael Russo

It's the data... it's always the data!! 


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/904300327872159745


----------



## garsh

Roderick80 said:


> 2) Where is Tesla's autonomous driving program compared to current Mobileye, Waymo or other competitor offerings?


I've given my thoughts on this.

Waymo has a huge lead on everyone else (references: 1, 2). I took a close look at the one demonstration video that Tesla released, and noted it making many mistakes (reference: 1). But nobody else is to the point of being able to demonstrate, so I think it's safe to say that Tesla is in second place. Given the amount of data that Tesla is gathering, I expect them to be able to gain abilities quickly and eventually catch up with Waymo's capabilities.


----------



## Roderick80

garsh said:


> I've given my thoughts on this.
> 
> Waymo has a huge lead on everyone else (references: 1, 2). I took a close look at the one demonstration video that Tesla released, and noted it making many mistakes (reference: 1). But nobody else is to the point of being able to demonstrate, so I think it's safe to say that Tesla is in second place. Given the amount of data that Tesla is gathering, I expect them to be able to gain abilities quickly and eventually catch up with Waymo's capabilities.


Thanks- I wasn't aware of the disingagement metric. Very interesting.


----------



## MelindaV

garsh said:


> I've given my thoughts on this.
> 
> Waymo has a huge lead on everyone else (references: 1, 2). I took a close look at the one demonstration video that Tesla released, and noted it making many mistakes (reference: 1). But nobody else is to the point of being able to demonstrate, so I think it's safe to say that Tesla is in second place. Given the amount of data that Tesla is gathering, I expect them to be able to gain abilities quickly and eventually catch up with Waymo's capabilities.


but how would waymo do outside of the bay area? they are learning the streets inside and out there, but likely would not do well if you dropped them in any other area.

for @Trent Eady - what would you anticipate the stock to do in the next 6 months? in my unprofessional opinion, I expect we will see it back up in the $380 range it hit earlier this year, but higher? will we see it hitting $400+ following the next couple quarterly earnings calls?


----------



## garsh

MelindaV said:


> but how would waymo do outside of the bay area?


It's a good question. They're also testing in Austin Texas and Phoenix Arizona that I know of, and they've built a "testing city" full of interesting roads & situations. But I keep waiting for them to start testing somewhere in the Northeast, where they have this stuff called "snow".


----------



## ng0

garsh said:


> It's a good question. They're also testing in Austin Texas and Phoenix Arizona that I know of, and they've built a "testing city" full of interesting roads & situations. But I keep waiting for them to start testing somewhere in the Northeast, where they have this stuff called "snow".


People keep talking about that stuff, but what is this snow stuff you refer to?


----------



## mservice

Reading through a number of forums and even news stories regarding autonomous vehicles (AV) the one thing I see very little of is the ramp up other non-AV. While it is becoming a fast track on AVs there is very little discussion on government regulations and we can't just expect federal regulations to make it all good. American roads are regulated by Federal, State, and local regulations. So, I do not expect that we will see AVs anytime soon, and the reason I didn't add it to my M3 package. 

There is also any other issue, that in my personal opinion could be larger; all of the non-AVs on the road. AV (ICE or EV) will still be a very low percentage of cars on the road for years to come. What that non-AV driver does will have a major impact on the driver in an AV. A blow out in a non-AV could make a dirext vector into an AV while the driver is reading a book, watching a movie, or sleeping. It is unlikely that it will turnout well. Until more people move to more modern cars this could be a bigger issue to an AV.

Now, before I get bombed for my opinion I'm 100% behind moving the technology forward, we just need to look at the bigger picture.


----------



## Michael Russo

mservice said:


> (...)
> Now, before I get bombed for my opinion I'm 100% behind moving the technology forward, we just need to look at the bigger picture.


@mservice , we don't 'bomb' people for their opinion here... we share views and in the worse case respectfully disagree... 

Welcome to the friendliest forum!!


----------



## ng0

mservice said:


> Reading through a number of forums and even news stories regarding autonomous vehicles (AV) the one thing I see very little of is the ramp up other non-AV. While it is becoming a fast track on AVs there is very little discussion on government regulations and we can't just expect federal regulations to make it all good. American roads are regulated by Federal, State, and local regulations. So, I do not expect that we will see AVs anytime soon, and *the reason I didn't add it to my M3 package. *
> 
> There is also any other issue, that in my personal opinion could be larger; all of the non-AVs on the road. AV (ICE or EV) will still be a very low percentage of cars on the road for years to come. What that non-AV driver does will have a major impact on the driver in an AV. A blow out in a non-AV could make a dirext vector into an AV while the driver is reading a book, watching a movie, or sleeping. It is unlikely that it will turnout well. Until more people move to more modern cars this could be a bigger issue to an AV.
> 
> Now, before I get bombed for my opinion I'm 100% behind moving the technology forward, we just need to look at the bigger picture.


Did you already configure your model 3!? 

I agree with you about government red tape being the biggest issue with the adoption of autonomous cars. The reality is that until true level 5 autonomy comes out, it'll be treated a lot like the current enhanced autopilot where a driver needs to be ready to take over at all times. The thing that will modify public opinion will be AI with the ability to really think through complicated situations like the one you outlined above. With level 5 autonomy, it theoretically won't matter what issues pop up on the road, the car would be able to consider all possible scenarios and choose the one with the best result. Unfortunately, this becomes an ethical issue. The car suddenly has to make life and death decisions and make choices like do you hit the pedestrian to the right or left. Also, who becomes liable for an accident like that?


----------



## mservice

Michael Russo said:


> @mservice , we don't 'bomb' people for their opinion here... we share views and in the worse case respectfully disagree...
> 
> Welcome to the friendliest forum!!


Mike: 
I'm on a couple of other forums and you are right this one is friendly. But, you know they are out there lurking


----------



## Michael Russo

mservice said:


> Mike:
> I'm on a couple of other forums and you are right this one is friendly. But, you know they are out there lurking


We mods keep a close watch... right, @TrevP , @MelindaV , @garsh ?


----------



## mservice

ng0 said:


> Did you already configure your model 3!?
> 
> I agree with you about government red tape being the biggest issue with the adoption of autonomous cars. The reality is that until true level 5 autonomy comes out, it'll be treated a lot like the current enhanced autopilot where a driver needs to be ready to take over at all times. The thing that will modify public opinion will be AI with the ability to really think through complicated situations like the one you outlined above. With level 5 autonomy, it theoretically won't matter what issues pop up on the road, the car would be able to consider all possible scenarios and choose the one with the best result. Unfortunately, this becomes an ethical issue. The car suddenly has to make life and death decisions and make choices like do you hit the pedestrian to the right or left. Also, who becomes liable for an accident like that?


@ng0 
Haven't officially configured yet.. my drop is Jan - Mar. and hoping closer to Jan...

You are right, with a car making decisions I can only guess how many people will go bonkers; a lot. The start of Cyberdyne Indisteries

Didn't Elon say that AI would start WWIII?


----------



## mservice

Michael Russo said:


> We mods keep a close watch... right, @TrevP , @MelindaV , @garsh ?


----------



## Michael Russo

Tell us more...


----------



## ng0

mservice said:


> @ng0
> Haven't officially configured yet.. my drop is Jan - Mar. and hoping closer to Jan...
> 
> You are right, with a car making decisions I can only guess how many people will go bonkers; a lot. The start of Cyberdyne Indisteries
> 
> Didn't Elon say that AI would start WWIII?


LoL. figured I'd check cause you said you didn't add it to your M3 package. ;-) Yea, I think Elon's getting a little nutty with his AI fears, but his company is making significant efforts to make sure AI really is as significant as he's fearing. Like I said, the bigger fear is the ethics of decision making skills, I think it'll be a long while before the military allows for truly autonomous attack systems.


----------



## Brokedoc

Back on Topic...

U.S. Treasury Secretary Elaine Chao will be announcing new proposed federal self-driving vehicle guidelines next week. *See Reuters article here.
*
Hopefully by legislating this as safety equipment, the federal government can bypass individual states to get some uniformity for autonomous driving. It would be up to the car companies to program specific local driving laws into the cars (such as no right on red in New York City)


----------



## mservice

ng0 said:


> LoL. figured I'd check cause you said you didn't add it to your M3 package. ;-) Yea, I think Elon's getting a little nutty with his AI fears, but his company is making significant efforts to make sure AI really is as significant as he's fearing. Like I said, the bigger fear is the ethics of decision making skills, I think it'll be a long while before the military allows for truly autonomous attack systems.


Yea, I think someone said that in T2, or 3 lol....


----------



## mservice

Michael Russo said:


> Tell us more...


Mike:

Configuration is killing me. Understand the business reason for the first rollout, it helps to feed revenue, and the spread over 12 months helps build on that revenue. Most are looking for the $7,500 tax credit so you sell the bells and whistles. I'm going with the long range battery +9k, and the premium package pretty much 'cause I want the better seats, don't care too much for the all glass roof, or heated seats, or sound system (ok I do like the sound system). So do I wait and push my luck on the credit and get a more basic 35k, or better wait till September for all wheel drive, and now smart suspension? I feel like I need to stop getting the updates of what's next.

So, after my diatribe this is kind'a it:

Base: 
Long Distance Battery: 
Premium Package: 
Paint: Won't likely do that until they make me.. 
Auto Drive:


----------



## ng0

mservice said:


> Mike:
> 
> Configuration is killing me. Understand the business reason for the first rollout, it helps to feed revenue, and the spread over 12 months helps build on that revenue. Most are looking for the $7,500 tax credit so you sell the bells and whistles. I'm going with the long range battery +9k, and the premium package pretty much 'cause I want the better seats, don't care too much for the all glass roof, or heated seats, or sound system (ok I do like the sound system). So do I wait and push my luck on the credit and get a more basic 35k, or better wait till September for all wheel drive, and now smart suspension? I feel like I need to stop getting the updates of what's next.
> 
> So, after my diatribe this is kind'a it:
> 
> Base:
> Long Distance Battery:
> Premium Package:
> Paint: Won't likely do that until they make me..
> Auto Drive:


Welcome to the $55K car club.


----------



## mservice

Brokedoc said:


> Back on Topic...
> 
> U.S. Treasury Secretary Elaine Chao will be announcing new proposed federal self-driving vehicle guidelines next week. *See Reuters article here.
> *
> Hopefully by legislating this as safety equipment, the federal government can bypass individual states to get some uniformity for autonomous driving. It would be up to the car companies to program specific local driving laws into the cars (such as no right on red in New York City)


Brokedoc:

I saw that it's a foot up, but with the current administration's view of government control I wouldn't hold my breath on federal legislation that would override states. But, you never know


----------



## mservice

ng0 said:


> Welcome to the $55K car club.


----------



## Brokedoc

mservice said:


> Brokedoc:
> 
> I saw that it's a foot up, but with the current administration's view of government control I wouldn't hold my breath on federal legislation that would override states. But, you never know


Vehicle safety equipment has always be set at a federal level like airbags, three point seat belts, etc. States at a local level can control emissions (like in Ca), license plates (rear only or both), and driving laws. Autonomous driving is tricky. Is it a driving law or a safety feature? It's possibly if a federal law is passed about automated driving that states may argue it to the SCOTUS but it's only delaying the inevitable and would create the possibility of patchwork laws which would be a complete nightmare for car makers.

It's interesting though that Chao is scheduled to make the announcement in Michigan even though Tesla is leading the field in self driving tech. Maybe Elon's parting from his government advisor role left some bad feelings...


----------



## mservice

Yep


----------



## mservice

Brokedoc said:


> Vehicle safety equipment has always be set at a federal level like airbags, three point seat belts, etc. States at a local level can control emissions (like in Ca), license plates (rear only or both), and driving laws. Autonomous driving is tricky. Is it a driving law or a safety feature? It's possibly if a federal law is passed about automated driving that states may argue it to the SCOTUS but it's only delaying the inevitable and would create the possibility of patchwork laws which would be a complete nightmare for car makers.
> 
> It's interesting though that Chao is scheduled to make the announcement in Michigan even though Tesla is leading the field in self driving tech. Maybe Elon's parting from his government advisor role left some bad feelings...


All good, but again I would be surprised if the administration will push. Don't get me wrong the earlier we start something the better.

Why announce in Michigan? the administration would likely lean to the big auto companies, and I would totally agree the president is likely PO'd at Elon.. Also of note Tesla beat the big boys on selling in Michigan. Don't be surprised if we see a bigger push by Michigan in the EV and AV world, Tesla has them looking over their shoulders.


----------



## Michael Russo

mservice said:


> Mike:
> Configuration is killing me. (...)


Life's all about choices... 
Budget remains a key driver... clearly lots (including me) will defer the Autopilot to a later OTA upgrade in favor if stuff you need to get from the factory from the get go (mostly LRB & premium). 
@ng0 , I am not ready to enter the $55k club...


----------



## ng0

Michael Russo said:


> Life's all about choices...
> Budget remains a key driver... clearly lots (including me) will defer the Autopilot to a later OTA upgrade in favor if stuff you need to get from the factory from the get go (mostly LRB & premium).
> @ng0 , I am not ready to enter the $55k club...


I definitely don't blame you. I'm still having a hard time wrapping my head around the huge car payments I'll have. The thing is that I've been excited about autopilot for a very long time, so I think I'll suck it up and pay a little extra every month to get it. I don't wanna pay am extra $1k later.


----------



## mservice

@Michael 
yep life is all about choices, and, all about budget, I bumped the battery because I don't have a garage (live in a town house) and wanted the extra range and juice if I can't get my HOA to let me put in a plug. I guess buying a Tesla your always going to see something better


----------



## Michael Russo

What was I just writing ? It's the data!
_Three.Million.Miles.A.Day_ of new data!! Wow.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/905536094053306372


----------



## ng0

Michael Russo said:


> What was I just writing ? It's the data!
> _Three.Million.Miles.A.Day_ of new data!! Wow.
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/905536094053306372


Pretty awesome though a little creepy how much data Tesla collects on everyone!


----------



## Michael Russo

ng0 said:


> Pretty awesome though a little creepy how much data Tesla collects on everyone!


It's for the good of mankind!!


----------



## mservice

Michael Russo said:


> It's for the good of mankind!!




For someone who's anti AI he sure pushing it to the cars.


----------



## KennethK

This is good news for autonomous vehicles.

https://electrek.co/2017/09/06/self-driving-car-national-measures-unanimously-approved-in-u-s-house/


----------



## mservice

Brokedoc said:


> Vehicle safety equipment has always be set at a federal level like airbags, three point seat belts, etc. States at a local level can control emissions (like in Ca), license plates (rear only or both), and driving laws. Autonomous driving is tricky. Is it a driving law or a safety feature? It's possibly if a federal law is passed about automated driving that states may argue it to the SCOTUS but it's only delaying the inevitable and would create the possibility of patchwork laws which would be a complete nightmare for car makers.
> 
> brokedoc: It's interesting though that Chao is scheduled to make the announcement in Michigan even though Tesla is leading the field in self driving tech. Maybe Elon's parting from his government advisor role left some bad feelings...


Looks like the first step congress passed a self-driving bill today. Next the senate where I feel it has a good chance. The bill is indeed tied to safety like you thought. The law is tied to testing more than driving, so we are still in a holding pattern.. it's going to be years until we are driving our own car.


----------



## Brokedoc

KennethK said:


> This is good news for autonomous vehicles.
> 
> https://electrek.co/2017/09/06/self-driving-car-national-measures-unanimously-approved-in-u-s-house/


That Uber self driving car could be something Marty McFly would drive!


----------



## Badback

Brokedoc said:


> Back on Topic...
> 
> U.S. Treasury Secretary Elaine Chao will be announcing new proposed federal self-driving vehicle guidelines next week. *See Reuters article here.
> *
> Hopefully by legislating this as safety equipment, the federal government can bypass individual states to get some uniformity for autonomous driving. It would be up to the car companies to program specific local driving laws into the cars (such as no right on red in New York City)


That's Transportation Secretary.


----------



## Badback

Brokedoc said:


> That Uber self driving car could be something Marty McFly would drive!
> 
> View attachment 3183


Looks like a bucket of chicken on top.


----------



## Gabzqc

Had a thought today about Model 3 being delivered late in UK. I wonder when it will become a "non issue" what side of the car the steering wheel is on... because the car drives itself...


----------



## Michael Russo

Gabzqc said:


> Had a thought today about Model 3 being delivered late in UK. I wonder when it will become a "non issue" what side of the car the steering wheel is on... because the car drives itself...


By the time the Model 3 finally makes it to the UK...


----------



## BILJ

Waiting on my Model 3, so in the meantime trying to understand Autopilot and the safety features in Tesla. What happens if you're driving with autopilot and the car next to you starts to change lanes right into you. Surely the Tesla is aware of what's happening. How would it react? Would it try to find best option like change lanes (if next lane over is free) or slow down or just scream at you loudly?


----------



## garsh

BILJ said:


> Waiting on my Model 3, so in the meantime trying to understand Autopilot and the safety features in Tesla. What happens if you're driving with autopilot and the car next to you starts to change lanes right into you. Surely the Tesla is aware of what's happening. How would it react? Would it try to find best option like change lanes (if next lane over is free) or slow down or just scream at you loudly?


From the late Joshua Brown:
_"Tesla Model S autopilot saved the car autonomously from a side collision from a boom lift truck. I was driving down the interstate and you can see the boom lift truck in question on the left side of the screen on a joining interstate road. Once the roads merged, the truck tried to get to the exit ramp on the right and never saw my Tesla. I actually wasn't watching that direction and Tessy (the name of my car) was on duty with autopilot engaged. I became aware of the danger when Tessy alerted me with the "immediately take over" warning chime and the car swerving to the right to avoid the side collision."
_​


----------



## Brokedoc

Michael Russo said:


> By the time the Model 3 finally makes it to the UK...


The navigation voice would need updates to mumble in a British accent....


----------



## Michael Russo

Brokedoc said:


> The navigation voice would need updates to mumble in a British accent....


And I always wanted my nav lady to speak proper American to me and they never do over here...


----------



## dogfood

When I consider autonomous vehicles (or "Autos," my favorite term), it makes me think of artificial superior intelligence. Is there going to be more than one version or is the second-place finisher going to be the best loser? It just seems like the mileage Tesla has been able to rack up is a definitive advantage.
It also recalls the other aspect: insurance. My neighbors in the field have already had several high-level meetings specifically to ruminate on how it's going to disrupt that business. We might see adoption based more on the discounts than on the wisdom of legislators (always a questionable quantity).


----------



## MarkB

ng0 said:


> The faster there's widespread adoption of these technologies, the faster the traffic congestion will get reduced.


So long as the result is not empty vehicles on the roads, which would actually ADD to congestion.

Just like Tesla now charges "idle Fees", jurisdictions will no doubt find ways to charge empty vehicles, such as circling the block without an occupant (to avoid paying for parking, or waiting for a "fare"). And just like Tesla's Idle fees, the cost would need to be enough to make a difference.


----------



## ng0

MarkB said:


> So long as the result is not empty vehicles on the roads, which would actually ADD to congestion.
> 
> Just like Tesla now charges "idle Fees", jurisdictions will no doubt find ways to charge empty vehicles, such as circling the block without an occupant (to avoid paying for parking, or waiting for a "fare"). And just like Tesla's Idle fees, the cost would need to be enough to make a difference.


Interesting perspective. I figured the efficiencies of not having human error and braking for no reason would make up for any additional empty vehicles on the road. Should be a constant flow of traffic outside of car problems that can't be anticipated. Also, shouldn't be any need for circling around. The car could go park somewhere free a short distance away and drive up and pick you up.


----------



## Michael Russo

Creative experiment... shows that, besides legislations, there are other key elements of change management to be considered in the advent of autonomous driving: other (traditional!) drivers... 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...e42ac0-98aa-11e7-82e4-f1076f6d6152_story.html


----------



## garsh

MarkB said:


> So long as the result is not empty vehicles on the roads, which would actually ADD to congestion.
> 
> Just like Tesla now charges "idle Fees", jurisdictions will no doubt find ways to charge empty vehicles, such as circling the block without an occupant (to avoid paying for parking, or waiting for a "fare"). And just like Tesla's Idle fees, the cost would need to be enough to make a difference.


Yes, that would be bad.


----------



## ng0

Michael Russo said:


> Creative experiment... shows that, besides legislations, there are other key elements of change management to be considered in the advent of autonomous driving: other (traditional!) drivers...
> 
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...e42ac0-98aa-11e7-82e4-f1076f6d6152_story.html


Interesting article. Autonomous driving definitely isn't an easy problem, but it's getting there! I was thinking it would be nice to have some kind of sign or signal on your car to let other drivers know that you're driving autonomously. I can imagine doing people reacting differently to cars when they know the driver isn't in control.


----------



## MarkB

ng0 said:


> Interesting perspective. I figured the efficiencies of not having human error and braking for no reason would make up for any additional empty vehicles on the road. Should be a constant flow of traffic outside of car problems that can't be anticipated. Also, shouldn't be any need for circling around. The car could go park somewhere free a short distance away and drive up and pick you up.


In theory, I agree with you. But that's years down the road. First it's got to work, then be approved, then be accepted (these might only take a number of years in total).

But what you envision will only exist when virtually all vehicles are purely autonomous. For that to be true, virtually all the current human-driven cars will have to be replaced. That won't be true until years (15? 20?) after the last non-autonomous vehicle is sold. I'd assume some incentives to expedite getting the last moving roadblocks off the road -- either carrot (rebates to replace non-autonomous vehicle with autonomous), or stick (have to drive in separate lanes, or hefty insurance premiums for those that choose to expose the rest of us to greater risks).

Some folks will resist because "it's their right to drive", or because "they like to drive" (even though taxpayer built roads are there to move people and goods. Tracks are for 'fun').

It will eventually happen.

But for now, there still needs to be enough pavement for all the vehicles. Even if all vehicles were autonomous, each takes up about 5 linear meters (without the "wasted space" between vehicles.

Where I live, the downtown core has very expensive real estate. Parking rates reflect that. One has to go a very significant distance to find "free" parking. That's still a lot of empty vehicles taking up (needless?) linear feet of limited pavement as they travel there and back.

I think there will be "incentives" to solve the empty vehicle issue as well - unfortunately I can only think of "sticks".

Smarter people than me will solve these issues.


----------



## ng0

MarkB said:


> In theory, I agree with you. But that's years down the road. First it's got to work, then be approved, then be accepted (these might only take a number of years in total).
> 
> But what you envision will only exist when virtually all vehicles are purely autonomous. For that to be true, virtually all the current human-driven cars will have to be replaced. That won't be true until years (15? 20?) after the last non-autonomous vehicle is sold. I'd assume some incentives to expedite getting the last moving roadblocks off the road -- either carrot (rebates to replace non-autonomous vehicle with autonomous), or stick (have to drive in separate lanes, or hefty insurance premiums for those that choose to expose the rest of us to greater risks).
> 
> Some folks will resist because "it's their right to drive", or because "they like to drive" (even though taxpayer built roads are there to move people and goods. Tracks are for 'fun').
> 
> It will eventually happen.
> 
> But for now, there still needs to be enough pavement for all the vehicles. Even if all vehicles were autonomous, each takes up about 5 linear meters (without the "wasted space" between vehicles.
> 
> Where I live, the downtown core has very expensive real estate. Parking rates reflect that. One has to go a very significant distance to find "free" parking. That's still a lot of empty vehicles taking up (needless?) linear feet of limited pavement as they travel there and back.
> 
> I think there will be "incentives" to solve the empty vehicle issue as well - unfortunately I can only think of "sticks".
> 
> Smarter people than me will solve these issues.


yea, I agree. It won't be an immediate solution. But really we're talking about autonomous vehicles. We all know there will be roadblocks/red tape/etc in getting that fully rolled out. I'm still pretty confident that 20 years should get us pretty close to fully autonomous to the point where we don't need steering wheels.


----------



## Brokedoc

ng0 said:


> Should be a constant flow of traffic outside of car problems that can't be anticipated....


Tesla is on the forefront of preventing excessive mechanical breakdowns. The first part is their fleet of mobile service techs that can handle 85% of service issues. Eventually with Tesla FSD activated, I imagine tech's can be automatically dispatched for breakdowns or even any fault codes that may indicate impending technical problems. How many times have we heard stories of the driver that ignored the light on their dash until the engine fell out of the car!

The second part is Tesla pairing up with tire companies to monitor tire wear and individual tire pressures to pre-emptively address issues such as nail in the tire or routine tire changes before the driver is even aware of any issues. This is also done with mobile service vans to be done on the go.

Tesloop partners with Goodyear


----------



## M3OC Rules

I don't know who is in what place but there are lots of contenders with videos out there.
GM Cruze - 



Drive.AI - 



Nissan - 




To a lessor extent:
Ford - 



Hyundai - 



and on and on

I think the problem is that this is mostly a simulation problem and they don't give simulation results. Let's take Elon's trip across the country for example. If they do it without a disengagement does that mean its ready for prime time. Not necessarily. If they have one disengagement does that mean others are ahead of them? Its basically going to be a marketing video like the others are. Don't get me wrong it may still get me to buy it and I'll watch the live stream live if they put it out there. Hopefully its closer to the record of 29 hours than a normal 41 hours. Maybe I'll try to sleep while its charging. But what if they charge on the road like refueling planes in the air?


----------



## Michael Russo

A step in the right direction (actually I should write 'left' in an LHD country... ) in the US... 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...10c5ac-a908-11e7-850e-2bdd1236be5d_story.html


----------



## Michael Russo

The psychology of self driving... 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...026fce-2606-11e7-a1b3-faff0034e2de_story.html


----------



## Topher

BILJ said:


> What happens if you're driving with autopilot and the car next to you starts to change lanes right into you.


The answer to ALL these 'what if' questions is simple. "What would YOU do?" It is likely that the AI will do the same thing (unless of course what you do gets you killed). The AI is being trained do what other drivers do, but without any of the mistakes.

Thank you kindly.


----------



## Michael Russo

Secret?? LOL. For sure, with six Lidar, definitely not inconspicuous!! 

Here's a closer look at Apple's secret self-driving car

https://www.theverge.com/2017/10/18/16496182/apple-self-driving-car-project-titan-sensor-lidar


----------



## SoFlaModel3

Michael Russo said:


> Secret?? LOL. For sure, with six Lidar, definitely not inconspicuous!!
> 
> Here's a closer look at Apple's secret self-driving car
> 
> https://www.theverge.com/2017/10/18/16496182/apple-self-driving-car-project-titan-sensor-lidar


Good thing they built it from the ground up


----------



## JimB

This may help guide us on the road to autonomous cars.

https://xkcd.com/1925/


----------



## Brokedoc

So just to ground people in reality, the current Autopilot 2.0 system and software is FAR from the fully autonomous functionality that people think of when they casually mention Tesla’s self driving cars.

I have had my MX since June and this weekend was the first substantial snow. We got a minimal amount, about 3 inches on grass and virtually none on road surfaces. AP2.0 would not engage even though I could clearly see the lane markers. My display shows the lane markers were being recognized by the car but it would not allow me to engage AP. I presume this is a software issue that will improve with future versions but this is another reason why I am not buying AP when I get the M3 unless the AP software matures a lot. I only wish that you can get auto-park function without buying Autopilot.

There are YouTube videos of Tesls on autopilot driving roads that have so much snow that lane markers aren’t visible. Presumably these are AP1 and the car uses its GPS to follow the path from previous trip data. Again another function that AP2 hasn’t caught up with...


----------



## Michael Russo

Interesting in-depth comparative review. Admittedly, I have not read as much of Alex' articles to-date yet it feels serious & objective enough to warrant the time it takes to read it all (it's quite long... )

http://www.thedrive.com/tech/17083/...esla-autopilot-vs-gm-supercruise-head-to-head


----------



## ng0

Michael Russo said:


> Interesting in-depth comparative review. Admittedly, I have not read as much of Alex' articles to-date yet it feels serious & objective enough to warrant the time it takes to read it all (it's quite long... )
> 
> http://www.thedrive.com/tech/17083/...esla-autopilot-vs-gm-supercruise-head-to-head


Very interesting article. I didn't read every detail, but I think I got the gist.

Summary ->>

Tesla Autopilot:
1) still requires you to put your hands on the wheel fairly often
2) OTA updates can be pushed out any time for SW and maps
3) Easy to fool the system to allow you to completely have your eyes off the road for an extended period of time
4) has the ability to change lanes automatically but still extremely unsafe
5) Purely uses cameras/sensors to negotiate road

GM Supercruise:
1) Very good indicators as to the status of the system (on/off/requires attention)
2) OTA only for maps once per quarter and no SW updates without going into the dealer
3) Very difficult if not impossible to fool the system. Eyes must be on the road at all times while system is engaged
4) Driver can manually change lanes and then system will reengage when back in the lane. No auto lane change.
5) Uses additional data to determine if a road is suitable for supercruise and will only engage on those sections of road.

Let me know if I missed anything.  Definitely glad to see more companies making an effort!


----------



## Michael Russo

Hate to say it but I'm a tad skeptical... 
you folks?

Ok. They might 'make it' yet will it sell?

GM will make an autonomous car without steering wheel or pedals by 2019

https://www.theverge.com/2018/1/12/16880978/gm-autonomous-car-2019-detroit-auto-show-2018


----------



## Ken Voss

Michael Russo said:


> Not sure thIs totally answers the question if you're still on the fence yet decently analytical...
> 
> https://simplywall.st/stocks/us/aut...ews/when-should-you-buy-tesla-inc-nasdaqtsla/





Michael Russo said:


> Hate to say it but I'm a tad skeptical...
> you folks?
> 
> Ok. They might 'make it' yet will it sell?
> 
> GM will make an autonomous car without steering wheel or pedals by 2019
> 
> https://www.theverge.com/2018/1/12/16880978/gm-autonomous-car-2019-detroit-auto-show-2018


We all know this WILL NOT happen in 2019 but that isn't the point, the point is for GM to get a message out there to their customers, shareholders and employees that they are on it. This will be delayed to 2020 and then 2021 and so on but in the mean time it is good marketing for them. We should expect similar messaging from all major auto makers, they all need to show they are in the game or die


----------



## Michael Russo

@Ken Voss , took the liberty to move your response here and include the post I think you were responding to. If you concur, we can take out the reference to my other post on where TSLA could be going...


----------



## Michael Russo

Important read: Alex Roy from The Drive sets the record straight on a recent 'article' by Doug DeMuro...

A good reminder that not all YouTubers, besides often being entertaining, are equally reliable as source of information!! 
(As y'all know... the M3OC Show videos are amongst the best though )

http://www.thedrive.com/opinion/17494/doug-demuros-semi-autonomous-systems-round-up-is-beyond-stupid-its-potentially-dangerous


----------



## Wooloomooloo

This is a few days old and I missed the story last week, but it's quite interesting.

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy...mo-far-ahead-of-tesla-in-driverless-car-race/

The reasons are numerous, but a lot of it has to do with Telsa's split from MobileEye and the lack of redundancies in their systems, which GM/Waymo have. While Musk has promised Level 5 autonomy by 2019, his predictions have been a little optimistic recently.

Thoughts?


----------



## dogfood

Reading about how many other companies are promising dramatic advances in the next couple years, the inclusion of Tesla at the bottom seems click-baity. Obviously, this comes from a report (which Zac and Jesse cover in their latest In Depth today), but that doesn't remove the nature of the inclusion. There's a definite "short" smell in the report and article.

I'm not crying foul that Tesla isn't having problems, but they aren't behind _every _other company that makes cool videos about vibrant colors pulsing from beneath cars and happy people living in the future.


----------



## Wooloomooloo

dogfood said:


> Reading about how many other companies are promising dramatic advances in the next couple years, the inclusion of Tesla at the bottom seems click-baity. Obviously, this comes from a report (which Zac and Jesse cover in their latest In Depth today), but that doesn't remove the nature of the inclusion. There's a definite "short" smell in the report and article.
> 
> I'm not crying foul that Tesla isn't having problems, but they aren't behind _every _other company that makes cool videos about vibrant colors pulsing from beneath cars and happy people living in the future.


I'm looking forward to the issued raised being discussed properly. On you click-bait comment specifically, I've been reading Arstechica for about 15 years, pretty much when it started, and they're really not that kind of blog. That article never made the front page, I only found it via reading another article about a guy using his autoPilot as a defense against a DUI stop.

I really hope the Tesla community doesn't just defend the company regardless of the facts (like Apple fans often do), because we really need good information and good discourse about this technology.


----------



## LucyferSam

Wooloomooloo said:


> I'm looking forward to the issued raised being discussed properly. On you click-bait comment specifically, I've been reading Arstechica for about 15 years, pretty much when it started, and they're really not that kind of blog. That article never made the front page, I only found it via reading another article about a guy using his autoPilot as a defense against a DUI stop.
> 
> I really hope the Tesla community doesn't just defend the company regardless of the facts (like Apple fans often do), because we really need good information and good discourse about this technology.


While the article most definitely made the front page of Ars when it came out, I'd tend to agree that the intent isn't to be click bait. They have on well thought out coverage, though it does cover the full range from overblown positive to overblown negative at times and probably averages to slightly more negative than average. The report referenced in the article has been fairly down on Tesla's autopilot efforts for the last couple years if I remember right, but that doesn't necessarily mean their wrong. Tesla has either the best or second best driver assist features on the market today (I haven't tried Cadillac's Super Cruise, but in depth reviews indicate it is very comparable), but that doesn't inherently mean they are the closest to an actual autonomous vehicle. The report, like many in the machine learning and autonomy industries don't believe that Tesla's approach is a viable on for reaching true autonomy, so due to Tesla's commitment to that approach they rank them last in terms of that goal. Their logic soundly follows from their assumptions, however, Tesla has demonstrated before the ability to do that which seems impossible so I wouldn't bet against them (however the fact that I didn't pay for FSD on my 3 also shows I wouldn't bet that heavily on them reaching that state...)


----------



## garsh

Wooloomooloo said:


> This is a few days old and I missed the story last week, but it's quite interesting.
> 
> https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy...mo-far-ahead-of-tesla-in-driverless-car-race/
> 
> The reasons are numerous, but a lot of it has to do with Telsa's split from MobileEye and the lack of redundancies in their systems, which GM/Waymo have. While Musk has promised Level 5 autonomy by 2019, his predictions have been a little optimistic recently.
> 
> Thoughts?


The ars article just points to some industry analysis. You have to pay to see the original report, and it's not immediately clear how they came to this conclusion.

My own personal understanding (which I've stated here many times before) is that Waymo is probably 6 years ahead of everybody else. If the Navigant report has GM ahead of Waymo, then I really need to question their methodology. Waymo has been working on this longer than everybody else. They've had autonomous cars driving around successfully for years - nobody else has (and we have autonomous UBER cars all over Pittsburgh, but it doesn't sound like one ever makes it though a whole trip without the driver intervening). Waymo has incredibly full, detailed maps to work with, which are going to be essential for keeping car computing requirements reasonable.

"Redundancies" are a red herring at this stage. Once there are self-driving cars being sold to the public, then redundancies are a hardware feature. But redundancy isn't really intrinsic to the development of self-driving capability.


----------



## TesLou

GM’s Super Cruise is no better than Autopilot, if you read the reviews from objective reporters who have driven both. Although I’ve never been in a car that employs Super Cruise, from all that I’ve read about it, I’d much rather have the lane change feature on AP and not being limited to using it on certain highways (as GM SC does).


----------



## Dan Detweiler

Wooloomooloo said:


> This is a few days old and I missed the story last week, but it's quite interesting.
> 
> https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy...mo-far-ahead-of-tesla-in-driverless-car-race/
> 
> The reasons are numerous, but a lot of it has to do with Telsa's split from MobileEye and the lack of redundancies in their systems, which GM/Waymo have. While Musk has promised Level 5 autonomy by 2019, his predictions have been a little optimistic recently.
> 
> Thoughts?


For clarification sake...to my knowledge Elon has never "promised" anything. He offers estimates when asked and I have no reason to believe that those estimates are not what Elon believes to be true at the time. His opinion, as knowledgeable as it is, is still just that...his opinion based on facts as he knows them to be true at the time. It kills me when people get bent out of shape as if they were flat out lied to when an opinion or estimate turns out to be something different than what they want.

Sorry, but I can't help but feel that a lot of the frustration some people associate with Elon and the company is self inflicted.

Dan


----------



## Brett

garsh said:


> If the Navigant report has GM ahead of Waymo, then I really need to question their methodology


IIRC, that report weighs "ability to produce cars at scale" very heavily. GM got points for having existing car manufacturing capacity and Waymo got docked for not having a plan to sell cars to consumers. That's just an example of how this report was heavily biased towards one point of view. It _*may *_be a correct point of view, but there are many contrasting options.

This report really should have been titled "Ranking companies on their potential ability to sell LIDAR based, Level 5 autonomous vehicles directly to consumers". With that title I think their analysis is pretty spot-on.


----------



## Brett

TesLou said:


> and not being limited to using it on certain highways (as GM SC does).


This is the biggest factor to me. My stop-and-go commute is on a road not supported by GM Super Cruise but where Tesla's EAP works perfectly. So in my case the GM system might as well not exist. For others it would be different.

There are a lot of things GM got right (e.g. Auto Pilot enabled indicator), but I much prefer Tesla's approach to allow flexibility at the possible expense of safety.


----------



## LucyferSam

Brett said:


> This report really should have been titled "Ranking companies on their potential ability to sell LIDAR based, Level 5 autonomous vehicles directly to consumers". With that title I think their analysis is pretty spot-on.


That would indeed be a good title for the report. If you accept their assumptions, the report follows reasonably and logically from that point. I don't happen to think their assumptions a great view of the potential for autonomous vehicles, but it's still a useful analysis of the developmental space as long as you understand what their assumptions are and the effect of those assumptions on the conclusions.


----------



## gregincal

garsh said:


> "Redundancies" are a red herring at this stage. Once there are self-driving cars being sold to the public, then redundancies are a hardware feature. But redundancy isn't really intrinsic to the development of self-driving capability.


Well it's applicable insofar as Tesla is saying the cars it sells today will be capable of full self driving in the future, which was the point made in the article (that there is no way that the hardware in today's Teslas will ever be capable of full self driving).


----------



## garsh

gregincal said:


> Well it's applicable insofar as Tesla is saying the cars it sells today will be capable of full self driving in the future, which was the point made in the article (that there is no way that the hardware in today's Teslas will ever be capable of full self driving).


But how does that help GM's ranking? None of their cars sold today contain any hardware to support self driving.


----------



## Michael Russo

In while I was sleeping...  New data on diminishing fear amongst Americans relative to FSD cars... though age & gender results vary...

Americans are slowly warming up to self-driving cars http://money.cnn.com/2018/01/24/technology/self-driving-car-safety/index.html


----------



## MichelT3

That age/gender difference is not much of a surprise. 
My 61 yo wife still refuses to use a dumb Cruise Control. I love it and want EAP and FSD (if ever).


----------



## MichelT3

gregincal said:


> Well it's applicable insofar as Tesla is saying the cars it sells today will be capable of full self driving in the future, which was the point made in the article (that there is no way that the hardware in today's Teslas will ever be capable of full self driving).


If I'm correct it has been noted that Tesla cameras are heated to keep away frost and moisture. And the promise has been made that if you buy EAP or FSD up front and the hardware needs to be changed to make it function, Tesla will do so, free of charge. Which makes the hardware capable.


----------



## Roderick80

I highly recommend giving this a listen for an objective analysis on Cruise relative to Tesla:

http://theteslashow.com/episodes/82-cruise


----------



## MichelT3

Why? GM doesn’t offer a comparable BEV. (No the Bolt isn’t, for many reasons.)


----------



## Dan Detweiler

MichelT3 said:


> If I'm correct it has been noted that Tesla cameras are heated to keep away frost and moisture. And the promise has been made that if you buy EAP or FSD up front and the hardware needs to be changed to make it function, Tesla will do so, free of charge. Which makes the hardware capable.


I know this has been alluded to in several posts and conversations regarding auto pilot hardware but do you have a reference from Tesla in this regard? I would love to see that in writing somewhere as it is one of my biggest justifications for purchasing FSD up front.

Dan


----------



## MichelT3

Sorry @Dan Detweiler, saw too many posts the past months. Can't remember. But know there was a text from Tesla / Elon. Maybe someone else knows?


----------



## Dan Detweiler

MichelT3 said:


> Sorry @Dan Detweiler, saw too many posts the past months. Can't remember. But know there was a text from Tesla / Elon. Maybe someone else knows?


To me, if confirmed, this would be huge. The reassurance that no further expense would be had regardless of what may come to pass down the road would make all the difference in the world to my piece of mind. I wouldn't have any problem plopping down the extra cash now if that were indeed the case since I plan to have this car for at least a decade. In that amount of time I am sure FSD will be upon us...in some form or fashion.

Dan


----------



## favo

There's this Electrek article from November 2017 about possible AP2 hardware upgrades.



> Musk reiterated again that Autopilot 2.0 owners will receive a computer upgrade for free if it turns out that it is needed to achieve full autonomy:
> 
> "For customers that have signed up for full software capability, we'll push that option. If it does turn out that a computer upgrade is necessary in order to meet the regulatory requirements in that area, we will replace the computer with something with greater power, which is just unpluging the old one, plug the new one in. But we feel confident of the competitiveness of our hardware strategy. I would say that we are certain that our hardware strategy is better than any other option… by a lot."


This Electrek article from August 2017 mentioned a possible free upgrade from the AP2 to AP2.5 CPU, if needed.



> Tesla still believes that it can achieve the promised full autonomy on the 2.0 suite, but they now say that they could upgrade HW 2.0 cars with the new 2.5 hardware at no cost in the "highly unlikely" possibility that it is actually needed:
> 
> "However, we still expect to achieve full self-driving capability with safety more than twice as good as the average human driver without making any hardware changes to HW 2.0. If this does not turn out to be the case, which we think is highly unlikely, we will upgrade customers to the 2.5 computer at no cost."


----------



## Ken Voss

favo said:


> There's this Electrek article from November 2017 about possible AP2 hardware upgrades.
> 
> This Electrek article from August 2017 mentioned a possible free upgrade from the AP2 to AP2.5 CPU, if needed.


That article plus $4.25 will buy you a Caffè Latte, where is the guarantee fro Tesla?


----------

