Autonomous Car Progress

[diplomat33]

Lemme put it another way.


Is it legally possible to operate an L4 car in CA without a driver?

Yes.

Is it legally possible to operate an L3 car in CA without a driver?

No.

But Tesla said that the car was capable of self-driving without any driver in the seat. So Tesla was claiming that the car was capable of L4. You can't ignore that. And it is possible to have a person in the seat of a L4 car if the driver is a passenger and does not do anything. The presence of a person in the driver seat does not automatically downgrade a car to L3. And Tesla said that the car did not need a driver, that the person in the driver seat was not doing anything, implying that the car was L4.

 

[Daniel in SD]

Perhaps the "legal reason" is that they could face a massive personal injury or wrongful death lawsuit if they sent a vehicle running beta FSD software on public roads with no safety driver.

 

[daniel]

Lemme put it another way.

Is it legally possible to operate an L4 car in CA without a driver?

Yes.

Is it legally possible to operate an L3 car in CA without a driver?

No.

With respect, I think your use of the word "possible" above is incorrect and misleading. The law does not deal with, regulate, or speak to what is possible. The law deals with what is permissible. "Legally possible" is a meaningless phrase.

It is legally permissible to operate a car without a driver in CA if the state has certified the car for L4 operation. You can't just say "This car is L4" and then operate it without a driver. You need state certification .

It is not legally permissible to operate a car without a driver if it has been certified only for L3 operation or lower, or has not been certified.

It is possible to operate an L3 car in CA without a driver. It's just not permitted and is illegal.

On a related note: The SAE levels deal with what a car is capable of doing. An L3 car is capable of performing all driving tasks under some conditions, and is capable of determining when it must give over control to a driver. It's the responsibility of the driver to be available when that happens. It's not the responsibility of the car to make sure the driver is available. That remains the driver's responsibility as far as the SAE definitions are concerned. But it makes sense for regulators to insist that cars be able to monitor drivers before granting certification. The bottom line for regulators is not the SAE definitions, it's public safety. And if the SAE definitions are inadequate, the regulators can insist that car makers go further.

 

[Knightshade]

With respect, I think your use of the word "possible" above is incorrect and misleading. The law does not deal with, regulate, or speak to what is possible. The law deals with what is permissible. "Legally possible" is a meaningless phrase.

With equal respect- that is factually incorrect- legally speaking.

It's not legally possible to give consent when in certain impaired states of mind for example.

It's also not legally possible to give consent beneath a certain age.

Just to cite the two really low hanging fruit examples.


For car purposes, it's not legally possible to operate a motor vehicle above a specific BAC, even if your actual driving is flawless in that condition.

 

[Knightshade]

But Tesla said that the car was capable of self-driving without any driver in the seat.

Did they?

AFAIK they said exactly the opposite on the legal form they filed with CA DMV, where they specifically called out the demo was level 3.

So Tesla was claiming that the car was capable of L4. You can't ignore that

I couldn't if they had actually made such a claim- but they did not.

. And it is possible to have a person in the seat of a L4 car if the driver is a passenger and does not do anything

Sure.

But it's also legally possible not to have one there at all for L4.

Thus, if the driver was legally required that means less than L4.

. And Tesla said that the car did not need a driver, that the person in the driver seat was not doing anything.

Again they did not literally say any such a thing.

They said the driver was there for legal reasons.

Which would be accurate for an L3 car in every possible circumstance

But is potentially not accurate for every possible case of an L4 vehicle.

Plus- as I said- on the actual legal report to CA DMV it was explicated stated the demo was L3, not L4.

 

[_jmk]

Interesting enough, even the cheap vw id3 starts to be better than teslas in terms of autonomy. Not sure what they have in it to do the magic (lane assist, tacc, sign detection) but the existing features do work well. It doesn’t seem to be mobileye..

 

[Daniel in SD]

Interesting enough, even the cheap vw id3 starts to be better than teslas in terms of autonomy. Not sure what they have in it to do the magic (lane assist, tacc, sign detection) but the existing features do work well. It doesn’t seem to be mobileye..

Pretty sure it's Mobileye.
Swarm data paves way for autonomous driving: Volkswagen and Mobileye sign agreement

 

[Tam]

What happened to the FSD language in the new car ordering menu?

"Upcoming:
Autosteer on city streets."

The old language was "Automatic driving on city streets."

I thought even a very basic, plain Autopilot has already achieved that function of "Autosteer on city streets".

 

[bd7349]

What happened to the FSD language in the new car ordering menu?

"Upcoming:
Autosteer on city streets."

I thought even a very basic, plain Autopilot has already achieved that function of "Autosteer on city streets".

Autosteer on city streets is basically FSD — turning at lights, avoiding parked cars, swerving around open car doors. Basically anything you’d experience in the city, it’ll be able to handle. The wording has changed multiple times throughout the year. I wouldn’t pay too much attention to it.

What’s interesting is that the Enhanced Autopilot upgrade has returned under the Upgrades tab in the app.
Enhanced Autopilot option is back... $4k : teslamotors

It’s $4k vs. $8k for the FSD upgrade, and the only difference is FSD gets traffic light and stop sign control and “upcoming: autosteer on city streets”. At the moment there’s barely any difference between the two, so this leads me to believe Tesla really is on the verge of releasing self driving features... or else what would make up that $4k difference? It’s certainly not traffic light and stop sign control.

My guess is we’ll hear more about FSD at the shareholder meeting. Really excited to see what comes of it.

 

[_jmk]

Pretty sure it's Mobileye.
Swarm data paves way for autonomous driving: Volkswagen and Mobileye sign agreement

VWs ID3 FAQ states it’s not, but it doesn’t say what it actually is. Audis etc have the mobileye.

 

[diplomat33]

Did they?

AFAIK they said exactly the opposite on the legal form they filed with CA DMV, where they specifically called out the demo was level 3.

I couldn't if they had actually made such a claim- but they did not.

On Autonomy Day, yes, they said it was L3. But in the 2016 demo, they implied L4. They said "the driver is only there for legal reasons". The word "only" there means that there are no other reasons for why there would be a driver. In other words, you are saying that if there were no legal reasons, that you would be able to remove the driver. You are implying that from just a self-driving point of view, the car does not need a driver, hence L4.

I guess we are quibbling over the language. Maybe legally it was not L4 since there was a driver in the seat. But saying that legal reasons were the only reasons implies that if you remove the "legal reasons" that the car could be driverless (L4). So it was implying L4 capability. Again, I am only talking about the 2016 demo here. The Autonomy Day demo was L3.

They said the driver was there for legal reasons.

No. they said that the driver was only there for legal reasons. Not quite the same. "only" adds a meaning that there were no other reasons for having a driver. In other words, if you remove the legal reasons, then they could have removed the driver because there were no technical reasons for having driver.

Plus- as I said- on the actual legal report to CA DMV it was explicated stated the demo was L3, not L4.

I am not talking about the Autonomy Day demo. Yes, Tesla reported that drive as being L3 to the CA DMV. I am talking about the 2016 demo where it says "the driver is only here for legal reasons." That drive was implied to be L4 IMO because the language used.

 

[diplomat33]

What happened to the FSD language in the new car ordering menu?

"Upcoming:
Autosteer on city streets."

The old language was "Automatic driving on city streets."

I thought even a very basic, plain Autopilot has already achieved that function of "Autosteer on city streets".

No. You can use autosteer on city streets. But there is still plenty of functionality missing.

Autosteer cannot make turns at intersections on city streets. Autosteer cannot yield at yield signs. Autosteer cannot handle all construction zones on city streets. Autosteer cannot handle roundabouts. Autosteer cannot turn on on streets with no lane markings, like residential streets or streets on a university campus.

So I expect that "autosteer on city streets" will add these features.

 

[Knightshade]

What’s interesting is that the Enhanced Autopilot upgrade has returned under the Upgrades tab in the app.
Enhanced Autopilot option is back... $4k : teslamotors

Now that is weird as hell.

Thanks for pointing it out though, hadn't seen that yet.

No. You can use autosteer on city streets. But there is still plenty of functionality missing.

Autosteer cannot make turns at intersections on city streets. Autosteer cannot yield at yield signs. Autosteer cannot handle all construction zones on city streets. Autosteer cannot handle roundabouts. Autosteer cannot turn on on streets with no lane markings, like residential streets or streets on a university campus.

So I expect that "autosteer on city streets" will add these features.

Also, the manual explicitly states autosteer isn't intended for city streets, so there's that.

On Autonomy Day, yes, they said it was L3.

Right- which I thought was the video we were discussing since it's the only remotely legit one Tesla ever put out.

But in the 2016 demo, they implied L4.

Yeah but as mentioned, that video was mostly special effects, not any actual FSD, based on the filings of many hundreds of miles driven and like 170-something disengagements during those runs to obtain that footage and edit it together to deceptively seem like a single take video.

So that video was effectively level 2 AT BEST regardless of what it was represented as.

It was also prior to the 2018 changes to CA self-driving regulations, so different laws in place anyway.

 

[diplomat33]

Also, the manual explicitly states autosteer isn't intended for city streets, so there's that.

Yeah, it is not intended for city streets, but Tesla still let's users turn it on on city streets.

Yeah but as mentioned, that video was mostly special effects, not any actual FSD, based on the filings of many hundreds of miles driven and like 170-something disengagements during those runs to obtain that footage and edit it together to deceptively seem like a single take video.

So that video was effectively level 2 AT BEST regardless of what it was represented as.

It was also prior to the 2018 changes to CA self-driving regulations, so different laws in place anyway.

Yeah, I know the 2016 demo was fake. I was merely pointing out that the disclaimer "the driver is only there for legal reasons" was making a (false) claim of L4.

 

[daniel]

What happened to the FSD language in the new car ordering menu?

"Upcoming:
Autosteer on city streets."

The old language was "Automatic driving on city streets."

I thought even a very basic, plain Autopilot has already achieved that function of "Autosteer on city streets".

As diplomat33 states, AP/EAP does allow autosteer on city streets. Just like autosteer on highways, it will not stop for lights or signage and it will not make turns. But it operates on city streets in exactly the same fashion that it works on highways. The manual says it's intended only for highways (and freeways) but it does work on city streets. (It requires the driver to take over far more often in the city than on the highway, but that's only because in the city there are far more of the things that it cannot handle city or highway.)

I think Tesla is continuing to slowly back away from earlier promises. When FSD was first introduced, it would allow the car to drive wherever you wanted to send it when nobody is in it. Now it's just a list of things like turns and stop signs and such.

 

[diplomat33]

I think Tesla is continuing to slowly back away from earlier promises. When FSD was first introduced, it would allow the car to drive wherever you wanted to send it when nobody is in it. Now it's just a list of things like turns and stop signs and such.

Probably because city self-driving is the most difficult self-driving. There are a lot of cases that are very complex for autonomous cars to handle correctly. That's why companies like Cruise and Waymo that have very good perception, very good planning, and can do good self-driving in the city, still have edge cases to solve before they can fully deploy driverless robotaxis everywhere.

Cruise shared this clip of city self-driving that is quite interesting with some difficult city driving cases. You can watch the full clip here:
https://twitter.com/Cruise/status/1307092038765215746

But here is a case of 2 double parked delivery trucks with a little 2 door red car that zips through them. It is hard to see the red car because of the double parked trucks. If you go around the van too quickly, you would hit the red car head one. This is a tricky case for autonomous cars.

I just share this as an example of difficult city driving cases for autonomous cars. I think that even after Tesla releases "autosteer on city streets", there are going to be a lot of cases like this where the driver will need to take over.

 

[Daniel in SD]

I just share this as an example of difficult city driving cases for autonomous cars. I think that even after Tesla releases "autosteer on city streets", there are going to be a lot of cases like this where the driver will need to take over.

It will be interesting to see how "automatic driving on city streets" will handle that (I doubt Autosteer will). It seems like having the cameras in the center of the car will make it very difficult.

 

[DanCar]

It will be interesting to see how "automatic driving on city streets" will handle that (I doubt Autosteer will). It seems like having the cameras in the center of the car will make it very difficult.

Yes, there will be many cases not handled until additional sensors are added. Ten plus years away from level 5. Software will be the biggest issue in the end, after additional sensors are added.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

Now that is weird as hell.

Thanks for pointing it out though, hadn't seen that yet.

Makes sense though! There are a lot of people who know (or think they know) that FSD will never work, but they do want the features of EAP (even though they are currently all extremely gimmicky - even NoA). So Tesla is almost certainly optimizing revenue by adding the upgraded EAP option. Though $4k seems like a lot to add the four listed features, given that the car already has TACC and Autosteer.

Probably required to be able to offer a competitive option package to other manufacturers. Though presumably there is not a directly comparable package.

(Brief explanation/“justification” of NoA being “gimmicky”: 1) Can’t take freeway interchanges smoothly 2) Can’t do I-5 in Central Valley properly (wrong lane logic) 3) Sudden braking for shaded pavement, phantom braking. Etc., etc. Basically requires far too much intervention if you want it to drive as well as a good human driver. It’s good as a driver assist but TACC and Autosteer will do that - though I definitely like having the automatic lane change (even without ULC).)

Yes, there will be many cases not handled until additional sensors are added.

Heresy!

 

[Tam]

No. You can use autosteer on city streets. But there is still plenty of functionality missing....

So I expect that "autosteer on city streets" will add these features.

It sounds like you agree that the new language is not an accurate description of what we paid for a promised FSD.

Autosteer automatically keeps the car center within a lane. It is not Auto Lane Change because with basic autopilot, you have still have to pay FSD in addition to Autosteer to get that Auto Lane Change feature. Autosteer is not automatic brakes. TACC performs that function for you if there's a car in front. Without a car in front, you'll need to pay FSD in addition to TACC to do that, for example stopping at a stop sign.

Thus, the new language "autosteer on city streets" sounds more restrictive than the old language "Automatic driving on city streets."

The old language "Automatic driving on city streets" should cover everything, from basic autopilot, to autosteer, to TACC, to auto-stopping without a car in front, to auto-turning at intersections...

The new language sounds like scaling back from the previously overgenerous promise.