You can install our site as a web app on your iOS device by utilizing the Add to Home Screen feature in Safari. Please see this thread for more details on this.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Only if max battery power is not turned on
Yes it is 2.9.40. I'm not sure what he is doing differently. I just press the brake firmly. While holding brake press accelerator to floor and let off. The notification pops up. Then press accelerator to floor again and hold it. When brake is released car launches.
You can only hold it the four seconds. It is a fairly significant torque build up before launch. No way to measure but I suspect a couple tenths improvement 0-60.
So true.If a company says something is beta and then before it is finalized they refine a feature to limit its scope I see how that's 'taking something away' but it also shouldn't be a shock. Maybe they'll add it back after it is refined some more. If you want a car that never changes it is pretty clear at this point that a Tesla is not that car.
This is not evolution. It's degradation. Intentional degradation.So true.
To all those who are agitated that something has been "taken away" in AP: you can continue trying to convince the world that you have been wronged, but Tesla is going to continue to change and evolve AP and push toward autonomous driving regardless of what you think.
It worked while preparing and ready. Yes the lurch occurs each time. That is the torque buildup I was referring to.
This is not evolution. It's degradation. Intentional degradation.
I believe I'm luckily at the perfect FW version from my perspective until TM determines the right balance it wants between enabling features and minimizing potential risk. Like Jason and Dirk, I may well put a "do not install updates requirement" on TM with express permission if the current version has proven negative ROI to me. As my car goes for annual service in a week, I'm eagerly waiting feedback from others on .40s restrictions.
Have you contacted TM yet stating what you believe is an acceptable level of risk that you'd accept, i.e. I would be fine signing a waiver of liability for misuse of AP features, modulo verification of data from independent 3rd party (to ensure objectivity in whether AP was at fault)?
And I don't know about you guys... but this image from a post above just looks like a horrible idea. :scared:
View attachment 104180
Rotlmao...
Before those wishing to be my mother chime in... I didn't actually LAUNCH that time. Rather was shocked that this enabled whilst sitting at traffic lights. Obviously it would have been stupid to launch at that point. As mentioned, and can be seen in the video, the actual launches were on empty freeway ramp on entry to 70mph section of I90 ;-)
FYI, regarding the Autopilot limitation of 45mph on surface streets, I have yet to see that message even though I'm on 2.9.40 and have tried several times on "roads without a center divider or residential roads".
In the below image, you can see that I'm on a 4-lane road without a divider, yet I was able to set Autopilot to 55mph and it didn't complain:
One point I haven't seen raised yet in the discussion concerning the autopilot changes is that Tesla may actually be increasing their liability by taking this action, which I expect is the exact opposite of what they intend.
Before having released the latest version of the firmware that has the new Auto Steer restrictions, had there been any catastrophic accidents, Tesla could easily have just pointed to the warnings about proper use of the feature and explained that the driver(s) did not operate the vehicle(s) in a safe manner in accordance with the warnings. But now that the firmware restricting certain functionality is out, should a vehicle that still has that functionality be involved in a catastrophic collision, the question to Tesla will be "Why was that vehicle still utilizing firmware you knew to be unsafe and had made the decision to restrict?" The next questions might be, "What percentage of the fleet was still utilizing that unsafe firmware at the time of the accident, and why?"
And the above is not even making any statement about the owners who may choose not to update. The above applies to Tesla's normal procedures for firmware roll out. As of today, it seems just a handful of people have the new firmware. I'm guessing the vast majority of AP cars don't yet have it, and won't for some time, even if their owners are willing to accept the update as soon as it is available.
I think Tesla's position on this was stronger before than it is now.
On the other hand, if Tesla manages to get the entire fleet updated before there are any catastrophic accidents, they will have then, of course, decreased their liability. I just think they are taking some big risks trying to get to that point.
I sent a message to ServiceHelpNA (not sure if it'll be actually read) that I accept the limitations of the AP and I'm using it responsibly to improve my safety. And that I'd be really pissed if Tesla decides to make this feature useless for me for a large part of my trips.Have you contacted TM yet stating what you believe is an acceptable level of risk that you'd accept, i.e. I would be fine signing a waiver of liability for misuse of AP features, modulo verification of data from independent 3rd party (to ensure objectivity in whether AP was at fault)?
If 2.9.40 does not in fact have these restrictions, I'd be perfectly OK with its installation. I'll likely wait for a couple of months or so just in case Tesla decides to turn on restrictions later via a stealthy OTA update.I believe I'm luckily at the perfect FW version from my perspective until TM determines the right balance it wants between enabling features and minimizing potential risk. Like Jason and Dirk, I may well put a "do not install updates requirement" on TM with express permission if the current version has proven negative ROI to me. As my car goes for annual service in a week, I'm eagerly waiting feedback from others on .40s restrictions.