Tesla recalls 2 million vehicles to limit use of Autopilot

[fholbert]

What does FSD have to do with basic AP?

Okay, disable Lane Assist thru FSD except for highway driving. Often city streets have non-standard lane markings which cause fits with the AP’s.

If Tesla drivers would let the AP’s assist in the driving vs do the driving, the media wouldn’t have a story.

 

[DrGriz]

Okay, disable Lane Assist thru FSD except for highway driving. Often city streets have non-standard lane markings which cause fits with the AP’s.

If Tesla drivers would let the AP’s assist in the driving vs do the driving, the media wouldn’t have a story.

I suspect that the vast majority of Tesla drivers don't let AP do the driving, because, unless they're really dense, they find out quickly that AP can't drive.

As for the exceptions, they are the problem. Not the car. Let's take all cars off the road because some people abuse them. /S Maybe even drive drunk.

 

[stopcrazypp]

Okay, disable Lane Assist thru FSD except for highway driving. Often city streets have non-standard lane markings which cause fits with the AP’s.

If Tesla drivers would let the AP’s assist in the driving vs do the driving, the media wouldn’t have a story.

No other system disables lane assist in city driving. Lane assist is still useful in city driving as it prevents you from veering out of lane.

Also, as another pointed out, why are you bringing in FSD? The test was about AP. FSD is able to stop for traffic lights and stop signs.

The point people are making is it's blatantly obvious AP doesn't stop for traffic lights or stop signs, just like any ACC system, even ones with green light detection (which can tell and chime you). You can literally take any ACC system and do the same test and it will blow through the intersection also unless there was a lead car. For the same reason NHTSA will not force Tesla to add the feature for free (and they didn't for this recall).

This recall is already dumbing things down for the worst drivers (including this journalist), we shouldn't have to have more removal of features because a few people can't take responsibility for their actions (many times it's disingenuous, as for example, even if you don't RTFM, after it blows through one or two intersections it's pretty clear the car will not stop for intersections by itself).

 

[FloridaJohn]

It doesn't matter what the general public thinks. What matters is that the article be truthful and factual

I’m curious as to which parts of the article you did not factual. I didn’t see any glaring errors, but clearly I have not reviewed the article as closely as you.

 

[DuncanM]

I’m curious as to which parts of the article you did not factual. I didn’t see any glaring errors, but clearly I have not reviewed the article as closely as you.

The sentence after the title:

On the streets of San Francisco, the updated version of Tesla’s driver-assistance software still took the wheel in places it wasn’t designed to handle, including blowing through stop signs

First off AP didn't 'take (took) the wheel'! This implies that the car autonomously took over when in fact the author/driver engaged Autopilot and handed it complete control when he was warned to keep his hands on the wheel and pay attention and that he's responsible for safe operation of the vehicle and should be ready to override AP at any moment. Most cruise control systems can be activated in urban areas with the same results. The author is trying to absolve himself of blame for committing a series of traffic violations by inappropriately activating an ADAS system in a situation for which it was not designed,

another quote and here the author is lying (he owns his MY) because it is clearly explained that AP will not stop for controlled intersections and this is true for almost all cruise control systems.

How I tested Tesla’s recall
It goes without saying: Don’t try this at home. I was quite surprised the Tesla would just blow through a stop sign, and activated Autopilot only near stops when there weren’t others around. I was only simulating not paying attention to understand the software’s capabilities and limitations, which are now clear.

​

 

[FloridaJohn]

The sentence after the title:



First off AP didn't 'take (took) the wheel'! This implies that the car autonomously took over when in fact the author/driver engaged Autopilot and handed it complete control when he was warned to keep his hands on the wheel and pay attention and that he's responsible for safe operation of the vehicle and should be ready to override AP at any moment. Most cruise control systems can be activated in urban areas with the same results. The author is trying to absolve himself of blame for committing a series of traffic violations by inappropriately activating an ADAS system in a situation for which it was not designed,

another quote and here the author is lying (he owns his MY) because it is clearly explained that AP will not stop for controlled intersections and this is true for almost all cruise control systems.

​

So only two non-factual statements by your review of the article. It’s quite a long article, so that seems pretty good to me. Based on your prior comments it sounded like the article was rife with errors.

When I read the phrase “took the wheel”, I didn’t interpret it as the car forcibly taking over driving. I read it as the driver relinquished control to the car, and the car willingly took it and did not object to the location of circumstances in which the driver requested the AP assistance. I suppose that could have been written more clearly, but based on the rest of the article, I don’t think the author intended that phrase to be taken the way you did.

As far as your second point, I don’t see anything there that we have not read people trying right here on this forum. He even says, “don’t do this,” and devotes several paragraphs to the limitations of AP. Perhaps he only had used AP on highways and had never tried it on city streets with stop signs. This is not an unusual occurrence even here on this forum, as many new owners have posted about surprise on how basic AP works. How many posts do we see by new owners who are gripping the wheel as tight as they can instead of applying torque to the wheel? One can be an owner and still not understand all of the nuances of AP.

 

[DrGriz]

So only two non-factual statements by your review of the article. It’s quite a long article, so that seems pretty good to me. Based on your prior comments it sounded like the article was rife with errors.

When I read the phrase “took the wheel”, I didn’t interpret it as the car forcibly taking over driving. I read it as the driver relinquished control to the car, and the car willingly took it and did not object to the location of circumstances in which the driver requested the AP assistance. I suppose that could have been written more clearly, but based on the rest of the article, I don’t think the author intended that phrase to be taken the way you did.

As far as your second point, I don’t see anything there that we have not read people trying right here on this forum. He even says, “don’t do this,” and devotes several paragraphs to the limitations of AP. Perhaps he only had used AP on highways and had never tried it on city streets with stop signs. This is not an unusual occurrence even here on this forum, as many new owners have posted about surprise on how basic AP works. How many posts do we see by new owners who are gripping the wheel as tight as they can instead of applying torque to the wheel? One can be an owner and still not understand all of the nuances of AP.

If you actually believe that the author intended to educate by his long, and as you yourself said, "could have been written more clearly" article, then all you need do is read the WP comments, where clearly, nobody learned any of the basics who didn't already understand.

I found it completely disingenuous. And since we all know he was lying when he said he was taken by surprise when AP blew through stop signs (especially since he let it do so twice, as though he's really that stupid) I refuse to give him the benefit of the doubt. Don't know why anyone would.

 

[DuncanM]

So only two non-factual statements by your review of the article. It’s quite a long article, so that seems pretty good to me. Based on your prior comments it sounded like the article was rife with errors.

When I read the phrase “took the wheel”, I didn’t interpret it as the car forcibly taking over driving. I read it as the driver relinquished control to the car, and the car willingly took it and did not object to the location of circumstances in which the driver requested the AP assistance. I suppose that could have been written more clearly, but based on the rest of the article, I don’t think the author intended that phrase to be taken the way you did.

As far as your second point, I don’t see anything there that we have not read people trying right here on this forum. He even says, “don’t do this,” and devotes several paragraphs to the limitations of AP. Perhaps he only had used AP on highways and had never tried it on city streets with stop signs. This is not an unusual occurrence even here on this forum, as many new owners have posted about surprise on how basic AP works. How many posts do we see by new owners who are gripping the wheel as tight as they can instead of applying torque to the wheel? One can be an owner and still not understand all of the nuances of AP.

You can only interpret 'took the wheel' that way if you're familiar with AP, Yeah the author might have never used AP previously in the city but he never states that. It's up to the driver to understand how to safely operate the vehicle before they take the wheel; I was taught that the first time I was given a learner's licence.

The biggest falsehood pushed by the article is the failure to state that ADAS is common on most new cars, and they generally operate the same way as autopilot. He also never states that AP is trained to recognise pedestrians and cyclists and that does help with safety when the driver is inattentive, even in urban areas.

The article is rife with errors and misleading statements but I'm not going to waste any more time on something that anyone can read.

I never apply torque to the wheel to give feedback but use the left scroll wheel to provide feedback when needed. Regardless it is the LAW that the driver is responsible for understanding how to safely operate the vehicle. Failing to read the manual doesn't cut it in a court of law.

 

[afadeev]

Do you realize that through fossil fuel subsidies that have gone on for over 100 years, you have had everything you rent, buy or own "directed" by the government, and so have your parents and maybe grandparents.

That big ICE pickup that just passed you would probably not exist if fossil fuels were not heavily subsidized.

What are all those magical "fossil fuel subsidies" that you are talking about?
This complaint keeps resurfacing, once in a while, so please provide an independent study that quantifies those subsidies.
For bonus points, please provide validation to the 100 years of history of those "magical subsidies".

Thanks in advance,
a

 

[afadeev]

Regardless it is the LAW that the driver is responsible for understanding how to safely operate the vehicle. Failing to read the manual doesn't cut it in a court of law.

You are totally missing the point, and by now, it appears to be intentional.

Tesla and Musk have gone all out advertising aspirational AP and FSD capabilities, for years, aggressively misleading the public about what both can actually deliver in real life. Occasionally both committed all-out fraud by putting out video reviews of FSD capabilities that were not even remotely available. Then proclaiming that their fraud is fine, because it's "free speech".

There is a million ways this was going to bite them in the rear. This recall, and recent articles on the subject, are just some of that.
Fainting surprise and indignation about this development is as lame, as is nitpicking a few phrases from a 2,000 word article. Common, man, your bias is too blatant to ignore!

Tesla has repeatedly proclaimed that its cars are self-driving, as the FSD product declares.
Burying "disclaimers" within the user manual that state that the very same capabilities will not actually work advertised, in a document NO sane person ever reads start-to-end (for any product!), is also super lame.
Or fraudulent, depending on how charitable you feel towards the automaker in question.

 

[Dewg]

You are totally missing the point, and by now, it appears to be intentional.

Tesla and Musk have gone all out advertising aspirational AP and FSD capabilities, for years, aggressively misleading the public about what both can actually deliver in real life. Occasionally both committed all-out fraud by putting out video reviews of FSD capabilities that were not even remotely available. Then proclaiming that their fraud is fine, because it's "free speech".

There is a million ways this was going to bite them in the rear. This recall, and recent articles on the subject, are just some of that.
Fainting surprise and indignation about this development is as lame, as is nitpicking a few phrases from a 2,000 word article. Common, man, your bias is too blatant to ignore!

Tesla has repeatedly proclaimed that its cars are self-driving, as the FSD product declares.
Burying "disclaimers" within the user manual that state that the very same capabilities will not actually work advertised, in a document NO sane person ever reads start-to-end (for any product!), is also super lame.
Or fraudulent, depending on how charitable you feel towards the automaker in question.

View attachment 1004926

Cool story, so what are you going to do about it? I hear lots of similar viewpoints, but never a concrete action plan to rectify it.

What's the plan?

 

[OxBrew]

What are all those magical "fossil fuel subsidies" that you are talking about?
This complaint keeps resurfacing, once in a while, so please provide an independent study that quantifies those subsidies.
For bonus points, please provide validation to the 100 years of history of those "magical subsidies".

Thanks in advance,
a

Oil subsidies have been going on for ever. They hit 1 trillion USD globally in 2022.

Turn them off, and the oil industry goes away. It can't exist without them. We are f----ing ourselves right in the -climate-, and paying (taxes) for the privelege.

The whole thing is just a sick tragedy.

Spend half that on alternative energy (starting 30 years ago) and we'd be fine right now.

Google oil industry subsidies, and history of same. First one is free:

Energy Subsidies – Topics - IEA

Explore analysis, reports, news and events about Energy Subsidies

www.iea.org

 

[stopcrazypp]

What are all those magical "fossil fuel subsidies" that you are talking about?
This complaint keeps resurfacing, once in a while, so please provide an independent study that quantifies those subsidies.
For bonus points, please provide validation to the 100 years of history of those "magical subsidies".

Thanks in advance,
a

Here's an article that covers fossil fuel subsidies that go as far back as the 1900s.
Long History Of U.S. Energy Subsidies

 

[DrGriz]

What are all those magical "fossil fuel subsidies" that you are talking about?
This complaint keeps resurfacing, once in a while, so please provide an independent study that quantifies those subsidies.
For bonus points, please provide validation to the 100 years of history of those "magical subsidies".

Thanks in advance,
a

Well, I am pretty sure that the key word in your question is "independent", and I have a feeling that to you "independent" means any source that doesn't support my statement.

However, I just did a quick search, and the Wikipedia article has some references for you to read if you are actually receptive.

the IMF estimates 2020 total subsidies at $5.9 trillion or 6.8 percent of GDP: this figure is much larger because over 90% of it is undercharging for environmental costs and foregone consumption taxes (implicit subsidies).[18] Setting fossil fuel prices that reflect their true cost would cut global CO2 emissions by 10% by 2030, according to the IPCC in 2023.[19] Unfortunately governments worldwide have increased their subsidies to 7 trillion in 2022 due to high energy prices according to the IMF.[20]

Fossil fuel subsidies - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

That, and the US Mining Law of 1872 which basically has allowed prospecting for free in the US until 1920, and that counts as a subsidy in my book. Since 1920, while Coal and Oil were removed from coverage by that law, they are still subsidized by the intangible drilling costs deduction, the credit for Clean Coal Investment, and the Nonconventional Fuels tax credit, just for starters. There are many other direct and indirect subsidies you are welcome to read about.

Fact Sheet | Fossil Fuel Subsidies: A Closer Look at Tax Breaks and Societal Costs (2019) | White Papers | EESI

www.eesi.org

 

[DuncanM]

You are totally missing the point, and by now, it appears to be intentional.

Tesla and Musk have gone all out advertising aspirational AP and FSD capabilities, for years, aggressively misleading the public about what both can actually deliver in real life. Occasionally both committed all-out fraud by putting out video reviews of FSD capabilities that were not even remotely available. Then proclaiming that their fraud is fine, because it's "free speech".

There is a million ways this was going to bite them in the rear. This recall, and recent articles on the subject, are just some of that.
Fainting surprise and indignation about this development is as lame, as is nitpicking a few phrases from a 2,000 word article. Common, man, your bias is too blatant to ignore!

Tesla has repeatedly proclaimed that its cars are self-driving, as the FSD product declares.
Burying "disclaimers" within the user manual that state that the very same capabilities will not actually work advertised, in a document NO sane person ever reads start-to-end (for any product!), is also super lame.
Or fraudulent, depending on how charitable you feel towards the automaker in question.

View attachment 1004926

I've a clear separation between AP and FSDb. FSD costs a bundle and no Tesla owner or potential buyer can miss the extra cost and so confuse the two.

Musk's claims about FSD and his personal eccentricities are not germaine to AP, whose functionality (lane centring and adaptive cruise control) is now offered as standard or optional on most new, non-Tesla cars. Non Tesla AP operates in near identical fashion as Tesla AP, with the same limitations.

 

[fholbert]

I've a clear separation between AP and FSDb. FSD costs a bundle and no Tesla owner or potential buyer can miss the extra cost and so confuse the two.

Musk's claims about FSD and his personal eccentricities are not germaine to AP, whose functionality is now offered as standard or optional on most new, non-Tesla cars. Non Tesla AP operates in near identical fashion as Tesla AP, with the same limitations.

Sorry, but you seem to be talking in circles.

Using the scroll wheel instead of putting pressure on the wheel. It really doesn’t make a difference.

Cruise control alone isn’t autopilot in any way.

Took the wheel, vs take the wheel? Who cares?

Because you don’t like what the article said, doesn’t mean it isn’t fact.

 

[Supcom]

Tesla and Musk have gone all out advertising aspirational AP and FSD capabilities, for years, aggressively misleading the public about what both can actually deliver in real life.

All out advertising? A few Tweets and a web site is all out advertising?

OK, so there's Whole Mars. I'll give you that. Blows away the competition.

 

[zoomer0056]

Cruise control alone isn’t autopilot in any way.

From the Model S owners manual, it says Autopilot consists of a set of features. If TACC is active but Autosteer is not then the car's Autopilot is active.

 

[Dewg]

All out advertising? A few Tweets and a web site is all out advertising?

OK, so there's Whole Mars. I'll give you that. Blows away the competition.

Exactly. Tesla is famous for NOT advertising.

 

[fholbert]

From the Model S owners manual, it says Autopilot consists of a set of features. If TACC is active but Autosteer is not then the car's Autopilot is active.
View attachment 1005055

Cruise control is part of the autopilot system, but cruise control by itself is not autopilot.