Tesla, TSLA & the Investment World: the Perpetual Investors' Roundtable

[MP3Mike]

regarding in-car camera monitoring being mandatory, has there been any clarification regarding those vehicles of the 2016-7-8 era that paid full price for FSD ("expected available by the end of "the" year" and all that) but which of course do not contain such cameras?

It doesn't stop in 2018. I don't think an S or X has been delivered with an internal camera yet... But actual FSD won't require an internal camera because a driver wouldn't need to be in the vehicle...

 

[EVWatcher]

It doesn't stop in 2018. I don't think an S or X has been delivered with an internal camera yet... But actual FSD won't require an internal camera because a driver wouldn't need to be in the vehicle...

It is an internal camera. But it’s also ON the rear view mirror. The camera over the license plate has always been iffy to me. I have long wondered if the plan was to keep to option open to retrofit the S and the X with a camera on the back window or the same location as the 3 and the y if it was deemed integral to a robo taxi but omit it for now because it’s a premium vehicle and more likely to dissuade people for privacy reasons in the premium market. To me that camera is a lot more useful for going in reverse or being aware of what’s happening behind the car than the license plate one. It feels like it’s been determined that the license plate camera does the job so the retrofit wouldn’t be necessary but I bet they kept the option open.

 

[ZeApelido]

Folks don't get your hopes up for FSD Beta.


Remember, according to some rankings, Tesla is in last place.

Bwahahahhaha!

 

[Tes La Ferrari]

I have never thought about buying a dually in my life - until now.

Introducing - Cybertruck dually.

Check Out This Tesla Cybertruck Render With Dually Conversion And Bed Rack

Unlike some of the more outrageous Tesla Cyberturck renderings, this more practical one shows what the truck could look like with some aftermarket goodies.

insideevs.com

OK - so not a Tesla factory OEM creation, (at least not yet) but pretty cool to see what the after market will be coming up with when this launches.

I think the Cybertruck will be a hit at a level that is completely misunderstood by the market.

HODL on !

 

[ZeApelido]

Tesla shareholders:

 

[Knightshade]

1) Tesla has a long history of installing hardware while planning to develop or refine its software later. This is one of their great strengths that competitors lack: OTA updatability of nearly all systems. For example, all Tesla cars got eight exterior cameras starting in 2016, but Autopilot didn't use more than one of them until later.

This is a nonsensical comparison.

Tesla announced in 2016 when the new HW came out they intended to use all 8 cameras for this purpose.

They didn't say one was for AP and then only decide to announce the others were years later, which would make your example actually relevant here.

(and it only took a while to get more working because of the well documented fallout with MobileEye whom they were originally expecting to keep providing software for a while then didn't)

2) Tesla's driver-monitoring system is not just the cabin camera. It is the camera plus AI that can learn to interpret behavior of the driver's upper body

Far as I can tell this is something you've just made this up.

There's nothing in the current code to support this claim of even looking at the "upper body" let alone having any AI that does anything with the data besides example if a phone is visible or where you head is pointed.


It's weird you keep getting upset when I point out actual evidence of code that says you're wrong- but seem fine making up code there's no evidence of at all to suggest otherwise.

, not just eyeballs.

Not eyeballs at all if wearing sunglasses- because the HW wasn't ever meant to be used for this purpose.

That's one of the specific things you keep denying weirdly.

That other vendors HW, actually designed for this use, has a capability this system does not.

Yet it remains a fact.

As does the fact all the states where it CAN see your eyes specifically are about your EYES, not "upper body posture"

Limitations of the camera do not mean the total system is "not great" or inferior to competitors

Again it factually does mean that because the hardware is physically less capable

It can see fewer things, and in fewer conditions.

Those are facts my dude.


It can not see through sunglasses

It can not see in the dark or very low light

Other vendors systems, since they were actually designed in the first place for driver monitoring, CAN.




You can certainly debate the OPINION of is Teslas system good enough.

You can not debate that it's not objectively less capable though.

, just as limitations of Tesla's exterior sensors (no lidar) do not mean Autopilot must be inferior

Again you're confused about how any of this works and making a nonsensical comparison.

That's not a "limitation" at all to what Tesla is doing.

Lidar adds nothing vision can't already get you for a generalized driving solution.

Dave Lee just did a fantastic video on that very topic.

. AI can get very smart, and do a lot with low-cost cameras.

Yes it can.

It can't change physics though.

It can't let a visual light camera see without light for example.

It can't let a standard camera see through sunglasses.

This is why specialized hardware is used for systems actually meant from the start to be driver monitoring systems


Teslas was not.


See- again- the fact they didn't even put these in the S/X at all

3) The software code discovered by VeryGreen is the current state of code for driver monitoring.

Right.

Which is why it debunked all the imaginary AI BODY LANGUAGE stuff you keep claiming exists.

We don't know if it is everything that Tesla plans for the system, or when they planned it.

We know they didn't plan it from the start.

Since Elon told us years ago why the camera was there, and it was for robotaxi monitoring of passengers.

Not to mention- if they had originally meant it for driver monitoring they'd have used different hardware, and not kept the interior camera exclusive to the vehicle they expected to be the primary robotaxi at the time.



I can't really understand why you seem SO OFFENDED that this was clearly not the original intent of the hardware.

it's a credit to Tesla engineering they found ANOTHER potential use later for HW not even meant to do this.... yet you're super mad when this is pointed out for...some reason?

But already the system is monitoring the driver's body

Except, it's not.

, since "PHONE_USE" requires more than eye movements.

No, it just requires recognizing what a phone looks like.

Has nothing to do with "body monitoring"


Further- you've already been shown the hardware sucks for this

Because it can't even see the left side of the drivers body or hand (nor anything below about dash level)

So he could be holding a phone there, and it's not even in frame of the camera

Because- again, the HW was not intended to be used this way originally

If it were- it'd be located on the steering column like all the people who install dedicated driver monitoring systems do- to have a much better full view of the drivers, instead of a wide, cut-off-at-the-side and low, view of him.

Smart AI will learn to detect phone or laptop use even if the device is outside the camera's view.

....what?

AI, despite appearances, is not magic.

If you're wearing sunglasses it can't see where you eyeballs are pointed.

The camera also can't see your left hand at all that could be holding your phone. It also can't see low on either side.

How does AI "know" you're using your phone there?


It doesn't. It can't.


you seem to be grasping at increasingly desperate straws and just waiving your hands and yelling AI!!! about it all.

The camera can see the driver reaching for the device to use it.

Why are they reaching? It's already in their hand.

The hand that the camera physically can't see- because it's not in the right place for ideal driver monitoring- because it was not originally meant for that purpose.

4) Elon often says things on Twitter without completely explaining the whole story (in 280 characters).

What?

He posted several tweets at the time explaining the purpose of the camera.

At no point did he even suggest they had anything to do with driver monitoring.

Not only that he SPECIFICALLY said at the time when it's enabled they'd include a setting to DISable it.

Which again would make no sense if there was any intent at the time to use it for safety/driver monitoring.


It's clear, through multiple known facts, on top of Elons own word, that using it for driver monitoring was a thought that came years later than the actual HW selection and initial installation.


Why you keep denying facts is left as an exercise for the reader I suppose.

5) It is possible that Tesla engineers installed the cabin camera without understanding it could have multiple uses, and only later realized "gee whiz, it can monitor the driver in addition to vandalism.

Not just possible, it fits literally every piece of information we have including the word of Elon Musk.

In fact, if they HAD meant to use it for driver monitoring, only then would there be anything bad to say about Tesla hardware selection because the camera is the wrong type, and in the wrong place, to do a great job of that task...also the fact they apparently forgot to add it to the S/X for years which wouldn't make sense either in that context.


It might, having been thought of years later to leverage it for that purpose, make a "good enough" system to satisfy the EU regs that came out years later though- which would be a great way for Tesla engineering to save the company time and money.

" It is possible they were that slow, uncreative, and non-first-principles oriented, but there is no compelling evidence for it.

This is just word salad.

I've noticed people cooking that dish LOVE to toss first principles into the recipe!


Teslas original plan- and it shows all over the design of the Model 3 was that L5 driving was RIGHT AROUND THE CORNER.

ACTUAL first principles thinking here is -Why would you need a fancier driver monitoring system than the torque sensor when drivers would be obsolete soon?


It's the same reason blind spot monitoring HW is garbage on the car from a driver perspective (but great from the AIs perspective).

It's the same reason there's no rear cross traffic alert HW like so many other cars have- the AI backs into spots, why would the car need that?

This is not a car Tesla expected humans would need to be manually driving for years and years, and it shows in the HW the car has (and does not have)

Why does this matter?

I legit have no idea but you seem to care really really really deeply about it, to the point no amount of evidence seems to matter.... and the utter lack of it on your own side doesn't seem to matter to you either.


Also hilariously you posted the 2020 change where they mention they're turning on the camera to develop new features.

Not "to finally get around to features we thought of in 2017 but just haven't gotten to working on yet"

So thanks for posting yet more evidence using it for DM was an idea they came up with years later

Maybe it doesn't much. I just don't like folks declaring that Tesla's engineers were a bit dense, based on no compelling evidence

This is outright false

Not only did I never make such a claim I repeatedly made the opposite claim.


That it's a testament to how clever their engineers are that they took hardware never intended for this use and found a way to make a decent, if not class leading, DM system out of it.

Potentially good enough to avoid future HW changes to meet EU regs in fact.



The irony is your argument is the one that paints them as a bit dense.

If they intended this to be a DM system from the start, they picked bad hardware for it and put it in physically the wrong place


I don't believe their engineers are so bad as to have done that though.

You, apparently, do....

 

[SN_8]

At the 100% risk of continuing a truly annoying sub-thread within this thread:

regarding in-car camera monitoring being mandatory, has there been any clarification regarding those vehicles of the 2016-7-8 era that paid full price for FSD ("expected available by the end of "this" year" and all that) but which of course do not contain such cameras?

Since visual monitoring is critical, perhaps Tesla can deploy an army of highly trained monkeys to sit shotgun and monitor driver behavior... Hope you don't have white seats.

 

[Knightshade]

At the 100% risk of continuing a truly annoying sub-thread within this thread:

regarding in-car camera monitoring being mandatory, has there been any clarification regarding those vehicles of the 2016-7-8 era that paid full price for FSD ("expected available by the end of "this" year" and all that) but which of course do not contain such cameras?

To my knowledge the "mandatory" bit is specifically that the EU will require driver monitoring systems on new cars as of next year.

If Tesla is able to make the robotaxi camera work "good enough" as a DM system to satisfy the EU, they save having to spend $ on sourcing, developing, testing, and installing, entirely new DM hardware in their cars next year.

instead they just insure the S/X get the 3/Y interior cam and call it a day.


Again that's an engineering WIN in my book if they can do that.

See again the Apollo 13 paraphrase "I don't care what it was intended to do, I care what it CAN do"


EDIT: There's actually a phase in in the EU thing:

Starting in 2022 with all new type-approved cars with a certain level of autonomous driving capability. By 2026, the law will include all newly produced cars on the EU market, no matter their level of automation.

I would THINK Tesla would be in the 2022 group, but can't find more specific details yet.

 

[ZeApelido]

This is a nonsensical comparison.

Tesla announced in 2016 when the new HW came out they intended to use all 8 cameras for this purpose.

They didn't say one was for AP and then only decide to announce the others were years later, which would make your example actually relevant here.

(and it only took a while to get more working because of the well documented fallout with MobileEye whom they were originally expecting to keep providing software for a while then didn't)





Far as I can tell this is something you've just made this up.

There's nothing in the current code to support this claim of even looking at the "upper body" let alone having any AI that does anything with the data besides example if a phone is visible or where you head is pointed.


It's weird you keep getting upset when I point out actual evidence of code that says you're wrong- but seem fine making up code there's no evidence of at all to suggest otherwise.




Not eyeballs at all if wearing sunglasses- because the HW wasn't ever meant to be used for this purpose.

That's one of the specific things you keep denying weirdly.

That other vendors HW, actually designed for this use, has a capability this system does not.

Yet it remains a fact.

As does the fact all the states where it CAN see your eyes specifically are about your EYES, not "upper body posture"






Again it factually does mean that because the hardware is physically less capable

It can see fewer things, and in fewer conditions.

Those are facts my dude.


It can not see through sunglasses

It can not see in the dark or very low light

Other vendors systems, since they were actually designed in the first place for driver monitoring, CAN.




You can certainly debate the OPINION of is Teslas system good enough.

You can not debate that it's not objectively less capable though.






Again you're confused about how any of this works and making a nonsensical comparison.

That's not a "limitation" at all to what Tesla is doing.

Lidar adds nothing vision can't already get you for a generalized driving solution.

Dave Lee just did a fantastic video on that very topic.




Yes it can.

It can't change physics though.

It can't let a visual light camera see without light for example.

It can't let a standard camera see through sunglasses.

This is why specialized hardware is used for systems actually meant from the start to be driver monitoring systems


Teslas was not.


See- again- the fact they didn't even put these in the S/X at all






Right.

Which is why it debunked all the imaginary AI BODY LANGUAGE stuff you keep claiming exists.






We know they didn't plan it from the start.

Since Elon told us years ago why the camera was there, and it was for robotaxi monitoring of passengers.

Not to mention- if they had originally meant it for driver monitoring they'd have used different hardware, and not kept the interior camera exclusive to the vehicle they expected to be the primary robotaxi at the time.



I can't really understand why you seem SO OFFENDED that this was clearly not the original intent of the hardware.

it's a credit to Tesla engineering they found ANOTHER potential use later for HW not even meant to do this.... yet you're super mad when this is pointed out for...some reason?





Except, it's not.



No, it just requires recognizing what a phone looks like.

Has nothing to do with "body monitoring"


Further- you've already been shown the hardware sucks for this

Because it can't even see the left side of the drivers body or hand (nor anything below about dash level)

So he could be holding a phone there, and it's not even in frame of the camera

Because- again, the HW was not intended to be used this way originally

If it were- it'd be located on the steering column like all the people who install dedicated driver monitoring systems do- to have a much better full view of the drivers, instead of a wide, cut-off-at-the-side and low, view of him.





....what?

AI, despite appearances, is not magic.

If you're wearing sunglasses it can't see where you eyeballs are pointed.

The camera also can't see your left hand at all that could be holding your phone. It also can't see low on either side.

How does AI "know" you're using your phone there?


It doesn't. It can't.


you seem to be grasping at increasingly desperate straws and just waiving your hands and yelling AI!!! about it all.




Why are they reaching? It's already in their hand.

The hand that the camera physically can't see- because it's not in the right place for ideal driver monitoring- because it was not originally meant for that purpose.





What?

He posted several tweets at the time explaining the purpose of the camera.

At no point did he even suggest they had anything to do with driver monitoring.

Not only that he SPECIFICALLY said at the time when it's enabled they'd include a setting to DISable it.

Which again would make no sense if there was any intent at the time to use it for safety/driver monitoring.


It's clear, through multiple known facts, on top of Elons own word, that using it for driver monitoring was a thought that came years later than the actual HW selection and initial installation.


Why you keep denying facts is left as an exercise for the reader I suppose.





Not just possible, it fits literally every piece of information we have including the word of Elon Musk.

In fact, if they HAD meant to use it for driver monitoring, only then would there be anything bad to say about Tesla hardware selection because the camera is the wrong type, and in the wrong place, to do a great job of that task...also the fact they apparently forgot to add it to the S/X for years which wouldn't make sense either in that context.


It might, having been thought of years later to leverage it for that purpose, make a "good enough" system to satisfy the EU regs that came out years later though- which would be a great way for Tesla engineering to save the company time and money.






This is just word salad.

I've noticed people cooking that dish LOVE to toss first principles into the recipe!


Teslas original plan- and it shows all over the design of the Model 3 was that L5 driving was RIGHT AROUND THE CORNER.

ACTUAL first principles thinking here is -Why would you need a fancier driver monitoring system than the torque sensor when drivers would be obsolete soon?


It's the same reason blind spot monitoring HW is garbage on the car from a driver perspective (but great from the AIs perspective).

It's the same reason there's no rear cross traffic alert HW like so many other cars have- the AI backs into spots, why would the car need that?

This is not a car Tesla expected humans would need to be manually driving for years and years, and it shows in the HW the car has (and does not have)





I legit have no idea but you seem to care really really really deeply about it, to the point no amount of evidence seems to matter.... and the utter lack of it on your own side doesn't seem to matter to you either.






This is outright false

Not only did I never make such a claim I repeatedly made the opposite claim.


That it's a testament to how clever their engineers are that they took hardware never intended for this use and found a way to make a decent, if not class leading, DM system out of it.

Potentially good enough to avoid future HW changes to meet EU regs in fact.



The irony is your argument is the one that paints them as a bit dense.

If they intended this to be a DM system from the start, they picked bad hardware for it and put it in physically the wrong place


I don't believe their engineers are so bad as to have done that though.

You, apparently, do....

With the forum upgrade you forgot to update your profile pic

 

[Johnny Ma]

Fun weekend posts. You're all crazy people and I love you all even when you post things that drive me nuts.

Took delivery of another Telsa today. A model Y. It's perfect.

Spent a good 30 minutes laughing out loud at the options for sounds you can have played through the external speaker. Besides the software/electronics improvements, this thing is much quieter on the road than our previous Teslas. The build quality is vastly improved from our Model 3 we bought in 2019, and that Model 3 is still amazing.

Topic change: talk me out of buying acceleration boost. Spoiler: you can't.

 

[MTL_HABS1909]

Fun weekend posts. You're all crazy people and I love you all even when you post things that drive me nuts.

Took delivery of another Telsa today. A model Y. It's perfect.

Spent a good 30 minutes laughing out loud at the options for sounds you can have played through the external speaker. Besides the software/electronics improvements, this thing is much quieter on the road than our previous Teslas. The build quality is vastly improved from our Model 3 we bought in 2019, and that Model 3 is still amazing.

Topic change: talk me out of buying acceleration boost. Spoiler: you can't.

Let me know if it’s noticeable. Thinking about doing my part for Q1 numbers by buying it for my Model 3.

 

[Knightshade]

With the forum upgrade you forgot to update your profile pic

View attachment 644469

Fixed!


Also, found more on the EU reg stuff

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ:L:2019:325:FULL&from=EN

Best I can find in it for defining required capabilities is:

(5) ‘driver drowsiness and attention warning’ means a system that assesses the driver’s alertness through vehicle systems
analysis and warns the driver if needed;

(6) ‘advanced driver distraction warning’ means a system that helps the driver to continue to pay attention to the traffic
situation and that warns the driver when he or she is distracted;

(23) ‘driver availability monitoring system’ means a system to assess whether the driver is in a position to take over the
driving function from an automated vehicle in particular situations, where appropriate;

Then later

Driver drowsiness and attention warning and advanced driver distraction warning systems shall be designed in such a
way that those systems do not continuously record nor retain any data other than what is necessary in relation to the
purposes for which they were collected or otherwise processed within the closed-loop system. Furthermore, those data
shall not be accessible or made available to third parties at any time and shall be immediately deleted after processing.
Those systems shall also be designed to avoid overlap and shall not prompt the driver separately and concurrently or in a
confusing manner where one action triggers both systems.

Sounds like in the EU anyway the system couldn't provide video back to Tesla even if a driver opts into doing so.

Shouldn't be an issue since they'll have the rest of the world who opt in for training.... it DOES suggest the system (in the EU) wouldn't be allowed to tell Tesla
you're being a bad boy though (closed loop, and deleted after processing).


so....probably the retro-using of the Robotaxi camera for driver monitoring is "good enough" for these regs- unless they get a lot more specific on requirements later but I can't find anything suggesting they do.

 

[Johnny Ma]

Let me know if it’s noticeable. Thinking about doing my part for Q1 numbers by buying it for my Model 3.

Will do. Feel free to PM me if I forget.

I got out of a hairy situation on the highway in my Model 3 because of its acceleration. Got it on dash cam. The ability to teleport your car out of danger is a great thing.

 

[StealthP3D]

No they wouldn't and you know that. Do I need to write a mathematical proof to show you why that's wrong? And I can only assume you think this was a good point to bring up because you thought I was saying it was competitive with Tesla. I didn't say that and I don't think it's competitive. It may be a compliance car, but to me, it looks like it's good enough to the average uneducated (on EVs) customer. There are millions upon millions of customers who don't know how to objectively compare different EVs.

*if* Ford can find a way to make money on the car while bringing down the prices, they'll sell units. Lots. 99% of the new and expensive cars I pass on the road are total trash compared to my Teslas, but they still sell in volume.

I know the "competition is coming" meme is annoying, but that's not what my post was about. Let me summarize what I was trying to say:

"The Taycan is beautiful. Too bad it many of its specs are sub-par. The Mach-E isn't a total POS. People might buy it if it were cheaper (because they don't know any better)."

I guess I don't understand what you are taking issue with. In my opinion, it's undeniable that any car will sell well if the price is low enough. The Edsel might not have been very attractive to most people but they would have over-looked that if Ford was willing to sell them for $500. The Mach-e would sell like hotcakes at $20K and in even higher numbers at $10K. The problem is the Mach-e is not very efficient so it's going to be difficult to sell in any number at a profit when it needs 25% more kWh worth of batteries to have the same range as a Model Y. Batteries comprise 30% of the cost to produce an EV.

 

[Johnny Ma]

I guess I don't understand what you are taking issue with.

I feel the same. I think we mostly agree. If you ever venture down to Red Country, I'll buy you a drink and I think we'd see eye-to-eye on this.

In my opinion, it's undeniable that any car will sell well if the price is low enough.

That's insane. The TAM for automobiles isn't infinite. My point was simply that the Mach-E isn't such a terrible POS that it wouldn't sell well if it wasn't as expensive at it is.

I just took delivery of an amazing Model Y. It beats the pants off of the Mach-E from all metrics I'm tracking (I didn't get to see infotainment in the Mach-E, but videos of it in operation are uncompelling). I still think the Mach-E has a chance at selling well, with a few assumptions on my part. We will see how things develop.

 

[willow_hiller]

OT FYI:

For those that missed out on Tesla Tequila, a second production run is going out to employees right now. Presumably they'll open up orders to the public shortly afterwards.

 

[AudubonB]

Ya think if i open a [email protected] account I can get some overpriced tequila? Hmmmm.....


On edit: Oops! That one actually exists! Sorry, whoever it is who got that test from me

 

[Tyler34]

Let me know if it’s noticeable. Thinking about doing my part for Q1 numbers by buying it for my Model 3.

I have it on my y. Extremely noticeable, no longer regretting not getting the performance model.

 

[PeterJA]

I got it! The best answer is the one given by George Hotz in the video just posted by someone.

@Knightshade claimed I made up the idea that the cabin camera is connected to AI. (What processes the images? The tires?) And he wondered (at first) if the camera will be "good enough" to monitor the driver to EU's satisfaction.

This sounds like someone's question to George: Will cameras be good enough to drive without lidar? George's answer: Can you drive without lidar? (Implied followup: If you can do it, then AI will do it better.)

My answer to Knighshade: Could you monitor the driver with that camera? Could you spot them keying or scrolling a phone off-camera, or falling asleep? If you could do it, then AI will do it better. Tesla don't need no stinking camera on the steering column.

(Sorry to prolong the annoying debate. I just couldn't contain my terrible anger.)

 

[Knightshade]

I got it! The best answer is the one given by George Hotz in the video just posted by someone.

@Knightshade claimed I made up the idea that the cabin camera is connected to AI.

Again you are falsely claiming I said something I did not.

Not only did I NOT claim the AI wasn't involved- I specifically made a point of the things the AI has no data to do anything with because the hardware physically can not see it

That wouldn't have made sense to do if I didn't think there was any AI in the first place would it?


It appears you don't have much of an argument if you stick to the things I actually said.

(or even the things Elon Musk said- since he also supports what I'm explaining to you)

(What processes the images?

What images?

The camera can not see the left side of the driver

The camera can not see in low or no light, or through sunglasses.

The camera can not see below roughly top dash level


That was the entire point I made about the AI having limits to the data the hardware could give it.

You somehow turned that into "OMG AI DOES NOT EXIST" or...something....

And he wondered (at first) if the camera will be "good enough" to monitor the driver to EU's satisfaction.

This sounds like someone's question to George: Will cameras be good enough to drive without lidar?

It doesn't sound like that at all if you have any understanding of the difference in task.

In fact I debunked your lidar comparison in the previous post too.

Lidar does not provide any info whatsoever the external cameras can't already provide with vision.

A proper meant-to-do-this-from-the-start driver monitoring system can provide info the Tesla afterthought system physically can not do


But again it appears you'd rather address what you imagine someone said instead of what I actually said.

My answer to Knighshade: Could you monitor the driver with that camera? Could you spot them keying or scrolling a phone off-camera, or falling asleep? If you could do it, then AI will do it better. Tesla don't need no stinking camera on the steering column.

Except, no, I can't do it fully.

Neither can you.

Because the camera is the wrong type and in the wrong position to do so


Like you've been told, with specific examples of the missing data, including a picture showing you it's missing the left hand of the driver entirely

You keep ignoring facts, data, and actual photographic evidence of being wrong though for....some reason....and instead making up things nobody said and getting mad about them.

(Sorry to prolong the annoying debate. I just couldn't contain my terrible anger.)

Clearly.


The extra confusing part is the only thing you've actually articulated being mad about is 'someone claiming Tesla engineers did a bad job'

The irony here is your argument is that they did a bad job because your premise is maybe they ALWAYS meant to use the camera this way- in which case they did a terrible job selecting, and placing, the hardware.


Whereas my actual argument is they did a great job because they took a system never intended for driver monitoring in the first place and managed to get it to do a decent job at that task anyway. Possibly good enough to satisfy the EU, who only added a requirement for such a system years after this HW went into the car




So which is it-

Am I right and Tesla engineers were great at retrofitting a solution with existing other HW?

Or are you right and the engineers who picked and placed the HW in 2016/2017 were terrible at picking the right stuff for driver monitoring and now they're having to somehow work around the limitations in software?


(hint: it's that first one- the timing, the absence of the HW at all in the S/X, the computer code, the actual capabilities of the camera, and the CEO of the actual company have all told you that already- you just refuse to believe them )