Vision only is a new solution - better is yet to be decided.Innovation is creating a new or better solution to a problem. Tesla did neither.
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.
Vision only is a new solution - better is yet to be decided.Innovation is creating a new or better solution to a problem. Tesla did neither.
Even assuming your assertion with zero proof is correct, I can assure you every new architecture, re-write, new software I've ever worked on always had more issues than the outgoing one. But noone would think an IBM mainframe code written in Cobol on text terminals would be better today than whatever they have now after 10 rewrites and upgrades.The problem with that argument in this case is that Autopilot reliability and safety has gone backwards, not forwards since removing radar. Innovation has been slowed due to the removal of radar.
So you don't consider the air and noise pollution of ICE vehicles a problem?Innovation is creating a new or better solution to a problem. Tesla did neither.
Wrong - it’s new but it still doesn’t fully work so it can’t be considered a solution.Vision only is a new solution - better is yet to be decided.
If you're going down that route, the old system didn't fully work either...Wrong - it’s new but it still doesn’t fully work so it can’t be considered a solution.
I provided a link to an article in a previous post. You could also look it up yourself for data.Even assuming your assertion with zero proof is correct, I can assure you every new architecture, re-write, new software I've ever worked on always had more issues than the outgoing one. But noone would think an IBM mainframe code written in Cobol on text terminals would be better today than whatever they have now after 10 rewrites and upgrades.
Really!? Having regard to the well oiled (emphasis on oil) Tesla bashing/ fake news/ groundless misnomer sprouting machine, I would expect quite the reverse. If we are not hearing about too many Tesla losses, just maybe that's because they have not lost too many.Probably no surprise if the public never hears about cases TSLA loses.
W.T.F.He does that only when not busy giving aid and comfort to Nazis, though.
FSD Beta is drastically better under Tesla Vision than it was with the radar hybrid previously. Of course you can't necessarily attribute this to removal of radar itself, but then you can't say either there were no improvements and that it played no role.Innovation is creating a new or better solution to a problem. Tesla did neither.
Business Insider ? No thanks.I provided a link to an article in a previous post.
Yes - like not wearing mask that can kill a million ? Suddeny when it comes to rare accidents, people because overly concerned about lives. But Covid & wars & poverty & Climate Change - who cares !You don’t seem to have any concern about the consequences of that decision. People are literally getting hurt because of it.
The publication cited interviews with dozens of former employees, test drivers, and other experts. After the update in 2021, more Teslas running on Autopilot or Full Self-Driving began stopping for imaginary obstacles, misidentifying street signs, and having difficulties identifying emergency vehicles, the Post reported, citing complaints that were filed with regulators.
I wonder how many people are killed by having the cruise control on and get lulled to distraction. Eliminate cruise control or pay attention to the warnings/disclaimers?I've said this many times - AP/FSD Beta will cause accidents, and it will kill people. People need to accept that. The point is that it should cause LESS accidents and kill LESS people than humans do. Last year 42,000 people died in car crashes in the US. If we can save any of those people by using ADAS systems, it's worth it.
The issue is human nature. Why is it more acceptable to us if another human kills a friend or loved one in a car accident vs a computer killing them? We want computer systems to be infallible and cause 0 accidents, but that's not reasonable.
Wouldn't be surprised at all if there were discussions and bumps in the road when basic cruise control first came out, it would be interesting to look into that historyI wonder how many people are killed by having the cruise control on and get lulled to distraction. Eliminate cruise control or pay attention to the warnings/disclaimers?
We don't have those stats, unfortunately. However, NHTSA is going to start acquiring that data in the near future so we can see all L2 crash data (which includes adaptive cruise control + lane keeping).I wonder how many people are killed by having the cruise control on and get lulled to distraction. Eliminate cruise control or pay attention to the warnings/disclaimers?
If they’re interested in L2 data they should include regular cruise control and adaptive cruise control without lane keeping since that would give a better comparison.We don't have those stats, unfortunately. However, NHTSA is going to start acquiring that data in the near future so we can see all L2 crash data (which includes adaptive cruise control + lane keeping).
Cattle prods installed in the driver seat should take care of that...If they’re interested in L2 data they should include regular cruise control and adaptive cruise control without lane keeping since that would give a better comparison.
The real problem with all of this is that there’s a point where increasing automation paradoxically becomes worse because it’s very good, just not good enough. Autopilot is at or close to that for routine highway driving. If you’re just driving straight on the highway in good weather it’s close to perfect in my experience. I drove 4 ½ hours from Minneapolis to Grand Forks and never had to do a thing other than satisfy the nag-o-tron. The problem is it’s not quite perfect and you get lulled into a sense of security and quit paying attention.
There's very little difference in the response to distraction or falling asleep between manual driving and cruise control. In both cases, the car quickly drifts out of its lane or runs into something. If the cruise control is traffic aware, it might not run into a leading car, but will still run off the road or through a red light.We don't have those stats, unfortunately. However, NHTSA is going to start acquiring that data in the near future so we can see all L2 crash data (which includes adaptive cruise control + lane keeping).
I think it'll be interesting to see the real stats. I think there is more accident data for L2 than people think. Quite a few cars today have basic L2. The question is are they involved in accidents, more likely do to a lack of driver attention.There's very little difference in the response to distraction or falling asleep between manual driving and cruise control. In both cases, the car quickly drifts out of its lane or runs into something. If the cruise control is traffic aware, it might not run into a leading car, but will still run off the road or through a red light.
Even if you are driving manually, most cars will simply coast if you stop providing accelerator input and the car's momentum is great enough to keep it moving at speed until it finds something to run into.
Newer cars like Teslas also have lane departure warnings which will alarm before you get to the dangerous point but if you don’t have lane departure warning then yeah, it’s no difference with cruise control, probably worse.There's very little difference in the response to distraction or falling asleep between manual driving and cruise control. In both cases, the car quickly drifts out of its lane or runs into something. If the cruise control is traffic aware, it might not run into a leading car, but will still run off the road or through a red light.
Even if you are driving manually, most cars will simply coast if you stop providing accelerator input and the car's momentum is great enough to keep it moving at speed until it finds something to run into.
One of the arguments for driver aids is that they reduce driver fatigue. Nominally that should be borne out in the stats, too, but if they increase inattentiveness it gets more murky.I think it'll be interesting to see the real stats. I think there is more accident data for L2 than people think. Quite a few cars today have basic L2. The question is are they involved in accidents, more likely do to a lack of driver attention.
It would be interesting to know how many people turn off lane departure warnings if they are loud enough to be annoying and are set off by typical lane changing maneuvers without using the turn signals.Newer cars like Teslas also have lane departure warnings which will alarm before you get to the dangerous point but if you don’t have lane departure warning then yeah, it’s no difference with cruise control, probably worse.
My Tesla is the first car I’ve had with it so I can’t compare but I haven’t found it to be annoying enough to disable. Once in a while it will squawk when it thinks I’m starting a turn too early but it’s generally pretty good.It would be interesting to know how many people turn off lane departure warnings if they are loud enough to be annoying and are set off by typical lane changing maneuvers without using the turn signals.