SCAM or SUBTERFUGE? Which level of Autonomy is Tesla REALLY at? 2, 3 or 4?
Vložit
- čas přidán 20. 08. 2024
- Tesla tells the DMV in California that it is a level 2 autonomy ADAS (Advanced Driver Assistance System). Tesla tells Tesla OWNERS that it is to be a level 4 or even level 5 autonomous system. Are one of these two parties being deceived? The answer will surprise you! What level of autonomy is Tesla actually at RIGHT NOW? Level 2 - as they publicly state? Level 3 or even Level 4? This video gives you a clear answer on this very controversial question.
LINK TO MY JAMES TAYLOR GARDEN CONCERT that I put on last August:
• A Tribute Concert to t...
I forgot to add that I am in the Los Angeles area actually in San Fernando Valley,
I purchased my model Y in 2022 February and I did purchase FSD and I am getting periodic updates on my FSD beta
A good review, Peter! We put about 3k miles on a rented MY recently. There were several phantom brake instances during our journey, which could be quite scary if someone is following too closely when this event occurs, but you can see that the steering and braking/distancing aspects of Tesla’s basic adaptive speed control (Autopilot) can make your drive safer than a human driver is usually capable of. It would be nice if their steering portion would permit lane changes/ passing without having to re-enable the system each time.
FSD is a huge challenge, and has come a long way. I’m surprised that it’s even capable of driving down a road with snow cover or no lines, but it at least tries, so you know they are in pursuit of a goal they think is achievable. More power to the FSD folks at Tesla!
Thanks for the positive comments Dennis! I'm of course using FSD as opposed to basic Autopilot, and I'm not getting phantom braking incidents any longer. Just wondering if the Autopilot and the FSD algortithms are perhaps out of sync and Autopilot doesn't have whatever it is that FSD possesses - if so, that should change (I was assuming your rented MY had basic Autopilot and not FSD). I think people don't really quite realize the revolution that is underway - cars being "sentient" enough to actually drive themselves, paying attention to their surroundings, and having the ability to recognize so many objects around it: people, dogs, bikes, cars, trucks, buses - etc etc. It is a real stealth revolution and off course the press LOVES to spread FUD at every opportunity possible - which makes the task of adoption much more difficult. So, we Tesla CZcamsrs try our best to give balanced reviews and accurate information. Educate AND entertain - that's the motto :)
@@model3man - hey Peter, thanks for the reply! The rented MY (built last summer) did just have AP on it. Re synchronizing the shared software between AP and FSD, perhaps the over the air updates can only occur when the rental agency (Hertz, in this case) permits it to occur, or AP is deliberately behind the tech in FSD beta.
Our 2019 Model 3 LR with full FSD package in Europe is locked at level "1,5ish" functionallity with phantom brakes. Rather frustrating to have paid for FSD four years ago and still cant use it. Due to this we bought Model Y Performance without any self driving features at all.
Well - I think each person has to do what they consider the best for them given finances, geographic location and so on. The main thing is, you still chose to get the safest car on the road, one that has over-the-air updates, an extensive charging network, the best battery-drive combination around - in other words, a TESLA :)
My 2022 Model Y Performance with FSD is improving all the time. I use every chance I get in the Denver area!!!
Thanks, Peter. Well presented and well said. I only have one suggestion for you. At the end of the video, you predict that true FSD will make the developer (Tesla or whoever) huge amounts of money. True enough. However, in my view, more important than profit, is the increased level of road safety that will result when true FSD level 4 is achieved. So, please emphasise the safety aspect over profit.
John - you are absolutely correct. That DEFINITELY should be emphasised above all else. I think what was in my mind at the time had more to do with the ultimate success (and dominance) of the TESLA company since that technology could then be licensed to the rest of the industry and it would ensure Tesla's growth, financial success, increasing share price and so on. But, it is all too easy to overlook just WHY FSD is being developed and that of course is to make driving safer, to save people's lives (like the unfortunate family where the husband drove them over a cliff in a suicidal act that filled everyone with horror - but because of the safety built into the car, they ALL survived!). SO, thanks for the appropriate reminder :)
@@model3man You're welcome, Peter. I agree. However, it will still take a long time before any other OEM gives in and licenses FSD from Tesla. Most of them still want to kill Tesla. They hate being forced to convert to electric by Tesla's pioneering work. You could say that they are being dragged, kicking and screaming into the EV age by Tesla. They still ONLY make money selling ICE vehicles. Only Tesla and BYD make money at it. So, let's not hold our breaths for FSD licensing. For now, safety and convenience are the thing wrt Auto Pilot and FSD. Already Teslas driving on its ADAS are 10 times safer than vehicles without it. 'Nuff said.
@@johnfruh - well said! On everything :) Enjoy your weekend !
13:00 Mercedes' autonomy only works below 40mph, on a limited number of roads, with lots of cars around it. Sounds like it was made for L.A. rush hour traffic (or Moskow). Well, from what I've heard of those places anyway.
I live just south of you across the border and have been Beta testing the FSD for some time now. In my experience, the software is not yet ready for level 3 and it would be irresponsible to not be in control of the vehicle. I have identified routes that I know the car can handle respectably and without a hitch so that I can impress friends, but in my experience the software regularly hits glitches under a wide range of conditions. I fully believe it will not achieve complete autonomy until roads become smart (lane edges are identified by something - wires embedded in the road - instead of just paint and when we reach the point that cars talk to each other. This technology is already being used in Europe. The software is amazing, but today my car wanted to stop on a busy highway when we came upon a "Traffic Advisory" sign with flashing yellow lights alerting traffic to tune to a radio station for additional information.
Lots of truth in your comments Terry. Smart roads ARE one avenue to greater road safety but sad to say, governments are all too willing to spend billions on pet projects rather than basic infrastructure like roads and highways - an infrastructure that has made most western countries so successful in terms of trade, travel, transportation of goods, food and so on. I cannot foresee that major changes to create 'smart' roads will ever take place without the political will to do so.
I think that is why Tesla is placing such emphasis on the vision aspect of FSD - the car seeing, and interpreting, just like a human, and being programmed more and more with correct responses. Now, it is certainly not close to perfect but I have discovered in all of my FSD testing that it has changed DRAMATICALLY in so many of its previously poor behaviours, that I do have hope for the ultimate success of the project.
Let's put it this way: if Elon and his most capable team cannot accomplish it, I am not sure any other manufacturer will.
Oh, I know there are dedicated robotaxis created by a number of companies in California that are fully decked out with lidar and radar and cameras and two way communication with a control center, but, they only travel on carefully mapped routes, at low speeds, in communication with a control center, and even so, just last month 4 of these vehicles jammed up an intersection and drivers had to be sent out to break the 'logjam'. So, this is possibility one of the most difficult technological challenges car makers have ever had to wrestle with. On balance - I think I'm optimistic.
Tesla has to do its experimental driving testing, in other, less regulated, countries.
If it can take on the streets of Delhi, then it has earned its right to self drive anywhere.
hahaha
It does all these great things in Fsd but continuously phantom brakes in Autopilot in my M3.
This does seem to be the most common gripe - certainly in this comment thread - and I believe it is solveable - certainly it seems to differ from car to car and location to location. I personally have not had any incidents of phantom braking now for about 4 months. I do wonder why the variance? Why in some cars and not others. Could be time of day; sun low in the sky; intense shadows - but you're right, it HAS TO BE SOLVED
3:39 - The 0 level autonomy cars even had GIANT chrome bumpers with pointy protrusions guaranteed to maim pedestrians. Nostalgia is nice but those cars were dangerous and not safe. Have you seen the "1959 Chevrolet Bel Air vs. 2009 Chevrolet Malibu IIHS crash test"? The '59 Chevy comes out way worse.
4:59 - The Mercedes level three (due later in 2023) is complete Horse Poo. Not even really "autonomous" as they need a lead car to be following and at a speed of 40 MPH or less.
I agree with all your comments Don! I don't even know how they got a level 3 certification - low speed; restricted roads on which it can be used? You really cannot call that autonomous driving. Elon's approach is a holistic one - but of course REALLY difficult to perfect: be able to drive ANY roads, even unmarked roads, in ANY area - residential or highway. But that is the right way - despite how much longer it is taking than he hoped / promised / predicted.
Tell them to fix phantom braking in autopilot. Tell Tesla to fix my car and be responsible.
I understand. The over-the-air updates are intended to do that. I think though we expect them to be much quicker at getting to solutions, but in practice these are tremendously complex and challenging things to fix - but I totally get where you are coming from, and agree with your sentiments
Peter
How about a rewrite ("reimagination") of Roadhouse Blues (The Doors) as applied to FSD Beta?
.
As you were talking the opening lines popped into my head!
Yes - that seems appropriate :). Although, in practice I tend to stick to James Taylor. If he wrote it, I'll sing it. And of course, there WAS one that describes everyone's experience on the road. From his album of 1977 he sang: "Damn this traffic jam.." - a song with brilliant harmonies!
I've been getting more and more disillusioned by Elon's promise that the FSD I purchased 4 years ago will even happen for my Model 3. I just can't see it happening with the camera's my car has and HW3. And since Elon said my car wouldn't get HW4, I doubt it will get better camera too. And that blinker light bleed is just terrible and will block FSD from using that camera.
Take a look at the FSD drive I just posted. You’ll find it very encouraging
The next interesting "discussion"?
If (inevitably?) Tesla initiates a full driver monitor, how would the FSD system perform when compared to Mercedes Drive Pilot?
(I can hear Tesla drivers laughing)
Oh yes - there are going to autonomous car "shoot-outs" in the near future. Perhaps people ARE already making those comparisons. I am going to research just what the new Mercedes level 3 strategy is capable of (aside from not working at greater than 35 mph, and working more on defined routes).
Funny how everyone in the media goes on and on with tesla always being late on developments. Did not Mary BS Barra of chevrolet say in 2013 " by 2020 we will have 25 fully electric vehicles in production, then in 2020 she said by 2022 they would have 25 models fully electric. HMMmmm did she in fact mean THEY WOULD HAVE 25 CARS TOTAL. WHY does the media not spout about THAT? Great vid CHEERS AND SAFE TRAVELS Steve h.
Thanks Steve. In full agreement with all the points you made! 100%
Average human Driver...Pass or Fail?
Hmmmmm. Fail? Quite a lot of the time :)
@@model3man You however are a definite "Pass" ... meaning spot on.
That source gave you an incorrect summary of these features. Look it up from the SAE site itself. Level 3 means that the vehicle can drive itself, without monitoring, but the vehicle will prompt the driver when they need to take over. With Level 4, you do not need a driver in the car, but the vehicles are restricted in terms of the locations and potentially scenarios they can operate in.
Mercedes, in its explanation of its Level 3 implementation, quotes this, saying, "SAE Level 3: the automated driving function takes over certain driving tasks. However, a driver is still required. The driver must be ready to take control of the vehicle at all times when prompted to intervene by the vehicle."
So it isn't a matter of taking over if you spot something that requires your intervention. That's why it's such a huge step over Level 2, because it means the car is truly responsible for identifying all threats when it's operating autonomously. It's also one reason that we realistically can't expect to see Level 3 and Level 4 ever appear in non geo-fenced releases. Proving that vehicles can identify and potentially handle every situation that occurs is something that's pretty much impossible if you can't control for the situations and places where they operate. And especially in the case of Level 4, the only way a vehicle could handle every situation a human can is if it's as smart as a human. And if that was the case, you'd be Level 5. When we consider this, we understand why Level 4's definition actually suggests geo-fencing. You're going to need humans nearby who can intervene when a situation arises the vehicle can't handle. If Tesla releases autonomous vehicles that operate with no driver, they will follow the example set by other companies of releasing in limited areas.
Level 3 and above, in the state of California, can not be tested by the public. But to be sure, companies are offering Level 4 services right now in California. They've done this through a combination of real world testing, and more importantly, simulation testing. Simulation is by far the most powerful way to advance, because it allows for as much control and repetition of scenarios as you need. We should also remember that Tesla is not exclusively training FSD by having it encounter real world scenarios and then figuring out how to work through them via machine learning. There are elements of this, yes, but there is still a large amount of good-old-fashioned programming logic governing how these vehicles behave. The macro decision making is still very much human designed.
It's also important to remember that vehicles don't need to be in control of themselves to acquire real world data. Companies collect data acquired from miles driven by humans and then apply it in simulation.
Regarding where FSD is today: In terms of its working functionality, FSD is clearly Level 2. It does not detect the situations where it makes mistakes and alert drivers to them. And it certainly makes mistakes. However, there is a legal argument to be made that FSD is Level 4 simply because Tesla may be developing it to be that. If that is their intent for the feature, then it doesn't actually matter what stage they're at in the process of reaching it. They would be governed by the regulations surrounding it. If you want to read about that, look up this article: "Do Tesla FSD Beta Releases Violate Public Road Testing Regulations?"
Some final anecdotes:
1. The big reason people assumed the 2021 crash involved Autopilot was because the driver was found in the backseat.
2. The people who join the FSD Beta testing program are willing guinea pigs. The people they interact with on the road may not be.
3. If a company actually ever releases a Level 5 vehicle, it will quite likely mean that artificial general intelligence has been achieved. And if that's the case, autonomous vehicles are small fries compared to the other economic changes we're going to see. I don't think it makes any sense for companies to pursue self-driving cars that can operate anywhere without a human driver. The AI needed for that is an AI that can do so much more, and self-driving cars aren't a great place to start building such a flexible AI.
We're going to see autonomous vehicles only in geo-fenced areas unless and until the day that an AI company working in some other field figures out how to make computers as smart as us.
Once again to battle, I see :)
I'm not going to give long-winded answers, but it IS important to make a few cogent points.
1. The SAE table of Autonomy levels is contradictory, and features often overlapping - leading to the descriptions making no sense at all. There is no category for what Tesla's can do. The items listed on the Level 2 chart are a small subset of what Tesla's are capable of. Unlisted capabilities include: traffic circles; stop signs; four-way stops; light-controlled traffic intersections; recognition and avoidance of people, animals, bikes etc. There are SO many more I'm not listing. These are WAY over and above the simple "steering AND brake/ acceleration support to the driver", and "lane centering AND • adaptive cruise control at the same time". In other words, Tesla's go WAY beyond Level 2, in which case, which level do they fit into? There are no SAE categories that encompass all that Teslas are currently capable of achieving.
2. Unlike Level 3 where it is geofenced and only able to work "Under limited conditions", Teslas can drive ANYWHERE that roads are even minimally marked, and where roads are in the mapping system that the car uses to perform navigation. (Bad weather of course is still the major exception). That is why these SAE levels of autonomy are virtually worse than useless for realworld evaluation of where different vehicles are on the scale of how advanced they are on the measure of real-world autonomy.
3. Since these levels of autonomy are artificial, contrived, inadequate and unable to deal with vehicles like Tesla that have far exceeded Level 2 but don't neatly fit into any of the SAE classification levels, it is pointless to try to figure where exactly in the SAE categories Tesla belongs.
HERE is the important point: rather than spend fruitless time trying to prove that Tesla is either only on Level 2 OR doing things illegally that they shouldn't be doing because they fall outside of Level 2, we should instead appreciate that Tesla is the ONE vehicle manufacturer that has TRULY advanced autonomous features that allow the car to drive ANYWHERE that roads exists, and its' cars do not need to live in neatly bounded Geo-fenced areas that are typical of many other vehicles whose manufacturers are also developing forms of autonomy. Yes, AI is at the heart of it, and Tesla is in the forefront of AI development - and not only for vehicles.
So, let's not waste time on fruitless arguments that won't convince each other, but instead give some time and space to see how the race towards full autonomy ENDS. Certainly NO-ONE (including Tesla) is anywhere near Level 5 yet. But as I said, give them (and the other manufacturers) the space and time to advance the way they are already doing, and then we can resume the discussion. Right now, argument tends to be fruitless - each trying to prove the other is wrong. And that is an exercise in wasting time and energy, right :)
By the way, the Level 3 Drive Pilot limitations are laughable and make it seem like a complete waste of time: speed needs to be 40mph or less; it needs to follow a 'lead' car; low sun angle immediately cancels it; only certain roads... etc etc. Tesla owners look at its limitations and laugh!
@@model3man
1. It's actually pretty clear. The big difference between Level 2 and 3 is that Level 3 is the first one where the car drives without being monitored.
2. You're praising them essentially for being a jack of all trades, master of none. I recommend you listen to Brad Templeton, a Tesla owner who is an expert in this field, having worked for some of these companies. He follows and writes professionally about the developments in autonomous driving. You can find his videos here on CZcams or read his articles on sites like Forbes. His take on a statement like yours is that, "No, FSD can't drive everywhere. It can't actually can't drive anywhere."
3. The real SAE chart makes it incredibly easy to place FSD. It meets none of the stated requirements for 3 and above. It fits perfectly in 2. The _only_ reason to think that it could be classified as 3 or above is because Tesla may be working on that as an eventual goal. And if you read the legal document I suggested for you, you would understand why they make this argument.
4. Your emphasis on Tesla being the only company bringing us towards autonomy is misguided. Tesla has not yet even shown conclusively that they are working on that goal. Meanwhile, other companies are actually releasing functioning autonomous vehicles.
5. How about this. If you really believe you're right and I'm wrong, let's put some money on it. Tell me when you think your current vehicle is going to actually operate everywhere without you monitoring it. I'm looking at Tesla's recent actions, releasing new hardware versions that 1. put cameras in different places, 2. add high definition radar, 3. add processing power and redundancy - and I'm recognizing that if Tesla is adding those hardware components, it almost certainly means they think they're necessary for autonomous driving without monitoring. I believe it's extremely likely now that the people who have already bought Teslas will never see this functionality offered in their current vehicles. I'm not alone. I know Dirty Tesla said the same thing.
6. I never stated that Mercedes' technology was more advanced than Tesla. But they created a product that is apparently focused on offering some Level 3 functionality. And there are some potential issues I see with Tesla trying to match it. When Tesla introduced its last hardware upgrade, it included computer redundancy. But they are apparently now using that backup computer for additional processing power for the basic driving task, removing their provision for a backup computer that can intervene if the first fails. I don't know what impact that has, if any, on their ability to offer autonomy without monitoring.
@@communityband1 - No more debates on this one. It's a carry over from the previous LONG thread you were in. Here's proof that everyone can agree on: first, NO Tesla owner would swap Full Self Driving and Autopilot for the stupid, limited, restricted MERCEDES DRIVE PILOT experience. No one!
Second, your authority is undermined by your resolute determination to NEVER go in a Tesla to EXPERIENCE FSD and Autopilot. And that renders your judgement merely academic and second hand. So, you can haul out as many theoreticals as you wish, but no Tesla owner would willingly swap what we have for what Mercedes is offering, and you can never experience why we feel that way so long as you stay away from PRACTICAL experience which spending hours in a Tesla would provide for you. Thanks for the discussions.
@@model3man I pointed you to an expert on this subject who _does_ drive a Tesla. Are you so threatened by this that you can't go listen to him?
Sir, the idea that I don't want to ride in a Tesla somehow has any effect on my arguments is absurd. The arguments stand alone and are echoed by people who do drive Teslas. You're offering no argument as for _how_ your feelings after driving a Tesla override the evidence I offer. You're just insisting they do, and you seem to fall back on this any time the arguments get difficult.
I have absolutely no means and no interest to get a ride in a car with FSD. Your offer for me to come to Canada to take a ride with you is a non-starter. I don't have the time or the documentation to make that trip. And I know absolutely nobody who owns a Tesla. I live in a place that's not remotely accommodating for electric vehicles. And I'm not going to look up some Tesla driver on the internet whom I can drive hundreds of miles to meet. There is literally only one net benefit to that. It would appease you (not really, but let's just pretend, okay?). No other Tesla owners seem to find that a relevant factor when I talk about these things with them. They're willing to discuss this on solid terms.
Meanwhile, you've released a video here that acknowledges something you previously denied and created a video about to make me look unreasonable. You are now agreeing that Tesla is indeed being deceptive. Subterfuge - deceit used in order to achieve one's goal. This is what I said. I said that Tesla is misleading either regulators or their customers. You denied that at first, and now you've released a video confirming you see it. It's time for you to quit trying to find variations in my words to make it seem like you were right before.
I disagree with your idea of morality. You think it's perfectly fine for Tesla to skirt the law because they're doing it for a purpose you deem worthy. Meanwhile, other companies are working within the law and delivering full autonomy today. Tesla's approach is not the only valid approach. It has yet to be proven that it even is valid.
_"Here's proof that everyone can agree on: first, NO Tesla owner would swap Full Self Driving and Autopilot for the stupid, limited, restricted MERCEDES DRIVE PILOT experience."_ Proof of what? That you can create a strawman argument? What do you think this proves, related to our argument?
@@communityband1 Sorry. You love argument for the sake of argument. It’s hopeless trying to counter your anti Tesla bias and FUD. Tesla’s autonomy progress is by far the best in the industry and getting better. Since you cannot / will not / don’t desire to actually get in a Tesla to experience what I and tens of thousands of Tesla owners are experiencing, our discussion is at an end. I will simply delete any further arguments you post here. We’re done with eternal point-scoring in a completely futile ‘debate’.
What gets me is that NHTSA says it's a recall of over 300k of vehicles - FUD. This is nowhere near true its an OTA update to the software. They are still grey thinkers and are not up with the latest systems and terminology. Reporting of this issue is rubbish, just causing FUD and trying to destabilise the stock market and people's judgment of Tesla.
Absolutely correct Chris! This is NO different than many previous FSD updates that have been issued - regularly - to fix issues where FSD did the wrong thing in a particular context! This is the media doing their best to (once again) sow FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt) to hurt Tesla as a brand, and hurt the price of their shares. This is the kind of behaviour we have come to expect and is simply a continuation of the desperate struggle the established players (traditional automakers and Big Oil) have waged against Tesla since the very beginning. Spot on for your observations.
@@model3man They will likely continue to call it a Recall until enough non-Tesla cars have OTA updates where it starts to (or may) hurt those brands too much to continue to have it called a "Recall"
Tesla's FSD is in Beta mode; what else do you need to know?
This video is the scam.
Not sure what you're referring to Frank. I'm FOR the FSD Beta. I'm endorsing it, and predicting Tesla will win its quest to become the first automaker to solve the thorny question of full self driving. Where's the scam? As I said at the start of the video, I'm NOT suggesting it is a scam, but that Tesla is engaging in some 'subterfuge' in order to keep NHTSA and the DMV at bay, while they continue to develop and test Level 4 features while retaining the restraints of Level 2 (full driver control). Perhaps you didn't listen through the entire video - but if I've got you wrong, please set me right.
@@model3man My apologies.
first 🙂