Featured Tesla Autopilot recall probed by safety regulator following new crashes

There was nothing in the posts to indicate that the current FSD is safer. After many attempts to claim that there were zero deaths while using FSD, post #254 does mention several deaths. I pointed out several deaths within 25 miles of my home. They were ignored.

And as for the claim that "data" was supplied... it's not data when there is nothing to back up the means by which the charts were compiled and what was excluded or added to the results.

I'm not sure why you are adamant that Teslas would not run a red light when using FSD (supervised). The very nature of the neural net training is that you don't really know what the car is going to do until after it has plotted it's course. After all, broadsiding fire engines with all lights flashing and slow moving trucks is sort of counter intuitive, but it's what prompted the probe.

As for the pretty picture of the empty charging station? It's just seems like a nice allegory to represent the Musk's tendency to promise things that he does not deliver.

 

It looks like the charger stations are covered as they usually are while waiting for the utility to do a final inspection before enabling their use

Mike

 

At this point, I have to wonder if you're just trolling. They were ignored because not relevant to FSD, like I previously said.

It's a chart of miles driven in FSD over time, that's all that is included. It can't be much simpler than that! You want a spreadsheet out of it? Interpolate the data like I did for January, it's easy. But you accept the death per million miles driven which are just number points where are all they say the source is

The following facts are based on analysis of data from the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Fatality Analysis Reporting System.

You don't see the source data and yet, you blindly accept it. The source I have given you is from a public company quarterly report, but it looks like it's not good enough for you.

When/where did I say it won't? I said it "could" not "would". Big difference here.

I could counter that it shows Tesla's agility as they are able to install 8 and 12 preassembled stalls in less than a week (or a few weeks for the non preassembled ones), unlike getting them powered up by the utility company, which is probably why they aren't up yet. But of course, this is all out the windows with Musk firing the whole Supercharger team. That, I find is concerning.

Like someone said, Musk is converting the "impossible" into merely "late".

 

Get out of there with your logic.

 

That saying is just like my uncle's favorite saying. He was fond of "I'd rather owe it to you than to cheat you out of it." Perpetually "late" is just as effective if you have a pocket full of deposits and advance purchases.

 

We veered off subject, no point continuing this discussion.

 

It will be interesting to keep an eye on the "autopilot recall". There should be some key learning coming out of that investigation. Sylvaing is correct in suggesting that we don't need all of the side issues about which self driving package is safer.

 

I wish it would have included FSD as well so we could get better insight about it, but for some reason, NHTSA specifically excluded it. Maybe to have a probe geared towards it later?

 

I repeat, the comment has nothing to do with the capability of the system to follow a road. You keep using that to brush aside valid criticisms of Tesla that have nothing to do with that, or even the ADAS system at all.

The video is another example of that from another source. It starts with CR's total score difference between Mercedes and Tesla before heading into their test. Yet Mercedes didn't score better because of their systems capability driving. It was because they did much better in the 'Keeping driver engaged' and 'Unresponsive driver' portions. It is Tesla's lacking there that is the reason for the investigation, recall, and this thread.

As for the video, the presenters were being reckless with a Level 2 system. Mercedes makes no claims about using it hands free. The Level 3 Drive Pilot sounds like a more capable TJA. It would be an issue if these guys managed to activate it in conditions it shouldn't. I only mention that cause my Subaru would have been more vocal under the conditions they were driving, but then I don't know how the user can adjust the alerts in the Mercedes.

Tesla is reckless for allowing hands free use for such extended periods in what they label a Level 2 system. That is the complaint against them. They are lax on the safe guards to keep drivers from misusing the system, while promoting how capable they are. Doesn't matter how capable the system cause it can't handle all situations, and drivers are crashing when they might not have with better safeguards.

I am perfectly happy with the ADAS in my Subaru. Sounds like I would have had to spend $6000 to Enhanced Autopilot to get its capability.

An attentive driver will be watching the road, with hands on wheel, and feet near pedals, whether at 35, 65, or 110 mph, and proper safeguards will keep the driver attentive to the road. Using Level 2 ADAS or not isn't going to change the danger level for the speed much. A car with ADAS likely also has the advanced safety feature, like emergency braking, that can mitigate the damage in case a crash occurs.

Tesla turns FSD off above 85mph cause they know there are inattentive drivers misusing the system.

Didn't MobilEye end the partnership over concerns of Tesla pushing the safety envelope?

The goal isn't the problem. It is how Tesla is going about it. They are trying to sneak it in to avoid regulatory oversight, in order to make more profits. While oversight can slow development, it isn't like a corporations saying "trust us" hasn't ended badly.