Like a dummy I paid something around 7,500 euros for the so-called FSD package when the Model 3 arrived in Europe in early 2019.
Five years later it still does practically nothing. The car can’t even do the bare minimum: it doesn’t recognize speed limits on most highways in Finland because it gets confused by round LED signs showing the limit (these are used because it’s different in winter and summer). It’s just embarrassing. A self-driving car should understand road signs that a five-year-old has no difficulty reading.
I’m guessing it works better on some Californian roads that have been carefully hand-tuned by Tesla so they can show the Boss an illusion of progress.
Personally I’m not going to buy another Tesla after this episode. Optimism is one thing, but this level of hype is actively dangerous because it gives people the wrong idea about the capabilities of something they rely on in traffic.
I bought "just" the EAP since by 2022 the FSD was clearly a scam, but I feel like an idiot for having purchased even that. 0 of its 5 advertised features are usable and 3 of them don't exist at all:
Navigate on Autopilot - Useless. Only handles highways, deactivates itself on normal roads. It can theoretically handle switching from one highway to another - in practice it attempts suicide every single time. If you don't intervene it will either crash, or cause a crash behind you.
Auto Lane Change - Nope, not "Auto" at all in Europe. Got to "consent" with your indicator lights and a gentle nudge on the steering wheel. Said nudge must apply a torque between 0.44 and 0.46 newton - anything less won't register, anything more will override the autopilot and leave you in manual control. Also it won't work if there's a car less than 200mt behind you in your target lane - it's ridiculously cautious. Finally, 30% of the time, despite above conditions being met, it hesitates for 30 seconds then opts to stay in its lane with a timeout error.
Autopark - nope, not since they removed the 3 EUR worth of ultrasonic sensors.
Summon - nope, see above.
Smart Summon - nope, again, see above
If there's anything like a class action in Germany I'll gladly join.
This is really a pity because I like the car apart from this scammy aspect.
There was an article here recently of someone who settled with Tesla for a refund with interest. I don't know Finnish consumer protection legislation but if they didn't deliver and aren't doing to, that might be something to look into.
I'm thinking it would be fair to get a refund based on what the cost of the FSD would be if invested in TSLA stock at the time of purchase. For me, that'd be a 17x. They used that money to build a company, after all.
The whole FSD thing is so misleading that it should make buyers eligible to a full refund. While the Tesla website only promises to deliver the feature at some point in the future, public comments from musk and others made it look like this point will be end of year
Not that it changes much, but your cheap car probably uses the same tech developed across all of VAG group, so the price of your car is less of a factor. People buying VWs, Audis and Porsches probably fund it!
Mine never knows either, and if I dare use the cruise control or autopilot on the highway near Oslo it phantom brakes by bridges and shadows randomly. Same bridge it was phantom braking when a friend had a Model X like 8 years ago, still not fixed even if probably thousands of Teslas drive there every day
Mine has no idea about the speed limit in the school zone next to my house. Why? Because the speed limit changes based upon if school is in session. When is school in session??? You might be able to tell by looking at the school parking lot. You could open a web browser, navigate to the correct school districts web page, download the school year calendar in pdf form, and determine if today is a school day. Or you could do what my tesla does and lets me drive 10mph over the regular speed limit (as of about a year ago - maybe they’ve fix it)
New one to add: The front license plate falls off constantly. They dont require those in california, so when you buy one in states that do require it, they send you a janky plastic holder with just a bit of double sided tape that never seems to hold.
Funniest one: When you are using cruise control you cannot disable the wipers.
> Funniest one: When you are using cruise control you cannot disable the wipers.
You cannot disable the automatic wipers when using cruise control. This makes sense to me: Because they use the cameras for cruise control, they need to be able to clean the cameras whenever necessary. If the weather is clear, the automatic wipers never come on unless you hit a puddle or something.
It is difficult to understand how this is not outright fraud.
If I bought a Honda without ABS (let's pretend it was in the 90s) but paid a lot extra for a promise that they'll retrofit ABS later but never do, clearly that would be fraud.
I am wondering if your local laws can help in this case or in the contract you signed there is some tricky text that allows them to sell you a broken FSD.
> I paid something around 7,500 euros for the so-called FSD package when the Model 3 arrived in Europe in early 2019.
So, this is something I never got. Like, even if you were convinced it was something which was definitely going to be delivered, on time, as promised, in a form that wouldn't cause the regulators to immediately ban it (and frankly this would be an unreasonable set of things to believe; even where the initial set of promises is reasonable, and they were not in this case, shit happens and things get delayed for reasons beyond anyone's control), why not just buy it when it became available? I don't get the impulse to pre-buy this sort of thing.
They've been misleading to the point of lying about FSD, but I feel like anyone who reads this site should have known enough not to pay that! Hope you get some of it back eventually anyway.
Why there hasn't been a class action about it yet is a real mystery.
> I’m guessing it works better on some Californian roads that have been carefully hand-tuned by Tesla so they can show the Boss an illusion of progress.
It has nothing to do with “the boss”. It’s just basic bias of where the engineers are and where testing happens.
All the stories about Twitter/X suggest that absolutely everything revolves around what the boss wants on a given day.
That’s autocratic micromanagement, and its downside is that the boss ultimately has a limited attention span and employees learn how to distract him with shiny demos that show a glimpse of the impossible thing he demanded they ship.
It reflects Musk's own bias. If he actually gave a shit about competence and quality, Teslas would be more functional outside California. But he doesn't and won't, so until he crawls into a hole somewhere and disappears, Teslas will continue to be over hyped garbage.
Do you work at Tesla? Or any big company? I definitely make sure that my work demos well for my higher ups, especially those that are known to be unpredictable and moody :)
It isn't about hand-tuning. I'm still confused by your description of speed limit signs in Finland.
Is the speed limit emitted by LEDs? Why is it ever different between winter and summer? Etc.
If the sign is not white background,no LEDs, and black or red font I as a human would ignore the signage just like the car is probably trained for as that isn't reflective of North America standards.
First of all, the standard for speed signs in most of the world is a round sign with a red border and a black number inside indicating the actual speed. US speed signs are extremely non-standard. Having the numbers be made out of LEDs in a country where winter means guaranteed ice and snow (so a much lower limit to be able to safely negotiate the same curves) would not be hard to recognize, as long as the standard is otherwise followed.
Secondly, road regulations are not dependent on what you personally know or are used to. A driver in Finland, even if they are coming from America, has the obligation of following all Finnish road markings. And if Tesla is selling FSD in Finland, it is obvious that they have the same obligation as any other road participant.
>Why is it ever different between winter and summer?
Because doing 120kph on an icy road or in heavy rain is a recipe for disaster. Northern Europe isn't California. The temperature ranges from +30C to -30C during the year.
As the car is sold outside of North America (with a promise of FSD) , you don't think it's fair to expect it to recognise the speed limit signs in the country that the car is sold?
You would ignore all the speed limit signs on a highway because they don’t have a white background? Come on. That doesn’t make any sense. Obviously the sign displaying a number enclosed in a circle is the speed limit (which you might also deduce by observing the speed everybody else is going). Next you’ll tell me that Tesla can’t possibly be expected to understand speed limits expressed in the exotic unit of km/h.
It’s fine if the car is trained for North American standards only. Why then is Tesla marketing and selling this feature in Europe at all? What did I get for 7,500 euros?
I’m sure they have fine print in the contract saying “we don’t guarantee this feature will ever do anything.” So I’m taking it as an expensive lesson.
Variable speed limit signage is not uncommon in the United States. It exists in areas of frequent and heavy fog, in construction zones, and in areas of regular stopped traffic.
> Why is it ever different between winter and summer?
Here in Oslo it's due to the local air pollution caused by winter tires. Studded tires especially but non-studded as well as they have soft rubber which sheds particulates more easily.
Due to physics, cold air can act as a lid, preventing the ground-level air from getting refreshed, causing a build-up of particulates.
Lower speed means less particulates from the asphalt and rubber.
I hope you ignore it. The fine you receive is based on your income. If you for example earn 5k EUR a month and go 20mph over the limit, you'll be fined 2640 EUR, payable on the spot. That you're not from Finland doesn't matter.
> Why is it ever different between winter and summer? Etc.
It doesn't matter to the discussion. For whatever reason, if that is how the local laws work, it is what it is. If a car company wants to sell a car in that market, they need to comply or get out.
I mean, remember that time when the Tesla engineers fixed Elon Musk's commute by literally repainting the lane lines so the vision system would see them [1]. Oh, or how about that time that they hand-tuned the FSD reveal demo, you know, the one that said "The driver is only there for legal reasons." and re-ran it over and over again until it succeeded without crashing (literally, it crashed once while they were making the demo video) as admitted under oath by the current head of Autopilot software who personally faked the demo even though it still, 7 years later, can not do that route consistently without error today [2].
At what point is saying "it's two years away, trust me!" Not just naive optimism but false advertising or market manipulation? He publicly said this for like four years, and then he walks it all back.
I just don't get it. Any other little person does this and they would be big time side by investors and shareholders, and yet people want to trip all over each other talking about how awesome he is.
After those two years have passed, probably. But the claim was actually stronger than that. It was that it should earn back the money it cost by running an autonomous taxi service during night and office hours. That specific claim was a scam from day one. That was not even on the research stage, and probably never will be.
Also that would require lending your vehicle out to random strangers all the time, so you couldn't keep anything valuable/fragile in the car and you'd need to clean it rather frequently.
Even on the face of it, it's more like owning a taxi than a car that makes you money.
Not defending Musk, but investors and shareholders don’t abandon him because he has delivered huge returns to them through Tesla stock. He is always too optimistic (maybe intentionally) about the timelines, but ends up generating money in the end.
Plus, he is super rich and people want to be close to big money - could lead to many benefits through networking and opportunities.
Does he end up generating money in the end though? The only way to say that definitively is if Tesla were at some point in the future to shut up shop and return a balance to the shareholders many multiples of what they bought the stock for.
Until that happens the plates are still spinning and could go either way.
Which is equally balanced with the anti-fanbois that don't have a Tesla but still flock to any thread about Musk to voice their opinions.
Look, I don't have a Tesla, never owned one. I don't use Twitter. I think Musk has major flaws. There is definitely a growing trend of anti-Musk vs Musk fanboi flame wars. This thread seems to be no better.
It never actually has to be a lie. Making predictions years into the future is impossible if variables are changing. He can make a perfectly truthful estimate of when the product will be ready as of today’s information, and then the information changes.
It’s up to you as a consumer to either discredit the optimism or buy into it.
On the other hand: Because he is always wrong with his timelines it cant be security fraud because everyone knows (and ridicules him/memes it) that his timelines are wrong.
It's more about the consumer's satisfaction IMHO. For one reason or another, it appears that the Tesla customers are happy with their purchase.
There is a cult mentality and the cult members are happy with what they got, even if it's not exactly as advertised however it's not just about the cult mentality but it's about the overall experience of the product.
I think if Elizabeth Holmes delivered slick blood testing machines that work no different than those on the market(large amount if blood instead of a drop), but had better workflow and user experience, Theranos could have been a success like Tesla.
She tried to imitate Steve Jobs, had she imitated Elon Musk she would have been fine. She should have had the Siemens machines modified to work with modern GUI, developed some automation for drawing large quantities of blood in a pod at the mall and integrate all that with the healthcare and keep repeating that in 2 years just a drop of blood would ne enough.
The only difference between Musk and Holmes was that Musk actually delivered something that had some redeeming properties.
The cars are nice and fun to drive. The charging network is ubiquitous and works perfectly. The highway-based "autopilot" isn't revolutionary, compared to other similar products, but works competently and makes long drives easier. The FSD Beta is a hot steaming pile of garbage that will kill people given the slightest opportunity.
> I think if Elizabeth Holmes delivered slick blood testing machines that work no different than those on the market(large amount if blood instead of a drop), but had better workflow and user experience, Theranos could have been a success like Tesla.
I wouldn't have said that Tesla just imitated existing car companies. Can you elaborate?
yeah he over promised on FSD, but still delivered on reusable rockets, and more or less nudged all other manufacturers to producing eletric cars at minimum, a few years earlier than they intended to.
He also exposed twitter's political bias & collusion with US security agencies, and exposed that the company can run with 80% less staff.
This then is a fine example that past performance is absolutely no indication of future one, despite our emotions screaming at us that its the case. We just don't like uncertainty or lack of trust environment by default, so subconsciously prefer replacing it with more comforting bad truth/lie rather than accepting the other choice.
The Space Shuttle from the 80s was reusable too. Falcon 9 isn't fully reusable (upper stage) and now Starship drops some new ring into the sea.
> More or less nudged all other manufacturers to producing eletric cars at minimum
Didn't he instead let them delay making electric cars by transacting with them for their ZEV credits?
I think the SpaceX stuff is still impressive, but he didn't deliver on his big statements. Dragon was supposed to land on Mars years ago for instance. The Space Shuttle wasn't economical, but Starship went back to lots of elements of its design.
This really captures the essence of his naïveté, to me:
> There are no fundamental challenges remaining. There are many small problems. And then there's the challenge of solving all those small problems and putting the whole system together.
That is the fundamental problem, of all AI research. How many edge cases are there, and how many does it have to handle gracefully before it’s “good enough”? I think the tail is longer than people expect, and the changes that have to be made to address it are very fundamental.
At the same time, I really want them to succeed, and I think FSD could be one of the most transformative tech advancements of the century, like the original invention of the automobile.
That's not the fundamental problem of all AI research. That's the fundamental problem of all software engineering!
Especially integration complexity is todays' biggest complexity in any significantly complex product. And you can't cheat yourself around it. We managed to cheat ourselves around growing complexity in subsystems by isolating them more and more, which allowed us to tackle the complexity with more people working in parallel. But that just further increases the integration complexity, where we don't know a way to effectively scale our approaches to deal with it.
The only way we know is "cutting corners": creating a system that's just working well in 99% of cases - leave the small problems of the remaining 1% unsolved, hence there's nothing to integrate for those. Works well enough for production use in a lot of situations. Doesn't work at all when it comes to Level 5 autonomous driving. And that's what Elon either doesn't understand or actively ignores.
>Especially integration complexity is todays' biggest complexity in any significantly complex product.
100% This, which should be very obvious to anyone working at a FAANG tier company.
There are no shortage of ideas, technical documents, prototypes working locally. However to get a product to production that integrates (even in a paved path) is most often the most complex task.
I'm not sure it is down to edge cases. It's more like they are a fundamental AI breakthrough away until it can understand say that that thing must be a fire truck although it doesn't look the same as the previous ones seen.
I mean alternatively you can take the Waymo approach with loads of sensors and pre mapped routes but Musk seems to be banking on almost human level AI and we aren't there yet.
> To me, it indicates that they haven't solved even the easiest part: there is something in a static setting, don't crash into it, stop.
That turns out to be a harder problem than most people think, and it gets in the way of the 'driving' part. "Are we looking at some big, blank object or are we looking at the sky? It's probably the sky, so we'll just drop it from the model." Which is how Teslas drive into big trucks. :/
Even if visuals failed, Tesla has a sonar, radar and Tesla is moving at snail pace.
Hell, my vacuum stops moving when it detects it crashed into something (likely torque required to move wheels is larger than expected).
Edit: at the end of the day, it doesn't matter why it happened. The result is a crash in a super simple environment and is (to me) quite indicative to the state of things. They are supposed to come up with solutions, not excuses (also, Elon hates lidar, but that is still on Tesla).
Problems involved being hard doesn't make it okay to willfully sell an unfinishable product.
I know for the fact that making a flying carpet is hard. Doesn't mean you should be greatful for life to be able to pay me $1M for a non-flying flying carpet that sets itself on fire.
It’s actually not hard, like at all. Every other manufacturer solved it. The problem is that Elon dropped all sane forms of “vision” like lidar because he wants to squeeze out profits at the cost of consumer safety (not to mention Tesla kills motorcyclists hand over fist)
He’s hell bent on machine vision which can’t even identify a cyclist for fucks sake! And somehow this is legal to deploy on public roads!
Are they just doing object detection, or are they also doing 3d scene reconstruction (visual SLAM)? My bet is on the latter, and the SLAM reconstruction should show them that there's something dangerously close to the car. Of course, vSLAM is notoriously finnicky in corner cases, lighting conditions etc., so it might have just not noticed the plane at all.
Given Elon's obsession with "it should see like a human does" i.e. only relying on vision and nothing else, I don't think FSD will ever be feasible and safe tbqh. This would be trivial to avoid if the car had an actual sense of distance other than comparing pixels.
Teslas drive under things on autopilot. The first autopilot fatality in 2016 decapitated Joshua Brown, and a couple later ones were due to what appears to be the same failure. They never even tried to fix it.
Driving very slowly into a parked giant blue airplane and not even stopping?
I think we can be pretty sure that almost all human drivers won't make that mistake and those who do should not be driving on their own just like Teslas software.
It's using smart summon, where a person, who can see the car because it's short range, uses their phone to move the car. They can stop it using their phone at any time by removing their finger from the touchscreen, yet weirdly didn't.
It's not autopilot, and it's not FSD, and it maxes out at 6 mph.
Also they've never updated the code for it, so it's not representative of the current tech in FSD
Makes no difference. Not crashing into big stationary things is the absolute bottom floor of what is required for anything 'car moves without driver behind wheel'.
From technical perspective, either they use same stack for environment awareness for summon and driving for shared capabilities and it failed or they do not, which is even worse. Either way, fail.
Interestingly, if you read the new Musk biography from Isaacson, Musk’s approach of committing to an overaggressive deadline, rallying all his workers to stay up until 3am on the shop floor and generally yelling at them like a military commander actually worked remarkably well again and again at Tesla and SpaceX. They accomplished business goals that no one thought was possible, continually pulling rabbits out of a hat.
However, the evidence suggests that this approach does not work for a research problem like developing self-driving cars. It seems that you can’t just yell at software engineers and make them stay awake all night until they make an AI research breakthrough. The difference with SpaceX/Tesla was that the hurdles were fundamentally manufacturing and efficiency problems (after all, we made it to the moon in 1969 - and in both cases Musk had a basically working prototype very early on), not problems of science research.
I think a bigger factor is the job market. Where's an aspiring rocket scientist going to go if they don't get a job for SpaceX? Or an electric car designer (back when Tesla started at least)?
There just weren't really many other places for people who wanted to work on those cool problems to go to work. So Musk had the leverage to push them really hard.
But software? Not so much! Programmers can work pretty much anywhere. Even for a cool project like driverless cars there's quite a lot of companies trying to do it. And how many of the driverless car programmers specifically want to work on driverless cars? They'd probably be cool with other AI projects, of which there are a gazillion.
> Where's an aspiring rocket scientist going to go if they don't get a job for SpaceX? Or an electric car designer (back when Tesla started at least)?
NASA, Boeing (or any defense contractor, really), Planet for satellite engineering, Google/Waymo was doing self-driving around that time. I contracted for some random small self-driving startup around 2010.
His method of deletion and challenging requirements works well for manufacturing. It would appear to me that the same doesn’t work for software nearly as well.
This feels like hearing all the talk about AI replacing developers and then actually building stuff with the best models available and seeing them fail to generate JSON function calls according to a simple JSON schema and just make shit up about what the parameters should look like.
I think the hype is driven by a combination of naivety, religious thinking and hope.
Personally my cynical perspective is I work with people that it could viably replace now and that's sad, not because it's good tech but the people are so fucking awful.
Except I’ve never heard anyone talking about AI replacing developers and selling a “full self-development” package for thousands of dollars at the same time.
>Except I’ve never heard anyone talking about AI replacing developers and selling a “full self-development” package for thousands of dollars at the same time.
Some developers are complaining that we will be replaced, that somehow GPT4 can write good code. Similar artists, writers etc complain they will be replaced.
I can't see an AI in the next 20 years that you ask it
"Build me GTA6" and it will create it for you, code, art, text, voices.
From my experience GPT is good for exploring, asking questions and getting sometimes inspiration from the answers, if the code you asked for what writen already by others and was trained on it then it will aproximate a good solution but it still does mistakes.
Current AI it is just interpollating some response based on what he saw in training, if the real answer is not close enough to points in training then you get garbage. Add on top bad training data and it generates most of the time sub optimal code. For example it always generates JavaScript code using old syntax and using old DOM APIs.
There is no logic with them, I asked an AI "is X legal in Javascript" and it answered No, it created an it created an answer that shows that was legal and working and rambled about why is not a good idea to use that. And I have many examples where the fcking long answers they give contradict themselves.
Sorry for the long comment, I daily see this devs complaining about this, earlier I read comments where some web devs were sure in three years they will have no job.
I've had a Tesla Model S for quite some time now. It cannot reliably adjust the high beam / low beam nor the windshield wipers. Those problems seem a bit easier than full self driving.
Model Y here. My automatic wipers are mostly okay except sometimes they seem to get obsessed with a tiny speck of bird crap they can't remove. High beam/low beam is a complete cluster f*ck: It gets fooled by highly-reflective road signs. So I adjust headlights manually, just like I have done over my entire driving career.
The phantom braking is the biggest deal: The car slams on the brakes in the middle of major highways in good weather just because it's a hot day and the camera saw a mirage and the car thinks it's about to drive off a cliff. This means the cruise control ("autopilot") on the car isn't even as reliable as "dumb" cruise control on a 20-year-old car, so I rarely use it.
Readit News
Five years later it still does practically nothing. The car can’t even do the bare minimum: it doesn’t recognize speed limits on most highways in Finland because it gets confused by round LED signs showing the limit (these are used because it’s different in winter and summer). It’s just embarrassing. A self-driving car should understand road signs that a five-year-old has no difficulty reading.
I’m guessing it works better on some Californian roads that have been carefully hand-tuned by Tesla so they can show the Boss an illusion of progress.
Personally I’m not going to buy another Tesla after this episode. Optimism is one thing, but this level of hype is actively dangerous because it gives people the wrong idea about the capabilities of something they rely on in traffic.
Navigate on Autopilot - Useless. Only handles highways, deactivates itself on normal roads. It can theoretically handle switching from one highway to another - in practice it attempts suicide every single time. If you don't intervene it will either crash, or cause a crash behind you.
Auto Lane Change - Nope, not "Auto" at all in Europe. Got to "consent" with your indicator lights and a gentle nudge on the steering wheel. Said nudge must apply a torque between 0.44 and 0.46 newton - anything less won't register, anything more will override the autopilot and leave you in manual control. Also it won't work if there's a car less than 200mt behind you in your target lane - it's ridiculously cautious. Finally, 30% of the time, despite above conditions being met, it hesitates for 30 seconds then opts to stay in its lane with a timeout error.
Autopark - nope, not since they removed the 3 EUR worth of ultrasonic sensors.
Summon - nope, see above.
Smart Summon - nope, again, see above
If there's anything like a class action in Germany I'll gladly join.
This is really a pity because I like the car apart from this scammy aspect.
Finnish consumer ombudsman (and only the ombudsman) got the power to sue a class action suit in 2007. This power has been used exactly zero times.
That's crazy; my 2018 Skoda (a cheap car, for anyone outside Europe) manages this, including temporary changes down to 40/50/60 on the motorway.
Yeah, but you're not seen as a hip modern well-off planetary savior, if you don't buy Elon's latest hype. How's the hyperloop going?
https://jodavaho.io/posts/things-i-hate-about-my-tesla.html
New one to add: The front license plate falls off constantly. They dont require those in california, so when you buy one in states that do require it, they send you a janky plastic holder with just a bit of double sided tape that never seems to hold.
Funniest one: When you are using cruise control you cannot disable the wipers.
There is one company licensed to do front license plate stickers instead of plates though:
https://licenseplatewrap.com/
You cannot disable the automatic wipers when using cruise control. This makes sense to me: Because they use the cameras for cruise control, they need to be able to clean the cameras whenever necessary. If the weather is clear, the automatic wipers never come on unless you hit a puddle or something.
If I bought a Honda without ABS (let's pretend it was in the 90s) but paid a lot extra for a promise that they'll retrofit ABS later but never do, clearly that would be fraud.
So, this is something I never got. Like, even if you were convinced it was something which was definitely going to be delivered, on time, as promised, in a form that wouldn't cause the regulators to immediately ban it (and frankly this would be an unreasonable set of things to believe; even where the initial set of promises is reasonable, and they were not in this case, shit happens and things get delayed for reasons beyond anyone's control), why not just buy it when it became available? I don't get the impulse to pre-buy this sort of thing.
Not the OP, but the reason probably is “because it likely would be significantly more expensive at that time”.
Why there hasn't been a class action about it yet is a real mystery.
It has nothing to do with “the boss”. It’s just basic bias of where the engineers are and where testing happens.
All the stories about Twitter/X suggest that absolutely everything revolves around what the boss wants on a given day.
That’s autocratic micromanagement, and its downside is that the boss ultimately has a limited attention span and employees learn how to distract him with shiny demos that show a glimpse of the impossible thing he demanded they ship.
Is the speed limit emitted by LEDs? Why is it ever different between winter and summer? Etc.
If the sign is not white background,no LEDs, and black or red font I as a human would ignore the signage just like the car is probably trained for as that isn't reflective of North America standards.
Secondly, road regulations are not dependent on what you personally know or are used to. A driver in Finland, even if they are coming from America, has the obligation of following all Finnish road markings. And if Tesla is selling FSD in Finland, it is obvious that they have the same obligation as any other road participant.
Because road conditions are different.
We have these variable limit LED signs in the US, too. https://wjla.com/amp/news/local/virginia-electronic-speed-li...
> that isn't reflective of North America standards
But they make and sell them outside North America.
Harsh conditions + dark winter means that we have lower max limits in the winter. (i.e. 120km/h -> 100km/h, 100 -> 80)
The signs are pretty obvious to humans, though: https://moottori.fi/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/muuttuva-nope...
The speed limit signs are LEDs. In real life they are much brighter than they appear in photos ('cause LED). https://maps.app.goo.gl/29Mg7HaqFeAi2L639
>Why is it ever different between winter and summer?
Because doing 120kph on an icy road or in heavy rain is a recipe for disaster. Northern Europe isn't California. The temperature ranges from +30C to -30C during the year.
> I as a human would ignore the signage
Why?
Why should cars sold in other territories only comply with North American signage?
Really easy to read, and very visible. But yeah, the AI is not trained for it. "Dumb" cars seem to recognize them though
It’s fine if the car is trained for North American standards only. Why then is Tesla marketing and selling this feature in Europe at all? What did I get for 7,500 euros?
I’m sure they have fine print in the contract saying “we don’t guarantee this feature will ever do anything.” So I’m taking it as an expensive lesson.
Here in Oslo it's due to the local air pollution caused by winter tires. Studded tires especially but non-studded as well as they have soft rubber which sheds particulates more easily.
Due to physics, cold air can act as a lid, preventing the ground-level air from getting refreshed, causing a build-up of particulates.
Lower speed means less particulates from the asphalt and rubber.
Deleted Comment
https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/provencountermeasures/variable-s...
It doesn't matter to the discussion. For whatever reason, if that is how the local laws work, it is what it is. If a car company wants to sell a car in that market, they need to comply or get out.
[1] https://www.engineering.com/story/now-revealed-why-teslas-ha...
[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MPgbDEVYOUQ
I just don't get it. Any other little person does this and they would be big time side by investors and shareholders, and yet people want to trip all over each other talking about how awesome he is.
Reminds me of another cult of personality.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_life_of_Joseph_Smith#T...
Also that would require lending your vehicle out to random strangers all the time, so you couldn't keep anything valuable/fragile in the car and you'd need to clean it rather frequently.
Even on the face of it, it's more like owning a taxi than a car that makes you money.
This was the exact moment i woke up from musk's spell.
Why would corporation create a money printing machine and sold it for pennies out of the goodness of their hearts?
His bullshit is no longer working on me and empty claims are clear as day.
Now that he is lacking new revolutionary ideas his bullshit is harder to hide behind next great thing he is 'working' on.
Plus, he is super rich and people want to be close to big money - could lead to many benefits through networking and opportunities.
Until that happens the plates are still spinning and could go either way.
He reminds me of another self-centered, self-entitled, hypocritical lying sack of human debris.
Look, I don't have a Tesla, never owned one. I don't use Twitter. I think Musk has major flaws. There is definitely a growing trend of anti-Musk vs Musk fanboi flame wars. This thread seems to be no better.
It’s up to you as a consumer to either discredit the optimism or buy into it.
Reminds me of different cult of personality.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theranos
There is a cult mentality and the cult members are happy with what they got, even if it's not exactly as advertised however it's not just about the cult mentality but it's about the overall experience of the product.
I think if Elizabeth Holmes delivered slick blood testing machines that work no different than those on the market(large amount if blood instead of a drop), but had better workflow and user experience, Theranos could have been a success like Tesla.
She tried to imitate Steve Jobs, had she imitated Elon Musk she would have been fine. She should have had the Siemens machines modified to work with modern GUI, developed some automation for drawing large quantities of blood in a pod at the mall and integrate all that with the healthcare and keep repeating that in 2 years just a drop of blood would ne enough.
The only difference between Musk and Holmes was that Musk actually delivered something that had some redeeming properties.
You could say this about Chrome, Apple's walled garden..and a bunch of things
I wouldn't have said that Tesla just imitated existing car companies. Can you elaborate?
He also exposed twitter's political bias & collusion with US security agencies, and exposed that the company can run with 80% less staff.
The Space Shuttle from the 80s was reusable too. Falcon 9 isn't fully reusable (upper stage) and now Starship drops some new ring into the sea.
> More or less nudged all other manufacturers to producing eletric cars at minimum
Didn't he instead let them delay making electric cars by transacting with them for their ZEV credits?
I think the SpaceX stuff is still impressive, but he didn't deliver on his big statements. Dragon was supposed to land on Mars years ago for instance. The Space Shuttle wasn't economical, but Starship went back to lots of elements of its design.
> There are no fundamental challenges remaining. There are many small problems. And then there's the challenge of solving all those small problems and putting the whole system together.
That is the fundamental problem, of all AI research. How many edge cases are there, and how many does it have to handle gracefully before it’s “good enough”? I think the tail is longer than people expect, and the changes that have to be made to address it are very fundamental.
At the same time, I really want them to succeed, and I think FSD could be one of the most transformative tech advancements of the century, like the original invention of the automobile.
Especially integration complexity is todays' biggest complexity in any significantly complex product. And you can't cheat yourself around it. We managed to cheat ourselves around growing complexity in subsystems by isolating them more and more, which allowed us to tackle the complexity with more people working in parallel. But that just further increases the integration complexity, where we don't know a way to effectively scale our approaches to deal with it.
The only way we know is "cutting corners": creating a system that's just working well in 99% of cases - leave the small problems of the remaining 1% unsolved, hence there's nothing to integrate for those. Works well enough for production use in a lot of situations. Doesn't work at all when it comes to Level 5 autonomous driving. And that's what Elon either doesn't understand or actively ignores.
100% This, which should be very obvious to anyone working at a FAANG tier company.
There are no shortage of ideas, technical documents, prototypes working locally. However to get a product to production that integrates (even in a paved path) is most often the most complex task.
No sir, he’s been making fraudulent claims about present capabilities not just future: convoy tech 10 times safer than humans, NOW.
I mean alternatively you can take the Waymo approach with loads of sensors and pre mapped routes but Musk seems to be banking on almost human level AI and we aren't there yet.
To me, it indicates that they haven't solved even the easiest part: there is something in a static setting, don't crash into it, stop.
That was in 2022, so 7 years after start of development/announcement.
I don't hold by breath.
Edit: link https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=TWMSc1TkDAI
That turns out to be a harder problem than most people think, and it gets in the way of the 'driving' part. "Are we looking at some big, blank object or are we looking at the sky? It's probably the sky, so we'll just drop it from the model." Which is how Teslas drive into big trucks. :/
Hell, my vacuum stops moving when it detects it crashed into something (likely torque required to move wheels is larger than expected).
Edit: at the end of the day, it doesn't matter why it happened. The result is a crash in a super simple environment and is (to me) quite indicative to the state of things. They are supposed to come up with solutions, not excuses (also, Elon hates lidar, but that is still on Tesla).
I understand computer vision could be used as primary input, but IMO it should be mandatory to have some kind of proximity sensor as backup input.
Proximity sensor senses something, speed vector indicates collision in X seconds => stop
I know for the fact that making a flying carpet is hard. Doesn't mean you should be greatful for life to be able to pay me $1M for a non-flying flying carpet that sets itself on fire.
He’s hell bent on machine vision which can’t even identify a cyclist for fucks sake! And somehow this is legal to deploy on public roads!
Deleted Comment
I think we can be pretty sure that almost all human drivers won't make that mistake and those who do should not be driving on their own just like Teslas software.
It's using smart summon, where a person, who can see the car because it's short range, uses their phone to move the car. They can stop it using their phone at any time by removing their finger from the touchscreen, yet weirdly didn't.
It's not autopilot, and it's not FSD, and it maxes out at 6 mph.
Also they've never updated the code for it, so it's not representative of the current tech in FSD
From technical perspective, either they use same stack for environment awareness for summon and driving for shared capabilities and it failed or they do not, which is even worse. Either way, fail.
Dead Comment
However, the evidence suggests that this approach does not work for a research problem like developing self-driving cars. It seems that you can’t just yell at software engineers and make them stay awake all night until they make an AI research breakthrough. The difference with SpaceX/Tesla was that the hurdles were fundamentally manufacturing and efficiency problems (after all, we made it to the moon in 1969 - and in both cases Musk had a basically working prototype very early on), not problems of science research.
There just weren't really many other places for people who wanted to work on those cool problems to go to work. So Musk had the leverage to push them really hard.
But software? Not so much! Programmers can work pretty much anywhere. Even for a cool project like driverless cars there's quite a lot of companies trying to do it. And how many of the driverless car programmers specifically want to work on driverless cars? They'd probably be cool with other AI projects, of which there are a gazillion.
NASA, Boeing (or any defense contractor, really), Planet for satellite engineering, Google/Waymo was doing self-driving around that time. I contracted for some random small self-driving startup around 2010.
Personally my cynical perspective is I work with people that it could viably replace now and that's sad, not because it's good tech but the people are so fucking awful.
Some developers are complaining that we will be replaced, that somehow GPT4 can write good code. Similar artists, writers etc complain they will be replaced.
I can't see an AI in the next 20 years that you ask it "Build me GTA6" and it will create it for you, code, art, text, voices.
From my experience GPT is good for exploring, asking questions and getting sometimes inspiration from the answers, if the code you asked for what writen already by others and was trained on it then it will aproximate a good solution but it still does mistakes.
Current AI it is just interpollating some response based on what he saw in training, if the real answer is not close enough to points in training then you get garbage. Add on top bad training data and it generates most of the time sub optimal code. For example it always generates JavaScript code using old syntax and using old DOM APIs.
There is no logic with them, I asked an AI "is X legal in Javascript" and it answered No, it created an it created an answer that shows that was legal and working and rambled about why is not a good idea to use that. And I have many examples where the fcking long answers they give contradict themselves.
Sorry for the long comment, I daily see this devs complaining about this, earlier I read comments where some web devs were sure in three years they will have no job.
Dead Comment
The phantom braking is the biggest deal: The car slams on the brakes in the middle of major highways in good weather just because it's a hot day and the camera saw a mirage and the car thinks it's about to drive off a cliff. This means the cruise control ("autopilot") on the car isn't even as reliable as "dumb" cruise control on a 20-year-old car, so I rarely use it.
https://www.businessinsider.com/tesla-takes-direct-aim-uber-...