It also doesn't mean it doesn't have the technical capability to drive through the streets of LA for 60 minutes.
https://www.thatcham.org/mercedes-to-accept-liability-for-ac...
Mercedes has soundly beaten the last decade of Tesla efforts by reaching L3.
I've personally watched FSD go off the rails and into a crash situation within 60 seconds of being turned on three times this month (I have a friend who loves to try it in San Francisco)
Had it crashed it'd be on my friend, not Tesla. The fact Mercedes is taking responsibility puts it in an entirely different level of effectiveness.
-
People also don't seem to understand Mercedes has a separate L2 system that works above 45 mph that already scores better than AP by consumer reports
Isn't Mercedes' L2 system non-upgradable, though? i.e. people with Merc's L2 system today won't be able to upgrade to L3+ later on, they'll need to buy a whole new car - right?
I bring this up only because I bought my X in 2018 with FSD prepaid - it's 5 years old now, and thanks to the gratis retrofitted computer upgrades it has the same level of FSD functionality as a factory-new Model Y purchased today - and I value that level of commitment to their carbuyers - whereas all the other carmakers I've ever dealt-with are the type that gladly charg $lots just for annual updates to the navigation maps SD card.
(I don't want to be seen defending Tesla, let alone Elon Musk here, but Tesla has avoided plenty of the worst practices of traditional automakers (okayokay, excepting the heated-seats thing).
Unless you have some source that suggests otherwise.
And it uses LiDAR which in my opinion is mandatory for FSD.
The fact that you're going to claim that Tesla, the company that famously discounts vehicles wholesale before unannounced upgrades, silently downgraded their CPO program to a used car program, removed ultrasonic sensors and didn't tell buyers if they'd be missing basic features like Summon temporarily (read: 4+ months) until their vehicles were delivered... is showing a commitment to their car buyers... really says something.
Elon makes a lot of “promises”, you’re right in that. Although, he really doesn’t. He makes educated guesses that you take for promises. Once Tesla’s own website and news outlets deliver those “promises”, should you start taking them for actual ones.
It's not like a basic Corolla has had features like drowsiness detection for close to a decade.
And you seem to have forgotten that in 2016 Elon claimed _all_ Teslas had FSD capable hardware, never contingent on if you had paid for FSD. That means the upgrades to 3 and 4 were paid upgrades for people who thought they were paying for a car that could already do FSD.
Overall you're upset and barking up the wrong tree (hardly even in the right forest)
Mine came as standard equipment.
i.e. neither your 2018 model X nor a factory Model Y is anywhere close to "Full Self Driving". Remember what Musk promised in 2017: "In November or December of this year, we should be able to go all the way from a parking lot in California to a parking lot in New York with no controls touched in the entire journey."
We're in 2023. You got scammed, and you're still defending the scammer.
You make it sounds like Tesla's with FSD on are crashing all the time. This makes no sense at all, because... they aren't?
17 fatalities, 736 crashes.
Based on what? ACC/LKAS has been a feature since before Tesla even existed as a corporation. You might be confusing their claims about FSD with AP (which they very much would like you to)
Similarly, they love for people to compare AP to all driver crashes and fatalities when AP only works in the situations that are otherwise least dangerous to drivers, in cars that are newer than the average car, driven by a demographic with higher than average safety records, etc... which means AP would need to kill a lot of people to not have better numbers than average
Without knowing the usual amount of no fault crashes given the number of driving miles the number is meaningless
And even if I did, my motivation for speaking up does not affect the fact that a crash happening does not mean autopilot was at fault.
[1] PDF https://static.nhtsa.gov/odi/inv/2022/INOA-EA22002-3184.PDF
Getting to a point where Mercedes can guarantee their system will correctly initiate disengagements and do so with a 10 seconds of response time while putting the liability on themselves is a massive leap of anything Tesla has ever put out.
Again, this is what happens when you have literally no clue how the space works (and then turn around and accuse people of FUD.)
Tells me what I want to know about which system is safer.
Yet, according to you that is somehow a bad thing (dangerous?) or worse han some other brand. Which again, is factually untrue afaik.
This reasoning still makes no sense at all.
For point of comparison, the entire rest of the auto industry, worldwide has fewer advanced driver deaths than Tesla, despite millions more cars on the road with advanced driving functionality.
On an absolute, and relative, basis Tesla advanced driving is the most dangerous advanced driving system in the world.
Where in the first few paragraphs it gives the impression Tesla has 5:1 deaths, but later you learn that they are including simple lane keeping and cruise control in the comparison, and
> None of the cars using the automated systems were involved in fatal accidents
If you mean Tesla, that is definitely false. Mostly famously, the Bay Area crash where autopilot was conveniently disabled seconds before the car crashed into a barrier, killing the driver. In the aftermath, the driver's family, and other Tesla drivers noted that a recent update to FSD had caused a regression, whereby Teslas would swerve toward the divider instead of away from it.
simple lane keeping and cruise control in the comparison
Some of Tesla AP's worst fatalities are instances where the car was just replicating simple lane keeping functionality and yet the car still crashed into a big rig or emergency vehicle the Tesla didn't see but which any other carmaker's system would have seen.
Notably, in instances where the Tesla was at fault Musk refuses to discuss the accident, even though he otherwise has no issues releasing information about the driver when the driver is at fault. It's telling that Musk rarely (but still) does this, which means that every time he doesn't it's very strong circumstantial evidence that the car was at fault.
At some point you need to stop making excuses for Tesla's atrocious safety practices and abysmal safety record and just except that they're fundamentally dangerous cars.
You said that "the entire rest of the auto industry, worldwide has fewer advanced driver deaths than Tesla, despite millions more cars on the road", what are your sources for that? Do you have numbers on non-Tesla L2 cars on the road to compare?
What are you talking about? The real FUD is Tesla not taking responsibility when "Autopilot" crashes into something.
People don't go off on Tesla because of its lack of technical prowess. People go off on Tesla because their marketing department is a bunch of pathological liars.
Your comment has complaints about an academic engineering definition/legal standard that, realistically, is probably going to be paid for in lives by delaying the roll-out and development of self driving vehicles. We know from the march of AI in other fields that the potential for cars to drive to superhuman safety standards is just on the cusp of technologically achievable and will likely be achieved with some sort of evolutionary approach of trying a bunch of things and seeing what works.
This is exactly the wrong time to be making automakers liable for experimenting. If anything, we should be lowering the standards automakers are held to to push through the last technical barriers and break into the oasis where less people kill themselves on the road. I've already lost too many tired friends to car accidents; we should be sparing no effort to get humans away from the driver's wheel. In a fair world, people advocating raising standards should be held liable for the lives they are throwing away on net.
Nobody is being forced to drive a car with autopilot if they aren't comfortable. The risks are obvious and understood. Personal liability is fine.
What about all the others participants on the road? Should pedestrian and cyclist also take personal responsibility for getting hit by a self driving car?
No. Personal liability is fine.
The situation would be very similar to how it is now, except a lot less people would be dying in car accidents.