News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:San Francisco raises Tesla 'self-driving' safety concerns... by sidibe on Sunday September 26, 2021 @11:25AM (#28661585)
> It does what it says.

> Full self driving drives the car on its own. It still monitors driver awareness. But the car does most of the driving.

Full directly contradicts most

Re:San Francisco raises Tesla 'self-driving' safety concerns... by onethought on Monday September 27, 2021 @02:23AM (#28667647)
Again, it’s closer to what it does than Blue Motion. Or Toyotas latest “Safety Sense” (even though it sense hazards aka forward collision detection…)

I can reel out examples all day, that no one bats an eye at. But Tesla so something… it’s a whole different ball game.

Re:San Francisco raises Tesla 'self-driving' safety concerns... by sidibe on Monday September 27, 2021 @08:46AM (#28669997)
Uh neither of those even suggest what it does while Tesla's says it does something it doesn't do
Re:San Francisco raises Tesla 'self-driving' safety concerns... by onethought on Tuesday September 28, 2021 @06:04AM (#28681018)
So esoteric meaningless names are good.

Descriptive names are bad, because: I don’t think full self driving is full if there are any interventions.

(Despite there being a sliding scale of autonomous driving from levels 1 to 5 with FSD easily falling into 3 if not 4).

Teslas official literature classes it at level 2. But yep, super misleading compared to “Safe Sense” (aka forward hazard detection). Do you know what Tesla call that feature: “forward hazard detection” those bastards with their descriptive names!