Re:California’s AV testing rules apply to Tesla’s “FSD”
by zozbot234 on Friday December 17, 2021 @06:01PM
(#29599395)
Last I checked, Tesla "FSD" was still a plain old SAE Level 2 system. It needs close monitoring and physical control by a human operator at all times, no exceptions, no ifs or buts. They're slowly inching towards adding SAE Level 3 in uninteresting, passively safe situations (like enabling the car to roll forward in a traffic jam). We're nowhere near a system that can actively "drive itself" in any real sense. The attempts we've seen (by Tesla and others) have been ludicrously ineffective and unsafe.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:California’s AV testing rules apply to Tesla’s “FSD”
by ajross on Friday December 17, 2021 @06:55PM
(#29599798)
> [FSD beta] needs close monitoring and physical control by a human operator at all times, no exceptions, no ifs or buts.
It requires it, for sure, because there are still bugs and edges. It really doesn't "need" it, not for routine driving. My car drives me around now. Zero-disengagement drives are the rule now, not the exception. And where I do take control it's never really been a "safety" situation in the sense of an impending collision. It's because the car is being a jerk and not letting someone merge, or making a poor lane change, or trying to "go around" cars stopped at a light, etc...
Really, it's pretty amazing. No, it's not done. But the kind of hyperbole you're deploying there just isn't correct anymore.
Have you not had a ride yet? Seriously, call a friend and get a ride.
Re:California’s AV testing rules apply to Tesla’s “FSD”
by nradov on Friday December 17, 2021 @06:38PM
(#29599661)
GM has promised an SAE Level 3 system in 2023 but so far it's still vaporware.
https://www.gmfinancial.com/en-us/financial-resources/articl...