For example, Tesla FSD seems like a pretty good highway cruise control, but it can be dangerously deployed in city driving too. Of course this is a little difficult to argue about since AFAIK Tesla has never defined its ODD and IIRC their lead autopilot software guy said in his deposition that he didn’t even know what an ODD was?
I suppose one man’s “marketing win” to “claim” L3 is another man’s “actually deploying L3.”
An autonomous system which cannot even change lanes should not - in my opinion - be classified as L3 Autonomy. Not only is it a gimmick, it’s basically a loophole in the spec.
As an aside, since you mentioned it, I think that describing FSD as “pretty good highway cruise control” is gaslighting.
Describing FSD as dangerously deployed in city driving is merely misinformed. In fact FSD (including the human driver and FSD’s comprehensive attention tracking and alerting) is safer than the average driver in city driving.
Anyway I’m sure Tesla will say it’s Level 3 whenever it’s Level 3. Would’ve thought that was a while back when they marketed, sold, and rolled out “Full Self Driving” on public roads.
It’s not like it’s this massively sophisticated system for FSD with most of the code commented out.
These are purpose-built and heavily tested to a specification - that’s how engineering works. The Mercedes system specification is extremely limited in practice, but gives them the marketing win of being able to claim they do L3.