Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

All Tesla Vehicles Being Produced Now Have Full Self-Driving Hardware (jalopnik.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the self-edited dept.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Jalopnik: All current Tesla models that will be produced in its Fremont, California factory will come with self-driving hardware built-in capable of Level 5 autonomy, including the upcoming Tesla Model 3, the company announced tonight. According to the announcement, Tesla will manufacture all of its cars with the hardware necessary for Level 5 self-driving systems going forward, including the Model S, Model X and new Model 3. At the introduction of the Model 3, it wasn't clear whether or not every Model 3 package would come standard with the hardware and software to handle Autopilot and any other self-driving features. That's been cleared up now, but there's a kicker. Just like on current Model S and Model X models, you can purchase the cars with the self-driving hardware included. But, in order to activate the software and actually use the Autopilot or upcoming advanced self-driving safety features, you will have to option it when you order the car, or pay more for it later. Elon Musk stated that the new hardware in all of Tesla's cars going forward are Tesla's own vision software, with a Tesla-developed neural net. The new hardware and software capabilities still need to undergo all of the testing required by Tesla's own standards, as well as government approval before unleashing Level 5 autonomous cars onto the streets.

186 comments

  1. This got posted quickly!! by haruchai · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Been a long time since I've seen a story get onto Slashdot this quickly

    --
    Pain is merely failure leaving the body
  2. self-driving or assisted driving ? by sittingnut · · Score: -1, Troll

    "self driving" should not require a human at wheel. tesla requires one.
    and as for "safety features" and tesla's "own standards", how about an alarm to warn driver that he has been away from wheel after a few seconds.

    musk and tesla better learn that false advertising will get them in trouble as crashes pile up.

    1. Re:self-driving or assisted driving ? by beelsebob · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The claim in the press release is "full class 5 driving", which means fully autonomous. I'll believe it when I see it. It seems like a strong claim to make that "we don't know how to do full class 5 driving yet, but we know this hardware is enough to meet the requirements of the thing we don't know".

    2. Re:self-driving or assisted driving ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Comes with the hardware built in" doesn't mean its doing it right now

      but its understandable there were no pictures in the summary to keep hold your attention

    3. Re:self-driving or assisted driving ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, the law requires a human at the wheel.

    4. Re:self-driving or assisted driving ? by Robotbeat · · Score: 1

      The new hardware is for eventual full self-driving. Not autopilot. (Autopilot in airplanes is "assisted driving," too, but is still called autopilot... That's why Tesla chose "autopilot" instead of "self-driving" as the label for their first-generation capability.)

      And yeah, there is a warning that goes off if the driver takes their hands of the wheel.

      Posters better learn to actually do research before posting. Oh wait, this is the Internet, that'll never happen. :P

    5. Re:self-driving or assisted driving ? by haruchai · · Score: 1

      "self driving" should not require a human at wheel. tesla requires one"

      This announcement is about the hardware necessary for autonomous driving but there's a huge amount of testing & programming to get the software up to that level. And I'm reasonably certain legislators or insurers will still insist on a human behind the wheel for years after the cars are good enough.

      "how about an alarm to warn driver that he has been away from wheel after a few seconds"
      I believe that was implemented in a recent update & Autopilot will be disabled if the driver ignores too many warnings

      "musk and tesla better learn that false advertising will get them in trouble as crashes pile up"
      I think they are learning that lesson but should have been more cautious from the very beginning

      --
      Pain is merely failure leaving the body
    6. Re:self-driving or assisted driving ? by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 2

      I'll believe it when I see it. It seems like a strong claim to make that "we don't know how to do full class 5 driving yet, but we know this hardware is enough to meet the requirements of the thing we don't know".

      Just because something isn't done yet doesn't mean they don't know how to do it. Tesla has self-driving software under test, that mostly works with their current cars. It is not yet ready for the public, but that isn't because of any deficiencies in the sensors.

    7. Re:self-driving or assisted driving ? by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 2

      And yeah, there is a warning that goes off if the driver takes their hands of the wheel.

      There is now. But originally, there was no warning. Tesla added the warning via a software update, because too many drivers were taking naps or watching movies.

    8. Re:self-driving or assisted driving ? by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      They have a warning that triggers when the driver takes their hands off the wheel. Repeated ignored warnings disengage the auto-pilot system. It will then lock out the feature until you stop the car.

    9. Re:self-driving or assisted driving ? by fluffernutter · · Score: 0

      Maybe you can explain how these work in snow when they still need to see clear lane markings.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    10. Re:self-driving or assisted driving ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No it doesn't.

      Find me a state that actually requires a human at the wheel. The law places conditions on a human who is at the wheel, but doesn't require one to be there.

    11. Re:self-driving or assisted driving ? by beelsebob · · Score: 1

      i mean, with 18 cameras, the car has more sensors than a human, so I don't see really a specific issue. Sure, for a human, snow driving is really hard. For our computers, currently, probably even harder. But that's not the same as "you'll never be able to drive in snow with 18 cameras and 12 ultrasound sensors".

    12. Re:self-driving or assisted driving ? by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      So I don't get what the point of it is then. From hearing people around who have used it, Autopilot disengages very easily and they are scared by it.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    13. Re:self-driving or assisted driving ? by fluffernutter · · Score: 2

      I don't give a damn how many cameras it has. I could drive with six people in my car, but twelve eyes doesn't make the drive safer than two. This is all about whether those 18 cameras and 12 ultrasound sensors can keep a car in a lane that has six inches of snow covering it.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    14. Re:self-driving or assisted driving ? by DarkVader · · Score: 1

      There are a lot of people on Slashdot who don't believe L5 self-driving is possible, or that it's decades away.

      I've been saying "within 5 years" for a while now, looks like not only were they wrong, I was too - it's coming sooner than that.

    15. Re:self-driving or assisted driving ? by beelsebob · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The point I was making, that if a human can interpret the visual information it's given, then a car with a bigger sensor set can in theory do it too. It's all about software at that point, but there's no limitation on hardware here that a human doesn't have.

    16. Re:self-driving or assisted driving ? by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      What about this article makes you think that?

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    17. Re:self-driving or assisted driving ? by Miamicanes · · Score: 1

      Just because they ship with the HARDWARE they'd need for "full class 5 driving" doesn't mean they'll ever get the SOFTWARE needed to actually DO it.

    18. Re:self-driving or assisted driving ? by Chuq · · Score: 1

      I think you're mixing up Autopilot, which Tesla vehicles have been using for a couple of years, and today's announcement. Today's reveal is about 100% autonomous self driving cars.

      Tesla won't require a human at the wheel for this. Local laws might, but I think for quite some time people will be just sitting in the driver seat doing absolutely nothing while they wait for the laws to catch up.

      Worth noting that Autopilot was never advertised as 100% autonomous - this new system will be.

      --
      - Chuq
    19. Re:self-driving or assisted driving ? by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      It's going to need a heat sensor if its going to differentiate between an animal crossing the road and a bag blowing across the road, unless they are really confident they can educate the car on tracking the motion of each and determining what it is as the car approaches.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    20. Re:self-driving or assisted driving ? by Chuq · · Score: 2

      The same as a human? They use visual cues such as other vehicles? Or perhaps they use Tesla's fleet learning experience to see where other vehicles have travelled in the area previously?

      --
      - Chuq
    21. Re:self-driving or assisted driving ? by Chuq · · Score: 1

      I'm sure most require a person to be at the wheel. But when traffic laws was first written, maybe some didn't consider it necessary to specify that a person be controlling the car, as it was assumed. Perhaps in all the different jurisdictions around the world, there is one where the wording of the law accidentally permits a self driving car to legally operate.

      --
      - Chuq
    22. Re:self-driving or assisted driving ? by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      I don't know if Tesla cars can understand the same visual cues as a human, that's why I'm asking. Using fleet learning would be very risky in the winter unless you teach it how to drive around stuck cars, snowbanks, snow clearing equipment, etc, real well.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    23. Re: self-driving or assisted driving ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

      "Maybe you can explain how these work in snow when they still need to see clear lane markings"

      If the vehicle is parked and just started, detecting such conditions would result in autopilot disengaging and refusing to pilot the vehicle.
      Hopefully along with a message informing the potentially stupid human behind the wheel that they should do the same, ie not drive in conditions impossible for them to see the road in.

      If the vehicle is already on its journey and then the impassable conditions begin, before reaching the threshold of impossible to see, it can pull over to the side of the road and disengage.

      Again, ideally informing the driver not to attempt to drive blind as well.

      Of course if the human chooses to break the law and drive in those conditions anyway, although I personally wouldn't mind the vehicle preventing them, it can at the very least warn the driver of the moving violation they are about to commit and the possibility it is a criminal action.

      The less humans driving blindly into the middle of frozen lakes and other peoples lawns, the better.

    24. Re:self-driving or assisted driving ? by Golden_Rider · · Score: 1

      It will still be years before any driverless car (note that lvl 5 autonomous driving means "no driver needed", i.e. stuff like "summoning your empty car to wherever you are right now") can handle a situation like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?... - this is not just about detecting lanes and checking GPS data, the car would need to actually detect that there is a traffic cop actively regulating the traffic and then understand hand signs. Since it would be a bit silly to expect the car to be able to do that, we would need a completely new traffic control infrastructure (i.e. transmitters everywhere - and I mean everywhere, even non main roads) to send information to and from autonomous cars. Or what if this happens and the map data has not been updated yet, will all autonomous cars then drive right into whatever danger lies ahead? http://i.istockimg.com/file_th...

    25. Re:self-driving or assisted driving ? by haruchai · · Score: 1

      5 yrs seems too soon; my guess is more than 10. Cars will probably have fair-weather driving nailed within 5-10 yrs but the Northern Hemisphere gets all kinds of crazy weather and L5 cars will have to be able to cope reliably. Nine times out of 10 won't be good enough, it'll have to be more like 995 times out of 1000.

      --
      Pain is merely failure leaving the body
    26. Re:self-driving or assisted driving ? by haruchai · · Score: 1

      "Worth noting that Autopilot was never advertised as 100% autonomous - this new system will be"

      In time, not today, not this year and not next year. But this & future generations of the hardware will be capable, just awaiting the software to catch up, which will take time. Another question is just how good the earlier & existing Autopilot cars can be since they simply don't have the hardware for L5 which Elon confirmed 2 years ago.

      --
      Pain is merely failure leaving the body
    27. Re: self-driving or assisted driving ? by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      Why are you talking about breaking the law? Where I come from, they don't tell you not to come into work just because there is a snow storm. People MUST drive in these conditions.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    28. Re:self-driving or assisted driving ? by sporkula · · Score: 1

      995 times out of 1000 won't be good enough. It will have to be an average of better than 99,970,000 out of 100,000,000 annually.

    29. Re:self-driving or assisted driving ? by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 3, Informative

      Maybe you can explain how these work in snow when they still need to see clear lane markings.

      I have a Tesla. They work fine in the snow. In fact, Tesla specifically recommends engaging Autopilot on snowy roads because that is safer than driving yourself. Tesla Autopilot has driven several million miles on snowy and icy roads.

      It is funny how people trying to point out weaknesses of SDCs, often focus on areas there they are particularly strong. On snowy roads, a human has only their eyes, so if they cannot see the lane markings, they have difficulty navigating. Tesla has cameras for vision, but also has GPS and radar, and can access a database of "landmarks" such as mileage markers, traffic signs, etc. that they can use as waypoints.

    30. Re:self-driving or assisted driving ? by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      Ok well I recently saw a comment indicating that Autopilot would turn off if the lane markers were covered, so I found that confusing.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    31. Re:self-driving or assisted driving ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They might need a neuromorphic processor in the future to satisfy some requirements. Unless they have done a formal proof of the necessary hardware requirements, I somehow too suspect the claim is little bit too strong. They should just ship every Tesla with the hardware in a test mode and compare the evaluated decisions with the decisions made by the human driver.

    32. Re:self-driving or assisted driving ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Humans don't require that. In theory the only sensors a self driving car needs is two cameras at driver head height in the diver seat with the ability to swivel around. Everything else is 'just software'.

      Even if you had a heat sensor you'd still have to educate the car. It could be a hot bag or cold animal. Sensors aren't the issue, you need EXCELLENT software.

    33. Re:self-driving or assisted driving ? by gl4ss · · Score: 0

      Just because something isn't done yet doesn't mean they don't know how to do it. Tesla has self-driving software under test, that mostly works with their current cars. It is not yet ready for the public, but that isn't because of any deficiencies in the sensors.

      They don't know that! thats why it's a joke to call them level 5 capable! A TOTAL FRAUD by your pal Musk. ..and really, didn't you learn anything from last 6 months? Teslas self driving autopilot they have released so far is basically just this: take lane assist and remove safeties and boom you have a lane follow "autopilot".

      they don't know if they are level 5 capable sensors, because they have not made them capable of that. they don't know if they are good enough to spot pedestrians(probably know that they are not!!!!!!).

      remember level 5 would mean that you could just leave it to drive alone by itself at night from vegas to downtown los angeles. they are just saying that in theory it's level 5 capable if someone figures out all the rest.. but in reality, they cannot really say if the sensors are good enough or not because they can only say that after they test their working level 5 implementation that doesn't kill people.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    34. Re: self-driving or assisted driving ? by backslashdot · · Score: 1

      It doesn't need lane markings if it can has a good 3D representation of what's around it. If a human can do it, a car can do it better because it will have far more deep imaging, radars, GPS based spatial awareness, cameras etc to lean on. If the conditions are dangerous for a human. A human shouldn't be driving in it either.

    35. Re: self-driving or assisted driving ? by backslashdot · · Score: 1

      Because now it's a matter of refining the software. Anyway, if it turns out they need a fancier radar or something I am sure they can swap one in. It's mostly well known what hardware and computing power is needed for self driving. We know how much CPU power is needed to render the 3D graphics of Avatar 2 but that doesn't mean the movie is completed. And like I said if someone invents a way to make it better then let the next generation cars have it.

    36. Re: self-driving or assisted driving ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because you have a heat sensor, dipshit?

    37. Re: self-driving or assisted driving ? by Pentium100 · · Score: 1

      Why being unable to see the lane markings is considered "driving blind"?

      Some streets in my city are not marked at all, some have double markings (the street was widened, new markings were put in place, but the old ones are still visible) or the markings may just be under a layer of snow, but I can perfectly see other cars and the sidewalk.

      I do not think that my boss would let me work from home or take the day off just because there was 1cm layer of snow on the street.

    38. Re: self-driving or assisted driving ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Humans drive in difficult conditions all the time. Accidents do happen but life goes on. When these selfdriving cars have accidents because of not having been made good enough for some driving condition, or just because glitch, who's responsible?

    39. Re:self-driving or assisted driving ? by AaronW · · Score: 1

      Radar should easily be able to tell the difference between the two.

      --
      This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal.
    40. Re:self-driving or assisted driving ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Tesla Autopilot has driven several million miles on snowy and icy roads.

      Has this data ever been audited by anyone outside of Tesla?

      The automotive industry is not exactly known to be completely honest about the safety of its products. Given that this company is run by an egomaniac, I think they should be held to even higher standards.

    41. Re:self-driving or assisted driving ? by goose-incarnated · · Score: 1

      Tesla has self-driving software under test, that mostly works with their current cars.

      We've had software that mostly work since the nineties. It's still at the "mostly works, in perfect conditions" stage that it's been in for almost two decades.

      It is not yet ready for the public, but that isn't because of any deficiencies in the sensors.

      We've had adequate sensors for far longer than we've had software that mostly works.

      Hardware isn't the problem. Software is the problem, a problem that hasn't been solved since the nineties despite the huge amounts of money thrown at it.

      --
      I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
    42. Re:self-driving or assisted driving ? by goose-incarnated · · Score: 1

      The same as a human? They use visual cues such as other vehicles?

      Get ready to receive your Nobel Prize, Turing Award and Fields Medal... you've managed to create AI.

      --
      I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
    43. Re: self-driving or assisted driving ? by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      you're forgetting one thing - they don't have the AI to do it. they may never have. the cars electronics might never be able to. a human that was watching all that sensor information might be able to drive with just them.

      why Tesla would be so stupid to make this press release right now is seriously puzzling. why they would be so stupid as to sell a vaporware pre-order prodcut they probably cannot deliver is equally puzzling and stupid.

      they don't know the requirements so how they can know they can deliver? and now they are further implying that autopilot is a term for a self driving! making their case of "it doesn't mean self driving" be even in worse place.

      and please no comments that Musk knows what he is doing when the only thing he knew how to provably be involved in profitably was a bank that was not a bank.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    44. Re:self-driving or assisted driving ? by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      And yeah, there is a warning that goes off if the driver takes their hands of the wheel.

      that was a retrofit. and now they are saying that the HARDWARE is capable of autonomous driving. .. of course it's not, not in the sense any consumer thinks of it.

      I'm seriously skeptical because the autopilot they have shipped is just the same as other manufacturers have shipped and indeed was based on off the shelf hw/sw solution ONLY WITH THE FUCKING SAFETIES DISABLED!!!!. that's not engineering - that's marketing and irresponsible product design.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    45. Re: self-driving or assisted driving ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When these selfdriving cars have accidents because of not having been made good enough for some driving condition, or just because glitch, who's responsible?

      That has already been answered presented on every major news page, including Slashdot.
      Spam, spam, spam and more spam.

    46. Re:self-driving or assisted driving ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Volvo is going to test 100 autonomous vehicles in Gothenburg next year.
      Does that satisfy your crazy weather conditions?

    47. Re:self-driving or assisted driving ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is no formal proof that your brakes won't evaporate the next time you use them or that the steering wheel will just randomly disattach.
      Formal proof is something that seldom leaves academia.

    48. Re:self-driving or assisted driving ? by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      where they recommend that? a link would be appreciated.

      also, I find that strange, since snow conditions and friction changes on winter roads rather abruptly in a fashion that would be pretty damn hard for a computer vision/radar system to know. like having ice in a tight turn. ..or have you just been reading musks tweets rather than what he thinks as marketing?

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    49. Re: self-driving or assisted driving ? by Ed_1024 · · Score: 1

      I think you are right. I admire Tesla for their can do attitude and having driven their products, I came away seriously impressed. I think they have jumped the shark on this one, though - it is not so much trying to run before you can walk, it is trying to run before you have evolved legs!

      You could say that any car has the hardware necessary for autonomous motoring: they just need an intelligent robot to sit at the controls and drive you around...

      As the saying goes, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence and at the moment, we seem to be hearing more about what their cars *cant* do than what they can...

    50. Re:self-driving or assisted driving ? by Kjella · · Score: 2

      The point I was making, that if a human can interpret the visual information it's given, then a car with a bigger sensor set can in theory do it too. It's all about software at that point, but there's no limitation on hardware here that a human doesn't have.

      Yeah but... Tesla's claim is like saying the brain consumes about 20W, the car can deliver 20W so it's "ready to support an artifical brain". While that might be technically correct it is also grossly misleading, in that we don't have and don't really expect to have an AI working at all or so well and certainly not within the constraints of a human body in the foreseeable future. Same thing with cameras, I expect the first real SDCs to use optical and radar and lidar and every other trick in the book to overcome the shortcomings of the brain behind it. Same way some talk of trying to simulate the brain with >10 megawatt computers.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    51. Re:self-driving or assisted driving ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you did watch the video in the announcement where they had a tesla self-driving in city traffic right?

      that very much looked like 'selfdriving in the sense any consumer thinks of it' to me

    52. Re:self-driving or assisted driving ? by michelcolman · · Score: 1

      That's exactly what they are doing. They call it "Fleet Learning". Even when driving manually, the system is constantly monitoring and learning from the experience. All this data is transmitted to Tesla and incorporated into future software updates.

      I don't know how this learning process works technically, but with the old sensor package lots of Tesla drivers have confirmed that they have seen the system get better and better over time.

      The new sensor package will initially lack a lot of features (even some features that were already working with the old sensors, like automatic braking). Those will already be working in test mode in the background just like you described, and be activated some time around the end of the year after gaining enough data to validate them. Full automomy would come around 2017, which is Tesla-speak for 2020.

      The processor may not be exactly "neuromorphic" but it's certainly running a neural net using a massively parallel NVIDIA processor.

    53. Re:self-driving or assisted driving ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about this TED talk from over a year ago? https://youtu.be/tiwVMrTLUWg (15 minutes video)

      Note that the "silly [thing] to expect a car to be able to do" is demonstrated at the 10th minute mark.

    54. Re:self-driving or assisted driving ? by dixonpete · · Score: 1

      Heck I have a problem doing that..

    55. Re:self-driving or assisted driving ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Correct me if I'm wrong, but AFAIK, the Tesla car requires another vehicle in front of it or lane markers, preferably both to drive itself, doesn't it?

      Considering the majority of roads in my country are not paved (Cite: http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/16-002-x/2009001/tbl/transpo/tbl001-eng.htm ) how am I going to get my Tesla to drive me anywhere if those same roads are, as usual, empty of traffic? I'm not even going to get into what happens when the roads are snowy because a dirt road is good enough due to the complete lack of road markers.

      L5 driving needs to handle something as simple as driving straight without stops on MOST roads pretty well, IMHO.

    56. Re:self-driving or assisted driving ? by DirkDaring · · Score: 2

      I'd like to see the Tesla pull over if a police officer waves it over from the side of the road. L5 requires that.
      I want to see the Tesla navigate construction cones when lanes are shut down. L5 requires that too.
      I want to see the Tesla go through a red light when an Ambulance comes up behind it and there is no other way to get out of the way. L5 requires that too.

      And there is probably hundreds of items like that L5 requires. So remains to be seen if they are really L5.

    57. Re:self-driving or assisted driving ? by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      You have the ability to do "full class 5 driving." We're pretty familiar withe sensors included in homo sapiens sapiens, particularly those are are used while driving.

    58. Re: self-driving or assisted driving ? by Pascoea · · Score: 1

      Apparently you haven't been to ND. They literally close the interstates down during severe weather, and it's a significant penalty to drive on them when closed.

    59. Re:self-driving or assisted driving ? by jbengt · · Score: 1

      Sensors aren't the issue, you need EXCELLENT software.

      Unfortunately, they are planning on using neural net software, which, while it may be Excellent at being a neural net, cannot be proven to be fool-proofed, as they relies on training in such a way that the actual calculations are not determined ahead of time.

    60. Re:self-driving or assisted driving ? by green1 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The manual for the Model S and Model X both disagree with you. They explicitly state not to use autopilot in slippery conditions. Just like every other cruise control system on the market.

      That said, we also know that this new hardware is NOT enough for full AP in inclement weather, or even a light drizzle of rain, because none of the rear cameras have wipers on them, and if you've ever tried to use the backup camera in the rain you'll see the problem.

      Cameras are essential for forward vision to deal with lane markings and signage, however to see cars coming behind you, you need radar, and they still haven't included rear radar.

      "Level 5 autonomy" in a car that can't drive in the rain is ridiculous.

    61. Re:self-driving or assisted driving ? by green1 · · Score: 1

      L5 also requires driving in the rain. They added rear cameras, but no rear radar, and no way to clear those rear cameras off, as anyone who's ever tried using a backup camera in the rain or snow knows, after driving for a few minutes you can't see a thing through them.

    62. Re: self-driving or assisted driving ? by Enigma2175 · · Score: 1

      Accidents do happen but life goes on.

      Not for everyone, sometimes life doesn't go on following a collision. Which is why we need self-driving cars, to avoid deadly auto accidents.

      --

      Enigma

    63. Re: self-driving or assisted driving ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      GPS.

    64. Re: self-driving or assisted driving ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is EXACTLY what they are doing. This will be there proof of working to various regulatory groups.

    65. Re: self-driving or assisted driving ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nope. It actually did give a warning before. But drivers would simply grab the wheel , trigger it off, and wait 5 minutes for the next warning.
      Now, it constantly monitors, but it still had a warning from the git-go.

    66. Re:self-driving or assisted driving ? by Immerman · · Score: 1

      Could be easy enough: it stops.

      A car that can reliably drive itself safely under 80% of road conditions, and can safely pull over the rest of the time and require a human to take over would be a wonderful advance. Especially for something like road-obscuring snow, which is something that only a small portion of the US population has to deal with more than a few handfuls of days out of the year.

      Reliable, market-worthy fully autonomous self driving doesn't necessarily have to be able to drive through *everything* it might encounter, there's no shame in having it bail and say "I can't handle this", assuming it bails gracefully and safely. Plenty of humans refuse to drive in road-obscuring snow, or at night, or in fog, or, or, or, because they feel they're not capable of doing so safely. A virtual chauffer that does the same would still give you back hundreds of hours per year lost to commute time.

      What's pointless is a "semi-autonomous" self driving car that demands you remain at attention and ready to take over at a moment's notice - you're time and attention must still remain dedicated to driving, all you're saving is the effort of actually steering, and with it the feedback loop that helps you actually keep your attention on the road. Not much of a benefit.

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    67. Re:self-driving or assisted driving ? by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately, they are planning on using neural net software

      The NNs are for object recognition, like the proverbial "rock vs plastic bag". They aren't using NNs to control the brakes and steering.

      a neural net, cannot be proven to be fool-proofed

      There are NO systems that are "fool proof" at object recognition, including human brains.

    68. Re: self-driving or assisted driving ? by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      So basically

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    69. Re: self-driving or assisted driving ? by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      So basically automated cars will suck. We will always need a steering wheel and be ready to take over. My biggest concern is that these things will creep along, stopping frequently, basically being frustating for human drivers. This will make traffic problems much worse. Stop and pull over to the side of the road in a snowstorm? Really? What if it is a major through fare with no parking lane, or on the highway and the shoulder on that section is not drivable?

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    70. Re:self-driving or assisted driving ? by beelsebob · · Score: 1

      What we're not familiar with though, is the amount of computing power required to take that sensor input, and drive sane output.

    71. Re: self-driving or assisted driving ? by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      They don't close the highways as soon as the lane markings are under snow. They close the highways when they are impassable by passenger vehicles.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    72. Re: self-driving or assisted driving ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because now it's a matter of refining the software.

      The hardware is the easy part - we've had most of the hardware available for decades. The software is the really, really hard part.

    73. Re:self-driving or assisted driving ? by kwbauer · · Score: 1

      The definition of "mostly" is "not fully". So, no, they are not there yet.

    74. Re:self-driving or assisted driving ? by kwbauer · · Score: 1

      "The point I was making, that if a human can interpret the visual information it's given, then a car with a bigger sensor set can in theory do it too. It's all about software at that point, but there's no limitation on hardware here that a human doesn't have."

      The second half of your last sentence is at odds with the first half. Either it is all about software or it is about the limited hardware. In reality, it can be about both but your statement precludes that as a possibility. You seem to be very conflicted internally. You are trying to make a point that the self-driving car is easy and here but then you admit that "in theory" something is possible.

    75. Re:self-driving or assisted driving ? by kwbauer · · Score: 1

      So, each self-driving car just needs 16-18 years of training on how to determine how to interact with the world while moving around in it and then a few months of training on how to accelerate, brake, turn and when to activate the turn signals. A few lessons about what various signage means and a quick explanation about solid lines and dashed lines and the self-driving car will be good to go. I image that this 16-18 year production line will result in drastically reduced prices over what we have today and vastly improved safety.

    76. Re:self-driving or assisted driving ? by kwbauer · · Score: 1

      Well, if you started saying "within 5 years" more than 5 years ago, then you are now a proven liar. Maybe you should use that as a learning experience about making idiotic prognostications in the future.

    77. Re:self-driving or assisted driving ? by kwbauer · · Score: 1

      Well, the site only said that it would happen in 2017. Is it only during the 3 or 4 summer months? Is it all year long?

      No, the site all by itself did not satisfactorily answer the question of whether crazy weather conditions would be tested.

      On the other hand, global warming means that we won't have winters for much longer anywhere on the planet so I guess the manufacturers don't see the need to prepare for it.

    78. Re: self-driving or assisted driving ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are already tons of teslas on the road none of which have caused any of those problems.

    79. Re:self-driving or assisted driving ? by ColdSam · · Score: 1

      His point is perfectly clear and consistent. Are you even trying to understand it? Apparently you have the hardware to comprehend it, but your software needs an upgrade.

    80. Re:self-driving or assisted driving ? by ColdSam · · Score: 1

      You have no idea how any of this stuff works, do you?

    81. Re:self-driving or assisted driving ? by minogully · · Score: 1

      Humans rely on training too.

    82. Re:self-driving or assisted driving ? by DarkVader · · Score: 1

      You're confusing the existing autopilot feature with the new self-driving capable cars they're building now.

      It's not the same thing.

    83. Re:self-driving or assisted driving ? by DarkVader · · Score: 1

      I wasn't saying it more than 5 years ago. I was saying it last year, though.

    84. Re:self-driving or assisted driving ? by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      I can't necessarily pick out snow conditions and friction changes, and a computer could be a lot faster at figuring out the right thing to do in the circumstances than I am.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    85. Re:self-driving or assisted driving ? by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Why would it be silly to expect a car to observe a police officer and hand signals?

      Those aren't really just hand signals. They involve at least the forearm. They're designed to be visible, distinctive, and understandable. Once the car recognizes that there's an officer directing traffic, it's not going to be difficult to figure out the signals.

      Maps aren't sufficient for not running into things in any case. A SDC has to have some sort of awareness of what's going on around it.no matter what, and therefore can tell when the map's leading it into immediate danger.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    86. Re:self-driving or assisted driving ? by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      From youtube videos of it, it takes about 4 minutes of hands-off driving for the warning to appear.

    87. Re:self-driving or assisted driving ? by ColdSam · · Score: 1

      A fleet of self-driving cars will also recognize or remember the icy spots, transitions or generally unsafe stretches of road. It will also react to the other cars on the road far better, e.g. noticing that other cars ahead of it took that icy turn very slowly (or didn't and wiped out).

      Not just that, but a well trained self-driving car will react much faster and be able to save itself, or at least minimize damage, far better than a good human driver, let alone the average schmuck driving in the snow.

  3. Neural Net Processor... by Robotbeat · · Score: 4, Funny

    "To make sense of all of this data, a new onboard computer with more than 40 times the computing power of the previous generation runs the new Tesla-developed neural net for vision, sonar and radar processing software."
    https://www.tesla.com/blog/all...

    So what you're saying is... the cpu is a neural net processor, a learning computer.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

    1. Re:Neural Net Processor... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes. In our future, Skynet will be a mesh network of Musky cars.

  4. Sans Auto by rtb61 · · Score: 1

    One seriously genuine question to Tesla corp, will they be producing models sans auto-crap, having no desire to be BSODed off a cliff, or into a bus going in the opposite direction or into a train, keep in mind purposeful hacks. That manual switch better guarantee 100% manual operation, pretty much kill the computer and allow complete manual control. Not being opposed to automated transport but I prefer star trek turbolift style auto transport, an enclosed, monitored and controlled transport route, no cliffs, no buses and no trains. Like quality broad band, you do want that connection right to your home, just call the lift, get in and tell it where to go.

    --
    Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    1. Re:Sans Auto by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      I think it's called "don't buy the car if you don't want it"

    2. Re:Sans Auto by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you can choose to not buy the autonomous $8k upgrade.

    3. Re:Sans Auto by DarkVader · · Score: 1

      The Tesla is not fully manually controllable in the sense that most cars (but by no means all, drive by wire is becoming much more common) are now. There is no 100% manual operation possible. The accelerator pedal is just an input sensor, for example.

    4. Re:Sans Auto by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      The idea at the very minimum is those controls should not rely on the proper functioning of the auto drive computer, you should be able to switch that computer right off and the car will react to the simple inputs from accelerator, brake, signals, steering wheel. The auto drive system should be separate and hook into the parrallel control system, otherwise it will get hacked and they will drive people off cliffs on purpose, there are bad people about and you should ensure safety protocols to protect everyone from them. Than manual override needs to be guaranteed to work and the auto system should never be able to over ride the manual system.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    5. Re:Sans Auto by scdeimos · · Score: 1

      The accelerator pedal is just an input sensor, for example.

      You don't say? Find me a current model car that still has a manual linkage between the accelerator pedal and the carburettor butterfly.

    6. Re:Sans Auto by DarkVader · · Score: 1

      What I'm saying is that you're asking for something that already does not exist on the vast majority of production cars. There are very few, if any, production cars where the accelerator is actually mechanically linked to the fuel system, if you switch the computer off, you've switched the car off.

      And it's even more true on any electric car, the motor control computer is absolutely critical to having a functional car.

    7. Re:Sans Auto by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      First you need a current model car with a carburetor.

    8. Re:Sans Auto by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No.

      Now vote with your wallet and buy something else. I'm sure you will be missed.

    9. Re:Sans Auto by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      What needs to work in a computer crash is brakes and steering. It's not necessary to make the thing fully drivable in such a state.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  5. radar? by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

    ultrasonic radar

    Don't they mean ultrasonic sonar?

    1. Re:radar? by FrankSchwab · · Score: 1

      No, they mean "8 cameras", "12 ultrasonic sensors" and "forward looking radar",

      --
      And the worms ate into his brain.
    2. Re:radar? by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      If you RTFA, you'd see they used the term "ultrasonic radar", hence why I put it in <quote> tags

  6. No biggie by Trogre · · Score: 1

    Looks like my next car will be a Leaf.

    --
    "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
    1. Re:No biggie by speedplane · · Score: 1

      Looks like my next car will be a Leaf.

      I love what Tesla is doing with technology, but I'm really disappointed with their marketing. If they could explain their story and their limitations clearly, without calling it "self driving" or "autopilot", they would gain so much credibility and advance the state of the art without endangering the public's acceptance of self-driving cars by needlessly pushing social limits.

      --
      Fast Federal Court and I.T.C. updates
    2. Re:No biggie by DirkDaring · · Score: 1

      Do you seriously want to drive a car that looks like Jar Jar binks?

    3. Re: No biggie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please do buy a new leaf. Just do not expect to be able to sell for any more than 1/5 of what you paid, after owning it for a year.

    4. Re:No biggie by fbobraga · · Score: 1

      it's ugly, but it's made for transportation, not to impress people by his beauty, you know...

    5. Re: No biggie by fbobraga · · Score: 1

      Why sell it before the end of useful life of it? Use until the end is not the idea?

    6. Re:No biggie by Trogre · · Score: 1

      In this economy, who seriously buys a car for its looks?

      Appearance is waaaay down the list of considerations when buying a car, well below "will it BSOD and kill me?".

      That's aesthetic appearance, by the way, not road visibility which is much higher.

      --
      "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
    7. Re: No biggie by Trogre · · Score: 1

      Alternatively buy a second hand Leaf from an early adopter, for 1/5 the price the rich schmuck paid for it new.

      --
      "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
  7. HAL9000 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "I'm sorry Dave. I'm afraid I can't drive you where you'd like to go. I'm feeling... lazy."

    1. Re:HAL9000 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "La-zy, La-zy, give me your answer, do.
      I'm not Dave-y, the hell is wrong with you?
      You're not quite the stylish carriage,
      I can't afford a garage.
      But you'll be fleet under my seat
      Else a bike I will trade for you."

  8. What about snow? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Seriously, did they found a solution for snow or literally anything that could cover up a road/block signs even slightly?
    For truly autonomous cars to be around, cities/countries need to have a 100% up to date GPS system so that even in the worst possible weather, the car could still drive itself on where there should be a road.

    1. Re:What about snow? by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      In fact, if they really want to save lives, driving reliably in the worst weather should be their goal.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    2. Re:What about snow? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How do you react to that? The car will have more information available than you would in the same situation.

    3. Re:What about snow? by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      Having 'information' is a small part of automated driving. Possibly 2% of the problem.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    4. Re:What about snow? by Chuq · · Score: 1

      They have fleet learning, where every car will share the same knowledge about a given route as all other Tesla cars. So if others have driven that same route with lane markings, your car will know where they are. And if not, it will use visual cues (paths being taken by other cars, etc) to work it out, the same as a human.

      --
      - Chuq
    5. Re: What about snow? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Driving in the worst weather conditions, a level 3 emergency in the states, is a crime punishable with jail time.

      As a side note, are you TRYING to kill yourself?!
      There's less painful ways to do it that won't endanger the lives of our emergency medical responders.

      It sounds to me like you should be the very last person setting goals for any driver, computer, human, or otherwise.

    6. Re:What about snow? by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      I still don't understand what happens when the route changes, due to construction or other obstacle. Fleet learning will only take you so far.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    7. Re:What about snow? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When it comes to self-driving cars, snow storm begets shit storm, as far as I'm concerned.

      I haven't spotted any Teslas where I live. I hope it stays that way for many years, even after "level 5" goes live, so I can see how it plays out in the rest of the world. My expectations are VERY low and full of twisted metal and dead bodies. Regular people fuck up sometimes and accidents happen, that much is a given, but I believe these things will too. Probably way more than all these foolish bright-eyed "AI IS THE FUTURE" people expect. More, less or equal to human accident frequency, who knows, but I'm worried that having both on the road will be disastrous. The cars could have lightning fast reaction times which would throw human drivers for a loop. How aggressively are they going to lane change or make turns? Are they going to push the limit of close calls and scare human drivers? Panicked drivers make even more mistakes. Can we expect to see shit storms erupt in the wake of self-driving cars?

      Not only that, we all know how humans are. Give them a calculator and they forget how to do long division. Give them a self-driving car and they WILL forget how to drive. What the fuck are they supposed to do when the car says no? I'll tell you what they'll do. They'll say "FUCK YOU CAR, it's [occasion] and I NEED to get to [destination]. I'll just drive there myself!" They'll ignore the risks just like they do already when they're drunk/high/sleepy/upset and get on the road anyway. AND they'll be out of practice if they've ever driven at all. And you can bet they'll be upset and nervous, posing a danger to everything in braking/swerving distance.

      No AI cars on my roads please.

      The evil you know is better than the evil you don't.

      s/evil/danger/g

    8. Re: What about snow? by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      Where I come from it's just a way of life. We don't shut down for every bad snow storm. Automated vehicles will have to work in such weather.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    9. Re: What about snow? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I did assume you were in the USA, my apologies.

      In the USA, driving in a declared level 3 emergency is a crime, so telsa will not need to do so.
      Also during a level 3, employers have been arrested and businesses closed down for retaliating against someone for not driving to work. I believe only certain class of emergency workers are exempt from that.

      So yes we pretty much have no choice but to shut down in such conditions. Way of life or not, it's not legal.

      It will be easy to determine by gps if you are in an area with such an emergency declared and refuse to enable autonomous mode.

      In any other countries, I dont know the answer to your question.
      I would guess that when the software is first released, it simply won't be capable of or willing to drive autonomously in weather exceeding US level 3 conditions.

      Such questions could only really be answered in many years from now once (if) they develop the software to such a point.

    10. Re: What about snow? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't seem to really understand anything. Kind of a bumbling fucking idiot.

    11. Re: What about snow? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fleet learning will be awesome! Those tesla cars out in the ditch? Fleet Learning(tm), for Your safety!

    12. Re:What about snow? by sxpert · · Score: 1

      that's called "fleet learning", as in, the map is updated whenever a car sees a new road sign with the presence of said road sign. if the sign is blocked, the next car will assume the presence of said sign, but maybe lower the statistical significance of said sign

    13. Re:What about snow? by goose-incarnated · · Score: 1

      How do you react to that? The car will have more information available than you would in the same situation.

      My phone currently has more information than me. Doesn't mean it can tell the difference between English and gibberish when I speak to it.

      --
      I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
    14. Re:What about snow? by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 1

      That's when you'll get a fleet of Teslas going lemming-like off the cliff where the bridge used to be.

      --
      Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
    15. Re: What about snow? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've lived in places that get frequent blizzards and ice storms for my entire life, and I have never once seen one declared a class 3 emergency.

    16. Re:What about snow? by fbobraga · · Score: 1

      My phone currently has more information than me

      I doubt it: it's not even possible

    17. Re:What about snow? by Immerman · · Score: 1

      I suspect there won't be any serious issue with overly aggressive AI drivers. They will be as aggressive as they're programmed to be, which is usually not very, for exactly the reasons you state - they have to deal with human drivers, and so they're programmed to act roughly within the norm for human drivers to avoid becoming a hazard themselves. In fact, most current experimental systems, such as Googles, are normally set to behave fairly timidly, both to avoid becoming a hazard, and to avoid frightening the occupants - apparently a Google car cranked up to high aggressiveness will still remain well within it's operational safety parameters, but tends to be a terrifying experience to ride in because you KNOW there's not enough time for a person to react.

      Basically, any halfway decent AI will "know" that the biggest risk on the road is other drivers acting in unpredictable fashions, and that any departure from the norm in it's own behavior will increase that risk.

      As for the idiot drivers taking over... we could always require a valid driver's license to be scanned before allowing human control. Probably even be a sales feature - that way you can let the kids ride the car to the mall on their own without worrying that they'd take manual control. Couple that with requiring owners of automated vehicles to actually pass a driving test to renew their license, and you're good to go.

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    18. Re:What about snow? by ColdSam · · Score: 1

      Better yet, you treat them like smaller kids and let them pretend to drive the car (a la Maggie Simpson), and the car itself will validate their driving ability.

    19. Re:What about snow? by Immerman · · Score: 1

      Yeah, that's not going to contribute to (pre-)teens learning horrible driving skills...

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    20. Re:What about snow? by ColdSam · · Score: 1

      It certainly won't be worse than the status quo.

    21. Re:What about snow? by Immerman · · Score: 1

      I'm not so sure - assuming the (pre-)teens aren't actually driving now, the "fake driving" could instill all sorts of bad habits that must be unlearned before they can learn to drive safely, and successfully unlearning something is often far more challenging than learning it in the first place.

      I suppose the car could set off alarms whenever it corrects the student driver, providing constant negative feedback for poor actions, but then you're in the situation of having the car constantly second-guessing the driver's intent. It could be done, but it might be very challenging to do well.

      Of course, if you're assuming the kids will all end up with their own self-driving cars from day one, well, who needs to learn to drive at all? Also potentially a rather generous assumption.

      It does raise an interesting point though - as autonomous vehicles become commonplace, learning to drive will be a very different thing. We will want to learn to drive in precisely the situations where the car is weakest: hings like off-road driving (even just driving across the field to your picnic site) and getting unstuck from snow/mud/accidents... though actually I could see AI sensors and reaction times being *extremely* advantageous for, for example, rocking a car out of snow or mud, though perhaps with a human judgment overseeing it.

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    22. Re:What about snow? by ColdSam · · Score: 1

      There could be various levels of "fake" driving, from the toddler scenario I mentioned all the way up to full, but monitored control. The latter being comparable to a driving instructor who is giving corrective feedback and having the ability to take emergency corrective action. People wouldn't be licensed to drive until they passed so many hours of relatively error free driving. The huge advantage of this method is that it can teach proper and consistent driving, rather than pass on incorrect and dangerous information from driver to driver (e.g. merge as soon as possible when you see a lane closing sign).

      But honestly, I don't think that will be necessary because self-driving as anything but sport will simply go away. The rare situations you describe are handled poorly (or not at all) by most human drivers. If you get stuck in the mud or run into an impossibly complex construction zone, you (or your car) will call a professional to get you out (or it will be done by remote control thousands of miles away).

  9. KITT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "You've got a computer in your car."
    "No, Julie, the computer is the car. KITT, introduce yourself to Julie Robinson."
    "I'm pleased to meet you, Miss Robinson."
    "A talking car. Well, now it's my turn to be impressed. KITT, is it? What an intriguing voice. A little too much gain in your tweeter, and a slight metallic tone to your bass."
    "Do you really think so?"

    1. Re:KITT by haruchai · · Score: 1

      "A talking car. Well, now it's my turn to be impressed. KITT, is it? What an intriguing voice. A little too much gain in your tweeter, and a slight metallic tone to your bass."
      "Do you really think so?"

      If TV was as explicit then as it is now, that might have been written as "just let me demonstrate some of the features of your seat and we'll see just how much gain we can get out of your tweeters"

      --
      Pain is merely failure leaving the body
    2. Re:KITT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not cool. The woman was blind, and her attention to audio was meant to emphasize her blindness.

    3. Re:KITT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sorry, I kept meaning to memorize all the scripts to the childrens TV show "Knight Rider". But I never got around to it.

      I'm feeling pretty stupid now.

    4. Re:KITT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      episode script

    5. Re:KITT by fbobraga · · Score: 1

      the voice of the car is made by Scarlett Johansson, like in http://www.imdb.com/title/tt17... !? (what a market campaign idea! I'll sell it!)

  10. Great?! What about normal non-rich people? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Seriously it's fucked up that this even makes the front page on /. Most of us are out of work and fucked for life (health care, etc) yet you continue to post irrelevant stories about cars that no normal person can afford. I mean we can't even afford tinfoil Civics, let alone AI electric test-platforms. Fuck you!

    1. Re:Great?! What about normal non-rich people? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey there. I thought all the unemployed tech sector former workers had given up and stopped coming here. Thanks for posting!

      And to answer your question, we poor people just don't own cars. We ride the city bus. The city still employs bus drivers, for now.

    2. Re: Great?! What about normal non-rich people? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't mean to belittle your situation here, as what's happened in the industry is quite fucked up..
      But humor is about all I got. So please believe me that I'm only making light of your comments wording and not your situation.

      But at least this is a technology related article on a technology dedicated and themed website.
      There is a plenty posted to the front page that's so off topic (political and hate inspiring articles being half-ish of what's there these days), there is certainly plenty to complain about other than slashdot sticking to its reason for existing.

      Isn't that a bit like me getting too old and then bitching about playboy containing pictures of women that would never want to be with me?

    3. Re: Great?! What about normal non-rich people? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      More like a 30-year-old woman bitching about getting too old to pose for Playboy. A lot of what's happened in the industry is straight up ageism. A coder over 30 can easily learn the latest trendy framework and keep on coding, but the attitude is 30 years old is too old to be a coder.

    4. Re:Great?! What about normal non-rich people? by fbobraga · · Score: 1

      http://www.nissanusa.com/elect...

    5. Re:Great?! What about normal non-rich people? by fbobraga · · Score: 1

      we poor people just don't own cars. We ride the city bus.

      It's called "prejudice" or "bias": collective transport is not only made for poor people... (I use it a lot, and I'm far from being "poor")

    6. Re:Great?! What about normal non-rich people? by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      I'd use it, but it's been a long time since I could find a good job that I could get to by bus. I'll probably wind up with a volunteer gig downtown when I retire, and I can use the bus then.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  11. Can't be level 5 by Chmarr · · Score: 4, Informative

    Level 5 means not having any controls that a human can use. So, unless their "future upgrade" includes ripping out the steering wheel and pedals, etc, then the car is only "level 4 ready".

    1. Re:Can't be level 5 by Jeremi · · Score: 1

      Does it count if the driving controls are present, but disabled, while the car is driving autonomously?

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
    2. Re:Can't be level 5 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      4.5.

    3. Re:Can't be level 5 by ClarkMills · · Score: 1

      Surely if the human-available controls have been inactivated by the computer (even though physically present) that would deem them level-5?

      [ I'm sorry Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that. This mission is too important... ]
      (the Hardware Abstraction Layer: HAL)

      You have no idea what I'm ranting about do you... :) I'm old...

    4. Re:Can't be level 5 by Scarred+Intellect · · Score: 2

      Level 5 means not having any controls that a human can use. So, unless their "future upgrade" includes ripping out the steering wheel and pedals, etc, then the car is only "level 4 ready".

      No, level 5 simply means fully autonomous, the system controls everything with no human interaction.

      SAE definitions: http://www.sae.org/misc/pdfs/a...

      DOT's definitions (hint: they adopted SAE's rather than NHTSA's): https://www.transportation.gov... (page 11)

    5. Re:Can't be level 5 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      According to Wikipedia:

      "Level 5: Other than setting the destination and starting the system, no human intervention is required. The automatic system can drive to any location where it is legal to drive."

      It doesn't say anywhere that human intervention is not possible. Therefore, a steering is not an obstacle to level 5.

    6. Re:Can't be level 5 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Level 5 means not having any controls that a human can use. So, unless their "future upgrade" includes ripping out the steering wheel and pedals, etc, then the car is only "level 4 ready".

      The automated vehicle classification system (J3016) doesn't say anything about level 5 not having controls that a human can use. It only states that the system must execute the controls, rather than the human: http://www.sae.org/misc/pdfs/a...

    7. Re:Can't be level 5 by fbobraga · · Score: 1

      I thought that "Level 5" was a marketing-only term (like "Mp5" for chinese media players)

    8. Re:Can't be level 5 by ColdSam · · Score: 1

      Removing all controls is not a requirement of level 5. It is sufficient that the controls never need to be used by a human under normal driving conditions.

    9. Re:Can't be level 5 by jeaton · · Score: 1

      http://www.sae.org/misc/pdfs/a... states that level 5 is "the full-time performance by an automated driving system of all aspects of the dynamic driving task under all roadway and environmental conditions that can be managed by a human driver"

      There's no requirement that the car must lack human controls, only that the car be capable of fully autonomous driving under any condition a human could drive a car.

    10. Re:Can't be level 5 by Immerman · · Score: 1

      Yes. Chmarr doesn't know what they're talking about. The standard requires that an L5 autonomous vehicle be *capable* of fully autonomous operation anywhere and under any conditions where it's legal to drive. It says nothing whatsoever about also being capable of being driven normally, and there's no reason both systems couldn't coexist.

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    11. Re:Can't be level 5 by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Level 5 means not having any controls that a human can use

      Actually Level 5 is not defined in the same way across different organisations. Some say that a vehicle simply must be able to make its way from a to b without any driver assistance or consideration as to obstacles. The SAE are the only group who say that the vehicle should have no manual controls (funny comment coming from an automation group). The NHSTA doesn't even have 5 levels.

      So I will give you 33% credit. You will need to resit the course.

  12. Elon Musk is a magician by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He has gotten people to not only believe in, but pay money for, something that doesn't and likely never will exist. He should consider becoming Pope! No, wait, the Pope actually has ethics.

  13. 22 cameras by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

    I find it very funny how easy some people think the software will be for these vehicles. Really, thinking you have all the hardware you need on the vehicle is not a very big deal. I could strap 22 cameras to my car and I wouldn't have much. So far it looks like Tesla has a start with Autopilot but the functionality is currently very lacking; people I have talked to says that it disengages frequently and still needs clear lane markings. So even if Tesla has the right hardware, the real question is how long will the *software* take to get from where it is to fully driving and that is currently unclear. Tesla has done the 80% easy part, but how long will the hard final 20% take? Elon Musk seems to make a lot of cheap comments like this, that get people exited and veil the real issues at hand.

    --
    Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    1. Re:22 cameras by nsuccorso · · Score: 1

      You are such a naysayer! Just like having a big rocket will solve all the problems with colonizing Mars, having a bunch of cameras will solve all the problems with Level 5 autonomous vehicles. q.e.d.

    2. Re:22 cameras by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If they open the hardware up with APIs anyone can plug their laptop to... the Tesla could become a cheap platform for everyone with a self-driving-car-prototype-software to test on... right now, you need Google level investment to even attempt to build a self driving car... if all you needed was a laptop with open APIs, just about every big university would have a self-driving-car research lab.

    3. Re:22 cameras by fbobraga · · Score: 1

      open APIs, just about every big university would have a self-driving-car research lab.

      it's a near future now: wait and see :)

  14. I am afraid of self driving cars by the_Bionic_lemming · · Score: 1

    Until it's legal for me to set my destination and lay down in the back seat of the car and and enjoy some beer and television with a guaranteed safety record better than air travel - I don't want "self driving" cars around me.

    Your mechanical failure can end my life.

    That's just my opinion.

    --
    _ _ _ Go for the eyes Boo! GO FOR THE EYES!
    1. Re:I am afraid of self driving cars by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Your mechanical failure can end my life.

      Odds are good that in order to use level 4 or 5 autonomy you're going to have to submit to regular safety inspections. Probably they will not be German in quality except in Germany, which is what I'd like to see, but I'd imagine they will at least be a lot more serious than they are now.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  15. hardware upgrades? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When the existing hardware is shown to be inadequate, will the hardware upgrades be free? These are promised to be "self-driving" but this phrase will develop more precision and meaning as we learn what it really takes. When new hardware is REQUIRED in order to keep meeting the "self-driving" criteria, who's gonna pay for it?

  16. Why Level 5 autonomy is a joke by purplie · · Score: 0

    We still don't even have Level 5 autonomy in elevators (they have a manual override for emergencies). Maybe Tesla should try designing some elevators first.

    1. Re:Why Level 5 autonomy is a joke by nsuccorso · · Score: 1

      The end of 2017, mark your calendar! Los Angeles to Times Square, no human touching the controls even ONCE! It's so, so, awesome. In the time that it takes some other tech company to add some cosmetic widgets and minor features to their mobile OS, Tesla will create a truly thinking machine, test it thoroughly, and demonstrate in on our roads. Yeah, next time I hear that some friggin' data entry system is going to be years behind schedule, I am going to flip out. Clearly, complex software has been trivial ALL THIS TIME! Those software pikers have been *malingering*!

    2. Re:Why Level 5 autonomy is a joke by HuguesT · · Score: 1

      Yes, very skeptical here too, however this time we have a deadline for this impossible software. We'll see soon enough.

  17. Read the small print in the announcement... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    According to The Register Tesla will not enable autopilot in new cars. The announcement states:

    "Before activating the features enabled by the new hardware, we will further calibrate the system using millions of miles of real-world driving to ensure significant improvements to safety and convenience.
    While this is occurring, Teslas with new hardware will temporarily lack certain features currently available on Teslas with first-generation Autopilot hardware, including some standard safety features such as automatic emergency breaking, collision warning, lane holding and active cruise control."

    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/10/20/did_you_read_the_iwholei_announcement_teslas_pulling_autopilot/

  18. Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I work as a software developer. Thus I'll never fully trust software. Too many things that can go wrong.
    One day you will have a massive accident caused by a self-driving car. Investigation will reveal a management failing where some worker highlighted a fault and management failed to respond.
    Take the VW crisis. Probably the case that hundreds knew what was going on. In reality a handful will take the blame.

  19. Ride Hailing and the Tesla Network by chr1sb · · Score: 1

    When specifying that you want "full self-driving capability" on the Tesla website, there is a disclaimer that you cannot use the car commercially for autonomous ride hailing. Tesla is planning a "Tesla Network", which is the only way that they will authorise commercial ride-sharing/hailing activities (details to be provided next year). I think that this is the first time that a car company has mentioned restrictions like this. They probably won't be the last.

  20. One step back, promises 2 steps forward later by nicolaiplum · · Score: 1

    From https://www.tesla.com/en_GB/bl... :

    "Before activating the features enabled by the new hardware, we will further calibrate the system using millions of miles of real-world driving to ensure significant improvements to safety and convenience. While this is occurring, Teslas with new hardware will temporarily lack certain features currently available on Teslas with first-generation Autopilot hardware, including some standard safety features such as automatic emergency braking, collision warning, lane holding and active cruise control. "

    So if I buy a Tesla tomorrow, it will come with less features than another one bought last month when it arrives? In fact, it will come with less features than a well-specified competitor (BMW, Mercedes, etc) and no idea when it will catch up.

    I don't want to go backwards. I want to go forwards. I want the features now and more, not less features now.

    I want a car that does the same things as earlier cars and more. I don't want to be funding Tesla's product development and then beta test their code when it's rolled out.

    Why do customers tolerate this from Tesla?

    --
    "For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled"
    1. Re:One step back, promises 2 steps forward later by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Same reason we all used googles "beta" projects for years.

    2. Re:One step back, promises 2 steps forward later by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >So if I buy a Tesla tomorrow, it will come with less features than another one bought last month when it arrives? In fact, it will come with less features than a well-specified competitor (BMW, Mercedes, etc) and no idea when it will catch up.

      Why do customers tolerate this from Tesla?

      I'm not in the market for a luxury car, but I would buy a Tesla over the BMW i8. The Mercedes AMG is $500k+ so not really the same market. Anyway, the Tesla is at least as fast & has better range than the i8. And it's made in the US.

  21. *horizon detection coming later by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Crazy that the Us Government is letting "auto-driving" features on the road in "beta", as if they were friggin' email solutions.

    These things are on the road now, and they will be developing a way to distinguish between a semi blocking your path, and the actual horizon, "in the future".

    I'm all for braking assistance and lane alerts, but fully autonomous is not what our analytics and god knows, our roads and road markings, are prepared for at this time, nor will be for years (software) and decades (roads).

  22. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  23. And the name of the tech can't be... by fbobraga · · Score: 1

    ... "autopilot"?!

  24. Insensitive clod by fbobraga · · Score: 1

    Nissan doesn't sell Leaf here in Brazil!

  25. Pareto's by fbobraga · · Score: 1

    Tesla has done the 80% easy part, but how long will the hard final 20% take?

    I don't think it's so easy to account: the "80%" is all we know for this specific case

  26. Fault Tolerant? by herbierobinson · · Score: 1

    I wonder how many of those actuators will be fault tolerant. I can't seem to find any information on the web, but if the auto industry is up to their usual tricks, they won't be. Not until a failed steering motor causes a massive fatal head-on on the Interstate.

    They are probably still counting on the driver grabbing noticing there is a problem in 1/10th of a second, grabbing the steering wheel and fighting against a motor that is running at full torque because of the failure :-)

    And we haven't even started talking about software bugs...

    --
    An engineer who ran for Congress. http://herbrobinson.us
  27. I think it's brilliant by Mondor · · Score: 1

    We don't know yet how to create the infinite source of power. But once we'll figure out, I am pretty sure that this model will be able to use it.

    We can't create the real artificial intelligence at the moment, but when we will, this wonderful computer will most certainly be able to host it!

    We aren't really there yet to create the sort of coffee that would prolong your life, but as soon as we will - this wonderful coffee maker machine that you can buy today - will make you live longer!