AutonoDriver

Not sure who needs to hear this Innovation in automotive engineering is fast and easy if you ignore safety. The hardest, longest, most expensive part of the engineering process is designing in system safety and then proving a feature is safe enough for public use.

@ItaliAuto I have one too.... 😁

#Fillupfriday for #FerrariFriday 👌 Daytona SP3 © 📷 IG Top Gear

This is consistent with FSD and AV industry experts. There is a pattern google.com/amp/s/futurism…

"Humanoid robots are easy harder than Musk seems to think" This is consistent with L4 camera only FSD Robotaxis as well spectrum.ieee.org/elon-musk-robot

Engineer porn..

@dustinpwalsh @NAIASDetroit Ummm... Raptor PU?

Why ... Why are there dinosaurs at the Detroit Auto Show? @NAIASDetroit

From the "Cars are not Smartphones" file...

Fantastic article on the facts around ADAS and AV system regulation/approvals or rather the lack of them. Read and learn 👇

Presented without comment

@BrandonLive I agree. These L2 systems like AP, FSD, GM SC and F BC are not safety systems. They are convenience ADAS and do not make driving safer. The human still needs to ensure safety. They make driving easier. AEB, Ped Braking, ESC, LKA make driving safer

@AutonoD I do agree they can and should be clearer - and Musk especially so. I just don’t think there’s any excuse for someone publishing an article like this.

This is yet another article in which "self driving" is construed to be an AI system that will make the right decisions. For the umpteenth time.. AP/FSD are L2 ADAS and the uninformed, misled drivers are always responsible for the safety of the vehicle. fossbytes.com/teslas-are-kil…

@BrandonLive I appreciate your comments Average customers are not like you and I. For them its extremely plausible that robotaxis are only a couple sw updates away so hey! Why not let AP or FSD drive me home? It's self driving right? This is the narrative that has caused so many AP accidents

@AutonoD I agree his repeated claims using vague & unrealistic statements (“I’d be shocked if it isn’t as safe as a human by the end of the year”) are terrible and he should have long ago stopped. I just don’t see how that would convince someone the current stuff is already there.

@BrandonLive We're not going to agree on this. Tweeting "lofty aspirations" and telling financial analysts on earning calls that robotaxis are right around the corner is irresponsible, self serving, and reckless. You and others can buy into his BS but people who know, well... they know.

@AutonoD I get how non-owners are confused, because of the media coverage and the name. That makes total sense. But the argument that a buyer and/or a driver using the system would think it is autonomous doesn’t make sense to me. Especially based on Musk’s lofty aspirations.

@BrandonLive YOU might get that. Many others want to believe. I'm sorry but any implication that this system will "someday" be autonomous is irresponsible, negligent and dangerous. There are many many people who are not technically knowledgeable in this area and over trust these systems

@AutonoD “Someday”

@BrandonLive I also agree that too many assumptions are made for specific incidents. There can be many contributing factors.

@AutonoD Of course we also don’t know that AP was enabled in either of these crashes, and in one of them the driver said *he* never saw the motorcyclist. Were their tail lights out? Or did other factors contribute to these accidents? We have no idea.

@BrandonLive @JamesHoffmann3 On this we agree. The article is garbage but I see it as the author taking Musk at his word

@JamesHoffmann3 @AutonoD But Tesla doesn’t even have an AV offering yet. This is just a dumpster fire of an “article” that only exists as clickbait, which dangerously misleads people in the process.

@BrandonLive The disclaimers make it clear. The tweets do not. Please show me a Musk tweet that says: FSD is an ADAS and drivers must pay attention at all times to insure safety. I don't know why you give Musk a pass on this He's the #1 #autonowashing offender.

@AutonoD Musk and Tesla never say they offer anything autonomous. The “Full Self Driving” name is problematic as we’ve discussed, but it’s clearly about *future* functionality, especially if you actually try to use it - it makes the limitations very clear.

@JamesHoffmann3 Agree. It really has the tone of FSD being a poor AV system rather than the vision only L2 ADAS it is

@AutonoD What bothers me is that people might assume from this article that Tesla's FSD is the state of the art. Tesla gives the AV industry a bad rep. People think that self-driving is dangerous because "AI" can't see objects. Reality is that Tesla's FSD is not autonomous and just bad.

This is the problem. Customer expectations are set by #Autonowashing Musk. People really need to understand $15k FSD is a L2 ADAS reqng an attend driver at all times and will never be a L4 robotaxi. Then decide if it's worth it.

This isn't surprising cnn.com/2022/09/07/bus…