
Tesla Model S Autopilot Features - extesy
http://www.teslamotors.com/presskit/autopilot
======
ChicagoBoy11
A common phrase in aircraft cockpits nowadays is "What the heck is it doing
now?" as pilots have migrated from actually flying the plane to simply being
glorified systems managers.

While planes have become so, so, so much safer because of all this automation,
pilots uncertainty regarding autopilot functioning is a major concern
nowadays, and the reason for several accidents.

There are very interesting HCI challenges around properly communicating to the
pilot/driver "what the heck it is doing" and clearly communicating just how
much control the human has or doesn't have at any given point.

This "announcement" certainly doesn't inspire any confidence that they have
really thought this through deeply enough (I think they probably have, but it
should be communicated like it). As a huge Tesla fan, I can't help but feel
like I need to hold my breath now and make sure something terrible doesn't
happen because of this, and it ends up leading to even more regs setting us
back on the path to full car automation.

~~~
sandworm101
As a Tesla enthusiast, would you buy a Tesla that wasn't capable of breaking
the speed limit? Perhaps one that couldn't ever under any circumstances move
faster than 70mph? That doesn't require fancy tech. It could be done today in
an instant.

That's where I see the real sticking point for automation. Driving isn't about
getting from A to B, nor is safety the top priority. If it were, there
wouldn't be such a thing as a V-8 (or whatever the electric equivalent is). I
find it very ironic that a performance car like the Tesla might promote "the
path to full car automation". You think the gun debate is tricky? Try telling
people they cannot do 51 in a 50 anymore.

~~~
alexland
It's a temporary problem though. Speed limits are set to try and keep people
safe, by enforcing a maximum speed. Once computers drive the cars, the speed
limit can be cranked up because reaction time goes up drastically and
distracted drivers are nonexistent. I expect to see lots of changes in driving
laws once automation takes over for exactly this reason.

~~~
Leszek
It's more likely to be cranked down though, because that's more efficient and
people might be less frustrated with slow driving if they can kill time on
their phones during the drive.

~~~
ecdavis
The improvements in traffic flow gained through full automation may even
offset the decreased speed limits.

~~~
sandworm101
Or full automation might increase the number of vehicles and exacerbate the
problem. (On the assumption that the vastly reduced cost of fielding driveless
vehicles could result in many more commercial vehicles on the road.)

~~~
rev_bird
But automation can also increase vehicle density: "Stop and go" traffic is way
more efficient when it's not groggy humans doing the stopping and going.

~~~
sandworm101
I'm not sure about that. Keeping the cars closer together would suggest more
abrupt acceleration and braking to such to avoid space being created as the
car ahead accelerates from a stop. Given these accelerations will not be
initiated by the driver, they will come as a surprise and thus be more
jarring. I imagine that might result in autodrives that accelerate/brake more
slowly, leaving greater distances between cars in stop=and-go environs. And I
cannot see autodrives leaving much less room between cars while in steady
motion or stopped. Humans are pretty good at tailgating.

~~~
michaelmior
I think the key is that computer controlled vehicles could synchronize their
stopping and starting. You wouldn't have to wait for the few feet moved by the
car in front to bubble down the line as drivers notice the extra space.
Instead, all stopped cars could coordinate to advance simultaneously.

~~~
TeMPOraL
You wouldn't even have to explicitly sync them; it'll take just few
milliseconds for a self-driving car to notice another car is beginning to
accelerate. Machines can keep precise control to the level simply unavailable
to and unperceivable by humans.

------
dognotdog
While the over-the-air update is novel, these features all exist on current
luxury and even some middle class vehicles as part of driver assistance option
packages.

They're typically called Lane Keeping Assistant, Adaptive Cruise Control,
Blindspot Warning, Automated Parking, Traffic Sign Recognition, etc.

The emergency steering bit is interesting, though no further details are
provided, as it requires the car to ensure that there is a safe space to steer
into, which is dicey for a forward collision emergency braking system, so I'd
conjecture it is connected to the side collision warning, and allows collision
avoidance if there is enough space in the current lane.

~~~
aerovistae
I see this strange contradiction where some people are saying "this is nothing
new, other manufacturers had this years ago" and yet somehow other
manufacturers don't get reaction videos on youtube and don't get to the top of
hacker news and reddit....it seems very clear to me that what Tesla has done
is above and beyond anything in the past. If this already existed, nobody
would really care.

You could make the whole brand argument, like with Apple releasing the iPad,
but....I simply disagree. Tesla deserves the credit they're getting.

~~~
csours
Elon Musk is undeniable a hype machine. A lot of it is deserved, to be sure:

He doesn't have 100 years of history weighing him down; he hasn't made a lemon
yet; his cars are actually pretty awesome.

But... all these features do already exist in other brands.

Disclaimer: I work for GM

~~~
windexh8er
They may exist, but that's not the fundamental difference between Tesla and
<enter most all other brands>. The first difference is long-term buyer delight
and is clearly shown in the first sentence of the linked article: "Model S is
designed to to keep getting better over time." Everyone else's stance? That
was last years model - if you want the new UI and/or new features buy the
current model year car. There is, most often, zero expectation for car buyers
today to expect upgrades or enhancements that are as drastic and as positively
interesting as how Tesla approaches it.

The second, and likely more critical differentiator (IMO), is security. Mr.
Musk would not accept public shaming of such magnitude like this:

[http://www.wired.com/2015/09/gm-took-5-years-fix-full-
takeov...](http://www.wired.com/2015/09/gm-took-5-years-fix-full-takeover-
hack-millions-onstar-cars/)

And I only pick on GM here since, well, you work there. When it comes to
software in cars Tesla treats it as a true part of the vehicle engineering.
Others seems to still treat it as an afterthought - and then the question
starts to linger: how good is the software in all of the other vendors
"features"? How much QA have they done with regard to lane keep, blind spot,
adaptive cruise, etc?

I don't own a Tesla, I really wish I did, but if I had to place a wager on a
car manufacturers QA process and ability to build fault tolerant vehicle
systems I would pick Tesla to oust the competition handily at this point.
While I realize it's a subjective matter, and there's really no good way to
compare, the directive of the company seems pointed in a more apt approach
than others.

$0.02.

~~~
csours
To be clear: I, personally, am really happy there are strong challengers in
the car market. Also, I am speaking solely for myself.

The quote: "Model S is designed to keep getting better over time" reminds me
of kaizen (1). It is a really awesome concept that not only can the car
manufacturing process and technology keep getting better, but the cars can
improve as well.

That being said: OTA update is REALLY FUCKING SCARY for cars. What if someone
puts the wrong update in the queue accidentally? (2)

The historic attitude to modules in cars is also important. Modules run
"code", but it is treated as mechanically as possible. Could you imagine
changing out a few pistons while driving? Probably not. This is a failure of
imagination that is being addressed now!

It is a truism that Big, Old, Large companies are risk-averse. The downside to
doing a bad OTA to a car is unlimited!

WRT to Tesla's QA - I don't know of anything that has been published in this
regard. I would hope they are "doing it right". I hope they are successful,
and I hope everyone is inspired by their leadership and learns from them.

1:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaizen](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaizen)
\- Article claims it was introduced by American business people, but Japanese
companies continuously improved it =D

2\. [http://www.techtimes.com/articles/90219/20151001/oops-
sorry-...](http://www.techtimes.com/articles/90219/20151001/oops-sorry-
microsoft-pushes-out-windows-7-test-patch-by-accident.htm)

~~~
rkangel
> That being said: OTA update is REALLY FUCKING SCARY for cars. What if
> someone puts the wrong update in the queue accidentally? (2)

OTA update is no more or less scary than any other form of software update, or
in fact any other form of mechanical update.

Software engineers are generally used to the level of rigour that goes on with
their software. If you're a web devloper shipping a commerce application
there's an appropriate level of testing and process, because there's only a
certian level of reliability you need to hit, and spending more money on that
would slow down your development. The way you go about delivering software for
medical devices for instance (which we do), is a completely different process
with a whole different level of rigour, testing and documentation. Because
that's appropriate in that environment.

There's a whole lot more documentation and thought that goes into the beam
that stops the top of your house from falling down, than goes into the beam
that stops your garden shed from falling down. It's no different than
software.

~~~
dognotdog
It's not as simple as that. NASA can update software on the mars rover or
interplanetary probes, but that's one device at a time, and the amount of
effort put into it is staggering.

At the same time, consumer electronics are routinely broken by OTA updates.

Cars fall squarely in the middle, high volume and high price. Additionally,
failures carry a high risk. Nobody will die if your webshop goes down, but if
your car decides to steer into oncoming traffic, well, bummer.

The support beam analogy is flawed in the sense that the beams are simply made
bigger to ensure they're strong enough even with considerable material
defects, but this doesn't work for software, where a single little bug can
lead to a catastrophic failure.

I am not aware of anything other than cars where such a high number of devices
carries such a high risk factor. Certainly doing OTA car updates in a
commercial environment is possible, but there is not yet a relatively
foolproof way to do it.

------
lightcatcher
What sensors does the Model S have? I'm surprised that Tesla sold a car with
enough sensors for semi-autonomous operation without the actual software until
now.

For those with more knowledge about cars, how does the sensor array in the
Model S compare with similar models from companies such as BMW, Audi,
Mercedes-Benz? I'm interested in knowing if it's software or the already
installed hardware holding back recent luxury cars from similar capabilities.

Also, does anyone know anything about the (digital) security features of the
Tesla? This announcement from Tesla makes it clear that the actual control of
the vehicle can be modified by an over the air software update. With the
recent Jeep hack[0] in mind, does any know if something similar is possible on
a Tesla, or if there are some safeguards such as signed updates? As one of the
most computerized cars on the market, I tend to think that the Tesla cars
might also be some of the most (maliciously) hackable cars on the market.

[0] [http://www.wired.com/2015/07/hackers-remotely-kill-jeep-
high...](http://www.wired.com/2015/07/hackers-remotely-kill-jeep-highway/)

~~~
dognotdog
Long story short, it's both hardware and software holding things back. On the
hardware side, there is a lot going on with solid state radar and lidar
sensors improving by the minute, while prices are down a factor of 10-100 from
even 5 years ago. There are now sensors available for research and product
development that in 5 years time will allow a semi high-end production car to
robustly drive all traffic conditions on a highway.

Car makers (and suppliers) have to learn how to make software to make optimal
use of the existing hardware, but they've got a long way to go, still. Every
major player nowadays has a research center in Palo Alto or whereabouts,
seemingly trying to learn how to do this via osmosis, but it will take some
time until they really understand how to keep pace with information
technology, and how to bring it into their mammuth manufacturing and legal
frameworks. Nevermind the necessary mindset to pull it off.

~~~
poutine
The software exists today to allow a production VW Golf with stock sensors to
self drive on the highway:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KHyw58hn4sM](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KHyw58hn4sM)

This stuff is coming fast...

~~~
dognotdog
It's no problem to autopilot on the highway today, 90-95% of the time. But
that number needs to go even higher, still, before it can be unleashed on the
public. And for that last edge, sensors and software have to get better. As a
guess, going from 90% to 99% is the same effort as going 0% to 90%, software
and hardware wise. Luckily, these diminuishing returns are (somewhat) offset
by more resources being poured into development, and hardware costs coming
down due to volume manufacturing.

------
joosters
Releasing driving assistance features as a ' _beta_ '? What on earth does that
mean here? Are the features ready to use or not? Do Tesla warrant that they
work and are safe?

Maybe they expect drivers to treat it like beta software - "Please don't use
these features in production cars. Make sure you keep backups of all drivers
and passengers in case of bugs."

~~~
viraptor
Since it had to go through regulatory approvals, I'd expect it's not 'beta' as
in 'potentially unsafe'. It's more of: it may require you taking over more
often than we'd like to.

~~~
jacquesm
> it may require you taking over more often than we'd like to.

That spells 'not ready for production and release on public roads'.

~~~
viraptor
Response to both you and joosters: I think you're being too strict here. Who
knows what the threshold is? Maybe it works 100% of the time on highways.
Maybe has problems only when there are no lines on the street? It's not a
completely unsupervised technology and is not advertised as such. You can't
even legally treat it as such - you have to be prepared to take over at any
point.

Compare it to the regular cruise control, already present in production for
years. Would you say cruise control is not ready for production or release on
public roads? It's a tiny subset of what Tesla's update does. (and it doesn't
even tell you when you need to take over)

~~~
jacquesm
Driving a car is different from 'taking over', if you drive a car you are
alert because you are controlling the vehicle, being prepared to 'take over'
is like having to wait for something out of the ordinary to happen and people
are notoriously bad at such tasks. Their attention will be sharp for a little
while and then drop off to levels where if something requiring intervention
does happen they likely will have very little situational awareness, whereas
if the same situation would happen when they were driving the car themselves
they would likely be able to respond adequately because they were already
processing all the relevant bits of information and would have accurate
situational awareness.

If you're required to be ready to intervene that's about the worst possible
way to introduce automated driving. And more to the point: the better the
implementation the longer between 'interventions' the more likely that such an
intervention will not be useful at all.

~~~
pixelcloud
Maybe the feature is not really a beta, but Tesla is trying to get the public
and regulators to accept the idea of a beta-feature-OTA-update to a car.

------
jzwinck
> Tesla requires drivers to remain engaged and aware when Autosteer is
> enabled. Drivers must keep their hands on the steering wheel.

Which sense of "must" is used here? The car seems to play an unwinnable game
with the driver: keep your hands on the wheel or I'll...what? Disengage
autosteer and perhaps crash? With no enforcement mechanism, drivers are
incentivized to "abuse" (aka "use") the system as much as it allows.

~~~
Analemma_
You can defeat the system any number of ways. This is just to wash Tesla's
hands of any liability: if you get in a crash because you intentionally
subverted the engagement requirements, it's clearly your own fault (not
attacking Tesla here, it's what all the other carmakers do too).

~~~
dogma1138
Not sure about US law but pretty much all driving laws I've seen mandate that
you have to keep both hands on the wheel unless you are operating another
system in the car in which case you still have to keep 1 hand on the wheel.

------
OopsCriticality
I was surprised to find that the Autopilot feature is a paid $2500 upgrade,
according to one source.[0] I'm not surprised that Tesla is charging for the
upgrade, but that in all the press and enthusiast coverage of Tesla, I don't
recall it being mentioned before.

[0] [http://blog.caranddriver.com/elon-take-the-wheel-we-test-
tes...](http://blog.caranddriver.com/elon-take-the-wheel-we-test-teslas-new-
autopilot-feature/)

~~~
adanto6840
I may be wrong, but I think that they removed the "Tech Package" option
(offered at initial purchase) and now instead offer the "Auto-Pilot Features"
option.

I'm not sure if they install the hardware sensors regardless & only control
access via software, though, but I'd be curious about this for sure. Anyone
know?

IIRC, when the Auto-Pilot hardware/option was originally released the "Tech
Package" was a pre-req to buying the "Auto-Pilot" option.

~~~
sowbug
"Tech Package with Autopilot" used to be a $4,250 option including a bunch of
small features such as LED cornering lights, fog lights, and a rear trunk that
opens remotely. I don't know whether all those differences were actually just
access-controlled in software.

For the autopilot features, the difference was only software. Even before the
Autopilot option was first available to order in October 2014, cars were being
silently shipped with Autopilot-ready hardware for several months. For those
cars, it's possible to call up Tesla with a credit card and enable the feature
over the phone.

~~~
toomuchtodo
> including a bunch of small features such as LED cornering lights, fog
> lights, and a rear trunk that opens remotely.

These were moved to the Premium Interior and Lighting Package ($3000).

------
verelo
All these controls sound very similar to those in my current year
Mercedes...although i would be hopeful that the autosteer on offer here is
better than the Distronic plus "lane assist" in the Merc, which while OK, does
not do a great job on less than gentle turns above 50km/hr (but its actually
great below that speed - to the point I wonder why i'm even in the seat, in
particular in stop-start traffic situations). It certainly sounds similar from
the "hands must be on the wheel" requirement.

I look forward to the next step up from all the car makers, which is clearly
the car driving on its own in a much more confident way, with the driver
simply there to manage exceptions as opposed to being 'assisted' by technology
as is with the current implementations.

~~~
eclipxe
The hands must be on the wheels part is a CYA statement. There are many videos
released today that show that you really do not have to have your hands on the
wheel. Mercedes' system requires driver input every 14 seconds.

~~~
csours
I wonder why 14? Lucky for dwarves?

------
mmerkes
The auto-park feature would be super handy, but I don't see an auto-unpark
feature... I look forward to seeing Teslas stuck in amazingly small parking
spots!

~~~
lutorm
The phase space for getting out of a parking spot is substantially larger than
that for getting into one...

------
Mizza
This seems insanely dangerous to me. They're introducing a feature which
could, potentially, cause massive highway accidents, but providing
documentation that amounts to little more than a glorified README file?:

> Auto Lane Change

> Changing lanes when Autosteer is engaged is simple: engage the turn signal
> and Model S will move itself to the adjacent lane when it’s safe to do so.

A single sentence! What's the point of having drivers license lessons and
testing if the fundamental operation of the vehicle can change so drastically?

Am I being a luddite, or does anybody else feel this way?

~~~
mynameisvlad
> What's the point of having drivers license lessons and testing

Hah, implying that these are actually useful. The Washington state test and
generic lesson plan doesn't even include highway driving. It's a 20 minute
test that quite possibly anyone could pass; all I had to do was briefly drive
around, and the hardest part was probably parallel parking with a couple of
feet of leeway, and controlling your speed down a hill.

~~~
mikestew
The point of a driver's license is to have something to hold over your head so
you'll pay your tickets. Oh, you thought it was about safety and competence?
My 50 year old wife got her "time to renew" letter in the mail: "check this
box if your eyes are still 20/40". Cataracts so bad you can barely see the
dashboard? Been putting off that eye exam because you _know_ you need glasses?
No problem, just check a box and you can still drive! I guess the token eye
check at the DMV was too onerous for WA drivers. Small wonder why WA drivers
suck so much.

~~~
tbomb
I recently moved states and was in person at the DMV. I handed the clerk an
existing (out of state) license that had a corrective lenses restriction on
it, and I informed the clerk that I was currently wearing contact lenses
before taking their eye test. They still didn't put the restriction on it..

------
grecy
Videos are starting to show up on youtube.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3yCAZWdqX_Y](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3yCAZWdqX_Y)

VERY impressive.

------
NN88
How is this different from Mercedes-Benz's "self driving?"

~~~
brk
Does it have to be? (serious question).

Right now, IMO, we just need more self-driving cars in general to move the
whole concept in terms of acceptability and availability. There is certainly
lots of room for innovation, but for now just more product selection alone is
valuable.

~~~
NN88
I'm not being facetious, just curious. Is this novel in any way or just an
expansion of technology on the market?

~~~
derefr
I think the part that's constantly fascinating about the Tesla cars is that
these features are being delivered as software updates. This would be like a
software update that switched your phone from 3G to 4G.

~~~
vincentkriek
Although I agree it's a cool way of rolling out features it's more like buying
a phone with 4G capabilities but it not being rolled out until a software
update; It's always been possible in the cars they just got the federal
approvement now.

~~~
derefr
In one sense, yes—though I would also compare it to some of the cool hacks
NASA does getting orbiting telescopes and Mars rovers doing new things they
weren't doing before. All the sensors and motors and antennae are there, but a
firmware update can put them together in new ways to enable entirely new high-
level behaviors that weren't being considered or planned for at launch.

An example in this vein: imagine a firmware update to a wi-fi router to give
it MIMO support. A MIMO antenna isn't any different than a regular antenna;
the difference comes in the baseband firmware doing clever-er math to pull out
overlapped signals, spacially model their sources, and modulate its own output
so the signal will constructively interfere for best performance at the
destination.

------
blisterpeanuts
This is fantastic. I'm psyched, not just because of the cool technology, but
also because it will finally spur the public to demand more frequent and
accurate road striping.

Massachusetts has terrible road striping; it seems as though they get around
to it about every four or five years, waiting until the lanes and ramp
markings are beyond dangerous. This has been irritating me for years. And then
they seem to use some kind of cheap paint that wears off quickly. Public works
job security, I suppose.

But automated lane navigation will require clear markings. Hundreds of
thousands of deaths later, we just might finally get a safer road system.
Pathetic, but better late than never, I guess.

~~~
josefresco
I doubt relying on lane markers alone will be enough given the variety of
markers, and possible road construction that will be encountered by these
cars.

------
waterlesscloud
Here's a video of version 7 in action that someone linked in
/r/selfdrivingcars last night. Not super-informative, but interesting to watch
anyway.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cw7Esg-
txR0&feature=youtu.be](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cw7Esg-
txR0&feature=youtu.be)

~~~
MichaelGG
Interesting that while he's in the left lane the dashboard seems to be warning
of a close object to the rear-left (the wall of the lane).

------
roflchoppa
Yo if anyone at tesla is reading this, can you implement a feature for the car
to move over into the far side of the lane when people are lane-splitting?
People already do it manually on the highway, but if this car also did it
would be neat. thx and look twice for motorcycles.

------
derek
> Drivers must keep their hands on the steering wheel.

This seems odd, my understanding was that drivers needed to "check in" every
so often, not handle the wheel at all times.

~~~
3JPLW
It seems like it'll create an uncanny valley between real control (the car
immediately reacts to every little movement) and soft control (the car kinda-
sorta follows what it thinks your intent behind the movement was; sometimes
ignoring small deviations). I'm really curious how it feels.

~~~
henrikschroder
In my car, the self-driving forces are very weak, so it feels more like you're
driving on rails. With one hand on the wheel, it's not jerking your hand
around, it's softly nudging you to do the right thing, keeping the car in the
lane.

------
sandworm101
Note two words absent from the OP: "Speed limit".

This machine will keep pace with traffic. OK. Does that mean it will break
speed limits? Unless it is scanning for each and every potential road sign, it
simply cannot be respond to arbitrary/temporary limits. The determination of
the legal limit on a piece of road is a complex task. Road construction, local
conditions, sunrise/set, time of year (school zones) and even weather can be a
factor. And let us not forget "Speed limit X when children on road". You need
some serious cpu time to work out whether that person walking along the road
is a schoolgirl or a construction worker.

Imho any system not capable of determining the speed limit accurately is a
legal liability. Have fun with the tickets.

>eliminating the need for drivers to worry about complex and difficult parking
maneuvers.

No. Parallel parking is not a complex nor difficult maneuver. It is total
beginner territory. No lives are at risk. With a decent bumper, even risk of
property damage is minimal. Anyone not capable of learning to parallel park
probably shouldn't be behind the wheel of much anything. Anyone buying this
car to avoid such mundane tasks isn't someone with whom I want to share the
road.

~~~
halosghost
Actually, my dad has a Model S and one of the coolest features is that it
actually does scan for speed limit signs and tell you the current speed limit
on the dashboard (you can configure a limit over the speed limit for when this
should show up).

Now, I have no idea whether or not this feature is utilized for autopilot
(though I would kind of assume it would be), but it is there :)

~~~
duskwuff
Is it actually scanning for signs, or is it using map data to determine the
speed for the current road segment? I suspect it's actually the latter;
reading road signs is a somewhat difficult CV problem, whereas having a well-
annotated map is largely a solved problem already. (My old Garmin GPS had this
data!)

~~~
JaggedJax
They very well may be doing the latter as well, but Tesla has specifically
said that their camera reads the speed from road signs[1]

[1] [http://www.teslamotors.com/blog/dual-motor-model-s-and-
autop...](http://www.teslamotors.com/blog/dual-motor-model-s-and-autopilot)

~~~
joosters
Reading road signs is exceedingly tricky. It's not just the OCR, there's
plenty of other gotchas. e.g. what if you miss a road sign because you were
overtaking a truck when the sign went past?

Road signs also have situational contexts. e.g. in the UK there are road signs
indicating a max speed for an upcoming sharp bend (or series of bends) in the
road. There isn't always a matching speed limit sign after the bend because
drivers are assumed to work that out for themselves. But will the cars do so?
Or will your self-driving car get stuck at the lower speed?

~~~
njharman
> Reading road signs is exceedingly tricky.

You (and parents) vastly overestimate difficulty. They are reflective, high
contrast, using known font and very limited symbols (0-9). Car CV systems can
distinguish pedestrians from background, they can read a freaking sign.

~~~
wibr
You have to distinguish the sign from signs on trucks (indicating their
maximum speed), reflections of signs in windows, you have to recognize the
sub-signs which might limit the scope of the main sign (speed limit might only
apply to exit or under certain weather conditions), then there are the usual
adverse conditions like rain, reflections, dirt, plants, shadows etc.. Just
search for "german traffic sign recognition benchmark" to see what the state
of the art is (ConvNet).

~~~
njharman
It knows where cars and the lanes are. So no it doesn't think there are speed
signs in middle of road or on a truck.

Sub signs I'll give you. Don't have any where I live though.

Compared to all the other things it must do reading signs is on the easy list.

------
Animats
This is similar to what other high-end cars have, lane-keeping and smart
cruise control, usable only in freeway-type situations. "Drivers must keep
their hands on the steering wheel." Mercedes calls this "Active Lane Keeping
Assist", and has offered it for several years now. Here's someone using it
with a can taped to the steering wheel to defeat the "hands on steering wheel"
requirement.[1] All the major manufacturers have demoed this.

This is NTSB level 2 automation, (Combined Function Automation).[2] ("An
example ... is adaptive cruise control in combination with lane centering.")
Google is at level 3 (Limited Self-Driving Automation), and going for level 4
(Full Self-Driving Automation).

The big problem at Level 2 is keeping drivers from using it when they
shouldn't. Level 2 doesn't understand intersections at all, for example. Or
pedestrians, bicycles, baby carriages, deer, snow, etc. That's why the major
manufacturers are being so cautious about launching it into a world of driving
idiots.

Volvo has now officially taken the position that if an autonomous car of
theirs gets into a crash, it's Volvo's fault and they will accept
liability.[3] Now that Volvo has said that, other car manufacturers will
probably have to commit to that as well.

[1]
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kv9JYqhFV-M](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kv9JYqhFV-M)
[2]
[http://www.nhtsa.gov/About+NHTSA/Press+Releases/U.S.+Departm...](http://www.nhtsa.gov/About+NHTSA/Press+Releases/U.S.+Department+of+Transportation+Releases+Policy+on+Automated+Vehicle+Development)
[3] [http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/215832-volvo-well-take-
th...](http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/215832-volvo-well-take-the-blame-if-
our-self-driving-cars-crash)

------
tonylemesmer
To me a big issue is the perception of the autonomous driving mode to other
road users. How will other drivers and pedestrians know that this car is being
driven automatically and treat it accordingly?

In the Bosch video[1] (also linked elsewhere on this thread), the system jumps
out of autonomous mode at the first junction. The driver has to re-engage it.
Drivers who are not closely monitoring the car situation might not realise
what's going on and take 5-10 seconds to realise they need to re-engage
autonomous mode or to take over fully.

Some following-drivers will get agitated by this, in the same way that some do
with elderly or learner drivers and make silly impatient manoeuvres. If the
state of the autonomous car is clearly communicated to other road users then
they might be prepared to make allowances.

During this transition phase of mostly human drivers vs. autonomous drivers it
will be these situations that frame people's perception of the merits of
autonomous vehicles.

That and how the systems react to dangerous swerving or lane changing or
conflict situations where collisions are impossible to avoid. The "Google
system" or the "Tesla system" will be tested millions of times a day and face
intense public scrutiny whereas human drivers are treated individually.

[1] [https://youtu.be/KwD1hjlbhwU](https://youtu.be/KwD1hjlbhwU)

------
thoman23
"Autosteering (Beta)"

That must be the single most frightening use of the Beta label in history.

~~~
dingo_bat
And in the explanation it says "Driver must keep hands on the steering wheel".
Then how will lane change on turn signal happen?

------
abalone
Any thoughts on the potential manufacturer liability for software bugs that
lead to accidents?

Certainly there are a lot of precedents with anti-lock braking systems, cruise
control, etc. But this stuff seems like such a massive expansion of complexity
of software control I wonder what will go down in the courts when the
inevitable happens.

------
mixmastamyk
Unfortunately little mention of front collision avoidance (braking), an
important safety feature, which I've waited for on Teslas must be years now.

In the forums there's always the guy that says we should "drive better"
instead. With that logic, there's little use for safety features at all.

~~~
leelin
That's already been release since the previous version via the traffic aware
cruise control and emergency braking.

Specifically, the Model S locks onto the car in front of you and matches its
speed, maintaining a certain number of car lengths behind it (which you can
set). When the car changes lanes, your Model S speeds up a bit to fill the
gap, and when a car cuts into the lane, the Model S slows down (although this
one is a bit scary). If the car in front comes to a complete stop, the Model S
also smoothly slows down into a complete stop.

~~~
anxman
This is correct. My Model S will fully come to a complete stop on the highway
and will alert me if I'm approaching a vehicle too quickly and it senses a
risk of collision. I've had the car save me from an accident at least once by
applying the brake for me.

~~~
mixmastamyk
Nice, and it works without the need for cruise control to be on, and at all
speeds?

~~~
anxman
Emergency braking is active with or without the cruise control.

------
spoon16
Anyone know how well the lane change feature works in heavy traffic?

~~~
lvspiff
I for one would hope Autosteer isn't engaged in heavy traffic...although
ability to autopilot during a sig alert on I10 in downtown LA on a Monday
morning does sound worth the price of the car and then some

~~~
vvanders
TACC in heavy traffic is worth the price of admission alone, I was shocked at
how much unconscious cognitive load there is associated with stop and go
traffic.

You still need to pay attention but I definitely felt much less exhausted
after they rolled out that feature. Really excited to see how autopilot
performs.

~~~
jerrac
Has anyone made a TACC add on for normal cars? The self-driving stuff I'm
reserving judgement on, but a cruise control that would let me automatically
match the speed of the car in front of me would be awesome. I've wanted one
for years...

~~~
spearo77
Subaru has had that technology for years. It came to the USA models about two
years ago. They call it "EyeSight" >>
[http://www.subaru.com/engineering/eyesight.html](http://www.subaru.com/engineering/eyesight.html)

------
Shivetya
Are they going to take responsibility for accidents like Volvo will? While
none of the features revealed are new to the industry he does a great job of
marketing it. The ace Tesla has is that over the air updates, something the
other manufacturers will need to work out, hopefully with an industry wide
standard that can be regulated properly to insure safety, security, and
liability.

------
mathrawka
As someone who spends a fair amount of time traveling between countries that
drive on different sides of the road... I am always getting the turn signal
and windshield wipers mixed up. So I doubt I can use the auto lane change
feature.

~~~
yen223
> I am always getting the turn signal and windshield wipers mixed up

That happens even between cars that drive on the same side. It seems different
car manufacturers have different standards as to where the turn signal and
windshield wiper should be.

------
51Cards
"Drivers must keep their hands on the steering wheel."

This video would seem to indicate otherwise?

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3yCAZWdqX_Y](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3yCAZWdqX_Y)

~~~
eclipxe
Correct, that statement is just for cover. You don't really have to keep your
hands on the wheel at all.

------
capkutay
This is a cool technical achievement, but I don't see the practical use nor
does it seem like a big win for tesla drives. So it allows drives to _kind of_
tune out while driving on the freeway?

------
devit
Is it smart enough to not change to a lane going in the opposite direction or
change to a "lane" that is actually a ditch off the road?

~~~
anxman
The Model S observes double-lane markers but it's up to the driver to initiate
a lane change.

------
rl3
I wonder how the parallel parking system copes with tailgaters rendering a
specific spot untenable.

