It worked out OK for these guys:
Maybe Elmo saw the film on the big screen in his yacht and decided that’s how Teslas should be thought of.
It is interesting to revisit the OP in threads like these. Quoting the article:
Tesla is aiming to have its driverless technology ready by 2018.
That didn’t happen.
Google has never given a formal deadline, but has suggested it’s working on having the technology ready by 2020.
That mostly didn’t happen. Waymo did open a public beta of their cars in 2020. It’s an extremely narrow use case (and IMO, doesn’t even reach level 4, due to the use of backup operators which are employed on a regular basis). Still, it almost squeaks out a win if you are very generous.
Toyota is looking to have a driverless car ready to go by 2020.
That didn’t happen.
BMW will introduce a fully self-driving car in 2021.
That didn’t happen. BMW now hopes to have level 3 by 2025.
Volvo is aiming to make its cars “deathproof” by 2020 by rolling out semi-autonomous features in its cars, eventually working up to fully driverless ones.
Volvo did not make their cars deathproof by 2020.
Nissan is committed to have a commercially viable autonomous car on the roads by 2020.
That didn’t happen. ProPILOT did not evolve into self-driving.
Ford is aiming to have its fully autonomous car ready in four to five years.
Four to five years would be 2021-22. That didn’t happen.
General Motors will have a fleet of self-driving cars available for employee use in late 2016.
Cruise did have their first driverless ride in 2021, and offered public rides in 2022. But like Waymo, it is highly geofenced and requires a remote human backup. Their original idea was to have a self-driving retrofit kit, but that never happened.
Daimler, the maker of the Mercedes-Benz, plans to have its driverless trucks ready by 2020.
That didn’t happen. They do have a system for their cars that allows you to take your hands off the wheel… at speeds below 40 mph.
The Audi A7 drove 550 miles by itself in 2015, but there’s no word about when it’s hitting the market.
Well, there’s no actual projection here. But Audi scrapped their project completely. I guess they’re relying on VW now.
Baidu, a Beijing-based search company, is aiming to have a commercial model of its driverless car ready by 2018.
That didn’t happen. They may have tested driverless cars in China in 2022 (I can’t tell, but they did get permission). There’s no commercial model.
Honda is aiming to have fully autonomous cars on the road in 2020.
That didn’t happen. I think they have an L3 system available in Japan. Nothing in the US.
Hyundai is aiming to have driverless features in its cars by 2020, but won’t have a fully autonomous car ready until 2030.
I guess we’ll have to wait until 2030 for this one. It seems a tad unambitious.
It’s rumored that Apple is working on a driverless car, but the company has yet to confirm.
There is still no Apple Car, let alone a self-driving one. But also no projected date.
Auto supplier Bosch has been working on driverless technology for several years with the ultimate goal of having an autonomous car ready in 2020.
That didn’t happen. I guess they probably make a few components that self-driving companies use.
PSA Groupe, the second largest car manufacturer in Europe, is aiming to have fully driverless cars ready by 2020.
A lot of 2020s, eh? That also didn’t happen. I guess 2020 sounded futuristic and far-off in 2017.
Start-up Faraday Future is working on an electric car and is developing autonomous technology for it.
Faraday Future has shipped a single car, period. It’s not autonomous.
LeEco, a Chinese tech company, is also working on an autonomous, electric car.
LeNope.
4 years is still a decent amount of time. Will Waymo or Cruise deploy a proper Level 4 car before 2027? It’s possible. But on the other hand, they don’t have much motivation to, being in the robotaxi business as opposed to the car business. Carmakers other than Tesla appear to be mostly flailing. I think it’s likely that Tesla will allow hands-free, but not driverless cars before that time. Pure driverless will take a while longer.
That was some claim all the same. Wording, dudes… makes Elon sound almost quaint.
Give those guys a break. They were all busy getting us that fusion reactor in 2020.
I thought on emergency calls firetrucks used flashing lights and blaring sirens… Cruise vehicles can’t pick this up?
lol Cruise robotaxi comes to a stop in wet concrete.
https://www.sfgate.com/tech/article/cruise-stuck-wet-concrete-sf-18297946.php
Good luck to the people living in SF, it seems you all agreed for you, your kids and your disabled to be beta testers for all of the world’s “self driving” cars.
You must be so proud to be on the crushing bleeding edge of tech.
Dirty Harry was a San Francisco cop. As he almost said on one memorable occasion:
Nuthin’ wrong with crushing people. 'Long as the right people get crushed.
Are you talking to the 3 members of the California Public Utilities Commission who green-lit the expansion? Or are you under the impression that all the citizens of SF approved it?
I am under the impression that nominally representatives of the public approved this expansion.
I am also under the impression that the people approving this stuff in SF are doing a spectacularly bad job representing the public interest.
The members of the PUC are appointed by the governor. So there is only a very indirect connection between what the “people” want, and what the PUC approves.
That is why I wish “the people” who got signed up to be beta testers good luck.
A key sentence from an article in today’s local newspaper:
“In California, it matters little whether city and emergency officials oppose driverless taxis on their streets. Authority lies with the state, which has embraced them.”
The city and emergency officials who oppose driverless taxis on their streets are very short-sited: there is a massive loss of lives and property because of the deficiencies of human drivers. When driverless cars are perfected there will be a substantial improvement–and you can’t perfect driverless cars without testing them on the streets.
“When” is the issue. Right now they seem to be creating havoc.
But can’t Teslas float?
I hope his insurance company denies any claim he makes. It seems basically deliberate.
FSD has gaze tracking using the interior camera to ensure you’re actually looking at the road. Obviously the driver chose to ignore what he was seeing.
Stupidity is a covered peril, they would have to prove that he was actually trying to damage it (not that he just drove deliberately into the water).
That said, California is one of the states where Tesla sells its own insurance product…if that’s who he bought it from, that’ll be an interesting conversation
I have to say that the warning signage was really pitifully inadequate to the actual threat ahead. Assuming the vid plays at actual driving speed, from the time the [flooded] sign becomes visible / legible until a driver needed to be braking aggressively is very short, a couple seconds at most.
I suspect many drivers of fully manual cars would have plowed into that water at a good clip too. Albeit probably not their full cruising speed.
Modern higher-end cars automated or otherwise give off a real aura of invincibility. It feels as if they can turn, stop, or accelerate better than any situation will ever require. Of course it’s an illusion and when a situation gets bad at 50+mph folks suddenly learn how much not-in-control they were and how screwed they now are as the expensive disaster unfolds.
That applies to a lot of tech outside of cars, too. The digital helpers can cover a lot of mistakes, up until they don’t–at which point they fail catastrophically. Digital products seem to have the effect of making the failure modes also digital. Analog stuff is in a constant state of being on the failure spectrum, which makes it more apparent when things are getting worse.