this post was submitted on 16 Jun 2024
1 points (100.0% liked)

[Dormant] moved to [email protected]

1596 readers
1 users here now

This community has moved to:

[email protected]

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 4 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago (1 children)

If it needs supervision, why is it still called 'full' self driving?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Ambitious marketing. I think they're still closer to self driving than competing systems, but "full self driving" is definitely a misleading name for what the software can currently do. We are gradually seeing more drives with zero disengagements, so the technology is slowly getting there.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

Zero disengagement is exactly what the drivers should be doing in its current state and why it shouldnt be called full self driving.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago

Ah, I think we are using term "disengagement" slightly differently. A disengagement generally refers to a human driver disengaging FSD as a manual override, not a human driver being disengaged with the task of driving.