2025 EV & self-driving news

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

gorobei

Diamond Member
Jan 7, 2007
3,940
1,422
136
forbes goes over tesla's upcoming june fsd rollout date in austin tx.
they are desperately scrambling to get it hammered out in time.
they go over all the indicators that suggest you should press f to doubt:
  • 8Mpixel cameras only vs everyone else using lidar
  • backup remote operators for emergency takeover operating on cellular networks with too much lag/latency
  • test driver comments not painting a pretty picture
  • single small restricted zone in austin vs waymo operating in far larger areas
  • tesla has permit to test in CA but has never filed date with the state govt whereas every other company (even apple) has filed data. waymo has filed public data for peer review over the last 15 years.
general consensus is that this a forced deadline so elmo can say he kept his word and they delivered. get your popcorn and lawnchairs ready.
 

Kaido

Elite Member & Kitchen Overlord
Feb 14, 2004
50,365
6,542
136
But a guy here keeps telling us Tesla's Autopilot is already great.

I absolutely don't believe in the "all or nothing" approach because nothing ever changes if we insist on waiting for perfection; I believe in iterative development as a way to improve on existing defaults (ex. human error in driving). The current iteration of Autopilot IS fantastic:

1. The progress has been good, especially for an 11-year-old technology
2. It's the best system available for consumers on the market as it stands today
3. It's getting better every day! As with AI, "today will be the worst day the technology will ever be"

However:

1. It is not perfect
2. It is limited by a vision-only system
3. It does not work in all conditions

Also:

1. It took us until 2018 to make backup cameras standard; automatic emergency braking won't be standard until 2029
2. Tesla's push for FSD has created an industry-wide dragnet effect pushed ADAS, TACC, AEB, Bluecruse, EyeSight, Super Cruise, DeepSeek, etc. from competitors
3. Would you take 10% fewer accidents from driving under the influence? From lane merges? From distracted driving? From speeding? Features like seatbelts, crumble zones, and airbags are injury & death reduction tools, not magic cure-alls. The push for FSD is the same way. Non-telescoping steering wheels were responsible for some really horrible injuries & deaths, but the technology got iteratively better over the years, despite slow industry adoption:

Though the collapsible steering column was invented in the 1930s, GM didn’t begin installing them until 1967.

The first attempt to do something about this came in 1956. Ford began installing "deep dish" steering wheels and safety belts on their car lines. The deep dish wheel collapsed about 6" in the event of a frontal crash. This wasn't enough and people were still being killed by the steering column. In the mid-sixties collapsing columns were designed and installed in cars. The government liked the statistical improvements and they've had a say so in car designs ever since.

As far as ADAS systems go:

According to the national crash database in the US, Forward Collision Prevention systems have the potential to reduce crashes by 29%. Similarly, Lane Keeping Assistance is shown to offer a reduction potential of 19%, while Blind Zone Detection could decrease crash incidents by 9%.

According to a 2021 research report from Canalys, approximately 33 percent of new vehicles sold in the United States, Europe, Japan, and China had ADAS. The firm also predicted that fifty percent of all automobiles on the road by the year 2030 would be ADAS-enabled.

Moving into the future:

1. imo LIDAR or a similar system will be required for Level 5 autonomous vehicles. Tesla stands to make boatloads of money if they adopt a more functional system.
2. Very curious to see if you will ever really be able to auto-share your FSD personal vehicle in the future. I think Tesla sees the potential dollar signs in the future, which is why they skipped the "cheap" Model 2 variant & are moving directly into the self-driving ride-sharing market. If they can crack that code & also figure out the home robot assistant situation, they will be worth trillions (they exceeded a $1 trillion dollar market value again this month).
2. Tesla isn't necessarily wrong for their approach, at least not from a business perspective: customers would rather have a solution they can afford & provides an imperfect yet usable iterative improvement (ex. like the cruise control to TACC to Autopilot migration over the years). Consumer supervised FSD costs $8k; Waymo's sensor suite costs $100k & is only available for ridesharing. My buddy drives from CT to NYC a few times a week (4-hour round-trip) for his work commute & it can now self-drive his entire route.

Today's iteration of consumer-vehicle Autopilot is great! However, Autopilot is not perfect. I can't foresee the current HW4/AI4 solving L5 FSD, so either a new technology will need to be created or LIDAR will need to drop in price & get adopted for mass production. But imo some progress is better than no progress! In 2024, we had nearly 40,000 deaths from car accidents. For comparison, the 2003 Iraq War lasted for 7 years with about 4,500 American deaths total, or an average of 650 deaths per year, meaning we killed over 60x as many people just driving on the road in the same time span. Which, to me, is insane.

So yes, I will gladly accept iterative progress for imperfect improvements, which also has the side effect of moving the entire industry forward. Ford's BlueCruise didn't even come out until 2021 (7 years after Autopilot's first release) because moral incentives don't drive profits.
 
Reactions: Brovane

Fenixgoon

Lifer
Jun 30, 2003
32,926
12,259
136
I absolutely don't believe in the "all or nothing" approach because nothing ever changes if we insist on waiting for perfection; I believe in iterative development as a way to improve on existing defaults (ex. human error in driving). The current iteration of Autopilot IS fantastic:

1. The progress has been good, especially for an 11-year-old technology
2. It's the best system available for consumers on the market as it stands today
3. It's getting better every day! As with AI, "today will be the worst day the technology will ever be"

However:

1. It is not perfect
2. It is limited by a vision-only system
3. It does not work in all conditions

Also:

1. It took us until 2018 to make backup cameras standard; automatic emergency braking won't be standard until 2029
2. Tesla's push for FSD has created an industry-wide dragnet effect pushed ADAS, TACC, AEB, Bluecruse, EyeSight, Super Cruise, DeepSeek, etc. from competitors
3. Would you take 10% fewer accidents from driving under the influence? From lane merges? From distracted driving? From speeding? Features like seatbelts, crumble zones, and airbags are injury & death reduction tools, not magic cure-alls. The push for FSD is the same way. Non-telescoping steering wheels were responsible for some really horrible injuries & deaths, but the technology got iteratively better over the years, despite slow industry adoption:





As far as ADAS systems go:



Moving into the future:

1. imo LIDAR or a similar system will be required for Level 5 autonomous vehicles. Tesla stands to make boatloads of money if they adopt a more functional system.
2. Very curious to see if you will ever really be able to auto-share your FSD personal vehicle in the future. I think Tesla sees the potential dollar signs in the future, which is why they skipped the "cheap" Model 2 variant & are moving directly into the self-driving ride-sharing market. If they can crack that code & also figure out the home robot assistant situation, they will be worth trillions (they exceeded a $1 trillion dollar market value again this month).
2. Tesla isn't necessarily wrong for their approach, at least not from a business perspective: customers would rather have a solution they can afford & provides an imperfect yet usable iterative improvement (ex. like the cruise control to TACC to Autopilot migration over the years). Consumer supervised FSD costs $8k; Waymo's sensor suite costs $100k & is only available for ridesharing. My buddy drives from CT to NYC a few times a week (4-hour round-trip) for his work commute & it can now self-drive his entire route.

Today's iteration of consumer-vehicle Autopilot is great! However, Autopilot is not perfect. I can't foresee the current HW4/AI4 solving L5 FSD, so either a new technology will need to be created or LIDAR will need to drop in price & get adopted for mass production. But imo some progress is better than no progress! In 2024, we had nearly 40,000 deaths from car accidents. For comparison, the 2003 Iraq War lasted for 7 years with about 4,500 American deaths total, or an average of 650 deaths per year, meaning we killed over 60x as many people just driving on the road in the same time span. Which, to me, is insane.

So yes, I will gladly accept iterative progress for imperfect improvements, which also has the side effect of moving the entire industry forward. Ford's BlueCruise didn't even come out until 2021 (7 years after Autopilot's first release) because moral incentives don't drive profits.
The problem isn't Tesla's systems per se. It's how Tesla has marketed the system to the public and to investors.

Autopilot/FSD are not accurate descriptors because the systems are technically incapable of being an autopilot or full self driving. Teslas will never be able to be run as robotaxis without a completely new vehicle model and computer vision architecture (lidar is a required piece of the puzzle).

If Tesla has marketed these systems as some form of ADAS like everyone else, no one would really care. No other manufacturer uses terms like "autopilot" or "full self driving" to describe their ADAS systems because right now they are all (including Tesla) completely incapable of Level5 automated driving.
 
Reactions: Brainonska511

Kaido

Elite Member & Kitchen Overlord
Feb 14, 2004
50,365
6,542
136
The problem isn't Tesla's systems per se. It's how Tesla has marketed the system to the public and to investors.

Autopilot/FSD are not accurate descriptors because the systems are technically incapable of being an autopilot or full self driving. Teslas will never be able to be run as robotaxis without a completely new vehicle model and computer vision architecture (lidar is a required piece of the puzzle).

If Tesla has marketed these systems as some form of ADAS like everyone else, no one would really care. No other manufacturer uses terms like "autopilot" or "full self driving" to describe their ADAS systems because right now they are all (including Tesla) completely incapable of Level5 automated driving.

I 100% think it should NOT be named Autopilot. "Full Self-Driving (Supervised)" is ridiculous marketing as well. It's not FULL if it's SUPERVISED lol.


I've mentioned in other threads what I call the "lull of complacency", which is that AP is pretty good in most situations, but it's when you get comfortable with relying on it & then it does something weird & THAT is the issue! Same with relying on ChatGPT's hallucinations & eating ultra-processed fast food all the time, when we know that poor-quality food is a major contributor to the Top 10 CDC killers...convenience becomes a trap!
 
Last edited:
Reactions: Fenixgoon

manly

Lifer
Jan 25, 2000
12,982
3,747
136
So yes, I will gladly accept iterative progress for imperfect improvements, which also has the side effect of moving the entire industry forward. Ford's BlueCruise didn't even come out until 2021 (7 years after Autopilot's first release) because moral incentives don't drive profits.
You basically propped up a straw man just to disagree with me.
Nobody here argued against iterative improvement; I'm pretty sure none of us is the Unabomber and we're all for iterative progress in many facets of life. I'm not aware that I argued in this thread, or any other one, that I demand perfection or nothing at all.

🤷‍♂️

Note I have no problem with you being impressed with Autopilot as it is; you're certainly entitled to your opinions and I have no reason to doubt your sincerity. I do find it somewhat striking how much you compliment AP, but I honestly don't know how many people are using it in the real world with good results.

(As an aside, I agree with you that autonomy can drive better and safer than humans can. Waymo aside, we're just not there yet.)


The problem isn't Tesla's systems per se. It's how Tesla has marketed the system to the public and to investors.

Autopilot/FSD are not accurate descriptors because the systems are technically incapable of being an autopilot or full self driving. Teslas will never be able to be run as robotaxis without a completely new vehicle model and computer vision architecture (lidar is a required piece of the puzzle).

If Tesla has marketed these systems as some form of ADAS like everyone else, no one would really care. No other manufacturer uses terms like "autopilot" or "full self driving" to describe their ADAS systems because right now they are all (including Tesla) completely incapable of Level5 automated driving.
While this was certainly an original issue, it's not really the point anymore. Elon has been claiming for the better part of 7 years that FSD is tantalizingly close to being done. This ongoing lie has worked stupendously for shareholders, so he has no choice but to continue the charade.*

They're claiming the big robotaxi reveal is next month, so we'll see how that goes. Presumably it doesn't get scared of some shadows, run off the road and flip over an embankment. We're all about iterative improvements around here.


* The RDF is the same reason why Elon leaving DOGE and returning to Tesla full-time is viewed as good for the company. When the reality is that Elon's political stances have arguably permanently dampened demand for Tesla's autos. But that's okay, since they're an AI and robotics play now. 🤣
 

Kaido

Elite Member & Kitchen Overlord
Feb 14, 2004
50,365
6,542
136
932-mile solid-state battery eyed for the future:


Silicone-based battery could push range to 3,000 miles:


Both are currently vaporware, however, this is a neat article from 2024:

World's 1st silicon anode EV battery will let you drive up to 186 miles after just 5 minutes of charging
 

Kaido

Elite Member & Kitchen Overlord
Feb 14, 2004
50,365
6,542
136
What could go wrong?

From last year:


Meanwhile, Tesla, long bullish on its "Full Self-Driving" (FSD) system, is now effectively admitting that true autonomy is still out of reach. Tesla’s upcoming "cybertaxi" fleet will reportedly include teleoperation—remote human drivers stepping in when the system struggles. Tesla claims their FSD system only requires support every 13 miles, but in dense urban settings, drivers report interventions as frequently as every 1-2 miles. For context, Waymo’s last reported disengagement rate in 2023 was once every 17,311 miles. Even in 2015, Waymo achieved 1 disengagement per 1,250 miles—meaning Tesla could be over a decade behind.


One study by a team of researchers at Coventry University's Centre for Future Transport and Cities found that even a 300- to 500-millisecond latency, or around half a second, can challenge a teleoperator's ability to control the vehicle even at slow speeds.

"Public roads. Invite only. Plenty of tele-ops to ensure safety levels ("we can't screw up")," Jonas wrote.


In preparation for the launch, the company this week operated a test vehicle on public roads in Austin with no one in the driver’s seat for the first time, according to the person. A Tesla engineer was riding in a passenger seat of a Model Y SUV, which drove autonomously with no remote operation, the person said.

Musk said this month that Tesla would initially roll out a fleet of about 10 self-driving robotaxis in Austin before expanding to a thousand vehicles within a few months.


 

Kaido

Elite Member & Kitchen Overlord
Feb 14, 2004
50,365
6,542
136
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |