Tesla Autopilot is a lot dumber than CEO Musk claims, says Cali DMV after speaking to the software's boss
- Reference: 1620430862
- News link: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2021/05/07/tesla_engineer_autopilot/
- Source link:
Legal non-profit PlainSite obtained the [1]DMV documents via the California Public Records Act and they include a summary, written by Miguel Acosta, chief of the DMV's Autonomous Vehicles Branch, of a March 9, 2021 meeting between DMV officials and Tesla personnel.
Acosta wrote that "DMV asked CJ [CJ Moore, director of Autopilot software at Tesla] to address, from an engineering perspective, Elon’s messaging about L5 capability by the end of the year."
[2]
[3]
[4]
This refers to a Twitter exchange at the beginning of the year. On December 31, 2020, Comma AI's Twitter account [5]said to Musk, "We hear you are extremely confident that you’ll have level five
[6]full automation
next year…" and invited him to wager on that.On January 1, 2021, Musk [7]responded , "Tesla Full Self-Driving will work at a safety level well above that of the average driver this year, of that I am confident. Can’t speak for regulators though."
But as Acosta recounts, Tesla engineers see things differently. "Elon’s tweet does not match engineering reality per CJ," wrote Acosta.
[8]
An effort was made to redact this particular passage but it wasn't very effective – selecting the unusually large area of whitespace then copying and pasting the result into a text editor reveals the white-on-white text.
Selective disclosure
Aaron Greenspan, founder of PlainSite, told The Register in an email that the DMV messed up. "The DMV attempted to redact that text and clearly failed," he said. "They essentially admit as much regarding selective disclosure in the cover letter posted at the beginning of the PDF on our site. Whether the slip-up was inadvertent or intentional I don't know."
The DMV did not respond to a request to explain what happened. The remainder of Acosta's observations are visible in the posted file:
Tesla is at Level 2 currently. The ratio of driver interaction would need to be in the magnitude of 1 or 2 million miles per driver interaction to move into higher levels of automation. Tesla indicated that Elon is extrapolating on the rates of improvement when speaking about L5 capabilities. Tesla couldn’t say if the rate of improvement would make it to L5 by end of calendar year.
The DMV's concern is that Tesla must provide clear communication to the public about the capabilities of its vehicles. "As Tesla is aware, the public’s misunderstanding about the limits of the technology and its misuse can have tragic consequences," said Acosta in an April 21 letter to Eric Williams, associate general counsel at Tesla.
The May 7, 2016 fatal crash of Tesla with a trailer truck near Williston, Florida represents an example of the potential consequences of misunderstanding the limits of the company's self-driving technology. The US National Transportation Safety Board in its report
[9]PDF
on the incident said the probable cause of the crash "was the truck driver’s failure to yield the right of way to the car, combined with the car driver’s inattention due to over-reliance on vehicle automation…"The [10]fatal March 23, 2018, crash of a Tesla Model X in Mountain View, California has also been attributed to "the Tesla 'Autopilot' system’s limitations, the driver’s over-reliance on the 'Autopilot' and the driver’s distraction."
[11]Technoking of comedy? Elon Musk to host Saturday Night Live
[12]Watchdog 'enables Tesla Autopilot' with string, some weight, a seat belt ... and no actual human at the wheel
[13]'There was no one driving that vehicle': Texas cops suspect Autopilot involved after two men killed in Tesla crash
[14]Listen, son... Monster trucks just aren't cool anymore. Real winners drive Tesla Roadsters
Tesla did not respond to a request for comment but the company [15]claims that its vehicles "are engineered to be the safest cars in the world."
Greenspan disagrees. "I think there is significant evidence suggesting that Tesla Autopilot is dangerous to the public as designed and advertised," he said. "Future versions may be safer as the result of design and marketing changes and better testing."
Greenspan in the past has been a short seller of Tesla stock and last year sued Elon Musk, Tesla, and others
[16]PDF
for defamation, harassment, copyright infringement, DMCA violations, and securities violations.[17]
Asked whether his legal challenge of Musk has any bearing on his concerns about Tesla's Autopilot, he responded that all journalism has bias.
"That being said, at the time I published this response from the DMV I did not have a short position on Tesla," said Greenspan. "I have pursued the truth about Elon Musk and other billionaires/ultra-wealthy individuals at various points both when I have had a respective short position and when I have had no position at all."
"I’ve also reported on companies in which I or my family have held long positions at times. I can’t predict in advance whether a document will confirm or reject my investment hypothesis, or if it will end up being relevant to anyone at all, but in the end what matters is that the documents speak for themselves, not what I think or what I’m invested in. And both long and short-sellers have cited PlainSite documents for this very reason." ®
Get our [18]Tech Resources
[1] https://www.plainsite.org/documents/28jcs0/california-dmv-tesla-robotaxi--fsd-notes/
[2] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/aiml&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2YJYM1ngabb3CmBnDIv@37gAAABU&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0
[3] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/aiml&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44YJYM1ngabb3CmBnDIv@37gAAABU&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[4] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/aiml&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33YJYM1ngabb3CmBnDIv@37gAAABU&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[5] https://twitter.com/comma_ai/status/1344675033231237120?s=20
[6] https://www.nhtsa.gov/technology-innovation/automated-vehicles-safety
[7] https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1345208391958888448?s=20
[8] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/aiml&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44YJYM1ngabb3CmBnDIv@37gAAABU&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[9] https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/AccidentReports/Reports/HAR1702.pdf
[10] https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/pages/HWY18FH011.aspx
[11] http://www.theregister.com/2021/04/26/musk_snl/
[12] http://www.theregister.com/2021/04/23/tesla_autopilot_consumer_reports_claims/
[13] http://www.theregister.com/2021/04/19/autopilot_tesla_fatal_crash/
[14] http://www.theregister.com/2021/04/15/matchbox_tesla_roadster/
[15] https://www.tesla.com/VehicleSafetyReport
[16] https://www.plainsite.org/dockets/download.html?id=295856532&z=596ccef1
[17] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/aiml&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33YJYM1ngabb3CmBnDIv@37gAAABU&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[18] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
Re: Musk rat
It's true that he's flirting with disaster. Should the company falter in the shares market, discrepancies like this could really cost.
Grow the tree of talk, no way to climb down because unreasonable expectations have been set for customers of both the shares and the product, so "grow more tree" becomes inexorable.
to be fair, CJ Moore is a regulator of sorts. And, I am sure he did not like Elons tweet. That said, L5 has not been released yet, and there is no guarantee it will be any time soon. Elon's statement reads like it implies that it will, but, he never said guaranteed. Maybe Elon will revaluate advancements by the end of the year and say differently, doing so would not be unusual, that happens often with new technologies. I ignore the hate fest.
Musk's bragaddacio and distant proximity to the truth reminds me of someone. Maybe one Donald Trump would like to consider him as his running mate at the next US presidential election. There again, Trumpy may resent associating with a real billionaire.
Fully Automatic my arse!
L2 to L5 eh?
I’m just glad the Muskmobiles are so expensive, helps keeps them off the public roads.
Is the market voting with its feet?
This prompted thought:
"The US National Transportation Safety Board in its report [PDF] on the incident said the probable cause of the crash "was the truck driver’s failure to yield the right of way to the car, combined with the car driver’s inattention due to over-reliance on vehicle automation…""
I'm sure this - drivers not paying attention - happens a fair bit more often than Tesla would care to know or admit. And yet the stats show that, even now at level 2, letting Autopilot do the driving is significantly safer than doing the driving yourself.
Could this be a case of the market anticipating the regulators, and drivers feeling comfortable enough with the automation to let the car do the driving and not pay attention? At least on the highway? It's marketed as level 2, it's intended to be used at level 2 - but at least some drivers seem to be comfortable using it at a higher level than that, in a way that was not intended, and the resulting accident rate is within the bounds that people (rather than regulators) find acceptable?
not a particularly high bar, is it
re: "Full Self-Driving will work at a safety level well above that of the average driver"
I guess the amount of work required to achieve this goal will depend on where one lives (local driving habits, quality of drivers' ed in school, and so on). Says one who lives where speed limits are generally interpreted as suggestions and local gubmint is loathe to interfere with the convenience of automobilists and their precious cars for something as silly as pedestrian safety. Clearly FSD will not outperform humans in all tasks that are part of driving, but maintaining at or below speed limits and recognizing that there are other things nearby (pedestrians, trees, bicyclists, street signs, hydrants, utility poles, &c) which should be given wide berth would, based on my observation and experience, tip the game to FSD.
Musk rat
Elon needs to be prosecuted for what I believe are essentially lies, misrepresentations and at times market manipulations. He needs to understand that he is not above the law.
A subsidy seeking parasite maybe, but not immune.
One of the issues seems to be the number of dreamers believing his high priced low quality toys are the future. Only in that they’ve pushed real vehicle manufacturers to change.