Featured Could Volvo's self-driving teach lessons to TESLA?

if you have fallen asleep 'OR ARE WATCHING A FILM'? oy vey.

 

Tesla's "autopilot" does not currently deserve the name "autopilot".
However, the goal is for the Tesla system to be fully autonomous, driving across the country by itself if needed.

Rather, it is currently more of a 'driver assistance' package. But as it grows, it will get closer to truly autonomous.

I have not tried a currently available autopilot/driver assistance package from Volvo, perhaps I should.

 

Yea, all two or three Volvos.

Bob Wilson

 

well, why even presume that Volvo is even telling the truth about their cars' abilities ?!?

Volvo SUV Plugin XC90 T8; EV Range is BS? | PriusChat

Perhaps Volvo's disdain for Tesla, stems from the fact that even if it's late to the show, if Tesla says their product will do it ... then in fact it will do it . . . . and THEN some.

.

 

The Volvo critic totally misses the Tesla approach. Tesla is not marketing their autopilot as a finished product. They are progressing to a officially certified government autopilot with the many decades of incremental steps necessary.

It is impossible to make a real automobile autopilot in one (or even ten) steps. In order for the each step to be taken, millions of actual hours of accumulated real highway data needs to be collected. Tesla is one of the only actual automakers doing this. By being first, they get to establish many of the software, hardware, safety, and recording standards...which match what is being put into their vehicles. The Tesla car development program is unique.

1) They work like crazy to get the highest safety ratings per vehicle possible.
2) They recall cars based on what they discover, not what the government states they must fix.
3) They update car software when needed, not on car availability.
4) They advertise their autopilot capabilities as increasing safety....and this looks to be their primary goal in (long term) autopilot development.


So how many SUV buyers claim to buy SUVs based on "being safer" (which is truly questionable)? It looks like Tesla wants to make sure when someone whats to pay extra money for "safety", then all the facts support Telsa (and not Volvo).

 

funny you should mention this. I regularly scan the web to see if & when there is an actual 1st fatality that is Tesla related. I find stuff like a model S speeds over a 300-foot cliff in the Malubu area ... and I find stuff like a dump truck crushes a Model S .... I find stuff like a thief steals a Model S driving over 100 mph evading police, & collides with a concrete piling, severing the car in 2, + multiple cars.... without a seatbelt (still lives for several days) . . . But I have yet to find a regular, good old-fashioned, run-of-the-mill accident where the tesla driver is injured or dies under sonewhat "normal" auto accident circumstances. With over 50,000 Model S being sold last year, they now have millions of miles on record . For whatever reason, that never seems to grab the attention of most people or the media. Even so, it's why we are on the model X waitlist. My better half has already been rear-ended 2X in auto accidents. That in itself is enough reason to increase the odds of not getting hurt ... driving a car where it's less likely to suffer as serious an injury.
.

 

Ouch !!!
so which is more dangerous .... the Volvo employees that blindly trust a car headind for them? only running on software? or the car's software.
Perhaps the lesson that Volvo can teach Tesla is to never buy a Volvo running on Volvo autopilot software. Maybe Tesla will feel sorry for them & allow Volvo to buy the programs from Tesla.
Other than that, it looks like their collision avoidance system, if any, must be optional.

Maybe these cars are part of the Skynet kamikaze defense system.
.

 

Over 2 Billion miles on the fleet now.
The safety of these vehicles is truly amazing.

 

Like a planes autopilot, the tesla autopilot requires a pilot or driver in command to monitor it and take over. Tesla's system learns from mistakes and in continuously improving, but should not be considered a hands off go to sleep system. It will help a distracted or bored driver drive better though.

Autonomous driving is not legal, and is really pushed by companies like uber that wants to fire their drivers after they drive taxis out of business. To me the government has a regulative responsibility to stop this scenario whether its tesla or volvo until the systems prove themselves.

There is no social need to fire these drivers, but there is a likelihood that a software glitch could kill with or without a driver.

Volvo's charge is correct tesla doesn't have self driving cars that may be in an accident when the driver passes out or is drunk etc, but that was not tesla's claim. It is a big so what. Tesla's system will probably be much safer than a car without it for driving when old, or young, or sick or distracted.

 

The first issue I ham in complete agreement with Volvo. You should still keep your hands on the wheel, ready to take over at any moment.
Someday this technology may be ready for hands free driving, but not today.

For the second, I am not sure how common that is. In the Tesla, if traffic comes to a stop, the car will start again on its own.
It does not (yet) register street signs (other than speed limits) or stop lights, so it is primarily used for highways.