undefined

points

[-]

Not sure about your car but the car I have with augmented cruise requires hands on wheel. Turns off otherwise. (Volvo XC90)

I agree that there are situations where what I do as a trained driver is different from augmented cruise.

A good example (or perhaps I'm wrong) is this: in a lane, car pulls into lane in front of me and between the car further ahead. Now I don't have enough space in between me and that new entrant. But instead of using brakes (unless eggregious), I bleed speed until I make space I want. Augmented cruise doesn't do that - it hits brakes.

So, from behind, I think it looks like I'm using my brakes a lot more than I am when on augmented cruise. And excessive brake use distracts the driver behind me.

by x1874632 hours ago|

prev|

[-]

Sure, but the practical experience is that FSD is fairly predictable. It's just a matter of personal preference that comes from experience. I wouldn't impose a system like FSD on everybody.

by FeloniousHam50 minutes ago|

parent|

[-]

I'm a >90% FSD user, and I approve this sentiment. My wife hates it for the mistakes it makes (eg. seems like there is recent shadow recognition regression) and "errors in judgement" (not getting in the turn lane in a timely manner), she would never use it on her own.

I've got plenty of experience, and (feel as though) I know most of it's failure points. I had to drive my 30 minute commute last week, and it was decidedly unfun. I have seen the future and I don't want to go back.

by x18746331 minutes ago|

parent|

[-]

96% here, including DC and Baltimore. Besides the bizarre Navigation choices and waiting to long for lane changes, FSD has reached essentially zero interventions outside of bad mapping situations. I really wish Tesla would use better map data, for sure.