• elrik@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    How is this different from the capabilities of Tesla’s FSD, which is considered level 2? It seems like Mercedes just decided they’ll take on liability to classify an equivalent level 2 system as level 3.

    • vin@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Ummm, yeah, that’s the real difference between level 2 and 3 - who is liable

        • Thetimefarm@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          No… it means they’re confident enough to assume the risk, Tesla is not. They’ve been using their tech in europe for a while now without issue, Teslas meanwhile still love to hit a variety of new and exciting objects.

          • ShepherdPie@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            They’re not confident enough to assume the risk if you look at the requirements you have to meet to use it. Under 40MPH on approved freeways in heavy traffic during daylight hours with clear skies and clear markers painted on the ground. This is essentially useless for a majority of people as it’s just going to inch ahead for you in gridlock traffic provided the road meets all the other requirements.

          • Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            And that’s a huge difference for consumers. I would never use a self drive feature where I am still responsible, that’s pointless and would just create more anxiety for me.

            • elrik@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              They’re assuming liability but that doesn’t mean it’s safe or more capable than other systems.

    • philpo@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s not about the sensors, it’s about the software. That’s the solution.

    • rsuri@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      According to the mercedes website the cars have radar and lidar sensors. FSD has radar only, but apparently decided to move away from them and towards optical only, I’m not sure if they currently have any role in FSD.

      That’s important because FSD relies on optical sensors only to tell not only where an object is, but that it exists. Based on videos I’ve seen of FSD, I suspect that if it hasn’t ingested the data to recognize, say, a plastic bucket, it won’t know that it’s not just part of the road. If there’s a radar or lidar sensor though, those directly measure distance and can have 3-D data about the world without the ability to recognize objects. Which means they can say “hey, there’s something there I don’t recognize, time to hit the brakes”.

    • GoodEye8@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      You’ve inadvertently pointed out how Tesla deliberately skirts the law. Teslas are way more capable than what level 2 describes, but they choose to stay as level 2 so they wouldn’t have to take responsibility for their public testing

    • Socsa@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah it’s pretty much an insurance product. They came up with a set of boundary conditions someone would underwrite for their “stay between the lines” tech.