[ra7]

So the technology isn’t there and nobody has gotten anywhere close to achieving those significant breakthroughs in vision or AI, but it’s “perfectly possible” with current hardware “because humans do it”? This answer makes no sense.

The real answer is nobody knows whether current hardware is enough or not, including Tesla. Until they demonstrate it, it’s just a claim. But they can’t sell the cars on FSD promise if they say it.

[Erlich_Bachman]

Humans don't need lidar -> that means all the information is present in the visual channel -> it is at least theoretically possible to do with cameras -> tesla cars have cameras -> tesla cars might have possibility to do it.

[ra7]

> it is at least theoretically possible to do with cameras

Theoretically, yes. But that’s different than confidently claiming it’s “perfectly possible” and that it’s only a question of computation and modeling.

[Erlich_Bachman]

Which is what the original poster wrote which you for some reason have a problem decoding:

"it’s possible that most Teslas on the road today will be capable of being upgraded to L5 capability via a software update."

He didn't say it will definitely guaranteed happen.

The antonym of the word possible is impossible, which if you try in that same sentence you'll see that it doesn't make any sense that way.

[ra7]

Tesla is categorically saying all their vehicles on the road have necessary hardware for full self driving. Did you somehow miss this? They’re taking money on this promise. So who cares if the original poster snuck in the word ‘possible’ or not?

[Erlich_Bachman]

Because you talk to and respond to people on this forum. You can't misrepresent what they write and call it "they snuck in a word". What kind of logic is that? To respond to some other claim from somewhere else on the internet, real or imaginary, regardless of what the person in question writes?

While I personally don't agree with your claim that "tesla categorically saying" those things, the poster still did say it even less.

This is what Tesla claim:

    The activation and use of these features are dependent on achieving reliability far in excess of human drivers as demonstrated by billions of miles of experience, as well as regulatory approval, which may take longer in some jurisdictions. As these self-driving features evolve, your car will be continuously upgraded through over-the-air software updates.

You are welcome to present any links or quotes as to where you got the idea that Tesla claims that the vechicle is guaranteed to have FSD in some specific claimed time period (including a time period within each individual vechicle's lifespan).

I also personally know several Tesla owners and none of them interpret the company's claims the way you do. So who are all these people who you think are defrauded or lied to? Where are all the angry buyers who thought they were getting Level 5?

[ra7]

> To respond to some other claim from somewhere else on the internet, real or imaginary, regardless of what the person in question writes?

I'm responding to Tesla's official claims about FSD hardware.

> You are welcome to present any links or quotes as to where you got the idea that Tesla claims that the vechicle is guaranteed to have FSD in some specific claimed time period (including a time period within each individual vechicle's lifespan).

Way to move the goal post. This whole thread is about hardware, not OTA software updates or a timeframe to deliver FSD. They've repeatedly claimed since 2016 that all Teslas have necessary hardware for Level 5 functionality. I've explained in this comment chain why that claim is disingenuous.

Source: https://www.theverge.com/2016/10/19/13340938/tesla-autopilot... and repeated Elon Musk tweets.

[CorrectHorseBat]

What about the other hardware, the computer doing the actual computations?