[wilg]

The Mercedes thing is bullshit.

> Mercedes says that Drive Pilot will only operate during daylight hours at speeds up to 40 mph on “suitable freeway sections and where there is high traffic density.”

> While the system is active, drivers must keep their faces visible to the vehicle’s in-car cameras at all times, but can turn their head to talk to a passenger or play a game on the vehicle’s infotainment screen. Drivers can’t crawl into the back seat to take a nap, for instance. The system will disengage if the driver’s face is obscured or an attempt is made to block access to the in-car cameras. Presumably the system will deactivate itself if it detects the driver is sleeping or operating the car while impaired.

<40 mph, specific freeways only, does not make any kind of lane change or exit autonomously. I think any carmaker with a decent off-the-shelf lane keeping feature could make a liability claim in this scenario. It's not a measure of the technology.

[Mawr]

Maybe any automaker could take liability too, maybe not. It's all just words in the wind until they actually do it. Mercedes put their money where their mouth is and I respect them for it. It's the opposite of bullshit.

[wilg]

As long as you clearly understand what they are actually taking liability for, and what the capabilities of their system are, feel however you like.

IMO it's a misleading marketing tactic to position themselves competitively as having any kind of self-driving technology by recognizing that you can play games with the SAE levels to make the system sound impressive.

[Mawr]

"SAE Level 3 DRIVE PILOT

It initiates a radical paradigm shift that permits the vehicle to take over the dynamic driving task under certain conditions in heavy traffic or congestion situations on suitable sections of freeway currently up to a speed of 60 km/h. This ultimate luxury experience enables customers to win back precious time when in the car through relaxation or productivity. For instance, they can communicate with work colleagues via in-car office tools, write messages and emails via the head unit, browse the internet or just sit back, relax and watch a movie." [1]

I'm confused where you see the opportunity for any ambiguity or misunderstanding. Even the name "SAE Level 3 DRIVE PILOT" tells you the limitations. If you want misleading, look at what Tesla's pulling with their "Full Self Driving".

In the end, users only care about what a feature enables them to do, not how impressive the tech behind it is. Being able to relax and watch a movie while sitting in busy traffic is a great value proposition.

P.S. Found a good article on it: https://arstechnica.com/cars/2023/09/mercedes-benzs-level-3-...

[1] https://group.mercedes-benz.com/innovation/case/autonomous/d...

[wilg]

I don't think it's worth discussing this any further together.

[seanmcdirmid]

It’s basically just useful for traffic jams…which isn’t bad idea. Most cars with smart cruise control could easily do something like this. I guess Mercedes is just adding a layer of security (driver’s face must show) and are then enabling it?

[wilg]

It's not a bad idea. I just think Mercedes has been very clever at ginning up a "Level 3" "self-driving" feature out of commodity lane keeping systems, restricted use cases, and a cheap legal liability waiver that will almost never come into play.