As a fellow lawyer, I love this content from you. You are uniquely capable of providing this information on TH-cam with a Tesla bent as most other Tesla YT’ers cannot do. Thanks!
Let’s not allow regulators to dictate type of technology to implement such as LiDAR, but rather say system must see objects through fog at 100 feet. Tell us what problem to solve, not dictate how to solve it.
They'd need stats on very particular things like accidents in conditions at specific density of fog particles, speed of area, city, urban or rural area, condition of road or highway and so on. Seeing an object and knowing what it is also important (human, car, truck, train, cat, tree, cardboard box, plastic bag etc). It's possible to control these in an enclosed environment but then you'd have systems trained just for specific tests and not the randomness of the real world.
@@Spruce_Goose ALL of that is encapsulated in *safer than human,* or incidents per passenger mile. We can't have them stipulating any more than that or they'll do nothing but impede progress.
@@WarrenRedlich Sorry, I must disagree. Humans are a weak standard. Hopefully you agree. If there was brain surgery only 60% successful by a human, but 80% successful by technology, wouldn’t you want that technology regulated? You want to regulate it because one day success may fall to 50% OR there are opportunities to raise it to 99%.
Pretty sure he gained most of his audience while SMR has been uploading anyway. Similar opinions, very different presentation styles. Honestly I sometimes get a little nauseated by SMR's arrogant presentation style. It just oozes a little too much sometimes.
@@mfpears Redundancy is annoying most of all but I get your take too. I find myself incrementally skipping half his vids. But his consistency of production and occasional brilliance is commendable. Hat's off to all that contribute content, I don't.
FAA will regulate a lot less. Not only when they have an interpretation they are certain will be subject to Chevron. But in general because the agency legal department will stop a lot of regulations because they don’t want the burden of defending them in court.
It’s a challenge, but the basic standards will be pushed to the states because the human driving standards are at the state level (I.e., drivers licensing) and moreover, traffic and roads standards flex state to state and FSD must comply or flex with those as the car/driver travels. NHTSA must write onlybasic standards and punt to the states.
Good video, explanation. The ICON recall for larger icons was overturned in Canada because Tesla went away from International standards for these symbols. BTW KMs are the international standard for distance not miles! 🇨🇦
I have heard legal opinions that this will also attack the ATFs arbitrary criminalizing of previously legal firearm ownership. The ATF thinks they are legislators.
As long as the super charging network is sufficiently built out, the least expensive Tesla model is always the best option, if you're economy minded. If you value safety, anything else is too much of a compromise.
Yes but ... In my US life I drove locally all the time so charging at home was 90% of my charging. We don't use a car much in Bangkok because of traffic, and we live near good transit. So road trips might be 90% of our driving.
@@WarrenRedlich I live in an apartment building and thus always supercharge and it hasn't been a problem. I have the base Model 3 with LFP batteries, which I feel good about, because they're more durable. With the LFP, Tesla recommends charging to 100%. I think the range is fine. I don't know anything about the charging network where you are, but unless there are some big gaps, I would think traveling would be fine.
21:28 Way to go on the workouts Warren. Cardo, weights, and some yoga exercises make such a difference in quality of life. Thanks for all the info as always!
@@WarrenRedlich I'm on month 13. I have occasional avocado or some blueberries with greek yogurt. I kid you not, it wiped out all my health issues at 45yo. I had severe GERD (I had to sleep almost sitting up!), NAFLD, PreDiabetes, Sleep Apnea, IBS, Restless Leg, Brain Fog and memory loss, Neuropathy, bleeding gums... Before that I had what most people would call a very healthy Mediterranean diet with little meat/fish involved. Takeouts/ready made/restaurant meals were rare. 90% was cooked fresh. I have never even owned a microwave. I went as far as juicing celery and other vegetables in a attempt to feel better.
Having used FSD for 2 months, it’s incredibly useful even in the early state it’s in. But the most annoying problem is how it stops at stop signs, which is the fault of the regulators. It’s one of the few times the software feels unnatural. And confusing to others on the road. If the regulator just left it alone, then FSD would be more effective and safe than current state.
FSD should be treated as if a human driver is at wheel. The system itself cannot be regulated, unless it impairs a human driver in the correct operation of the vehicle when using the FSD system. The rules of road, cannot be bifurcated, unless the FSD enabled cars have their own lane. Any behavior, that is not consistent with rules of road will be deemed a defect, irrespective of any disobeying human drivers. Just some 💭
If the NHTSA does not adopt any standards for autonomous driving, then each state will have zero guidelines for what to allow and what not to allow. Just like leaving abortions up to each state to decide whether or not they are legal or not, and in which situations.
How can there be a standard for something that is still in process of invention? Are standards not guidelines for best practices? Until FSD is complete there are no best practices, they are being invented. The noun should follow after the adjective, creating standards as rules to follow with being informed by common practice is and idiot thinking they know better than the inventor how this stuff should work. Nothing good will come from that.
Warren, please get the Model Y over the Atto 3, just for the overall safety of the vehicle. And you need the safest vehicle when driving in Thailand. Stay safe.
Warren, thanks for the legal understanding of this clearly giant issue. One aspect that struck me when you showed us the mission of NHTSA the word “practicable” . Watch the movie Tucker and see how the establishment stomped on Mr. Tucker for his embarrasment of the big three automakers back when. They used that word to stomp innovation in autos the last time a bold person tried to make cars substantially better.
Thanks for expressing your enterpretations they were VERY interesting.I appreciate your explanation and comments. Also Glad to here your improving your health!!! my 2cents says READ THE LABEL and go chemical free....
I agree with your stop sign position; that's the only part of FSD that's super annoying, and it's only due to misdirected regulators. I would phrase it a little differently, though--slowing down to almost zero rather than coming to a dead stop. Your general point is critical. Regulators should be defining safety requirements rather than micromanaging. They could also evaluate cars on their safety like they do crash testing, but micromanaging the details is disastrous.
"slowing down to almost zero rather than coming to a dead stop" Tesla's approach generally is train the car to drive like the best drivers. If they don't stop at that stop sign, FSD shouldn't either.
NHTS has open book to make decision on “safety “ without making standards . Now tech companies like Tesla could challenge any decision as long as there are no standards. That is very important t.
Will this give us the ability to not require external rear view mirrors and be replaced with cameras? We could improve the coefficient of friction due to side mirrors on cars.
I really dislike the idea of regulators requiring lidar, or any other specific technology for that matter. Shouldn't regulators simply be defining what is safe, not how a company gets there? If a company can produce a system that is 10 times safer than a human driver without some technology, then why should they be required to use a specific technology? Another company might take a different approach, and if this also works, then more power to them.
For many decades cars made around the world has a tiny instrument cluster between the driver and the passenger so you have to take your eyes off the road, I have never heard anyone complain about this. Tesla has a huge screen in the middle between passenger and driver and it's much easier to quickly look out of the corner of your eye without really taking your eyes off the road and the haters complain about it day and night. Scientia Habet Non Domus, (Knowledge Has No Home) antiguajohn
14:33 Icon sizes can be compared to the warning lights on the car's dashboard. Those are important, so the icons on the screen should be either that size or bigger. I think this is a fair comparison based on what we already have.
Oh, there's nothing related to safety on the center touchscreen? Anyway, since people driving cars are required to have good vision _(with or without glasses)_ there's no case against icons that are equal in size or bigger than the dashboard lights.
I must say that your stop sign example is a bit silly . Full self-driving vehicles should absolutely comply with the rules of the road. Just because some humans disobey the law and drive in a manner that ignores the rules and/or endangers others does not mean a vehicle operating under full self driving should perpetuate these bad habits.
Rule of law only applies to liberals when they can use it to restrain or impose their socialist control freak rules against anyone who disagrees with them or believes in limited government, personal freedom and individual responsibility. The screech of hypocrisy is the left's anthem.
Zero-based thinking is required for stop signs. The majority of Stop Signs are an effort to control speeding. If speed limits were properly enforced(like they are in Britain and Europe), we could remove 95% of stop signs.
@@nguyep4 Doing rolling stops or, as we refer to them in my family, "California stops" breeds a bad habit. Just like blasting through an intersection at 3 A.M. When that is done enough times it becomes a force of habit and then the person attempts to zoom through at 1 P.M. and runs over Sally as she is returning to the office from her lunch break at the cafe across the street.
@@pauld6967 Blasting through at 3am is not the same as still looking 3 ways and slowly proceed with caution. The other is outright careless. The autonomy doesn't and will never just blast through. Being dramatic and stirring fear is just that, fear mongering, or the boy cries wolf.
11:40 In some circumstances, rolling through stops may be safe enough, but it can still get you a ticket for not stopping, or worse, possibly throw blame on you if there is a collision, even if from your point of view it was caused by the other driver drifting into "your" lane where you could not have been, had you stopped at the stop sign.
Yes, however the idea of FSD is train it to drive like the best drivers. If they don't stop in a situation, it's because it's safe not to stop, possibly safer than stopping.
Tesla is the standard, at this point it really doesn’t matter that much what the government does in the US, the cat is out of the bag. It’s about competitiveness on a world scale!
NHTSA was never envisioned to address FSD. It was based on the old paradigm of a human driver in a machine. They were supposed to regulate the safety of the machine, the hardware, not the driver. Airbags, brakes, seat belts, headlights, crumple zones, etc. Drivers are regulated by traffic laws, no DUI, follow the traffic rules and laws, wear seat belts, no texting, etc. However, clearly FSD needs to be regulated by something or someone. Humanoid robots are going to need to be regulated too. I suggest a new agency to regulate AI and AI controlled machines like FSD and robots. Staff it with experts from industry who know what they are doing. The problem is anyone good is going to go into industry and get rich and not want to work for peanuts in the government. Only idiots will get civil servant jobs in this field. So industry is going to have to contribute experts to regulation on a parttime rotating basis. I know that this will be criticized by the leftists, but it can work with a team of smart government officials who are experts on safety and industry experts on AI. I was involved in such a process related to computer security. Industry needs guidance and direction by experts in safety and risk management, not overbearing and stupid regulations by idiots. Mandated cooperation and teamwork is the key.
"clearly FSD needs to be regulated by something or someone. Humanoid robots are going to need to be regulated too." Nah bruh. FSD will be safer than human. Why does it need to be regulated? Regulate Robots? Who in government has any competence to make such decisions? Why would you trust them?
@@WarrenRedlich As I said, a team effort with safety, ethics, and risk management experts along with AI experts, the people actually doing the development. This facilitated by government experts on such team efforts. It can work and it is necessary. Unregulated AI development is dangerous. Nobody likes regulation, but without regulation there is no civilization. A democratic approach is better than a dictatorial one.
Dont leave us warren, i dont do social media, i dont event have x lol. also, how are things in vietnam? i hear good things as it pertains to their views toward americans.
Good comments. However relying on congress to address issues like FSD safety rules (or comprehensive immigration reform laws) is not going to happen. It is more likely that Martians will visit earth.
The real clear sign that FSD is ready to go is when Tesla says “This works and we will insure you” As long as Tesla says the “driver is responsible” full self driving is a joke. BTW, who is insuring Robo Taxi??
You did not get his point. The rolling stop will be expected by an human driver behind car on FSD. Therefore, the removal of rolling stop makes the car with FSD a danger. FSD was developed to prevent such accidents from happening
NTHSA has the right to ask why a particular Tesla had an accident. One reason is regulatory. Another is the power vested to it to study traffic accidents. FSD being a novel feataure one remedy is to ban it.
And how many critical steps have you ignored by establishing cause and effect via studying and banning; via judicial order I presume. Or do we just lay down when ordered by unelected officials?
@@WarrenRedlich I do not want it as per se. But it is an option, if Tesla is not aiding with the accident investigations. One traditional way for Tesla to avoid these investigstions has been to settle these cases. If NHTSA sees FSD is proven to operate better than human, go for it. I do not see it an impossibility that NTHSA would grant Tesla a public road testing licence for it. But if Tesla is racking "unexplainable" FSD related accidents and continues to be unresponsive with NTHSA inquiries, banning use of FSD is - a possibility.
As a fellow lawyer, I love this content from you. You are uniquely capable of providing this information on TH-cam with a Tesla bent as most other Tesla YT’ers cannot do. Thanks!
Thanks for your kind words.
Great! 👍
Wow, that's a great endorsement, l already thought Warren was a solid lawyer now I'm sure of it.👍
I was a pretty good trial lawyer. Not the best, and not at the high level that Tesla deals with.
Congrats Warren on scooping this topic. The latest All In Podcast has Chevron as a topic but you brought this up way earlier.
They didn't really to into long term impact that decision will have on business.
Agreed. When I watched it, it felt like old news
Reduction in bureaucratic assholery is always good.
FJB
well said
Not always
Sometimes they have to be assholes
Thanks Warren for keeping us informed.
Thank you Warren, a very pertinent conversation ‼️
Let’s not allow regulators to dictate type of technology to implement such as LiDAR, but rather say system must see objects through fog at 100 feet. Tell us what problem to solve, not dictate how to solve it.
They'd need stats on very particular things like accidents in conditions at specific density of fog particles, speed of area, city, urban or rural area, condition of road or highway and so on. Seeing an object and knowing what it is also important (human, car, truck, train, cat, tree, cardboard box, plastic bag etc). It's possible to control these in an enclosed environment but then you'd have systems trained just for specific tests and not the randomness of the real world.
They shouldn't be allowed to regulate a technology that's safer than human
@@Spruce_Goose ALL of that is encapsulated in *safer than human,* or incidents per passenger mile. We can't have them stipulating any more than that or they'll do nothing but impede progress.
@@WarrenRedlich Sorry, I must disagree. Humans are a weak standard. Hopefully you agree. If there was brain surgery only 60% successful by a human, but 80% successful by technology, wouldn’t you want that technology regulated? You want to regulate it because one day success may fall to 50% OR there are opportunities to raise it to 99%.
@@johnpoldo8817anything that slows adoption is evil. Bring that up again in 10 years when self-driving is the norm.
See Warren?--you provide important *unique* content in this space.
Thank you. More on my mind so will do more soon.
@@WarrenRedlich Thank you. SMR is cool but *no substitute.*
Pretty sure he gained most of his audience while SMR has been uploading anyway. Similar opinions, very different presentation styles. Honestly I sometimes get a little nauseated by SMR's arrogant presentation style. It just oozes a little too much sometimes.
Steven is a character. His audience loves him. I started before he did. He built his channel well and works hard.
@@mfpears Redundancy is annoying most of all but I get your take too. I find myself incrementally skipping half his vids. But his consistency of production and occasional brilliance is commendable.
Hat's off to all that contribute content, I don't.
My take from this is that it makes it possible for companies like tesla to challenge NITSA . That is very important for future FSD technology.
FAA will regulate a lot less.
Not only when they have an interpretation they are certain will be subject to Chevron.
But in general because the agency legal department will stop a lot of regulations because they don’t want the burden of defending them in court.
Hi Warren - really great to get all these juristical and law informations aorund TESLA. Thanks!
At the federal level, I don't see much, but the implications at the state level could be incredible
It’s a challenge, but the basic standards will be pushed to the states because the human driving standards are at the state level (I.e., drivers licensing) and moreover, traffic and roads standards flex state to state and FSD must comply or flex with those as the car/driver travels. NHTSA must write onlybasic standards and punt to the states.
I don't hate that
Elon during his showing FSD 12.00 before it was released, said they had to manually put one code for FSD and that was for stop sign.
Good video, explanation. The ICON recall for larger icons was overturned in Canada because Tesla went away from International standards for these symbols. BTW KMs are the international standard for distance not miles! 🇨🇦
Ok so that’s fine and dandy. Will we be getting the real boombox functionality back? That’s all I care about.
Thank you Warren for reminding me to follow you on X. And appreciate the breakdown of the laws and the standards.❤
I have heard legal opinions that this will also attack the ATFs arbitrary criminalizing of previously legal firearm ownership. The ATF thinks they are legislators.
As long as the super charging network is sufficiently built out, the least expensive Tesla model is always the best option, if you're economy minded. If you value safety, anything else is too much of a compromise.
Yes but ...
In my US life I drove locally all the time so charging at home was 90% of my charging.
We don't use a car much in Bangkok because of traffic, and we live near good transit. So road trips might be 90% of our driving.
@@WarrenRedlich
I live in an apartment building and thus always supercharge and it hasn't been a problem. I have the base Model 3 with LFP batteries, which I feel good about, because they're more durable. With the LFP, Tesla recommends charging to 100%. I think the range is fine. I don't know anything about the charging network where you are, but unless there are some big gaps, I would think traveling would be fine.
There's an extensive network of other chargers. BYD is everywhere in Thailand. Tesla network is growing and already in great locations.
21:28 Way to go on the workouts Warren. Cardo, weights, and some yoga exercises make such a difference in quality of life. Thanks for all the info as always!
Carnivore diet 💪
I don't go carnivore but I do eat a lot of meat and other animal protein like eggs, and whey supplement. I still like veggies and fruit.
@@WarrenRedlich I'm on month 13. I have occasional avocado or some blueberries with greek yogurt. I kid you not, it wiped out all my health issues at 45yo.
I had severe GERD (I had to sleep almost sitting up!), NAFLD, PreDiabetes, Sleep Apnea, IBS, Restless Leg, Brain Fog and memory loss, Neuropathy, bleeding gums...
Before that I had what most people would call a very healthy Mediterranean diet with little meat/fish involved. Takeouts/ready made/restaurant meals were rare. 90% was cooked fresh. I have never even owned a microwave. I went as far as juicing celery and other vegetables in a attempt to feel better.
Having used FSD for 2 months, it’s incredibly useful even in the early state it’s in. But the most annoying problem is how it stops at stop signs, which is the fault of the regulators. It’s one of the few times the software feels unnatural. And confusing to others on the road. If the regulator just left it alone, then FSD would be more effective and safe than current state.
Great stuff Warren. These are really important contributions you making. Thanks.
Supreme Court rocks!!!!!
In my view, “Standards” are what is accepted by the largest part of the market. Should not be confused with regulation.
Agree but that's how they wrote the law
Good one Warren 👍🏼
Thanks 👍
Good chance we will visit Space Coast by the end of this year. Hope to see you.
I am interested how this decision applies to the CFPB
FSD should be treated as if a human driver is at wheel. The system itself cannot be regulated, unless it impairs a human driver in the correct operation of the vehicle when using the FSD system. The rules of road, cannot be bifurcated, unless the FSD enabled cars have their own lane. Any behavior, that is not consistent with rules of road will be deemed a defect, irrespective of any disobeying human drivers. Just some 💭
If the NHTSA does not adopt any standards for autonomous driving, then each state will have zero guidelines for what to allow and what not to allow. Just like leaving abortions up to each state to decide whether or not they are legal or not, and in which situations.
Sawasdee krub Khun Warren. Thanks for an informative video 🙏🏼
How can there be a standard for something that is still in process of invention? Are standards not guidelines for best practices? Until FSD is complete there are no best practices, they are being invented. The noun should follow after the adjective, creating standards as rules to follow with being informed by common practice is and idiot thinking they know better than the inventor how this stuff should work. Nothing good will come from that.
Warren, please get the Model Y over the Atto 3, just for the overall safety of the vehicle. And you need the safest vehicle when driving in Thailand. Stay safe.
Warren, thanks for the legal understanding of this clearly giant issue. One aspect that struck me when you showed us the mission of NHTSA the word “practicable” . Watch the movie Tucker and see how the establishment stomped on Mr. Tucker for his embarrasment of the big three automakers back when. They used that word to stomp innovation in autos the last time a bold person tried to make cars substantially better.
Yes but Tucker was before the NHTSA existed
@@WarrenRedlich the they I was speaking of… was gummint
Thanks Warren.
Thanks for expressing your enterpretations they were VERY interesting.I appreciate your explanation and comments. Also Glad to here your improving your health!!! my 2cents says READ THE LABEL and go chemical free....
Good morning Warren
Morning!
I agree with your stop sign position; that's the only part of FSD that's super annoying, and it's only due to misdirected regulators. I would phrase it a little differently, though--slowing down to almost zero rather than coming to a dead stop.
Your general point is critical. Regulators should be defining safety requirements rather than micromanaging. They could also evaluate cars on their safety like they do crash testing, but micromanaging the details is disastrous.
"slowing down to almost zero rather than coming to a dead stop"
Tesla's approach generally is train the car to drive like the best drivers. If they don't stop at that stop sign, FSD shouldn't either.
NHTS has open book to make decision on “safety “ without making standards . Now tech companies like Tesla could challenge any decision as long as there are no standards. That is very important t.
They HAD power to regulate without standards. Agree - very important.
Great vid Warren!!!!!!!!!! 😊😊😊
Will this give us the ability to not require external rear view mirrors and be replaced with cameras? We could improve the coefficient of friction due to side mirrors on cars.
Long live Chevron dominance
I really dislike the idea of regulators requiring lidar, or any other specific technology for that matter. Shouldn't regulators simply be defining what is safe, not how a company gets there? If a company can produce a system that is 10 times safer than a human driver without some technology, then why should they be required to use a specific technology? Another company might take a different approach, and if this also works, then more power to them.
They shouldn't be regulating the details of the safest cars and the safest technologies. They should focus on what's unsafe.
Screw NHTSA
Tesla had a choice of complying with the font sizing or not like Ford, VW and others. They don't care about FUD atricles like investors do.
For many decades cars made around the world has a tiny instrument cluster between the driver and the passenger so you have to take your eyes off the road, I have never heard anyone complain about this.
Tesla has a huge screen in the middle between passenger and driver and it's much easier to quickly look out of the corner of your eye without really taking your eyes off the road and the haters complain about it day and night.
Scientia Habet Non Domus,
(Knowledge Has No Home)
antiguajohn
True. I just had this conversation.
Hazardous air mode in the Model Y is fantastic
Does this affect the side mirror requirement?
It should give Tesla the ability to at least obtain data that would persuade regulators to consider the change
I don't think it affects it if there is a standard already set by the NHTSA, and there probably is.
14:33 Icon sizes can be compared to the warning lights on the car's dashboard. Those are important, so the icons on the screen should be either that size or bigger. I think this is a fair comparison based on what we already have.
They don't relate to braking function. It's a massive stretch by the agency.
Oh, there's nothing related to safety on the center touchscreen?
Anyway, since people driving cars are required to have good vision _(with or without glasses)_ there's no case against icons that are equal in size or bigger than the dashboard lights.
You seem to have difficulty reading. Get your glasses checked. :-)
I don't drive, and I haven't been in a Tesla to see their icons or screen. :) I can only ask.
I must say that your stop sign example is a bit silly .
Full self-driving vehicles should absolutely comply with the rules of the road.
Just because some humans disobey the law and drive in a manner that ignores the rules and/or endangers others does not mean a vehicle operating under full self driving should perpetuate these bad habits.
A rolling stop is not dangerous when no vehicles are present. It is efficient and effective. Which is what a roundabout meant to do.
Rule of law only applies to liberals when they can use it to restrain or impose their socialist control freak rules against anyone who disagrees with them or believes in limited government, personal freedom and individual responsibility. The screech of hypocrisy is the left's anthem.
Zero-based thinking is required for stop signs. The majority of Stop Signs are an effort to control speeding. If speed limits were properly enforced(like they are in Britain and Europe), we could remove 95% of stop signs.
@@nguyep4 Doing rolling stops or, as we refer to them in my family, "California stops" breeds a bad habit.
Just like blasting through an intersection at 3 A.M. When that is done enough times it becomes a force of habit and then the person attempts to zoom through at 1 P.M. and runs over Sally as she is returning to the office from her lunch break at the cafe across the street.
@@pauld6967 Blasting through at 3am is not the same as still looking 3 ways and slowly proceed with caution. The other is outright careless. The autonomy doesn't and will never just blast through. Being dramatic and stirring fear is just that, fear mongering, or the boy cries wolf.
11:40 In some circumstances, rolling through stops may be safe enough, but it can still get you a ticket for not stopping, or worse, possibly throw blame on you if there is a collision, even if from your point of view it was caused by the other driver drifting into "your" lane where you could not have been, had you stopped at the stop sign.
Yes, however the idea of FSD is train it to drive like the best drivers. If they don't stop in a situation, it's because it's safe not to stop, possibly safer than stopping.
"the Secretary shall have wide discretionary authority to regulate Biden critics, especially eLoN BaD."
69 USC 420
This is actually also huge for crypto
Agree
Tesla is the standard, at this point it really doesn’t matter that much what the government does in the US, the cat is out of the bag. It’s about competitiveness on a world scale!
@23 min
Model y vs Atto. What about FSD happening around the world?
Hard to see myself getting anything but a Tesla
NHTSA was never envisioned to address FSD. It was based on the old paradigm of a human driver in a machine. They were supposed to regulate the safety of the machine, the hardware, not the driver. Airbags, brakes, seat belts, headlights, crumple zones, etc. Drivers are regulated by traffic laws, no DUI, follow the traffic rules and laws, wear seat belts, no texting, etc. However, clearly FSD needs to be regulated by something or someone. Humanoid robots are going to need to be regulated too. I suggest a new agency to regulate AI and AI controlled machines like FSD and robots. Staff it with experts from industry who know what they are doing. The problem is anyone good is going to go into industry and get rich and not want to work for peanuts in the government. Only idiots will get civil servant jobs in this field. So industry is going to have to contribute experts to regulation on a parttime rotating basis. I know that this will be criticized by the leftists, but it can work with a team of smart government officials who are experts on safety and industry experts on AI. I was involved in such a process related to computer security. Industry needs guidance and direction by experts in safety and risk management, not overbearing and stupid regulations by idiots. Mandated cooperation and teamwork is the key.
"clearly FSD needs to be regulated by something or someone. Humanoid robots are going to need to be regulated too."
Nah bruh. FSD will be safer than human. Why does it need to be regulated?
Regulate Robots? Who in government has any competence to make such decisions? Why would you trust them?
@@WarrenRedlich As I said, a team effort with safety, ethics, and risk management experts along with AI experts, the people actually doing the development. This facilitated by government experts on such team efforts. It can work and it is necessary. Unregulated AI development is dangerous. Nobody likes regulation, but without regulation there is no civilization. A democratic approach is better than a dictatorial one.
Once you learn about regulatory capture, you can't unsee it.
NHTSA is so aggressive against Tesla because it is controlled by legacy auto and the DNC.
@@WarrenRedlich True, dat. Politics is a cancer.
Someone get just Biden’s comments during the debate and ask Chatgpt to analyze it. 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Elon IMO has a barrel ribcage it is not standard IRC most people have a more rectangle ribcage.
Interesting
Why dont I ever hear about the set up that entire Delaware suit clearly was?
Not sure. Not the angle I prefer to attack it.
Dont leave us warren, i dont do social media, i dont event have x lol. also, how are things in vietnam? i hear good things as it pertains to their views toward americans.
Good comments. However relying on congress to address issues like FSD safety rules (or comprehensive immigration reform laws) is not going to happen. It is more likely that Martians will visit earth.
I'm happy to keep the Feds out of it
The real clear sign that FSD is ready to go is when Tesla says “This works and we will insure you”
As long as Tesla says the “driver is responsible” full self driving is a joke.
BTW, who is insuring Robo Taxi??
You did not get his point. The rolling stop will be expected by an human driver behind car on FSD. Therefore, the removal of rolling stop makes the car with FSD a danger. FSD was developed to prevent such accidents from happening
I get it and agree with you. Maybe you're replying to another comment or someone in the chat?
@@WarrenRedlich Yes
NTHSA has the right to ask why a particular Tesla had an accident. One reason is regulatory. Another is the power vested to it to study traffic accidents. FSD being a novel feataure one remedy is to ban it.
FJB
And how many critical steps have you ignored by establishing cause and effect via studying and banning; via judicial order I presume. Or do we just lay down when ordered by unelected officials?
At the federal level, I don't see much, but the implications at the state level could be incredible
Mika wants the NHTSA to ban a technology that makes us all safer because it's "a novel feature"
@@WarrenRedlich I do not want it as per se. But it is an option, if Tesla is not aiding with the accident investigations. One traditional way for Tesla to avoid these investigstions has been to settle these cases. If NHTSA sees FSD is proven to operate better than human, go for it. I do not see it an impossibility that NTHSA would grant Tesla a public road testing licence for it. But if Tesla is racking "unexplainable" FSD related accidents and continues to be unresponsive with NTHSA inquiries, banning use of FSD is - a possibility.
👍 👍 👍
What about a used Model Y?
No significant used market in Thailand yet. Looking out for that.
You are the best. Do you live in west palm, if so let’s meet .
I live in Delray, but I'm rarely there
Currently nomad in Asia
@@WarrenRedlich thailand is my favorite, have fun
Will there be a pleasure Bot?😂
Likely
There are already are, especially in Japan I think
Why do you speak in such absolutes about Tesla's future? Your predictions about things to come have not panned-out well.
Warrens prediction accuracy is not related to his tendencies toward absolutes. He is a lawyer. Absolutes are to be expected
@@trent_carterLawyers almost never speak in absolutes.
Oh Spartan - Lawyers always speak in absolutes! :-)
Elon follows you 😂😂 he mustn't be aware you are a sell out like Ross