No, the other user is claiming that they don't have a "working" full self driving but is being vague about what they mean by "working".

Full Self Driving is just the name of the software. There's also autopilot but that's different. The end goal of it is to eventually be capable of level 5 self driving so that's why it's named like that even though it has been a work in progress all of it's existence. Wouldn't make much sense to call it "partial self driving under supervision" because Full Self Driving is a better marketing term. Misleading? Well yeah perhaps but that's what marketing teams do. Nothing new there. Not a single Tesla owner is under the illusion that you can just enable the system and take a nap. Doesn't mean people don't do that but they know that they shouldn't. The system tells you that every single time you enable it.

Personally I don't see a huge issue with that name. It's level 2 meaning that it needs driver supervision and it's by no means flawless but it does what the name implies: drives itself. It's not just an advanced cruise control like for example the Mercedes Drive Pilot but it is actually capable of independently driving itself and especially with the V12 it's actually getting quite good at it.

I'm glad you like it!

The twigs stand out due to the lighting conditions. I didn't do anything to intentionally make them pop. Them beight light colored and me bumping up the "whites" probably plays a factor though.

I generally try to underexpose my pictures to avoid blowing out the highlights and I then bring back the shadows in post-processing. My editing usually consists of playing with shadows/highlights and blacks/whites so that I get maximum detail from the shadows without any too bright spots around the edges distracting from the subject of the photo. Generally this also includes adding vignette and often also a gradient filter on the top/bottom of the photo to lead your eyes to the centre. I also try to keep the darkest parts of the photo dark gray instead of black. For moody photos like this I usually also bring down the vibrance for more realism. In daylight shots I do the opposite. I do this all by eye.

Almost all my photos also contain some amount of "dodge and burn" meaning locally brushing in darker and brighter spots all around the picture to make the lighting more interesting. I never use any color filters but I tend to adjust the white balance more towards the warm side.

One good tip for editing is to not save it when you think you're done. Put it away for a little while and then come back to it. Our eyes get used to the look of it pretty quick and we tend to go a overboard with the editing. More often than not I end up toning it down a bit.

Here's the settings for this picture:

I'll PM you a link to my Pixelfed incase you want to see my other pictures. You'll probably be able to pick out the common theme between them.

Well, I mean.. Besides the first two those are not the worst rules to live by. As an agnostic I'm obviously against pushing your religion onto others but I think I'll reserve my outrage for something more important.

The more civilians die the better PR it's for Hamas. Not only is it a non-issue for them but it's actually a good thing. Being martyred gets you straight into heaven or what ever their equivalance for it is. There's a very good reason the combatants themselves are hiding in the tunnels while the civilians are placed as human shields on top of them. It's the same reason for why they shoot rockets from next to schools, mosques, hospitals, refugee camps etc. and for why they started moving people back into their homes during the cease-fire. They know that the fear of killing civilians deters Israeli strikes. I know this is probably something that's impossible to believe by someone that's waist deep in the "pro-palestinian" propaganda but Israel is actually going into great lenghts to minimize civilian casualties. Nobody cares less about the lives of the palestinian population than Hamas.

Agreed. It's also a great way to get extra calories with plenty of protein and fats and minimal carbonhydrates.

Would be quite surprising if there was an ads-based platform that doesn't do that. Age and gender are among the most relevant things when targeting ads.

We may very well be doomed if AI reaches consciousness but I'm not quite convinced LLM's is the way to get there but even if it was and it was solely trained on social media content I still wouldn't expect it to adopt the behaviour of your typical social media commentor. The toxic behaviour on social media is, in my view, almost solely driven by our human ego and pettiness. It's not obvious to me that AI would care about things like winning arguments or coming up with snide remarks and such. What I see as the most likely outcome would be endlessly patient and quite autistic-like being that's balanced in it's views and would most likely be pretty difficult to argue against. I doubt humans are anywhere even near the far-end of the intelligence spectrum and something with the information processing capability that's orders of magnitude greater than ours would more than likely not get caught up in stuff like confirmation bias, partisan thinking, motivated reasoning, being tossed around by emotions, cognitive dissonance etc. Those are by definitions human features.

Probably similar to why you can make the turn indicator make fart noises or have the car "dance" by flashing lights and opening doors and such. The hardware is there so why not. Utterly pointless features but atleast it's something the competition isn't doing I guess.

Tho I must admit that it was quite funny when I once heard a guy lock the doors on his Tesla and instead of the generick "click click" it said "quack" instead.

Jesus christ dude. There's quote from the author himself, Walter Isaacson who is the person from whose book the whole claim originated from.

To clarify on the Starlink issue: the Ukrainians THOUGHT coverage was enabled all the way to Crimea, but it was not. They asked Musk to enable it for their drone sub attack on the Russian fleet. Musk did not enable it, because he thought, probably correctly, that would cause a major war.

You believe him when the narrative suits you but you don't when it doesn't. Talk about cognitive dissonance lol

Enabling Starlink in Crimea would have been against the sanctions to Russia by the US. Literally illegal.

Anyway I'm done with you. Don't bother replying.

I feel like this type of guides are only understood by people who already know how different camera settings affect the picture quality. As a such person it's really difficult to imagine myself in the place of a total novice but I can imagine this not being helpful at all.

if Musk sabotaged Ukraine access again

Misinformation

That's not how FSD works. It's a neural net trained on millions of hours of video content of good human driving. Nowhere in the code is even specified what a bicycle is.

Yeah I have no idea what you're trying to tell me. You're not going to buy a Tesla because they lied about FSD a decade earlier? Ok. Good for you?

Another thing about TikTok that I don't get is all the useless crap laid over the video. Seems extremely distracting to me.

I'm a bit surprised about how quickly I got tired of seeing AI content (mostly porn and non-nudes) Somehow it all just looks the same. You'd think that being AI generated would give you infinite variety but apparently not.

Are you misleading on purpose?

The level 3 driving is available only on a handful of highways between LA, SF and LV and even then only in ideal weather and traffic conditions.

Stated clearly in the very next sentence.

This comparison shows that Tesla FSD in reality is merely a drive assist.

Always has been. That video compares drive assist to another. Apples to apples comparison. What exactly is the issue here?

I thought the consensus was that Tesla is far behind, hence why Mercedes is the first brand to actually have some basic level 3 automomus driving actually to customers

Yeah that seems to be the consensus but I have no idea what it's based on. When the Mercedes system is put against FSD it looks like this. The level 3 driving is available only on a handful of highways between LA, SF and LV and even then only in ideal weather and traffic conditions.

If the competition really is ahead then where are all the videos of their vehicles doing what FSD does? There are countless accounts on YouTube demonstrating the capabilities of FSD driving both on highways and in cities but nothing about these other brands.

..and I don't see anyone claiming it to be "working" as in it being safe enough to not need supervision.

The whole thread is about Musk claiming in 2019 that Tesla has FSD working NOW

From the article:

(1) representations that Tesla vehicles have the hardware needed for full self-driving capability and, (2) representations that a Tesla car would be able to drive itself cross-country in the coming year.

So not only are you clearly emotionally invested here but you're also being dishonest about the claims that have been made. I don't think there's any reason to go further with this.

I don't see anyone claiming they have "working full self driving". That's a strawman argument. Their system is really good and years ahead of competition but there's still a shit ton to improve. That's why it's classified as level 2 and not level 3. It's a vehicle capable of driving itself under supervision but it's not a self driving vehicle.

I’ve seen videos with FSD creating numerous dangerous situations on a single trip

In the past few months? Because the current software version is completely different than what it used to be. They've moved entirely from human code to neural nets and it made a giant improvement in its performance.