If you wanted to buy the NAG removal chip then I gave some bad news 💸

[PungoteagueDave]

REN is always full of sh*t, claiming stuff and spewing statistics that are clearly pulled out of his butt. He’s what they call in the military a “Joe” for GI Joe - the guys who follow every “rule” and call out anyone who edges the line. Fanbois gotta fanboi and Joe’s gotta Joe.

Sponsored

 

[PhilEsq]

I wonder if it's somehow different in every truck, see my experience is the opposite, I even posted about it a while back. Mine makes me touch the wheel constantly.

That's either strange or you are not noticing the blue flash at the top of the monitor

 

[REM]

I suppose you are either not discerning enough, or too dense to understand that I am merely pointing out that it's not only illegal, but dangerous to attempt to use safety feature defeat devices.

You keep trying to attribute an argument (that I'm not making) on my behalf, then attacking that argument. You have poor debate skills too.

 

[REM]

You are too deluded to understand the argument being made here.

 

[REM]

I muted that moron weeks ago because he was also too ignorant to engage in a sensible debate. It's not a shocker that he would be trash talking yet again with a completely indefensible position.

Are you guys actually trying to pick up a defensible position on this topic? Really? Let's rally for the guys trying to use FSD safety feature defeat devices to the detriment of literally everyone who uses the software?

 

[dalton108]

I muted that moron weeks ago because he was also too ignorant to engage in a sensible debate. It's not a shocker that he would be trash talking yet again with a completely indefensible position.

Are you guys actually trying to pick up a defensible position on this topic? Really? Let's rally for the guys trying to use FSD safety feature defeat devices to the detriment of literally everyone who uses the software?

Muting is my love language! It’s how I show love to my eyeballs!

They work so hard, they don’t need this shit!

????

 

[HaulingAss]

You know, this is the kind of negative personal bullshit that ruins this forum.

Don't assume that everyone who understands the ADAS attention monitoring system, and knows how to use it, are automatically lying "fanbois". I use the center screen to navigate, select new songs and playlists, find Superchargers, etc. without getting the nag the vast majority of the time. When I become complacent over time, it will gently remind me, and I will remember to look out the windshield more often. Because I don't use the center screen without deliberating glancing up at the road every few seconds. That's all it takes to defeat the nag.

That you think anyone more adept than you at operating the most advanced ADAS available to the general public is just making it up is the height of hypocrisy.

Ironically, the biggest concern of FSD naysayers four or five years ago was that as FSD approached a state of development where it was very, very good, but still not good enough to safely be unsupervised, that it would be impossible to prevent people from becoming too complacent, from assuming that FSD didn't need constant supervision as Tesla instructs, and that fatal accidents would necessarily occur due to driver inattention. Now that FSD 12 has arrived at that point, the concern seems to have shifted. Now the naysayers think it monitors the driver too closely, even though it's simply because they don't know how the attention monitoring system works so they can adapt to using it. They are so entitled that they think they should be drive like they always have, and that they shouldn't have to adapt their behavior at all to satisfy the Attention Monitoring System. That they are above doing that.

But guess what? All their complaining is for naught. Because the ADAS Attention Monitoring System is a transitional technology, occupying but a blip in time. It's only purpose is to get FSD owners through this brief period of FSD development safely. It is adeptly fulfilling that need even though it's a technology with zero long-term value (because it becomes totally unnecessary with an FSD that doesn't require supervision).

Accusing people like @REM of becoming "hysterical" simply because he believes people shouldn't break their user agreement by using third-party safety defeat devices is completely uncalled for. I completely agree with him. Because when you do that, you become the problem, you become the agitator and the person who ends up looking foolish for not being able to discuss differences of opinion without becoming hostile and unreasonable.

Most people here see right through what you are doing, attempting present the defeating of the safety systems as your God-given right, even though Tesla requires you to agree not to use safety defeat devices as a condition of using the technology under development. Do you think a person's word is just fluff? That agreements don't actually mean what they say? I don't respect people I can't count on to do what they agree to, who are so arrogant that they will sign agreements they have no intention of keeping. @REM is not the problem here, you are the one with an unreasonable position, you just can't see it.

Plus, the third party defeat device doesn't even work on the Cybertruck. Because Tesla is one step ahead of the arrogant people who don't want to honor their agreement signed as a condition of using Tesla's ADAS system. So why are we even discussing the use of a device that doesn't even work on a transitional technology that will most likely not even be needed within a year?

 

[REM]

You know, this is the kind of negative personal bullshit that ruins this forum.

Don't assume that everyone who understands the ADAS attention monitoring system, and knows how to use it, are automatically lying "fanbois". I use the center screen to navigate, select new songs and playlists, find Superchargers, etc. without getting the nag the vast majority of the time. When I become complacent over time, it will gently remind me, and I will remember to look out the windshield more often. Because I don't use the center screen without deliberating glancing up at the road every few seconds. That's all it takes to defeat the nag.

That you think anyone more adept than you at operating the most advanced ADAS available to the general public is just making it up is the height of hypocrisy.

Ironically, the biggest concern of FSD naysayers four or five years ago was that as FSD approached a state of development where it was very, very good, but still not good enough to safely be unsupervised, that it would be impossible to prevent people from becoming too complacent, from assuming that FSD didn't need constant supervision as Tesla instructs, and that fatal accidents would necessarily occur due to driver inattention. Now that FSD 12 has arrived at that point, the concern seems to have shifted. Now the naysayers think it monitors the driver too closely, even though it's simply because they don't know how the attention monitoring system works so they can adapt to using it. They are so entitled that they think they should be drive like they always have, and that they shouldn't have to adapt their behavior at all to satisfy the Attention Monitoring System. That they are above doing that.

But guess what? All their complaining is for naught. Because the ADAS Attention Monitoring System is a transitional technology, occupying but a blip in time. It's only purpose is to get FSD owners through this brief period of FSD development safely. It is adeptly fulfilling that need even though it's a technology with zero long-term value (because it becomes totally unnecessary with an FSD that doesn't require supervision).

Accusing people like @REM of becoming "hysterical" simply because he believes people shouldn't break their user agreement by using third-party safety defeat devices is completely uncalled for. I completely agree with him. Because when you do that, you become the problem, you become the agitator and the person who ends up looking foolish for not being able to discuss differences of opinion without becoming hostile and unreasonable.

Most people here see right through what you are doing, attempting present the defeating of the safety systems as your God-given right, even though Tesla requires you to agree not to use safety defeat devices as a condition of using the technology under development. Do you think a person's word is just fluff? That agreements don't actually mean what they say? I don't respect people I can't count on to do what they agree to, who are so arrogant that they will sign agreements they have no intention of keeping. @REM is not the problem here, you are the one with an unreasonable position, you just can't see it.

Plus, the third party defeat device doesn't even work on the Cybertruck. Because Tesla is one step ahead of the arrogant people who don't want to honor their agreement signed as a condition of using Tesla's ADAS system. So why are we even discussing the use of a device that doesn't even work on a transitional technology that will most likely not even be needed within a year?

Absolutely spot on.

 

[REM]

Bottom line: the system only nags you when you are not paying due attention to FSD, in exact accordance to the instructions and Terms of Use.

The system works perfectly fine as it's designed. You are just being a contrarian here.

Sponsored