Earlier quoted context omitted.
I suggest you check out www.idealista.es and www.fotocasa.es.
So it's not real. Got it.
It's not my job to do their research for them, but two minutes will show that it very much is the case.
Ford F-150 Lightning: Fast Truck, Slow Computer
541–550 of 570 posts
Re: Ford F-150 Lightning: Fast Truck, Slow Computer
#542Earlier quoted context omitted.
Want to know something terrifying? ECU code is often nearly as sloppily written as that JavaScript. They follow MISRA and usually have a couple "QA" teams to catch the most egregious errors of course, but the overall quality is eerily similar to what you'd get if half the team came straight out of a time machine from 1995. I've had to give informational sessions on why boot systems should have redundancy and what und…
And yet the ECU shipped with nearly every car for the past few decades almost never fails through millions of cycles. I think all this "ECU code is bad" stuff is just people who don't like the style of the produced code. Are you sure those edge cases aren't accounted for in other ways? Maybe they decided that everything should be "best case" code, and any error just resets the ECU which boots up before the next spark…
A similar argument was made by Toyota about their systems during the lead-up to the unintended acceleration debacle. I recommend Koopman's talk [1] on the subject for details, but long story short the Toyota ETC was apparently utterly reliable and installed in some of the most popular vehicles on the market at the time. However, detailed investigation of the systems and code behind the few publicized incidents revealed basic system issues like the watchdog failed to detect task crashes, rampant memory safety issues, and even a failure to follow their own internal code guidelines. All of that was manifesting in people's vehicles, but it was only rarely turning lethal and even those cases went mostly unrecognized.
Things have improved significantly since the Toyota acceleration issue, in large part because all those details came out. Model-based design is now basically standard for most ECUs, which eliminates large amounts of buggy human-written code. Formal methods tools that don't entirely suck exist. However, most of the issues Koopman points out (especially memory safety) still exist in many places on modern vehicles and all of his points about the issues with relying on testing to surface quality problems remain relevant.
[1] https://users.ece.cmu.edu/~koopman/pubs/koopman14_toyota_ua_...
Re: Ford F-150 Lightning: Fast Truck, Slow Computer
#543Earlier quoted context omitted.
In this case, looking into side mirrors is dangerous, but not looking into them is also dangerous. Thus driving is dangerous, but walking is dangerous too, so better to sit in a safe room away from the dangers.
Driving is dangerous. But looking in your side mirrors is necessary. But looking too long is dangerous, especially in stop and go traffic. My point is not that we should do nothing because everything is dangerous, but that we should minimize the risk by avoiding things that are unnecessary. Adjusting the radio is almost certainly unnecessary to drive.
Annoying music makes the driver angry and inattentive, so not adjusting the radio is also dangerous. This kind of risk assessment algorithm is already built into our brains, and I doubt you can improve it with a formal simplistic model, partially because the risk weights depend on circumstances.
Re: Ford F-150 Lightning: Fast Truck, Slow Computer
#544Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The F150 issues can literally be fixed if Ford decides to install a quicker one on MY23. I’m unconvinced the problem can be fixed by “installing a quicker computer”. The functionality here isn’t materially different from what Tesla offered almost 10 years ago at this point. If nearly 10 years of hardware advancements couldn’t close the gap, a marginally faster computer next year won’t do it either.
The unavoidable Tesla comparison sorry, I am not convinced. What functionality is better? Not everybody is interested in fart apps or Steam games or other questionable "extra" functionality. OK, let's just say that Tesla has better software. It lacks however in other departments, such a build quality. But fact of the matter is here the following: if one reads The Verge article, his complains are mainly about the slow…
>The unavoidable Tesla comparison sorry, I am not convinced. What functionality is better?
I never said the functionality was better. My post says "The functionality here isn’t materially different from what Tesla offered." 5 year old Teslas, today, do not have laggy interfaces.
Your claim that it will be "easily" fixed will remain to be seen. Ford isn't new to touch screen interfaces. Every consumer has been opining for Android Auto/Carplay because they know stock interfaces will be laggy, unresponsive and unintuitive. This has been an issue for years, before EVs, and it takes a very healthy amount of optimism to believe it will just be fixed next year.
The iPhone was able to have smooth, responsive interfaces on a battery powered device in 2008. That was 14 years ago. How much more powerful of a device do you need than the iPhone 3GS to open a touch screen menu at 30fps? Only a handful of auto manufacturers care about software, and it's been that way for years. This isn't new.
Re: Ford F-150 Lightning: Fast Truck, Slow Computer
#545Re: Ford F-150 Lightning: Fast Truck, Slow Computer
#546FWIW Ford was hiring around this area (southern Ontario) for software engineers to work on their in-car systems like this. Not sure if this specific one. From what I've heard they were woefully underpaying. A friend of mine talked to them -- very qualified; like me he worked on similar touchscreen, interactive display type systems at Google/Nest, and had a general background on similar systems, and on QNX, etc. They…
I see this sentiment everywhere outside the tech first ecosystem. In the generalization of 'workers'/'engineers' v/s 'supervisors'/'managers', programmers are often seen as just workers. For whatever reason, an MBA or even a BBA is seen as an officer/supervisor. Even product teams at tech first companies tend to represent this dogma. There are exceptions but the programmers are workers dogma is prevalent in this worl…
> So yeah, Ford might make a fast car, they will almost never be able to build a software driven car, which is the car of the future.
I would kill for a "low-tech" EV - think Toyota Corolla[1], but with an electric power train. No touch screen, no "self driving" beyond lane assistance & adaptive cruise. Unfortunately, manufacturers are unwilling to start off with a low-margin products, but I believe that is the car of the future, and will sell like hot cakes.
1. An electric Ford Maverick would fit the bill too, if they don't ape Tesla's cockpit design. The Nissan Leaf is close to my ideal, but the lack of active cooling on the battery is a non-starter.
Re: Ford F-150 Lightning: Fast Truck, Slow Computer
#547Earlier quoted context omitted.
What's not to like about Tesla's data policy? I mean, for one thing, they don't have any of your data unless you opt in, and they don't resort to any tricks or pressure to get you to opt in. And even if you do opt in, it is not linked to any identifier for you or your car. How do you perceive that as a bad thing? Or were you just mistaken about their policy?
Based on friends cars, you either opt in or don’t get any features like nav, autopilot, and even music. I remember during a crash investigation, Tesla released data on a customer before they gave it to the family and the NHTSA. I perceive that as a bad thing.
> Based on friends cars, you either opt in or don’t get any features like nav, autopilot, and even music.
Not true.
Re: Ford F-150 Lightning: Fast Truck, Slow Computer
#548Earlier quoted context omitted.
I see this sentiment everywhere outside the tech first ecosystem. In the generalization of 'workers'/'engineers' v/s 'supervisors'/'managers', programmers are often seen as just workers. For whatever reason, an MBA or even a BBA is seen as an officer/supervisor. Even product teams at tech first companies tend to represent this dogma. There are exceptions but the programmers are workers dogma is prevalent in this worl…
> So yeah, Ford might make a fast car, they will almost never be able to build a software driven car, which is the car of the future. I would kill for a "low-tech" EV - think Toyota Corolla[1], but with an electric power train. No touch screen, no "self driving" beyond lane assistance & adaptive cruise. Unfortunately, manufacturers are unwilling to start off with a low-margin products, but I believe that is the car o…
This is what is desperately needed.
Re: Ford F-150 Lightning: Fast Truck, Slow Computer
#549Earlier quoted context omitted.
The car knows how intense the sun is. It has sensors to measure that. Coupled with some decent low emissive tint it's really not hard for it to handle such an idea. I live in Texas. I assure you I live in an area with high heat and intense sun. My cars have glass roofs. My cars seem to handle it fine.
Perhaps it depends on complexity of the system? I like in Florida and have to do some tuning occasionally, but I think it just has a typical in cabin and ambient sensor and isn't aware of how much sunlight there is.
If it has a screen it probably knows how bright it is as it can probably change between night and day modes. If it can tell it's bright, it can guess you're getting more radiant heating. It's been like that on every car with a screen built in that I've owned, more than a decade of model years.