Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Indian startup 3D prints rocket engine in 72 hours

spectrum.ieee.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 288 posts

Re: Indian startup 3D prints rocket engine in 72 hours

#261

Post by toss1 »

ETH_start wrote: post #240
mynameisvlad wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don’t just get a pass, especially not when you actively are promoting it as soon™ being able to drive you without any input whatsoever. Robotaxis and the like have been promised for years now, it’s not like Tesla isn’t actively claiming the technology is basically around the corner. In short, saying it’s “Full Self Driving (Supervised)” is not really enough.

You get a pass because nobody who drives a Tesla can reasonably believe the vehicle can drive itself. That it can't fully drive itself is fully and adequately disclosed.

So, what is the difference between your argument and this more concise version?

The falsehood of the "Full Self-Driving" claims are generally known to existing customers, therefore it is ok to lie to new customers.

Re: Indian startup 3D prints rocket engine in 72 hours

#262

Post by guax »

hliyan wrote: post #243
guax wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Titan submersible sound detection system vibes.

What does "vibes" mean here? Are you saying that this is a comparable level of negligence, or that it simply personally reminds you of the former case, and nothing else? There are better words available than "vibes".

I'm not vibing with your distaste for the vibes.

Re: Indian startup 3D prints rocket engine in 72 hours

#263

Post by ETH_start »

sjsdaiuasgdia wrote: post #250
ETH_start wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What the name implies if interpreted without any context pales in comparison to the repeated and explicit instructions and warnings given to the driver that clarify that the driver should always be in control

There's a reason "it does what it says on the tin" is generally seen as a positive aspect of a product. When a product's naming and branding is well aligned with its actual utility, it builds trust with the customer. The customer doesn't feel like the seller is trying to pull a fast one on them. Tesla chose their branding direction and Elon chooses to make his "optimistic" predictions that have made it sound like tru…

This is simply a mischaracterization of the situation. No one who drives a Tesla thinks that the driver assist features are intended to or capable of autonomous driving.

The naming, whatever you may think of it, is massively overrided by the strongly worded warnings and instructions that are abundantly and repeatedly displayed to the driver, that effectively and unambiguously convey to the driver that they must be attentive while using the driver assist features.

Re: Indian startup 3D prints rocket engine in 72 hours

#264

Post by ETH_start »

Dah00n wrote: post #259
ETH_start wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

More conspiracy theories. The driver assist disengaging had nothing to do with a ploy by Tesla to shift responsibility. A driver taking control of the car 0.1s before impact is a result of inattentive driving. Like I said in the other comment: There is absolutely no other company in the world where a predictable and disclosed shortcoming of the driver assist combined with the failure of the driver to fulfill their re…

the lengths that people go to to defend them is obviously agenda-driven and a result of emotions

I only go to great lengths because I can see that the attacks are driven by an agenda that is not impartial.

And I've articulated why I think that in this case.

Re: Indian startup 3D prints rocket engine in 72 hours

#265

Post by ETH_start »

toss1 wrote: post #253
ETH_start wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

More conspiracy theories. The driver assist disengaging had nothing to do with a ploy by Tesla to shift responsibility. A driver taking control of the car 0.1s before impact is a result of inattentive driving. Like I said in the other comment: There is absolutely no other company in the world where a predictable and disclosed shortcoming of the driver assist combined with the failure of the driver to fulfill their re…

>>conspiracy theories ... agenda-driven and a result of emotions No, not even close, dead wrong spurious insults. For many years, I held Musk in very high regard, and you can find I've even posted extensive defenses of him here on HN. My changed views are a direct result of observed behavior. No, the fact that the driver assist disengages is NOT what I am pointing to as the attempt to shift responsibility. Tesla is s…

Your views on Musk changed precisely when everyone else's did, when he started challenging the establishment on critical points, like their support for rampant censorship of Twitter and other social media sites (e.g. removing the Hunter Biden story before the election and permanently banning users if they used certain gender pronoun conventions).

No one who drives a Tesla thinks that the driver assist features are intended to or capable of autonomous driving. The naming, whatever you may think of it, is massively overrided by the strongly worded warnings and instructions that are abundantly and repeatedly displayed to the driver, that effectively and unambiguously convey to the driver that they must be engaged while using the driver assist features.

If you want to criticize the naming for being inaccurate even if they argue it's intended to be a forwarding looking statement of aspirations, I would accept that criticism as arguably justified.

But that the driver is fully aware of their responsibilities is beyond any doubt.

Blaming Tesla for its autopilot disengaging 0.1s before impact in a number of accidents is therefore unjustified.

Re: Indian startup 3D prints rocket engine in 72 hours

#266

Post by ETH_start »

toss1 wrote: post #261
ETH_start wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You get a pass because nobody who drives a Tesla can reasonably believe the vehicle can drive itself. That it can't fully drive itself is fully and adequately disclosed.

So, what is the difference between your argument and this more concise version? The falsehood of the " Full Self-Driving" claims are generally known to existing customers, therefore it is ok to lie to new customers.

I'm challenging the original comment, which blames Tesla for accidents caused by drivers being inattentive.

The name of the driver assist program even if inaccurate, did not mislead any of those drivers, as any driver who uses these features is amply informed/warned that the features do not provide autonomous driving and don't obviate the requirement of the driver to remain fully engaged at all time.

Re: Indian startup 3D prints rocket engine in 72 hours

#267

Post by mlindner »

ab8 wrote: post #189
mlindner wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn't jump to praise so quickly. Additive manufacturing (aka 3D printing) is standard in the industry and the time is dependent on the size (and to some extent the mass) of the engine. They then further claim you don't need to do any post-manufacturing qualifications, which is absolute nonsense. So it's either misreporting or it's an indication of Indian incompetence/lying.

I wonder where Indian incompetence/lying falls on the Elon scale.

I don't remember Elon ever stating something does something it's not actually doing. His future timelines are off but it's never his competence that's been a problem with anything relating to SpaceX. And calling SpaceX (the entire industry leader) anywhere near "incompetent" beggars belief.

WDon't believe everything you read in headlines written by people with no understanding of the space industry. If you want to read about the industry, read about it on industry specific sites (like spacenews.com) or from industry specific reporters (Eric Berger or Stephen Clark at ArsTechnica). Davenport at Washington Post is good too.

Re: Indian startup 3D prints rocket engine in 72 hours

#268

Post by toss1 »

ETH_start wrote: post #266
toss1 wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, what is the difference between your argument and this more concise version? The falsehood of the " Full Self-Driving" claims are generally known to existing customers, therefore it is ok to lie to new customers.

I'm challenging the original comment, which blames Tesla for accidents caused by drivers being inattentive. The name of the driver assist program even if inaccurate, did not mislead any of those drivers, as any driver who uses these features is amply informed/warned that the features do not provide autonomous driving and don't obviate the requirement of the driver to remain fully engaged at all time.

Since your core point is that Tesla requires drivers to be fully engaged 100% or the time, it is an odd way to challenge someone blaming Tesla by responding to me pointing out that Tesla's advertising is fundamentally dishonest.

Tesla are trying to have it both ways. They ADVERTISE and promote that it is "FULL Self-Driving" and "FSD", while simultaneously doing everything post-sale to ensure the driver is responsible for failures of FSD.

I wasn't originally in that camp, but your arguments are convincing me that Tesla does in fact bear some responsibility for the crashes, despite the facts you point out that Tesla post-sale promotes driver attention.

Despite all Tesla's efforts towards driver attention, Tesla ALSO broadcasts conflicting messages which do give the impression that FSD is more capable and safe than it is. What percent responsible? I don't know, but I think it's above 5%, especially for new drivers, who have been more exposed to the sales pitch and less to the documentation.

Re: Indian startup 3D prints rocket engine in 72 hours

#269

Post by IG_Semmelweiss »

nathan_compton wrote: post #254
IG_Semmelweiss wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>> The lines are basically drawn by aristocrats of one kind or another and the rest of us have to deal with it I agree. So ? Tribes had the same interactions. Nothing's changed. We are still humans. >>> The rights paid for in blood, sweat, and tears, as you say, were wrenched from the hands of the kinds of people So by that assertion , wherever you live, you should vacate right now. Because if you take that line of…

There are not property rights and there is no security except the security that human beings create for themselves and, ultimately, one another. "Property rights" do not descend from the platonic realm to protect you if someone invades your home. You may protect yourself or your neighbors may protect you or, as is more generally the case, I believe, a general sense of bonhomie shared by human beings everywhere, does…

The biggest flaw on your argument is that you are choosing to ignore that we are talking is a complex system that involves time in a grand scale. Like most things in nature.

You can't understand the dynamics of a colony by observing 1 ant. Similarly, you can't understand borders by focusing on who or when they were drawn.

Borders are the equilibrium point of the strength and culture of a particular tribe over a very long period of time developed thru their communal effort. Borders will move or disappear when a tribe gets too strong or weak. Its a process that has always taken place in nature at all levels, for all time.

You can choose to look at the ant, and the ant may appeal feckless and it has a very short lifespan.

You are just stuck in the wrong domain. We are talking about natural processes. You seem to insist to suggest this is a different domain.

Re: Indian startup 3D prints rocket engine in 72 hours

#270

Post by ETH_start »

toss1 wrote: post #268
ETH_start wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm challenging the original comment, which blames Tesla for accidents caused by drivers being inattentive. The name of the driver assist program even if inaccurate, did not mislead any of those drivers, as any driver who uses these features is amply informed/warned that the features do not provide autonomous driving and don't obviate the requirement of the driver to remain fully engaged at all time.

Since your core point is that Tesla requires drivers to be fully engaged 100% or the time, it is an odd way to challenge someone blaming Tesla by responding to me pointing out that Tesla's advertising is fundamentally dishonest. Tesla are trying to have it both ways. They ADVERTISE and promote that it is " FULL Self-Driving" and "FSD", while simultaneously doing everything post-sale to ensure the driver is responsibl…

Either the advertising misleads the driver or it does not. Whether the advertising might mislead some buyers, investors and unconnected members of the general public, is orthogonal to whether drivers are being misled, and thus whether accidents caused by their unattentiveness should be blamed on Tesla.

There is no credible case to be made that any Tesla driver is unaware of Tesla's stance, that the driver assist features cannot provide autonomous driving and that the driver must always remain engaged.

The warnings are absolutely clear and reiterated so they could not be missed. If you want to challenge that notion in court, be my guest.

Post reply on HN