Safe and reliable production changes, and how Rivian recently got this wrong
blog.substrate.tools
Safe and reliable production changes, and how Rivian recently got this wrong
1–10 of 47 posts
Re: Safe and reliable production changes, and how Rivian recently got this wrong
#2[flagged]
Re: Safe and reliable production changes, and how Rivian recently got this wrong
#3> In this post I’ll be discussing a recent over-the-air (OTA) software update to Rivian vehicles that went badly. It is speculative; I have no insider knowledge of Rivian’s software, systems or practices.
and then it goes into canary testing, "pre flight tests" and rollback
Re: Safe and reliable production changes, and how Rivian recently got this wrong
#4Software in cars and OTA is the stupidest thing in recent years. Like the damn laptop riddled with mediocre software wasn't already frustrating enough, let's fuck up cars too.
Re: Safe and reliable production changes, and how Rivian recently got this wrong
#5Software in cars and OTA is the stupidest thing in recent years. Like the damn laptop riddled with mediocre software wasn't already frustrating enough, let's fuck up cars too.
Same things with phones. A phone should just make calls, it doesn't need software.
Re: Safe and reliable production changes, and how Rivian recently got this wrong
#6Software in cars and OTA is the stupidest thing in recent years. Like the damn laptop riddled with mediocre software wasn't already frustrating enough, let's fuck up cars too.
Same things with phones. A phone should just make calls, it doesn't need software.
After the deluge of spam calls I receive daily I'm somewhat inclined to opt for the opposite direction. No more phonecalls and just using apps for communication.
Re: Safe and reliable production changes, and how Rivian recently got this wrong
#7Software in cars and OTA is the stupidest thing in recent years. Like the damn laptop riddled with mediocre software wasn't already frustrating enough, let's fuck up cars too.
To be fair cars as currently designed are a pretty stupid idea to begin with. Let’s just waste energy carrying around 5000lbs of car at ridiculous speeds to move around a 200lb person.
Re: Safe and reliable production changes, and how Rivian recently got this wrong
#8Software in cars and OTA is the stupidest thing in recent years. Like the damn laptop riddled with mediocre software wasn't already frustrating enough, let's fuck up cars too.
To be fair cars as currently designed are a pretty stupid idea to begin with. Let’s just waste energy carrying around 5000lbs of car at ridiculous speeds to move around a 200lb person.
In this case it's even what, 7000 or 8500lbs car? Which is even crazier when you consider road wear scales on the 3rd or 4th power of weight.
(Edit: 4th power, damn) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_power_law
So a 8500 car does 64x as much road wear as my small sedan.
Re: Safe and reliable production changes, and how Rivian recently got this wrong
#9Earlier quoted context omitted.
Same things with phones. A phone should just make calls, it doesn't need software.
After the deluge of spam calls I receive daily I'm somewhat inclined to opt for the opposite direction. No more phonecalls and just using apps for communication.
That's so much better. I only communicate with people who have the rich man's apps. No unintended negative side-effects can possibly be found there!
Re: Safe and reliable production changes, and how Rivian recently got this wrong
#10Earlier quoted context omitted.
To be fair cars as currently designed are a pretty stupid idea to begin with. Let’s just waste energy carrying around 5000lbs of car at ridiculous speeds to move around a 200lb person.
In this case it's even what, 7000 or 8500lbs car? Which is even crazier when you consider road wear scales on the 3rd or 4th power of weight. (Edit: 4th power, damn) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_power_law So a 8500 car does 64x as much road wear as my small sedan.
Wrong
https://twitter.com/ajisuzu1/status/1681123111364620294?s=46
TLDR; From a road wear perspective there is no real difference between a heavy EV and a lightweight smaller ICE.
Edit: Not sure why I get downvoted so heavily. It is just a fact that the weight difference between an EV and comparable ICE has no measurable difference to road wear.
People like the above poster just like to touch on the fourth power law but not how the calculations actually work.
ESAL is part of that calculation. A 5 axel semi has a ESAL of 2.35, a dumptruck ~4, a 3.5ton vehicle .004, a 3ton vehicle .002. When we are talking about the difference in hundreds of pounds between EV and ICE, there is no wear difference.