211–220 of 864 posts
I'm astonished consumers are still paying fifteen thousand dollars to be guinea pigs for this bullshit. No car that currently has tires on the road is going to let you fall asleep in your driveway and wake up at work.
This morning I tried to turn it on, and the car immediately veered left into the oncoming lane on a straight, 2 lane road. Fortunately, there were no other vehicles nearby.
I immediately turned it off in the settings, and have no intention of re-enabling.
That's 4-5B USD worth of fraud. This thing could actually be quite dangerous for TSLA. One class-action lawsuit around this and they're bankrupt. Edit: Dang, you're all right, they could eat this and still be alive. My whole sentiment comes from FSD being their big shot (and everything that comes with that, like the robotaxis and whatnot). Without FSD, they're "just another car company" and the market is already thri…
What would happen to the other ~15B they have in the bank?
I love that this is the same guy who wants to send people to Mars one-way and then figure out the return trip later.
You'd be surprised how many people want a one-way ticket to Mars. I think Elon can make good money from that alone.
I love that this is the same guy who wants to send people to Mars one-way and then figure out the return trip later.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why? It involves a safety system! That needs to be tracked publicly and updated! Nothing more than an OTA - does not mean much when everything is fly by wire and a bug could mean your car does not stop accelerating or something.
Recall implies something being returned. This should be called a mandatory software patch, or something like that. The problem is Tesla owners repeatedly see "recall" to mean "software update", so this might lead to a lot of confusion if a physical recall is actually required in the future.
Thanks to the Tesla owners on the front lines risking their lives for the greater good (of Tesla)! Jokes aside, it's gotta be damn tough to QA a system like this in any sort of way that resembles full coverage. Can't even really define what full test coverage means.
A autonomous Tesla driving into a group of people or swerving into oncoming traffic is potentially killing other people.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why? It involves a safety system! That needs to be tracked publicly and updated! Nothing more than an OTA - does not mean much when everything is fly by wire and a bug could mean your car does not stop accelerating or something.
Recall implies something being returned. This should be called a mandatory software patch, or something like that. The problem is Tesla owners repeatedly see "recall" to mean "software update", so this might lead to a lot of confusion if a physical recall is actually required in the future.
I have a Model 3, and was excited to get the FSD beta access about a month ago. I don't use it super regularly, but it's neat. This morning I tried to turn it on, and the car immediately veered left into the oncoming lane on a straight, 2 lane road. Fortunately, there were no other vehicles nearby. I immediately turned it off in the settings, and have no intention of re-enabling.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's the thing about neural networks: any QA is going to be superficial due to their statistical black box nature.
What? Black box testing has plenty of techniques: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black-box_testing Whether it's a neural network inside or not is completely irrelevant. That's why it's called "black box".