Tesla's self-driving efforts rank last in study of self-driving companies
businessinsider.com
Tesla's self-driving efforts rank last in study of self-driving companies
1–10 of 32 posts
Re: Tesla's self-driving efforts rank last in study of self-driving companies
#2It seems biased. Tesla exaggerated claims feel scammy, but at least they have a product out there. None of these “leaders” have something you can test yourself.
Re: Tesla's self-driving efforts rank last in study of self-driving companies
#3It seems biased. Tesla exaggerated claims feel scammy, but at least they have a product out there. None of these “leaders” have something you can test yourself.
Perhaps because none of them are actually ready for usage in public?
That would say a lot more about Tesla's practices than about the ability of the others to deliver a product.
Re: Tesla's self-driving efforts rank last in study of self-driving companies
#4It seems biased. Tesla exaggerated claims feel scammy, but at least they have a product out there. None of these “leaders” have something you can test yourself.
You mean the others don't make public beta tests.
Re: Tesla's self-driving efforts rank last in study of self-driving companies
#5Re: Tesla's self-driving efforts rank last in study of self-driving companies
#6It seems biased. Tesla exaggerated claims feel scammy, but at least they have a product out there. None of these “leaders” have something you can test yourself.
Charging $15k for software that doesn't work yet, and encourages dangerous behavior by untrained testers on public roads, for years, is not brave.
Re: Tesla's self-driving efforts rank last in study of self-driving companies
#7It seems biased. Tesla exaggerated claims feel scammy, but at least they have a product out there. None of these “leaders” have something you can test yourself.
You are never testing as self-driving car only by yourself. Any time you take a self-driving car for testing, you are also including other cars and pedestrians in your experiment. (unless you are doing it on a closed track )
Re: Tesla's self-driving efforts rank last in study of self-driving companies
#8Maybe it's because to do cutting edge self-driving you need cutting edge software and machine learning engineers, and software engineers are less likely to put up with Elon's crap because they have more options?
Tesla and Space X get heavy talent (despite the downsides of working for Elon Musk) because in their primary fields they are the leader by a large enough margin that if you're one of the best there aren't a lot of other places to go that are going to really challenge you. That's just not the case for the software involved.
Re: Tesla's self-driving efforts rank last in study of self-driving companies
#9It seems biased. Tesla exaggerated claims feel scammy, but at least they have a product out there. None of these “leaders” have something you can test yourself.
Charging $15k for software that doesn't work yet, and encourages dangerous behavior by untrained testers on public roads, for years, is not brave.
They make it clear that it's not ready yet at time of purchase and there is no definitive launch date. You are by no means required to pay for it and most people don't.
>encourages dangerous behavior by untrained testers on public roads
There are idiots everywhere. The functionality has been locked behind their driver safety score to ensure only responsible drivers can beta test. There's a delusion that it is dangerous based on the amount of press coverage any Tesla involved incident gets.
Do I trust that their car is better at driving than me? No. But is is better than most people on the road. I'd rather be driving near a Tesla than a Prius.
Re: Tesla's self-driving efforts rank last in study of self-driving companies
#10I'm underwhelmed by the article's quality. First, it's an article about a consultancy's opinion of the marketplace. The most said about methodology:
"To come up with the list, Guidehouse weighs factors such as a company's vision, go-to-market and production strategies, partners, tech, commercial readiness, and more. Guidehouse sorts the companies it ranks into four categories: leaders, contenders, challengers, and followers."
Oh dear. How much mere opinion and supposition went into this one I wonder. Did the companies evaluated provide information? Where they even requested to do so? Did only some of them do so? What are the relative weightings of different factors? etc.
Another, perhaps more familiar way to this audience, to read this report is to think about the credibility you'd give to a news article with a title like "Company XYZ Comes in Dead Last in Gartner Group Study". Yes, you know others with important decision making power may weigh such a Gartner Group report in their decisions, but that the report tells you more about the thinking, biases, and objectives of the study authors than anything terribly objective or important about the marketplace itself.