Elon Musk is 'full of crap'

[bonnie]

I don't accept the belief that anecdotal reports are useless because they may be unvetted or proven, sometimes a hands on report from "in the trenches" can be very valuable and enhances the clinical values offered

Then you are free to take my anecdotal evidence and use it.

But the point remains that if it's not accompanying real data, stories are stories. We can all say 'well I have a friend' to support whatever point we're making. Mine was true - but still useless if my group of friends is not representative of the general public.

 

[Krugerrand]

Of course not. All I'm saying is to evaluate them as separate things.

No you weren’t, but okay.

 

[AnxietyRanger]

No you weren’t, but okay.

Why not be nice sometime? I clicked helpful on your post, acknowledged your point and responded trying to move things forward.

 

[gg_got_a_tesla]

Don't know about the degree of crap involved but, I do have a problem with Elon and Tesla taking even a dime from customers *at this point* for the currently-non-existent FSD. If and when it works robustly and as allowed by regulations in the customer's area, allow customers to turn it on - much like Supercharging or battery capacity unlocking in the past - by paying after the fact (as Tesla does allow but for a higher price). Taking money upfront with the promise is rather unethical IMHO.

 

[PrGrPa]

Arguments of computer vision vs human vision aside, I wonder what the reason for this statement being made by GM is.

Perhaps to create further uncertainty in Tesla’s current approach to FSD.

Perhaps to increase belief in the ‘safe and steady’ GM approach to EVs and vehicle control.

Perhaps to change investor sentiment.

GM has already been bailed out by government and benefits from various direct and indirect government support throughout the world. Any threat, no matter how modest, needs to be dealt with. And to use such bold language I think indicates the possibly existential threat that small EV producers possibly represent to the large motor manufacturers.

There’s no denying that Elon Musk has an optimistic approach to project planning and to the future. But dramatic changes are not forged by meek goals.

Tesla has taken a big bet on the camera-based approach to assisted and autonomous driving. I hope it pays off. If it does that’s great in many ways. If it doesn’t then in 2018 I’ll be driving an EV with no vehicular emissions and performance, comfort, and safety beyond what I could otherwise access. The Model S beats any offering I could afford or would want from GM in the U.K. I’m content with that.

 

[Skotty]

Rain sensing is.

Hmm...I hadn't considered this. Would explain why AP2 cars don't have auto-wipers yet. Perhaps rain sensing is a component of the AP software suite (as in, rain knowledge was considered an important attribute to build into the AP system), and Tesla figured they could use that for the wipers as well. Now rain sensing is stuck paired with an AP software suite that is taking a long time to mature. I used to assume it was an entirely separate thing, but quite possibly not.

I've long been one of the major pessimists on AP self-driving timeline. Doesn't mean I don't think they should work on it though. I do think the AP2 hardware should be sufficient. Keep working on it, Tesla, and good luck. As often as I'm driving on the interstate for work, I would love to have full self driving on the interstate. I could get a lot more work done that way (just need my laptop to work on my software projects). Maybe someday.

I think people are often over-optimistic about computers doing things that humans are inherently good at. Driving is one of those things. I know some of you think humans are terrible drivers, but those who have a little experience and actually focus on the job are actually really good at it. There's a ton of processing that gets done that you don't even have to "think" about. Complex situations involving traffic, construction, nearby people and animals, identifying and classifying obstacles, risk assessments, etc. Meanwhile, AP2 still has trouble not taking every highway exit.

 

[PrGrPa]

Don't know about the degree of crap involved but, I do have a problem with Elon and Tesla taking even a dime from customers *at this point* for the currently-non-existent FSD.
...
Taking money upfront with the promise is rather unethical IMHO.

“Unethical” is strong. While Elon Musk makes various future-looking claims, the terms of licensing for FSD are clear. You get a £1,000 discount for buying the license upfront with the knowledge that the features are in development and that no specific date is set for their delivery.

Moreover, the FSD license is determined by ‘regulators’. Anticipating the speed of such regulation in the U.K./EU made me not opt for FSD.

A GM exec’s ad hominem comment sparked this thread perhaps based on similar reasoning: Elon said FSD would be seen by some date in 2017. We’ve not seen it yet. Or perhaps the GM exec was referencing the model 3 production forecasts?

 

[daniel]

Don't know about the degree of crap involved but, I do have a problem with Elon and Tesla taking even a dime from customers *at this point* for the currently-non-existent FSD. If and when it works robustly and as allowed by regulations in the customer's area, allow customers to turn it on - much like Supercharging or battery capacity unlocking in the past - by paying after the fact (as Tesla does allow but for a higher price). Taking money upfront with the promise is rather unethical IMHO.

I agree that taking money for FSD on 2017 cars is ethically questionable, since I don't expect FSD to be available for a decade or so. Perhaps Tesla should make an offer like, e.g., if FSD is not available in five years, or ends up requiring hardware not on the car, you get the $1,000 back. Technology advances rapidly, and when FSD does arrive, it might well benefit from a type of sensor that does not yet exist, or was only later recognized to be useful.

When it comes time to order my car, I'll get the hardware if and only if it provides functionality now. I.e., if there are things the car can do now that require the hardware. I'm not going to buy a license for software that I think will be 5 to 10 years in coming.

Elon Musk is a visionary and a great man. GM would not have made the Bolt, or even the Volt, were it not for Tesla taking a chunk of the car market with EVs. And I love my Roadster. But visionaries don't always get it right, and I think Musk is overly optimistic on the timeline for FSD.

 

[stopcrazypp]

Because no AP1/AP2 car uses cameras yet that aren't covered by the front wipers (as well as those are the highest placed cameras).

Trust me, my rear-view camera gets blocked all the time, though...

The rear cameras seem to be the weakest and that probably has to do with the aerodynamics which seems to suck water and grime into the area. It seems the side cameras do fine however despite having no wiper coverage.

 

[AnxietyRanger]

The rear cameras seem to be the weakest and that probably has to do with the aerodynamics which seems to suck water and grime into the area. It seems the side cameras do fine however despite having no wiper coverage.

Hard to say when there is no application or view for them yet, nor have many of us been through a proper winter with them yet.

We shall see.

 

[McRat]

... GM would not have made the Bolt, or even the Volt, were it not for Tesla taking a chunk of the car market with EVs. ...

Technically, if you ignore Lutz many crazy monologues, the Volt was not just the answer to the Prius and CARB, it was also part of GM's game plan.

"GM CEO Rick Wagoner said in late 2006 that the auto industry would need to lessen its oil dependency", in early 2007 demonstrated the Volt Concept Car to the world.

Elon Musk became the CEO of Tesla Motors in 2008. By then the Volt was already in the testing phase. At this stage, Tesla had not made more than a handful of cars. Not really a 'chunk'.

 

[S4WRXTTCS]

Humans can drive with 1-2 eyes, and usually what fails them is their attention span or impulse control failure. Fully autonomous driving is doable, as long as you focus on doing the right thing. 2 cameras would be enough if they were scanning in various directions.

Humans have wipers.

 

[bonnie]

Technically, if you ignore Lutz many crazy monologues, the Volt was not just the answer to the Prius and CARB, it was also part of GM's game plan.

"GM CEO Rick Wagoner said in late 2006 that the auto industry would need to lessen its oil dependency"

Elon Musk became the CEO of Tesla Motors in 2008. By then the Volt was already in the testing phase. At this stage, Tesla had not made more than a handful of cars. Not really a 'chunk'.

Yes, the Volt was - but not the Bolt. GM's bet was that consumers wanted both electric and 'a range extender' ... i.e., the ability gas it up. They were very dismissive of the idea that consumers would embrace BEV. I believe that without Tesla, there would be no Bolt today. Maybe in 5 or 10 years, but not today.

 

[McRat]

Yes, the Volt was - but not the Bolt. GM's bet was that consumers wanted both electric and 'a range extender' ... i.e., the ability gas it up. They were very dismissive of the idea that consumers would embrace BEV. I believe that without Tesla, there would be no Bolt today. Maybe in 5 or 10 years, but not today.

What about the EV1? Would there be an EV1 and S10 EV if it weren't for Elon Musk? And it's hard to ignore the Leaf. Nothing at all like anything Tesla Motors envisioned, but on the road back then.

 

[McRat]

People were building EVs in their garages when Tesla Motors incorporated. And many automakers were researching EV technology. Toyota and Honda had produced a large number of hybrids in the preceding decade.

Technology evolves, and has roots.

Elon Musk's real claim to fame is making EV's "cool-kids-cars" instead of econoboxes.

 

[bonnie]

What about the EV1? Would there be an EV1 and S10 EV if it weren't for Elon Musk? And it's hard to ignore the Leaf. Nothing at all like anything Tesla Motors envisioned, but on the road back then.

Well, as you know they crushed the EV1. Hardly an endorsement of electric. And I love the Leaf. But without the Supercharging network, the Leaf's limited range (yes, i know it's supposed to increase this year) has kept it as a commuter car for all but the most dedicated.

Not arguing that there would be no electric, but (as I said in previous post), Tesla's success has accelerated the transition for the entire market.

 

[McRat]

Well, as you know they crushed the EV1. Hardly an endorsement of electric. And I love the Leaf. But without the Supercharging network, the Leaf's limited range (yes, i know it's supposed to increase this year) has kept it as a commuter car for all but the most dedicated.

Not arguing that there would be no electric, but (as I said in previous post), Tesla's success has accelerated the transition for the entire market.

So far, nobody has followed Tesla's direction in producing 'cool-kids-cars' that people lust after (RIP Fisker). They are all still producing utilitarian designs of modest performance. Well other than the MegaBuck Hybrids, such as the 918 and LaFerrari.

 

[bonnie]

So far, nobody has followed Tesla's direction in producing 'cool-kids-cars' that people lust after (RIP Fisker). They are all still producing utilitarian designs of modest performance. Well other than the MegaBuck Hybrids, such as the 918 and LaFerrari.

Can we agree that without Tesla in the marketplace, we would not see so many companies currently pursuing EV offerings?

 

[Skotty]

Not arguing that there would be no electric, but (as I said in previous post), Tesla's success has accelerated the transition for the entire market.

Which of course was one of the primary goals of Tesla and stated in their Mission Statement.

 

[AnxietyRanger]

So far, nobody has followed Tesla's direction in producing 'cool-kids-cars' that people lust after (RIP Fisker). They are all still producing utilitarian designs of modest performance. Well other than the MegaBuck Hybrids, such as the 918 and LaFerrari.

Well, there is Rimac...