-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
I guess this is a difference between want and need. They need patents on hand for defensive and negotiation purposes, even if they don't intend to use them for offensive purposes.
It's kind of like militarization. There's a lot of countries that have never initiated a conflict, but almost all countries in the world have a military or equivalently a defense agreement with another country with a military.
Tesla are still struggling to even recognize curbs, road edges and barriers as lanes marking.
There are false positive braking almost every trip.
and here's it braking for a bag of chips lol
and when it needs to brake it doesn't even brake.
and heres video proof from another person.
1 min 0 secs
look at what happens when it rains.
Anyone who thinks tesla replicated mobileye eye3 in 6 months needs to share with us whatever they are smoking. its been 8 months and they are no where close to parity with ap1 and clocks still ticking.
AP1 on the other hand
Last edited:
[/QUOTE]
My quote was about side collision false warnings...
But I've had my share of false TACC. Tesla seems to be getting better quickly with whitelisting.
You should work for Apple, Microsoft, Facebook, etc. because every one of them can't do this 100% of the time. They must not be as successful as you are
You feel that Tesla put as much though into the media player as into mission critical items??? Do even remotely think the same software developers did both? Do you think the media player is as rigorously tested and validated as mission critical software?
Tesla doesn't need to be transparent on how they are developing software and that hasn't stopped you from assuming they are incompetent. Tesla has been transparent about their release and testing process but you still seem to think it goes magically from a hand full of beta testers straight to 100% of the general public which is not the case at all, and has never been the case. Tesla uses a similar process to other tech companies especially with the notion of shadow mode.
Here's a good book for you to read The DevOps Handbook: How to Create World-Class Agility, Reliability, and Security in Technology Organizations: Gene Kim, Patrick Debois, John Willis, Jez Humble, John Allspaw: 9781942788003: Amazon.com: Books
Other major companies (Tesla needs to be considered a "major" company now, with a valuation higher than GM and Ford) also suffer from bugs getting into released products - all software has flaws. But they don't have the obvious flaws Tesla has had in their releases.
As one of Tesla's early Model S customers (VIN 3xxx), I've been willing to accept the flaws in Tesla's software - it's understandable for a young company trying to aggressively get products to market.
My concern is that customers like my wife anxiously waiting to get a Model 3 may not be as tolerant. It's very likely that the customers paying less for their Tesla cars will be less understanding - and if Tesla continues using their current process, they risk getting a bad reputation among their Model 3 customers.
I'm not advocating Tesla adopts a "failure is not an option" methodology like what NASA uses for their mission critical systems, but they should be able to take a few reasonable steps, that other companies have been taking, to detect and correct more of the obvious problems, before they get out to customers.
JeffK
Well-Known Member
I don't know, I'd consider the GM ignition flaw which they knew about for a decade, which cost human lives, a pretty big, obvious, flaw. There's also the Jeep flaw that cost Anton Yelchin his life. Every major manufacturer has these stories. It's more of a measure of how quickly are these things found and addressed.
NASA has also had some failures, some were simple metric/imperial unit mistakes. Many things seem obvious with the benefit of hindsight.
I do agree that Tesla should focus on quality control for the Model 3 even more so than for all previous models with both software and hardware. I firmly believe Elon understands this as well, which is why employees are getting the first few thousand cars off the line.
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
The comment was talking about who has the best implementation of Mobileye, so it'll mostly be a comparison of AP1 vs the Volvo system. And for AP2, the latest update supposedly adds significant improvement. Hard to tell which is better just from anecdotes. A comparison under the same route and seeing how many user interventions are required (as in the articles linked) is the easiest to tell. I'm sure someone will eventually do that with PA2 if it's any good (maybe when Supercruise comes out there will be a follow up comparison test).
The plural of anecdote is not data. Pointing out individual reports, regardless of how many you can find, proves only that there is a non-zero chance of such a false positive. It gives no indication, whatsoever, how common/rare that event it.
Similar threads
