Get ready for a *lot* of crap on Forbes

[ZachShahan]

Bertel Schmitt is now writing on Forbes. He has a long history of Tesla bashing that often comes across (on the surface) as worth considering. People who know Tesla well can see through it, but for those who don't...

Housekeeping: Minor changes at the Dailykanban - DailyKanban​

 

[Jaff]

Is this the guy who lost the bet, but wouldn't eat his hat?

 

[efusco]

Is this the guy who lost the bet, but wouldn't eat his hat?

yep, and subsequently blocked a bunch of us from his twitter account when called out on it. I though Forbes would be a bit more particular who they allow write for them.

 

[JohnSnowNW]

Well, that's unfortunate. It would appear clear that Forbes cares nothing for integrity.

 

[Jaff]

Agree....Forbes should have more class (and smarts) than associating with this worthless scribe...you lie down with dogs...

yep, and subsequently blocked a bunch of us from his twitter account when called out on it. I though Forbes would be a bit more particular who they allow write for them.

 

[nwdiver]

LOL... that's pretty funny... another Tesla bear proven wrong...

'P.S.: If that Autopilot changes lanes automatically at the touch of a blinker stalk by, say, one year from now, in a series Model D, I will publicly eat a Tesla baseball hat on Twitter, Facebook and YouTube. How about it, Elon?' - Bertel Schmitt Dec 10, 2014

 

[TNEVol]

Think about the opportunity to put that in a comment to his Forbes articles maybe as a parting shot.

 

[JER]

His argument was that the lack of a rear-facing radar and/or narrow field camera meant Model S could not determine if a lane change was unsafe due to fast-approaching traffic from behind (out of ultrasound range). To be fair, that is actually true.

Autopilot does of course place this responsibility (and others) upon the driver; it's an aid, not a substitute. Bertel now says this doesn't qualify as "automatic." So, I' guess he's conflating automatic with fully automatic, for his convenience.

It sure looks to me a lot more automatic than doing everything manually.

 

[green1]

His argument was that the lack of a rear-facing radar and/or narrow field camera meant Model S could not determine if a lane change was unsafe due to fast-approaching traffic from behind (out of ultrasound range). To be fair, that is actually true.

Autopilot does of course place this responsibility (and others) upon the driver; it's an aid, not a substitute. Bertel now says this doesn't qualify as "automatic." So, I' guess he's conflating automatic with fully automatic, for his convenience.

It sure looks to me a lot more automatic than doing everything manually.

He specifically said at the touch of a stalk, and that's exactly what it does. He's the one that specified the level of autonomy, and it's exactly what Tesla promised, and exactly what Tesla delivered.

 

[JER]

He specifically said at the touch of a stalk, and that's exactly what it does. He's the one that specified the level of autonomy, and it's exactly what Tesla promised, and exactly what Tesla delivered.

No argument there. The requirement to check the lane's safety further back to qualify as "automatic" was, as I already stated, only Bertel's insistence.

 

[Grendal]

Forbes has a comment system. I've used it a lot over the years. I don't know if he can block that.

 

[Taipan]

Forbes has a comment system. I've used it a lot over the years. I don't know if he can block that.

The author can "rig" their comment system with the "top comment" feature to bury the annoying ones, especially since you must then click on each of them to just display and read it.
Worst comment UX, iuam.

Now they also seem to face a major backlash from tech-centric readers since they fully blocked access to users of Adblocks & co. in December, many tweeting "Screw you Forbes, u just lost another reader" in light of their last summer delivery of malware in ads.
You must turn off Adblocks to "experience an ad-light version of Forbes.com", with approx 20 ads per page similar to ad-farms posting "15 most dangerous airports/animals/cars/foods/genitals in the world".

IMHO their audience figures are going down the drain, sad for they have a bunch of talented contributors in Tech/Games like Erik Kain, Jason Evanghelo or Paul Tassi.

 

[Fuzzy_Dice]

No. His argument (and mine) is that when you call something "autopilot" it should say what's written on the tin. If the car can't guarantee the safety of its occupants while changing lanes, because it can't see over its shoulder (which a proper automated or autonomous car can do) then don't call it "autopilot". It's misleading and will give a bad name to automated or autonomous driving. That's all. Is autopilot cool? Probably. Is it automated in any way? No. Adaptive cruise control and lane keeping don't make a car automated. They've been around for a while and they are just what you call "active safety features". Key word is safety. If Elon had had the roadster with these features several years back he'd have called them autopilot or starship enterprise or something. No question the man is a marketing genius, but that's not what Bertel's bet was about. Don't pretend like you're not understanding his point. That is bad faith.

 

[green1]

No. His argument (and mine) is that when you call something "autopilot" it should say what's written on the tin. If the car can't guarantee the safety of its occupants while changing lanes, because it can't see over its shoulder (which a proper automated or autonomous car can do) then don't call it "autopilot". It's misleading and will give a bad name to automated or autonomous driving. That's all. Is autopilot cool? Probably. Is it automated in any way? No. Adaptive cruise control and lane keeping don't make a car automated. They've been around for a while and they are just what you call "active safety features". Key word is safety. If Elon had had the roadster with these features several years back he'd have called them autopilot or starship enterprise or something. No question the man is a marketing genius, but that's not what Bertel's bet was about. Don't pretend like you're not understanding his point. That is bad faith.

Just what do you think an aircraft autopilot (which this is named after) does?
This does everything one of those does, there's absolutely nothing deceptive about the name, it's actually an amazingly good comparison. If you think autopilot doesn't require pilots, please explain why there's always 2 of them on every flight?

Autopilot

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Not to be confused with unmanned aircraft or unmanned vehicle.
An autopilot is a system used to control the trajectory of a vehicle without constant 'hands-on' control by a human operator being required. Autopilots do not replace a human operator, but assist them in controlling the vehicle, allowing them to focus on broader aspects of operation, such as monitoring the trajectory, weather and systems.[SUP][1][/SUP] Autopilots are used in aircraft, boats (known as self-steering gear), spacecraft, missiles, and others. Autopilots have evolved significantly over time, from early autopilots that merely held an attitude to modern autopilots capable of performing automated landings under the supervision of a pilot.

 

[Max*]

No. His argument (and mine) is that when you call something "autopilot" it should say what's written on the tin. If the car can't guarantee the safety of its occupants while changing lanes, because it can't see over its shoulder (which a proper automated or autonomous car can do) then don't call it "autopilot". It's misleading and will give a bad name to automated or autonomous driving. That's all. Is autopilot cool? Probably. Is it automated in any way? No. Adaptive cruise control and lane keeping don't make a car automated. They've been around for a while and they are just what you call "active safety features". Key word is safety. If Elon had had the roadster with these features several years back he'd have called them autopilot or starship enterprise or something. No question the man is a marketing genius, but that's not what Bertel's bet was about. Don't pretend like you're not understanding his point. That is bad faith.

Lots of people have issues with the name. And Musk may have oversold it's on-ramp to off-ramp capabilities, but Autopilot != Autonomous.

 

[RDoc]

No. His argument (and mine) is that when you call something "autopilot" it should say what's written on the tin. If the car can't guarantee the safety of its occupants while changing lanes, because it can't see over its shoulder (which a proper automated or autonomous car can do) then don't call it "autopilot". It's misleading and will give a bad name to automated or autonomous driving. That's all. Is autopilot cool? Probably. Is it automated in any way? No. Adaptive cruise control and lane keeping don't make a car automated. They've been around for a while and they are just what you call "active safety features". Key word is safety. If Elon had had the roadster with these features several years back he'd have called them autopilot or starship enterprise or something. No question the man is a marketing genius, but that's not what Bertel's bet was about. Don't pretend like you're not understanding his point. That is bad faith.

I'd suggest you avoid bets with bookies in the US. There likely would be serious consequences of attempting to change the stated terms after the bet was lost.

 

[green1]

Lots of people have issues with the name.

But why does anyone have issues with it? it describes exactly what the system does, and I can not, for the life of me, come up with a better name for what it does. It's an amazingly accurate comparison without making up some ridiculous term like MB did which tells nobody anything.

Nobody gets on an airliner equipped with autopilot and expects to see the pilots in the back drinking with the passengers, everyone assumes the pilot still needs to be in control of the aircraft. So why would they think the same term should mean something completely different if applied to a car???

 

[Max*]

But why does anyone have issues with it? it describes exactly what the system does, and I can not, for the life of me, come up with a better name for what it does. It's an amazingly accurate comparison without making up some ridiculous term like MB did which tells nobody anything.

Nobody gets on an airliner equipped with autopilot and expects to see the pilots in the back drinking with the passengers, everyone assumes the pilot still needs to be in control of the aircraft. So why would they think the same term should mean something completely different if applied to a car???

I bought my car after doing extensive research, so I knew I wasn't getting an autonomous car. I knew production autonomous cars are a decent ways away.

That being said, "AutoPilot" for the non-aviation crowd (me included) implies more than TACC + steer assist. And Tesla did more than steer assist, the car steers and keeps you centered.

I think it's a combination of calling it AutoPilot (for us non pilots) and the way Musk oversold it that people thought the car can do more than it can. "No hands on wheel", remember the rumors around that? And the no nag? (well they killed that last one, but still).


I have no problem with AP, actually I love it and use it on trips all the time. But like I said, I can see why some people might feel jipped.

 

[green1]

I bought my car after doing extensive research, so I knew I wasn't getting an autonomous car. I knew production autonomous cars are a decent ways away.

That being said, "AutoPilot" for the non-aviation crowd (me included) implies more than TACC + steer assist. And Tesla did more than steer assist, the car steers and keeps you centered.

I think it's a combination of calling it AutoPilot (for us non pilots) and the way Musk oversold it that people thought the car can do more than it can. "No hands on wheel", remember the rumors around that? And the no nag? (well they killed that last one, but still).


I have no problem with AP, actually I love it and use it on trips all the time. But like I said, I can see why some people might feel jipped.

You don't need to be a pilot to get that autopilot isn't autonomous. Do you get on an airplane and expect the pilots don't need to pay attention and can drink in the back? I don't know anyone who thinks the pilots don't need to pay attention, so why would you think that it's different in a car?

 

[Max*]

You don't need to be a pilot to get that autopilot isn't autonomous. Do you get on an airplane and expect the pilots don't need to pay attention and can drink in the back? I don't know anyone who thinks the pilots don't need to pay attention, so why would you think that it's different in a car?

I'm confused, are you implying that pilots don't nap in first class and drink in the back?

But seriously, we're going in circles. I think the name AP + the way it was advertised boarders on misleading. At the same time, anyone who spends 5 minutes doing their due diligence on a car purchase, would know that Autopilot != Autonomous.