Initial 1000 HW2 cars getting AP software 12/31/16

[Economite]

Tesla shouldn't be charging for software that doesn't exist yet; it should be delivering "beta" software only to those who request it; and it shouldn't act as if the delivery of "beta" software fulfills its promise to deliver what it has sold to people.

The current practice of selling software functionality before it is ready, and then delivering only "beta" software would barely be acceptable with internet software, and is totally unacceptable as a business practice for software that affects how a car drives.

If Tesla has confidence that it's software works, it shouldn't call it Beta. If Tesla doesn't have confidence that its software works reliably then it shouldn't be selling and delivering it to mass market consumers; but instead should be testing it in-house and possibly via well-trained customers who volunteer to be testers and have a good understand of what they are testing (and how to test it). It's not fair to the other vehicles on the road for Tesla to release driving software that only kind of works.

It seems like Tesla has taken a potentially great new advance in automotive engineering (over-the-air software updates) but is using it not to fix minor bugs, but as an excuse to release software features way before the software is actually ready and fully safe. They figure they can always fix or improve the software over time. But this approach means that (i) they are always rushing to release "something" that kind of looks like what they have pre-sold, even if it's not quite ready, (ii) they aren't doing as much in-house testing as they probably would if they didn't have the ability to over-the-air-update, and (iii) they are constantly changing the way cars that have already been sold work.

From reading these boards, it is pretty clear that lots of folks aren't certain (from update to update) which AP features are implemented on their cars, what the limitations of those features are, or how they are supposed to be used. This confusion is largely a result of Tesla (I) selling a set of features that is far greater than what is implemented at any particular point, (ii) constantly adding, removing, and changing features in cars it has already sold, and (iii) not releasing particularly detailed documentation (note for instance the fact that folks aren't sure whether the current version of TACC slows for curves, and that no one can agree on what a "divided highway" is).

 

[totochi]

I installed 2.50.185 update on 12/31 at 10pm and have driven 150 miles with the camera still calibrating. I contacted Tesla service (email) and after a few exchanges, here's what they said:

"The vehicle may take between 1-5 hours of driving with the features enabled for the calibration message to clear. The features will also not be enabled until the next drive cycle once calibration is complete. Calibration is quicker on well-marked roads, but road conditions (not marked, poor visibility, etc.) may significantly increase the time required. Please keep an eye on this and let us know if after 5 hours of driving you still see this calibration message."

I was primarily complaining that basic cruise control was gone while cameras were calibrating. I probably have ~4 hours of driving on SoCal freeways and well marked roads since the update. Maybe nighttime driving doesn't help with calibration. Will keep driving.

 

[MarcusMaximus]

If it doesn't say the software is in BETA and all the features aren't there as described when you configure and buy the car in the design studio but when you receive the car it says BETA and the features you actually get when you purchase the car. Thats very bait and switchess

That's the thing, it *does* say that the features aren't there as described when you configure the car. I just checked and the message saying that they *expect* some EAP features to be enabled via software update in December is still there, even now. "Expect", of course, meaning that it's not guaranteed, but that's what they were shooting for.

So the bait and switch actually goes somewhat in the opposite direction, you're told up front that the features aren't there, but then they're added with the BETA sticker attached.

 

[MarcusMaximus]

I installed 2.50.185 update on 12/31 at 10pm and have driven 150 miles with the camera still calibrating. I contacted Tesla service (email) and after a few exchanges, here's what they said:

"The vehicle may take between 1-5 hours of driving with the features enabled for the calibration message to clear. The features will also not be enabled until the next drive cycle once calibration is complete. Calibration is quicker on well-marked roads, but road conditions (not marked, poor visibility, etc.) may significantly increase the time required. Please keep an eye on this and let us know if after 5 hours of driving you still see this calibration message."

I was primarily complaining that basic cruise control was gone while cameras were calibrating. I probably have ~4 hours of driving on SoCal freeways and well marked roads since the update. Maybe nighttime driving doesn't help with calibration. Will keep driving.

Hang in there, as I noted elsewhere, I've done more than 9. I'm also wondering about driving conditions. ~7 of those hours were done at night and the rest mostly in the rain. Of course, we all(those with the update) seem to be in California so I shouldn't exactly be alone in having it be rainy.

 

[Joeker88]

Still waiting for my upgrade.

 

[182RG]

they *expect* some EAP features to be enabled via software update in December is still there, even now.

The word "some" isn't used anywhere in the phraseology. Read it again. Tesla explicitly gave a specific list, and set the expectation of a December 2016 implementation.

 

[MarcusMaximus]

The word "some" isn't used anywhere in the phraseology. Read it again. Tesla explicitly gave a specific list, and set the expectation of a December 2016 implementation.

My point stands. "Expect" is not a guarantee. It means they're trying for December and think they'll hit it but aren't sure. Given that it's now January, that statement has recently become non-sensical but still not a broken promise. Now, if they update that saying that it's available now without denoting that they consider it in Beta, then that's a problem.

 

[182RG]

but still not a broken promise.

I find the psychology of this fascinating...the need for owners and fans to apologize and develop excuses and defenses for a maker of a consumer product. Are you seriously defining words for them?

It's like Stockholm Syndrome for expensive products.

 

[MarcusMaximus]

I find the psychology of this fascinating...the need for owners and fans to apologize and develop excuses and defenses for a maker of a consumer product. Are you seriously defining words for them?

It's like Stockholm Syndrome for expensive products.

Are you suggesting that when you read "We expect X to be done in December", you count that as absolutely set in stone, with no possibility of slipping that timeframe? I'm not exactly getting into technicalities in the definition in suggesting that the word "expect" is a pretty big hedge allowing for the possibility of a timing miss.

I read it that way before I bought the car, and knew full well going in that the expectation wasn't a guarantee.

 

[stopcrazypp]

I understand Autopilot Software releases is not the same as a traditional application software release. Fleet learning in lamen's term is just the autopilot software is learning as it goes (machine learning). Im saying before updates like 8.1/AP2 Tesla should be doing their own real world fleet learning prior to releasing the Beta (could have been done...Im not sure). In my opinion Tesla should have charged to use EAP Beta users now and it would be a lesser charge as its rolled out for all cars. That way they can save themselves from class action lawsuits as the software isn't actually "out" yet.

I think you have a very poor understanding of Tesla's testing process. Tesla does do internal testing (with Elon being one of the main testers, as per articles from before Autopilot 1.0).
Elon Musk Personally Tests Tesla Autopilot Every Week

After, that there is closed beta testing (lower case beta) as part of their Early Access Program (not to be confused with Enhanced Autopilot with the same acronym). Back in Autopilot 1.0 this involved around 1000 special owners who signed up for the program (they are also under NDA), the numbers may be different today.
Tesla Autopilot’s vision neural net is ‘now working well’, but it needs to get real-world road data, says Elon Musk

After that, it goes to general release. The "Beta" label (upper case) is just a marketing label. It has nothing to do with the word as used traditionally in software.
Elon Musk clarifies the use of the word ‘beta’ for the Autopilot, says will need at least 1 billion miles to get out of it
The use of "Beta" is similar to how gmail used it, which is to describe software that will continually improve. The software released, however, would have gone through the same amount of testing as any full release and is just as ready as any software.
Perpetual beta - Wikipedia

 

[Economite]

The "Beta" label (upper case) is just a marketing label. It has nothing to do with the word as used traditionally in software.

To me, that's a real problem. Beta has an understood meaning. Using it to mean something other than that meaning is confusing. And confusion is something that should be avoided with respect to the control software for a motor vehicle that travels on the public highways.

Also, the Beta label always seems to be an attempt by Tesla to act as if users should understand that AP might not actually work 100% reliably, and therefore Tesla shouldn't be held responsible if AP doesn't work as expected. That's a really problematic sort of shifting of responsibilities.

If a company sells a product, the product should work reliably and properly. That's especially true where the product has a real potential for injuring it's user and (more importantly) inuring others on the road and/or damaging other vehicles.

It's not good that AP often drives only as well as a teenage driver or a sleepy driver. That puts too much burden on all the other cars on the road.

 

[HX_Guy]

Are you suggesting that when you read "We expect X to be done in December", you count that as absolutely set in stone, with no possibility of slipping that timeframe? I'm not exactly getting into technicalities in the definition in suggesting that the word "expect" is a pretty big hedge allowing for the possibility of a timing miss.

I read it that way before I bought the car, and knew full well going in that the expectation wasn't a guarantee.

I still maintain that th most misleading part of EAP is that the description says EAP expands on AP. I honestly truthfully thought that the items we would be waiting on were auto lane change and on ramp transitioning plus summon. It never even crossed my mind that TACC, lane keeping assist and emergency braking were on the table as items not working when the car was delivered.

 

[spiderbro]

Christ, give it a rest.

 

[techmaven]

If a company sells a product, the product should work reliably and properly. That's especially true where the product has a real potential for injuring it's user and (more importantly) inuring others on the road and/or damaging other vehicles.

Go read any of the manuals for any manufacturer's AEB systems. There are a slew of conditions where their AEB systems don't work reliably or properly. This is a re-hash of the arguments about AP1.

 

[ZeroDarkSilver]

It's not good that AP often drives only as well as a teenage driver or a sleepy driver. That puts too much burden on all the other cars on the road.

AP is not a teenage driver. AP is not a sleepy driver. AP is not a drunk driver. AP is not a tipsy driver. AP is not any kind of driver.

YOU ARE THE DAMN DRIVER.

It is a driver assist. It assists YOU, the DRIVER. If you're letting it drive by itself you're doing it wrong.

 

[Economite]

I'm not talking about AEB. AEB only kicks in if you make a mistake and are about to crash. Therefore, even an imperfect implementation of AEB is an improvement over not having any AEB. Drivers don't drive differently than they normally would merely because they are relying on the presence of AEB.

The problem is with Autosteer. An essential aspect of using Autosteer is that the driver behaves differently than they would driving a car without AutoSteer. Without Autosteer the driver steers for themselves. With Autosteer, the driver lets the car take care of the steering until the driver decides he or she needs to step in.

This change in driver behavior has a real potential for making a car with Autosteer more of a hazard to other cars on the road than a car without Autosteer. Experience has shown that a lot of drivers don't know (or disagree about) when they need to step in and how AutoSteer should be used. This is dangerous. And Tesla doesn't help by giving vague documentation/instructions for the feature and constantly changing its functions/performance. That's why Autosteer shouldn't be released unless it's extremely reliable and its safe use cases are very well documented and explained.

 

[theslimshadyist]

unsubscribe. lol

 

[ZeroDarkSilver]

Ok I think we can lock this thread now because it is time for all of us to sell our Tesla's and go pick up our FF 91's...

 

[hill]

Where does it state that EAP is a beta? I went to the Design Studio page and actually did a search for the word "beta" and nothing.

Beta inasmuch that it doesn't even work well enough to launch it to the general populace?

At least according to the reps I've talked to, having it parked in a garage won't do anything. The camera calibration only occurs while driving.

With that in mind - drove around the block several times - for 55 minutes/11 miles down the drain. will check after i get up tomorrow to see if that made a difference. If not - it'll just happen when it happens.
.

 

[Economite]

AP is not a teenage driver. AP is not a sleepy driver. AP is not a drunk driver. AP is not a tipsy driver. AP is not any kind of driver.

YOU ARE THE DAMN DRIVER.

It is a driver assist. It assists YOU, the DRIVER. If you're letting it drive by itself you're doing it wrong.

But each time you, as the driver, have to correct something AP does less than perfectly (or begins to do less than perfectly), the combination of mistake and correction presents to others on the road as less than perfect driving.