-
Watched
x 58
Pack Performance and Launch Mode Limits
Ingineer, Dec 15, 2016 ... 195 196 197
Replies:
3,938
Views:
155,094
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
My request that the Arizona Attorney General's office investigate Tesla's changes to Ludicrous Mode
- Thread starter azdryheat
- Start date
Not that I have seen. The listings are collected here.
Fast Tesla Model-Ss 1/4 Mile 0-60 Drag Racing - DragTimes.com
Most of those are probably with pano, and they even be lugging around UHF and their UMC etc. But TRC and another car did 10.8. and there is a V2 with a pano and driven by a lumberjack of a guy did 11.0.
So few people take their cars to the drag strip (understandably -- it's an odd and risky place) -- which is about the only place any of these alleged changes would even be noticable (aside from a screen on power tools).
I'd like to see az dry explain his damages:
"How do you know the car is slower sir?"
"Well it shows fewer kw on the power tools app"
"Yes, but how do you know the car is slower? How do you know the car can't achieve advertised specs?"
"Umm Powertools .. the kw number is lower .. powertools. "
"Where was a kw peak power advertised? "
"Umm Powertools.. Powertools. Powertools"
Last edited:
Canuck
Well-Known Member
This is not about improving corporate culture. It's about the changes made to Ludicrous mode. Unlike you, I have been very specific in this thread, asking the OP what he wanted, and he told me:
This is what we are talking about. Please do not keep changing the goal posts. Of course corporations can change corporate culture. But that's not what this thread is about at all.
This thread is about compensation for the changes to ludicrous mode (that's what he complained to the AG for) and I said it all comes down to money, and more particularly how much money, and I said settlements or resolutions happen without an admission of liability and usually with a NDA clause. This is how corporations work. They don't admit liability. It is imposed on them by regulators or courts. Period - end of story.
You can live in a fantasy land where corporations don't work this way, and can change, but I chose to live live in the real world and deal with reality.
Yes, but Tesla is not a human with an addiction problem. It's a corporation acting exactly how corporations act, and how legal advisers tell corporations to act. No adviser would tell a human to be an alcoholic.
That's why I used the shark analogy, like in the documentary on corporations I posted above -- which is where I got that analogy. You can't change a shark with a 12 step program even with all of your complaining.
The majority of those people are people who come back to read the updates and are not new viewers. Plus, a ton of readers don't own Teslas let alone one with ludicrous mode. You really can't dispute the fact that surprisingly few Tesla owners even know about this issue.
Web searches also brought me here before buying my Tesla and I'm thankful there weren't all the glass half full, pessimistic Tesla bashers in those days.
Now that's hilarious! I have a bridge to sell you if you're interested.
And here I am thinking all those end of quarter push were about money.
Last edited:
Canuck
Well-Known Member
Because that's how the counters work. Every time I come to this thread, or others, it counts me again. Plus, these threads are not restricted to Tesla owners, let alone Tesla with ludicrous mode owners. I have a buddy with a P100D and he has no interest in these forums, like most people who own a Tesla, and they have no idea of any of these issues. To think the majority of Tesla owners know about this is naive thinking, in my view.
I said this:
That's some aversion training that can make a shark choose not to be a shark. Can you make it into a dove with that training?
Like I thought, pure conjecture. You and your buddy, that's a sample of two. And here I thought you had contacted the mods and asked them about unique visits and sent a mailer out to all tesla owners and asked if they knew about this site.
Don't have to change its species, just make it unpleasant when it does undesirable behaviors.
Canuck
Well-Known Member
Is that not allowed here? But it wasn't pure conjecture since I did give facts in support.
Of course you did.
You hit the nail on the head. Sharks are rewarded for shark behaviour just like corporations are rewarded for shark-like behaviour. Corporations do not admit liability on the advice of legal counsel, and that behaviour is rewarded. This is reality.
Hence let's start making unwanted behavior unpleasant to the corporations instead of excusing it as "sharks will be sharks"...
Yes?
Canuck
Well-Known Member
Both. My comments are not mutually exclusive. We need to change the fundamental underpinnings of corporations if we don't want them to roll all over us. Yes, we may be able to change a bit here and there but corporations are the new countries and superpowers and unless we rein them in, with changes to their very structure, we're in a losing game of whack-a-mole.
I'm the first to say hold Tesla's feet to the flame. But again you're playing whack-a-mole. We need to deal with the larger issue.
This is an interesting discussion but I got to get some work done so I can take off for my cabin for what is a long weekend here. I look forward to discussing it further later. Thanks for the interesting debate.
It's up to you to support your unsubstantiated claims.
Of course, if all they receive is reinforcement their behavior will never change. That's why we have to make things unpleasant to mold them into the better sharks we want them to be. Negative reinforcement does work.
I recently upgraded to the latest version of windows on my laptop.
It slowed down my computer and some features was apparently removed.
How do I sue them to make Microsoft re-instate the speed and features? I am not interesting in downgrading since it would remove a security patch that is important.
Please advice on how I use the hell out of them? I actually have similar issues with my smartphone, smart-tv and my Netflix + HBO accounts. And now that I think of it, the latest version of Microsoft office also contains updates I don't like.
How do I successfully sue?
It slowed down my computer and some features was apparently removed.
How do I sue them to make Microsoft re-instate the speed and features? I am not interesting in downgrading since it would remove a security patch that is important.
Please advice on how I use the hell out of them? I actually have similar issues with my smartphone, smart-tv and my Netflix + HBO accounts. And now that I think of it, the latest version of Microsoft office also contains updates I don't like.
How do I successfully sue?
You might want to join this class action
Microsoft sued for millions over Windows 10 upgrades
And apparently if you have a sony ps3, you are entitled to damages because they removed Linux compatibility.
But I think, mostly, you would be better served if you visited a Microsoft windows forum.
Walta
Member
The over the air OTA part of this whole issue is really the most defining part for me in deciding to want out of the ludicrous option. After Jon McNeill's statements that all power reductions would be removed, followed by testing that showed otherwise? That was it. How can I go forward with the $10K ludicrous mode performance option after that? I want my money back.. take the ludicrous option from my car. Leave me with insane mode. But even better, to eliminate any further performance tinkering from Tesla I would think it best to remove the P and be reduced to a 90D... with a refund equal to the difference between a 90D and a P90DL.
Even still - what if then Tesla finds out that 90D's would have less warranty problems if they reduced their performance????
The OTA stuff has really taken a wrong turn from the earlier days with Tesla.
Even still - what if then Tesla finds out that 90D's would have less warranty problems if they reduced their performance????
The OTA stuff has really taken a wrong turn from the earlier days with Tesla.
Last edited:
I'm all for solving the small and big pictures. Good suggestions are welcome.
Indeed. Tesla seems to have noticed they can sell poorly tested stuff that pushes the envelope for maximum PR/sales effect with unknown consequences and then just throttle things back later to avoid liabilities if it all goes south. That's what the appearances of it are, anyway.
The irony is that, the biggest reason corporations are the skanky way they are is from the same sorts of what many would consider unreasonable indignation and demands some folks are espousing here. Remind me to tell you how abusing the American legal system all but killed the entire general aviation industry by the early 1970's.
Krugerrand
Meow
That's a super simplified statement about negative reinforcement and/or punishment as a training/retraining tactic, which tells me you don't actually train/retrain aggressive predator fish like sharks. Or aggressive dogs or aggressive horses, or, or, or.
First of all, predators react to negative stimuli different than prey animals. Prey animals can typically be taught to change behavior easily by using negative reinforcement and/or punishment, however the change is often accompanied by negative results; fear, anxiety, uncertainty, lack of confidence etc... Whereas simply ignoring the undesirable behavior in a prey animal and then using positive reinforcement by praising wanted behaviors results in an animal that is relaxed and looking for more ways to get along and please. They'll stop the unwanted behaviors and repeat the wanted behaviors in a desire to get more positive reinforcement. Predators on the other hand will often simply just up their aggression when challenged through unpleasant experiences. They'll fight right back if you get up in their faces. Poke a shark and you'll piss him off. And if he happens to be really hungry at the time, you'll have to mortally wound him to get him to let go of your leg. In the end, would be just easier for all parties if you'd thrown a bone to the shark and let it be.
And Canuck is right; a shark will always behave like a shark just as a corporation will always behave as a corporation (even though that corporation is made up of a bunch of people, who may have an entirely different view of things.) Think of it in terms of a bunch of good, happy go lucky people go to a football game and now become a crowd. Some individuals in the crowd have a few beers, the refs make a few bad calls, a few of those happy go lucky people aren't so happy go lucky anymore and start booing and throwing beer cans, and then more happy go lucky people (the ones who tend to be followers in life) join in, and so on. Before you know it, there's a riot and the *crowd* made up of happy go lucky people has an entirely new life all of its own.
Last edited:
Similar threads
