Supercharging letter from Tesla 8-13-2015

[Max*]

Eh. Not much apparently lol looking at the avg software engineer salary on glassdoor it's very very low for that area. Hard to keep around good talent IMO unless you pay them more.

You're right (103k - 123k for those without an account). That coupled with likely extra long work hours...

 

[yobigd20]

Also I'm surprised nobody's screamed "big brother" and "invasion of privacy" yet.

 

[Max*]

I don't program.

But couldn't an abuser successfully evade detection by your algorithm simply by setting their home location in the NAV system to a location they never charge near? For example, someone abusing the Superchargers in the Bay Area, and occasionally travelling to LA, or elsewhere on the west coast simply sets their home location as New York City in the NAV system.

And before you answer and say that people wouldn't realize that this is how they were being targeted, I recall in the "Is Tesla limiting the Supercharging speed" thread (that wasn't the exact thread title) people suggesting changing the home location in the NAV, to see what impact it would have. My point is, that is one of the first things people will think to do.

If I'm wrong about that being a flaw in your system, I apologize. Just chalk it up to my not being familiar with coding.

You're not wrong. It's easier to reverse engineer something when you see the code, but you're right: that's one easy way of avoiding the whole thing.

At the same time, if someone is resourceful enough to change their home location and too cheap to not pay for home charging, don't you think he could find a loophole in nearly every algorithm?

Tesla can also use DMV records, if they so incline. Tesla can use the else part of that statement (median of gps history, though wouldn't work for workaholics who spend most of their time at work instead of at home, etc.)


I think the goal is to email as many people correctly as you can, while emailing as few letters to the people who did nothing wrong. If I were Tesla, I'd aire on the side of caution (i.e. if you only properly nail 80% of the abusers correctly and <0.1% of the non-abusers, you did well. If you hit 90% of the abusers and 2% of the non-abusers, you didn't do so well).

 

[stopcrazypp]

Also I'm surprised nobody's screamed "big brother" and "invasion of privacy" yet.

I actually thought of that, but I'm pretty sure most people already signed that away with their owner's agreement. A lot of the car's functionality (automatic settings as you get home for example) as well as troubleshooting when there is a problem (which definitely has happened at superchargers) requires Tesla to have that data.

Also if this is done by an algorithm instead of manually by a person, I think people find it more acceptable. However, I do wonder if Tesla needed to do some manual pruning, what people's reaction to that would be.

 

[deonb]

You're right (103k - 123k for those without an account). That coupled with likely extra long work hours...

You won't know how much they get in stock options based on that.

I'll work for 123k if they give me 50'000 options at $200...

 

[Max*]

You won't know how much they get in stock options based on that.

I'll work for 123k if they give me 50'000 options at $200...

True. But considering they're a public company, and these are software engineerings not VPs/C-suite, I don't expect it to be too lucrative.

It could also be structured like wall street. Your salary is $50k, your bonuses (based on company profits) are $250k (also doubt it, but hey, anything is possible).

 

[yobigd20]

I actually thought of that, but I'm pretty sure most people already signed that away with their owner's agreement. A lot of the car's functionality (automatic settings as you get home for example) as well as troubleshooting when there is a problem (which definitely has happened at superchargers) requires Tesla to have that data.

Also if this is done by an algorithm instead of manually by a person, I think people find it more acceptable. However, I do wonder if Tesla needed to do some manual pruning, what people's reaction to that would be.

there is a MASSIVE difference between collecting data for accumulating statistics and improving software vs collecting data and individually calling people out on their usage. the latter is clearly a major violation of privacy of which I doubt anyone here would knowingly volunteer for.

- - - Updated - - -

You won't know how much they get in stock options based on that.

I'll work for 123k if they give me 50'000 options at $200...

glassdoor includes reporting bonus's like that and the average stock bonus for engineers is a measly $5k ....

 

[Andyw2100]

You're not wrong. It's easier to reverse engineer something when you see the code, but you're right: that's one easy way of avoiding the whole thing.

At the same time, if someone is resourceful enough to change their home location and too cheap to not pay for home charging, don't you think he could find a loophole in nearly every algorithm?

I can't say on the ability to always find a loophole. I was just trying to help close a pretty big one that had been pointed out in another thread. I'll add that no one saw any code to reverse engineer in that case, but were rather guessing at how Tesla would choose to know where "home" was. What's set in the NAV is a pretty obvious guess, and the workaround is pretty simple. With all the work you've already done on your algorithm, I think closing that particular loophole would be worthwhile, but then again, you're the one doing the work for Tesla for free! (Actually I guess I am now too, though clearly not nearly as much!)

 

[ggies07]

@Max* and @Matteo - It was fun reading the back and forth on the algo you guys came up with. I try to create algos all the time for fun when situations get complicated and I was right there with you guys the whole time, excellent work.

 

[Max*]

I can't say on the ability to always find a loophole. I was just trying to help close a pretty big one that had been pointed out in another thread. I'll add that no one saw any code to reverse engineer in that case, but were rather guessing at how Tesla would choose to know where "home" was. What's set in the NAV is a pretty obvious guess, and the workaround is pretty simple. With all the work you've already done on your algorithm, I think closing that particular loophole would be worthwhile, but then again, you're the one doing the work for Tesla for free! (Actually I guess I am now too, though clearly not nearly as much!)

I know Tesla reads this board, but I don't expect them to actually use anything I did. This was more of just for fun, can I figure out something that will work reasonable well. And I think I did, it'll work reasonably well (not perfect). This is close to what I used to do for a living, so I enjoy it.

I might add a few lines of psuedo-code later to test the median gps history location, which seems like a pretty good way of checking where someone lives. This can also give the top 2-3 median locations, i.e. someone's home, work and vacation property/inlaws/etc.

- - - Updated - - -

@Max* and @Matteo - It was fun reading the back and forth on the algo you guys came up with. I try to create algos all the time for fun when situations get complicated and I was right there with you guys the whole time, excellent work.

.

 

[stopcrazypp]

there is a MASSIVE difference between collecting data for accumulating statistics and improving software vs collecting data and individually calling people out on their usage. the latter is clearly a major violation of privacy of which I doubt anyone here would knowingly volunteer for.

I guess in terms of reaction maybe, but legally both have probably been signed away. However, judging from this thread, it seems people aren't overly concerned about that. I think everyone already knows Tesla collects this data, so whether it is used to display statistics on use, troubleshooting / customer support, offering new features, or in this case sending letters probably doesn't really matter that much. It's just a different way of parsing the same data by Tesla themselves. If they gave that data to a third party or the government that would be a different story however.

 

[Max*]

I guess in terms of reaction maybe, but legally both have probably been signed away. However, judging from this thread, it seems people aren't overly concerned about that. I think everyone already knows Tesla collects this data, so whether it is used to display statistics on use, troubleshooting / customer support, offering new features, or in this case sending letters probably doesn't really matter that much. It's just a different way of parsing the same data by Tesla themselves. If they gave that data to a third party or the government that would be a different story however.

I don't care. Google already collects this and a lot more from me. They have my emails, call history, chat history, text history, calendar history, work location, home location, music preference, video preference, search history, etc. etc. etc.

I can see WHY people care. But I'm the camp of -- take whatever you need, keep it anonymous (for the most part) and improve what you can offer me. Yeah, yeah, I know there'll be security experts who completely disagree.

 

[SteveS0353]

I attributed more common sense to members. Sorry if you think I'm wrong.

The point of the poll, requested by a few members, was to quantify how big the mailing was. The results are clear it wasn't the mass mailing that many were suggesting.

Interestingly, I've not seen any new posts recently, after the initial batch triggered by the OP, claiming to have received the e-mail. I think Nigel is correct. It was not a mass mailing. Perhaps Tesla noticed the erroneous selection algorithm and pulled the campaign. Perhaps Tesla caught the inappropriate accusatory phrases and pulled the campaign. It seems that the storm may have passed for the moment, but the "mop-up" in near 500 posts and climbing is extraordinary.

 

[AmpedRealtor]

But there have been less than 200K Leafs sold total. If Tesla really is going to meet it's sales targets it's got to be a lot better than a Leaf or a compliance cars.

With a 200+ mile real-world range, it will be even if it has nothing else.

- - - Updated - - -

Telsa obviously sent out emails to people that shouldn't have gotten it. I wouldn't consider what you are doing abusing the system since you can charge at home and always do when you have the time. Use the network when you need to as its intended for. If Tesla does anything more than send an email then get upset but one email could very well be a mistake on their part.

+1. Tesla sent emails about the premium console being canceled in all trims but Piano Black, but that didn't apply to everyone even though everyone was up in arms about it. **** happens.

- - - Updated - - -

Based on my usage and comments in another thread from Napabill, I suspect that they took the percentage of total supercharger power used versus home or other charging over an unknown period of time without taking supercharger distance into account. That distance element seems like it could be the missing filter that caused some erroneous emails if so.

About ⅔ of the power I used over the past three months was from (distant) superchargers on road trips to CA. I got the letter, although I don't charge at nearby superchargers.

Well, Tesla promised "free supercharging for life", they did not promise "free and unlimited supercharging for life". Not wanting to stir up a hornet's nest, but that could be an important distinction that we'll find out about when Tesla sends a 2nd, followup email in a few weeks or months...

- - - Updated - - -

there is a MASSIVE difference between collecting data for accumulating statistics and improving software vs collecting data and individually calling people out on their usage. the latter is clearly a major violation of privacy of which I doubt anyone here would knowingly volunteer for.

Cell phone companies and internet service providers do this all the time in order to determine whether your use of their network is appropriate. Why is Tesla's managing its network of Superchargers any different?

 

[Kshira]

New here and I admit to not reading every page of the thread but as of now (1:44 p.m. EDT, August 14, 2015) Tesla's Support/Supercharging page still says "How much does it cost to use the Superchargers?
Supercharging is free for the life of Model S, once the Supercharger option is enabled." Nothing about "...unless we change our minds". I'd love to see what the Agreement of purchase and Sale (or automotive equivalent) says.

 

[stopcrazypp]

Well, Tesla promised "free supercharging for life", they did not promise "free and unlimited supercharging for life". Not wanting to stir up a hornet's nest, but that could be an important distinction that we'll find out about when Tesla sends a 2nd, followup email in a few weeks or months...

I pointed out the same thing, but I was accused of being overly defensive of Tesla. That doesn't really change the fact that such a distinction exists. However, I don't really see Tesla using that to do throttling. The whole idea of sending a letter is to do soft measures to encourage Model S owners to voluntarily reduce abuse and improve supercharger etiquette. As I put elsewhere, the situation has not reached a point where throttling is necessary.

I don't anticipate reaching that point until Model 3 production is well under way (JB said ~1 million cars). If most people do heed to the letters and Tesla marketing does a decent job of changing the perception of superchargers being used to offset daily charging, throttling would not be necessary at that point either.

 

[omarsultan]

I hope this thread and the sister thread over on the Tesla Motors site finally convinces Elon to burn some headcount on an actual corp comm team. Instead, they have taken a position that I think the vast majority of owners would support (discouraging locals from apparently hogging SCs) and handled it a way that needlessly pisses off customers and creates FUD for current owners, potential buyers and detractors, and undermining one of the key selling points of Tesla. The self-inflicted wound was unnecessary.

For the record, I do not think they will make material changes to the Supercharger network: Tesla recognizes ubiquitous, dependable, predictable infrastructure is a key to successful adoption (look at all the fun FCEV owners are having, or the lottery that is the Nissan Dealer-based Chademo network). Its a huge marketing win for them and, IMO, a great tool in helping first-time buyers overcome range anxiety.

Quite a few folks have mentioned cost-containment. I do not think that is that case. Quoting from the latest 10Q (emphasis added):

As of June 30, 2015 and December 31, 2014, the net book value of our Supercharger network was $139.8 million and $107.8 million and currently includes 480 locations globally. We plan to continue investing in our Supercharger network for the foreseeable future, including in North America, Europe and Asia and expect such spending to be approximately 5% of total capital spending over the next 12 months. During 2015, this investment will grow our Supercharger network by about 50%. We allocate Supercharger related expenses to cost of automotive revenues and selling, general, and administrative expenses. These costs were immaterial for all periods presented.

Looking at it another way, there is a reserve of $36.4M for "Supercharger access" which works out to a reserve of about $460 for each of the ~78,000 Model Ses sold (yes, I know not everyone has Supercharging, but I am being conservative). At $0.1055/kWh (average price for commercial service in the US per EIA) and an efficiency of 320wh/mi, that's over 13,000 Supercharged miles per car. For most of you, that would be more than a year of driving. I would argue the typical owner will flip their car before they burn through their reserve and the outliers (high/low milage and long/short ownership) will balance each other out.

 

[brianman]

LOL. I also can appreciate anyone who can write decent C++ code.

Should be "const Owner&" for the helper function. No need to sully the owner, nor check for null-ness.

 

[Matteo]

I would argue the typical owner will flip their car before they burn through their reserve

A typical owner might sell the car after 5 years but supercharging is attached to the car, not the owner. After you sell the car, the car continues to have free supercharging. Most current Model S cars that have free supercharging for life will end up as taxis and Uber cars. They will get old and restored multiple times. Future Tesla buyers will pay for the fuels of these cars for decades to come. The problems are just starting. Over time there will be more superchargers near dense areas and used Model S cars will be cheaper. It means people looking for opportunities will buy a Model S to start a business.

 

[yobigd20]

A typical owner might keep the car for 5 years. However supercharging is attached to the car, not the owner. After you sell the car, the car continues to have free supercharging. Most current Model S cars that have free supercharging for life will end up as taxis and Uber cars. They will get old and restored multiple times. Future Tesla buyers will pay for the fuels of these cars for decades to come. The problems are just starting. Over time there will be more superchargers near dense areas and used Model S cars will be cheaper. It means people looking for opportunities will buy a Model S to start a business.

Or Tesla could say free supercharging doesn't transfer just like the service plan and extended warranty don't transfer.