Tesla cofounder calls Autopilot and FSD software 'crap' that could risk the carmaker's future - Autoblog
Elon Musk has made autonomous driving a top priority at Tesla. One of the carmaker's original founders doesn't approve.
www.autoblog.com
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Tesla cofounder says FSD is “Crap”
- Thread starter 2101Guy
- Start date
www.autoblog.com
Krugerrand
Meow
So, what. He’s irrelevant and hasn’t been involved in the company for 15! years. Move on already, Martin.
"So, keep in mind that all this FSD autonomous, autopilot crap — none of that existed when I was there," he said.
He said he doesn't like the idea of a software based car. He didn't criticize FSD and autopilot...he said the idea of FSD/Autopilot is crap.
There's a big difference...he's not a fan of autonomous vehicles period.
Also, the article erroneously states that FSD beta is for sale at $15,000 or $199/month...and a misleading headline, of course. But we're used to this nonsense by now
He said he doesn't like the idea of a software based car. He didn't criticize FSD and autopilot...he said the idea of FSD/Autopilot is crap.
There's a big difference...he's not a fan of autonomous vehicles period.
Also, the article erroneously states that FSD beta is for sale at $15,000 or $199/month...and a misleading headline, of course. But we're used to this nonsense by now
He doesn't like AP/EAP/FSD, which is fine and a perfectly valid opinion. He wants Tesla to focus on making a good car. I'd argue they've already done that. Take AP/EAP/FSD out, and you're left with a car that has outsold every other luxury car on the market. In 2022, they beat BMW for the #1 spot by more than 156 thousand cars. The Model 3 outsold the Toyota Camry. They are a great EV, fun to drive, great performance, great stock audio, great entertainment apps, great navigation features, and top safety scores in both US and EU. Hell, one just plummeted off a 250 foot cliff and the 4 occupants survived.
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
I have tons of respect for Martin (having been following Tesla from the original Roadster days), but I disagree that about his point about how cars shouldn't be software platforms. Even if you care nothing about FSD or AP, it's pretty clear that cars being software platforms are the future and is a major reason for Tesla's success. Even though the Roadster was inspirational as a long range EV, the Model S was what really brought Tesla to the forefront, and its software and OTA capabilities played a huge part in that.
And even if you don't care about FSD or EAP, it's pretty clear that the standard AP is a very useful feature that a ton of people use and is also a great selling point. Sure, there's still room for improvement, but it's plenty capable already. Even for someone like me that previously never used cruise control in my cars that had them, I am using AP regularly now.
And even if you don't care about FSD or EAP, it's pretty clear that the standard AP is a very useful feature that a ton of people use and is also a great selling point. Sure, there's still room for improvement, but it's plenty capable already. Even for someone like me that previously never used cruise control in my cars that had them, I am using AP regularly now.
I can't say that I followed Tesla closely back when Eberhard was involved; I don't think many people did because there was no Tesla car yet. (I vaguely remember hearing from our field apps team, about people that were going to power a car with thousands of laptop batteries. It sounded kind of intriguing, and I remember thinking about a motor-per-wheel concept for primary motive and braking power.)
But I truly have to marvel at the ability of entrepreneurial engineers to turn into bitter old codgers and start spouting nonsense. Last week I wrote about Dan O'Dowd who is definitely in this category, and who absurdly railed against Tesla because "everything being connected to the internet" is dangerous, despite the fact that his nemesis FSD is not connected to the internet in its basic operation. There are more than a few less-famous codgers here on TMC, who know oh so much better then Elon and his Autopilot team. At least once a week I see grumbling that Elon's or Tesla's time has passed, and it's time to let the adults (lawyers? accountants? PR experts? fund managers? oil sheiks?) take over the unterprise - just a mystifying conclusion to me.
I can't take anything away from Martin E. for his original inspirations, but he seems to be completely missing the point of Tesla's massive success, now and into the foreseeable future: Tesla (along with Elon's other ventures) is in an amazing period of growth and innovation because they are applying their energy, ideas and investment on a very broad front, not yielding ground or conceding technical or industrial primacy to anyone. They are running faster than anyone can keep up, and we're talking about real tangible products with real end customers, not financial market shenanigans, government consulting or one of many subsidized service Industries. The heavily software-driven platform of Tesla cars, including but not limited to the autonomy features, are an essential component of this dramatic success.
Eberhard seems to be inexplicably oblivious of this point, essentially taking the familiar position of "do one thing and do it very well". This is a nice principle and it can get you a nice niche company, but it doesn't get you a meaningful market position against an entrenched worldwide network of automotive giants, embedded in a powerful government/l-industry-labor complex. To me, it's staggering that he can't acknowledge the brilliance and success that's right in front of him. If Elon had pushed him out and went on to destroy the company, as nearly happened with Steve Jobs and Apple, then Eberhard might have a case.
I'm not sure what he thinks would be better if Tesla would drop the autonomy "crap". If he came back in as CEO and ordered that, would he make Tesla grow more than 50% per year, maybe shore up that moribund stock valuation? [/s] Would he also eliminate the distraction of Tesla Energy, eliminate the Semi, eliminate future work on HVAC products? I'm sure poor Optimus would be marched into the crusher. Then he could get back to building a really, really nice car.
@2101Guy , I know you search hard for these negative articles and quotes, and it just makes your day to be able to post one, sit back, gather some approval and take in all the pushback. Well, congratuoations. We've got Munger, we've got Bill Gates, we've got O'Dowd, we've got Eberhard. Please go look for yet another aging billionaire or entrepreneur to tell us it's all a mistake. I'm sure it won't take long.
But I truly have to marvel at the ability of entrepreneurial engineers to turn into bitter old codgers and start spouting nonsense. Last week I wrote about Dan O'Dowd who is definitely in this category, and who absurdly railed against Tesla because "everything being connected to the internet" is dangerous, despite the fact that his nemesis FSD is not connected to the internet in its basic operation. There are more than a few less-famous codgers here on TMC, who know oh so much better then Elon and his Autopilot team. At least once a week I see grumbling that Elon's or Tesla's time has passed, and it's time to let the adults (lawyers? accountants? PR experts? fund managers? oil sheiks?) take over the unterprise - just a mystifying conclusion to me.
I can't take anything away from Martin E. for his original inspirations, but he seems to be completely missing the point of Tesla's massive success, now and into the foreseeable future: Tesla (along with Elon's other ventures) is in an amazing period of growth and innovation because they are applying their energy, ideas and investment on a very broad front, not yielding ground or conceding technical or industrial primacy to anyone. They are running faster than anyone can keep up, and we're talking about real tangible products with real end customers, not financial market shenanigans, government consulting or one of many subsidized service Industries. The heavily software-driven platform of Tesla cars, including but not limited to the autonomy features, are an essential component of this dramatic success.
Eberhard seems to be inexplicably oblivious of this point, essentially taking the familiar position of "do one thing and do it very well". This is a nice principle and it can get you a nice niche company, but it doesn't get you a meaningful market position against an entrenched worldwide network of automotive giants, embedded in a powerful government/l-industry-labor complex. To me, it's staggering that he can't acknowledge the brilliance and success that's right in front of him. If Elon had pushed him out and went on to destroy the company, as nearly happened with Steve Jobs and Apple, then Eberhard might have a case.
I'm not sure what he thinks would be better if Tesla would drop the autonomy "crap". If he came back in as CEO and ordered that, would he make Tesla grow more than 50% per year, maybe shore up that moribund stock valuation? [/s] Would he also eliminate the distraction of Tesla Energy, eliminate the Semi, eliminate future work on HVAC products? I'm sure poor Optimus would be marched into the crusher. Then he could get back to building a really, really nice car.
@2101Guy , I know you search hard for these negative articles and quotes, and it just makes your day to be able to post one, sit back, gather some approval and take in all the pushback. Well, congratuoations. We've got Munger, we've got Bill Gates, we've got O'Dowd, we've got Eberhard. Please go look for yet another aging billionaire or entrepreneur to tell us it's all a mistake. I'm sure it won't take long.
Olle
Active Member
Ni kidding! What a surprise that a man who was pushed out and publicly humiliated by a company and has fallen out with the current CEO calls their products crap. (Irony)
Not the product..just FSD. Same thing majority of persons here call crappy/thats the subject of multiple lawsuits, multiple accidents, government recalls, investigations, etc. That one.
COS Blue
Member
Never heard of Eberhard until today, but he's right. Tesla has done a fantastic job of making EVs that are practical, efficient, fast, beautiful, and fun to drive. From a software perspective, including Autopilot, they are a constant disappointment. I don't have FSD and I never will. They can't even get basic driver assist to work correctly and consistently. Within a couple months of owning my car, it slammed on the brakes while going 78mph because it saw the shadow of a bridge across the Interstate. For a while, phantom braking got better, now it's worse than it was when I bought the car, thanks to Tesla Vision. I cannot drive to the mountains for a ski trip without multiple, seemingly random sharp jabs on the brakes. And this is not on the twisty mountain passes, this is on the long, almost perfectly straight sections of highway. It's embarrassing and I have to apologize to my family and passengers regularly. This is just using TACC, I don't even bother with Autosteer most of the time, because it's next to worthless on my ski trip. Why? Because there are long stretches of road where the speed limit it 65 mph, but my car thinks it's 45 mph, even though the speed limit sign is right there where it's always been. Thus, if I use Autosteer, it slows me down to 50 mph in a 65mph zone. Useless.
The constant software updates have been a net negative without doubt. Here's a list off the top of my head of things that have degraded due to software updates:
I think most people want a car that just works reliably and predictably. The idea of constant improvement sounds great until you get burned several times when your car suddenly doesn't do things as well as it did yesterday because of a software update. And TACC is so bad that I've started reverting to not even using cruise control because it makes me (and my passengers) too nervous.
The constant software updates have been a net negative without doubt. Here's a list off the top of my head of things that have degraded due to software updates:
- Ability to set the regen level has been removed
- Voice command that I used regularly no longer works
- Phantom braking is now a regular occurrence due to Tesla Vision (yes, apparently Tesla can disable my radar if they feel like it)
- Cannot listen to music without sporadic 1/2 second pauses
- Latest UI re-design took seat heaters, heated steering wheel, defrost off the bottom row. Eventually they let me put it back but it's still not as good as it was originally.
- Cannot use cruise control if the sun is low in front of me, due to Tesla Vision. It just starts slowing down because of "low visibility"
I think most people want a car that just works reliably and predictably. The idea of constant improvement sounds great until you get burned several times when your car suddenly doesn't do things as well as it did yesterday because of a software update. And TACC is so bad that I've started reverting to not even using cruise control because it makes me (and my passengers) too nervous.
Correct.Tesla cofounder calls Autopilot and FSD software 'crap' that could risk the carmaker's future - Autoblog
Elon Musk has made autonomous driving a top priority at Tesla. One of the carmaker's original founders doesn't approve.
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
Completely false characterization if you read the article. Not only does he also rail against AP, he is also opposed to the idea of the car being a software platform (an idea that practically every automaker is trying to copy now). He is not talking solely about FSD.
Last edited:
It should not be made usable until it functions properly...period. Don't use BETA..do in house testing like every other company.
They do in-house simulation and testing (alpha testing). If it passes those tests, then they do a limited beta test with a select set of the public. If it passes those tests, then they they go in increments to an ever-widening release. The fact that FSDb is not causing accidents is a sign that their safety controls are working so far. FSDb doesn't always prevent accidents that we'd like it to, but we hope that it will in time.
Beta testing is standard in the software industry, though I've never worked in safety-critical systems. I'm not sure there are that many safety-critical consumer software systems. Operating systems can be, but most people don't use them that way.
If Tesla messes up a wide release in any significant way, it could open them up to a class action lawsuit, cause irreparable damage to the company's future, and possibly end the allure of the software-defined car for the entire industry. You can believe they're being careful.
Similar threads
