Respectfully disagree. An individual can be both qualified and unduly biased. Such a person does not make a good regulator.Despite that lack of response, the article itself appeared to be reasonably accurate. The software versions and vehicle-specific data were not in the article beyond that the vehicles one and three had 'different software versions' and vehicle two has FSD. The major conclusions that there should be some regulatory oversight and that use of agile techniques should still have software changes tested and documented are uncontroversial. Elon Musk has on occasion suggested as much.
Ms. Cummings is distinctly qualified for the proposed role. Specifically, she has very extensive experience with advanced aircraft control systems. In that context she absolutely knows the material between the Boeing 737 MAX MCAS (undisclosed to operators/pilots, largely untested, operated without notifying pilots) as well as the F-18. Both are excellent case studies for the development of better and fully documented control systems. The F-18, 100% fly-by-wire(FBW, is an especially relevant case: Also from aviation are another two cases from Airbus that demonstrate the risk of complacency.:
First, an airshow crash solely due to an exceedingly experienced pilot having overconfidence in the first commercial FBW aircraft:
Second, an Airbus A330 crash due to pilots ignoring pitot tube freezing:
Ms. Cummings knows very well the risks of inattention and overconfidence. She is NOT a critic of highly automated systems but she IS an advocate for careful documentation, driver monitoring and consistent timely warning of system inability to perform.
Her criticism of Tesla Autopilot is not idle nor is it ignorant. I do not believe she opposes their development and deployment. I don't even think she's anti-Tesla. She is acutely aware of both the positive and negative aspects of L2 systems including the papers invention of L2+.
Bluntly we all know these systems require careful use with diligent driver monitoring. That is what Level 2 implies, but many people do ignore the limitations and those people also get into easily preventable accidents. That in no way detracts from the obvious benefits including much lower accident rates and lower serious injuries and deaths in the Tesla systems. The dual edge of much safer but also high potential risk of inattention is quite perfectly analogous to the aircraft situations also.
She will argue for OTA updates to have rigorous vetting, and chances are high she'll argue for a formal standard for documentation. That need not even slow down OTA but it will require better release vetting and documentation. That will be "A Good Thing". It will also generate major controversy, such things are not easy.
Many may disagree but these are my views. With both FSD and FBW aircraft operation in my history, I really want better documentation, better alerting systems and driver training (maybe even some delivery-based trying would help).
Just think, please: Plaids are being delivered with ZERO instruction. When I got mine it was me who explained things to the delivery person. How can that be a good thing? I had never driven one until mine. I had read the entire manual multiple times (perhaps a residue of aircraft pilot type rating ground training habits) but I had never driven one.
How many accidents are happening because of bad training or none at all? Th spectacular ones are clearly the result of overconfidence, and ignorance can exacerbate that.
So, a does of Ms. Commings is, in my opinion, a good thing, overdue.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Tesla, TSLA & the Investment World: the Perpetual Investors' Roundtable
- Thread starter AudubonB
- Start date
Artful Dodger
"Neko no me"
Ms. Cummings is a Board Member and an Investor in a company that sells automotive LIDAR systems. Thus, she has a distinct conflict of interest to advise the NHTSA on competing technology, Tesla's vision-only sensor approach.
Her biased statements and inflamatory tweets against Tesla and Elon Musk in particular over a years-long period make that obvious.
Futher, attempting to pass off a what is little more than an opinion paper as a peer-reviewed scientific study the day before AI Day is an obvious attempt to influence the Market, not the Regulator.
Sorry, her aviation background doesn't make her immune from bias. She clearly picked her horse years ago, and is now riding it. No evidence, no indication of progress, the AI vision world has passed her by. LIDAR is not the solution, but she may use it to delay adoption of the system that would actually work, for her own financial benefit.
Her appointment is clearly motivated by a desire to impede progress, not accelerate it. That's strike two against the Administration.
snellenr
Member
I may get slagged for this… but if you can get beyond the turgid melodrama and the late-inning exposition dump about her Objectivism ideas, Ayn Rand’s “Atlas Shrugged” may help you understand how (and why) second-raters and competitors might work together to drag down an innovator, with Elon playing the Hank Rearden role…
Good area to explore rationally. IMO NHTSA has been planning for autonomous driving for decades BUT not via Neural nets. NN technology is not their expertise IMO.
They prefer validated code working with highway telematics or lots of technology gadgets, if I had to guess.
Rationally, none of us know if NNs will ultimately be successful. Looks great now but it could be that the difficulty level becomes impractical before the solution is achieved. Cost prohibitive at todays tech level. There are serious sober questions to be solved but so far so good.
I would guess that FSD is likely to be a divisive issue for a portion of society. For instance, NHTSA could request that special designations or indicators appear on vehicles under autonomous control until there is a clear regulatory status defined. (Anyone keen to have a flashing light on the roof When in FSD mode?)
The good news is that FSD could remain in eternal beta mode as far as I am concerned. It is not a crucial “win” in the same way that energy storage advancements seem to be for mitigating climate change.
FSD is preview to Optimus which is crucial for Mars IMO. In the mean time, it’s earnings day!
jeewee3000
Active Member
No other cars are delivered with training. That's what a drivers license is for.
That the Plaid is a fast car is known to the consumer that has paid +100k for it. Same goes for people buying a Porsche, Ferrari or other fast car.
When you order it even boasts about the acceleration, so the customer cannot claim to be uninformed. If said customer cannot control the vehicle, that's on him/her.
Yep and yep
???Relevence and conclusion. Notwithstanding the 'tampered evidence' theory, the crash reportedly had everything to do with pilot error (too low, applied power too late) and nothing to do with it being a fly by wire system.First, an airshow crash solely due to an exceedingly experienced pilot having overconfidence in the first commercial FBW aircraft:
Are you implying there is no testing of changes? If not, the conclusion is that Tesla is already doing the right thing. Documentation already exists in the form of the testing results from the NN build with test cases and subsequent human drivability.
How is it even possible for OTA to not be slowed down by additional release vetting? That implies further testing which must occur after the release candidate is created.
Yet Tesla is the lightning rod/ problem child? We had zero training on our Ford Explorer's Adaptive Cruise Control and you know what? It will not slow the vehicle below 12MPH nor will it reliably detect stopped cars nor those going under 6 MPH. In other words it is guaranteedIto hit the car in front of it if traffic stops. Ford Lane assist will bounce you off the edges once or twice, then put you in the ditch. Typically, Tesla's TACC will not. Are they addressing the industry or the front runner?
I might even go so far as to say training on the exact behavior of a particular software version is problematic since the next version may act differently and any two cars could have different versions. While less informative, a blanket "It drives like a teenager, don't trust it completely" may be the better approach.
Thanks for your comments. Pilots have some experience to offer here. What we permit on the roads would never be allowed in the air IMO.Despite that lack of response, the article itself appeared to be reasonably accurate. The software versions and vehicle-specific data were not in the article beyond that the vehicles one and three had 'different software versions' and vehicle two has FSD. The major conclusions that there should be some regulatory oversight and that use of agile techniques should still have software changes tested and documented are uncontroversial. Elon Musk has on occasion suggested as much.
Ms. Cummings is distinctly qualified for the proposed role. Specifically, she has very extensive experience with advanced aircraft control systems. In that context she absolutely knows the material between the Boeing 737 MAX MCAS (undisclosed to operators/pilots, largely untested, operated without notifying pilots) as well as the F-18. Both are excellent case studies for the development of better and fully documented control systems. The F-18, 100% fly-by-wire(FBW, is an especially relevant case: Also from aviation are another two cases from Airbus that demonstrate the risk of complacency.:
First, an airshow crash solely due to an exceedingly experienced pilot having overconfidence in the first commercial FBW aircraft:
Second, an Airbus A330 crash due to pilots ignoring pitot tube freezing:
Ms. Cummings knows very well the risks of inattention and overconfidence. She is NOT a critic of highly automated systems but she IS an advocate for careful documentation, driver monitoring and consistent timely warning of system inability to perform.
Her criticism of Tesla Autopilot is not idle nor is it ignorant. I do not believe she opposes their development and deployment. I don't even think she's anti-Tesla. She is acutely aware of both the positive and negative aspects of L2 systems including the papers invention of L2+.
Bluntly we all know these systems require careful use with diligent driver monitoring. That is what Level 2 implies, but many people do ignore the limitations and those people also get into easily preventable accidents. That in no way detracts from the obvious benefits including much lower accident rates and lower serious injuries and deaths in the Tesla systems. The dual edge of much safer but also high potential risk of inattention is quite perfectly analogous to the aircraft situations also.
She will argue for OTA updates to have rigorous vetting, and chances are high she'll argue for a formal standard for documentation. That need not even slow down OTA but it will require better release vetting and documentation. That will be "A Good Thing". It will also generate major controversy, such things are not easy.
Many may disagree but these are my views. With both FSD and FBW aircraft operation in my history, I really want better documentation, better alerting systems and driver training (maybe even some delivery-based trying would help).
Just think, please: Plaids are being delivered with ZERO instruction. When I got mine it was me who explained things to the delivery person. How can that be a good thing? I had never driven one until mine. I had read the entire manual multiple times (perhaps a residue of aircraft pilot type rating ground training habits) but I had never driven one.
How many accidents are happening because of bad training or none at all? Th spectacular ones are clearly the result of overconfidence, and ignorance can exacerbate that.
So, a does of Ms. Commings is, in my opinion, a good thing, overdue.
The world’s platform for change
Change.org is the world’s largest petition platform, using technology to empower more than 200 million users to create the change they want to see.
www.change.org
signed, and forwarded to like-minded friends. Please, everyone, do so as well!
I think there is a typo in the petition:
"We humbly request that this appointment by reviewed for violation"
Though I'm not native english, so I may very well be wrong.
I think there is a typo in the petition:
"We humbly request that this appointment by reviewed for violation"
Though I'm not native english, so I may very well be wrong.
Last edited:
It was nice to hear Andrew from CNBC push Pete Buttigieg to answer if and why the administration has had an apparent "beef" with Elon and Tesla. Pete didn't completely answer the question directly and explained that they want to see all auto manufacturers succeed.
This is really all you need to know to understand Missy Cumming's motivations and actions against Tesla. It's simply financial and self preservation.
jkirkwood001
Active Member
Let's think this through: the US is, what, maybe a quarter of Tesla's future market? Say the NHTSA forces Tesla to disable some part of FSD. So foreign countries use full Full Self Driving and the stats start showing fewer deaths (all other factors being normalized). The US experiences more deaths than the NHTSA could help prevent.
How's that going to look for Ms. Cummings?
You can't stop progress completely.
You can't stop innovation.
You can't stop Tesla.
I signed and contributed. But this has all the makings of pissing into the wind.The world’s platform for change
Change.org is the world’s largest petition platform, using technology to empower more than 200 million users to create the change they want to see.
I know politics has no place here so I will not elaborate, but I personally am brutally dissatisfied and disappointed with the current administration which appears to be the best the US horrible two party system can offer. The globe has critical existential problems to deal with and we appear incapable only for political reasons.
I will keep trudging on…. I hope we arrive at a better place through our collective actions.
Yes, should be "be" and not "by". And if the main point is her conflict of interest through her board position in Veoneer, it should be noted that Veoneer is being sold to Qualcomm. Qualcomm and SSW Partners Reach Definitive Agreement to Acquire Veoneer | Qualcomm
I accept the obvious questions regarding her potential bias, but I do think the petition looks a little bit too conspiratorial. If drafted by a lawyer, it would probably be more fact based. I doubt the arguments about who she follows and or interacts with on Twitter will impress a lot. If you look at it from the flip side, would someone following Musk on twitter also be excused. Seems a difficult case to make.
Artful Dodger
"Neko no me"
The world’s platform for change
Change.org is the world’s largest petition platform, using technology to empower more than 200 million users to create the change they want to see.
Here are the specific conflicts of interest which should disqualify Missy Cummings as an Advisor to the NHTSA: (2 screenshots from her CV)
on Twitter: "@crusaderx2 @missy_cummings @elonmusk @MatchasmMatt @NHTSAgov @GaryMarcus Question #3 to Missy Cummings: 
You are a shareholder, board member & derive substantial income from LIDAR manufacturer Veoneer, a direct competitor to Tesla who is eliminating LIDAR. Will you recuse yourself from all NHTSA decisions that involve Veoneer & their competitors? https://t.co/aX8CjaqCv2" / Twitter
Let's get the relevant text into this thread to make it available for Search engines:
- Missy Cummings is a member of the Veoneer, Inc. Board of Directors
- Veoneer is an American Swedish provider of automotive technology based in Stockholm and incorporated in Delaware
- Veoneer's products include radars, lidars, thermal night vision cameras, vision systems and advanced driver assistance and autonomous driving software
- Veoneer counts all major global automakers as its customers
Don't be fooled by what happens next. On any level playing field, no one can be both a player and a referee. Sorry Missy Cummins, you are disqualified.
Regards,
Lodger
Last edited:
Wow. Another case of real life being more unbelievable than what goes on in the movies.
As a supporter of Democrats, I plan to call the White house, Democratic State Senators, and local Democrat candidates and let them know why I'm stopping my (small but monthly) support. They're all way too strong union supporters, and giving only lip service to electric cars while failing to acknowledge and working AGAINST Tesla is the most destructive path they can take to ensure losing in the midterms.
What to say for the greatest effect, exactly?
anthonyj
Stonks
I’ve just been writing cash secured puts when the stock is red and covering them when I make a few g’s. It’s been fun and a great side incomeI remember your bold 1880 leaps call. Any more recent bold moves?
"LIDAR Mandate"
Has a nice ring to it.
It will make us safe.
It is the way we do things. The proper way to do things.
Has a nice ring to it.
It will make us safe.
It is the way we do things. The proper way to do things.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
