Blog WSJ: Ambitious Autopilot Push Angered Tesla Engineers

Tesla engineers are reportedly jumping ship because they don’t believe Autopilot 2.0 hardware can meet the fully self-driving promise that Elon Musk proudly touts.

The Wall Street Journal says Sterling Anderson, previously the Autopilot director, decided to leave Tesla in December in part because he didn’t agree with the claims Musk was making about the vehicle’s potential for full autonomy.

According to the WSJ (paywall):

In a meeting after the announcement, someone asked Autopilot director Sterling Anderson how Tesla could brand the product “Full Self-Driving,” several employees recall. “This was Elon’s decision,” they said he responded. Two months later, Mr. Anderson resigned.

The Autopilot division has lost some 10 employees and four managers recently, according to the report. Satish Jeyachandran, the former director of hardware engineering for Tesla’s Autopilot team, and Berta Rodriguez-Hervas, a former machine learning manager also left the company in June. Anderson was succeeded by Chris Lattner, a former Apple developer, but he left in June after just six months on the job.

Tesla has declined to comment on the report.

 

[whitex]

I am not familiar with that case. Did Tesla took their deposits and didn't deliver the product?

Or look at 691hp the speed vs. actually produced 463hp. Tesla's ethical response, "the motors are car is capable, just not the rest of the car". Initially the 691hp was coming via "passing speed ota update" too, until it didn't. I can see the blog coming "The current AP2 system is absolutely FSD capable, just not the software running on it".

 

[McRat]

I have invented a flying Tesla. Please pay me $15,000 for performing the appropriate mods to your car. I will deliver it to you when I complete final validation. Thanks.

OK, that is a bit over the top.

Funny though.

 

[McRat]

Or look at 691hp the speed vs. actually produced 463hp. Tesla's ethical response, "the motors are car is capable, just not the rest of the car". Initially the 691hp was coming via "passing speed ota update" too, until it didn't. I can see the blog coming "The current AP2 system is absolutely FSD capable, just not the software running on it".

Do a web search on 762 HP Tesla. It generates over 200k pages. This is what made me start paying attention to Tesla since the record for an available car was 707 HP for the Dodge Hellcat. I was rooting for the Tesla because I believe EVs are the future. This is what brought me to this site. The fact Tesla has not produced a 762 HP version certainly dismays me. I came very, very close to ordering a 762 version to replace my sluggish 638HP supercar.

 

[Tam]

Taking money for something impossible to deliver is not unethical? You seems to have very unique set of ethics.

There may be engineers who disagree with Tesla because they think what Tesla promise is impossible or unethical but Tesla has proven them wrong.

Please read the above example when Panasonic thought that Tesla was crazy to ask it producing more, not just more, but much more cells. It thought it's impossible to have that much of demand. It's been in the business along time and it is the expert of how much cells it should produce but Tesla was talking about a Gigafactory? It's just impossible.

Tesla sold Panasonic the idea and now Panasonic has admitted that it was wrong!

 

[AnxietyRanger]

There may be engineers who disagree with Tesla because they think what Tesla promise is impossible or unethical but Tesla has proven them wrong.

Please read the above example when Panasonic thought that Tesla was crazy to ask it producing more, not just more, but much more cells. It thought it's impossible to have that much of demand. It's been in the business along time and it is the expert of how much cells it should produce but Tesla was talking about a Gigafactory? It's just impossible.

Tesla sold Panasonic the idea and now Panasonic has admitted that it was wrong!

I think you exaggerate Tesla's infallibility and are not very familiar with their recent history.

Tesla has made plenty of mistakes.

 

[Mo City]

While I'm not going to cancel my M3 pre-order... As an engineer with limited understanding of the technology challenges I've never really believed that full self driving was going to arrive in this generation of vehicle and would have to be a kind of an extreme optimist to pay $3000 up front for the tantalizing promise of future tech that might never arrive.

I'm not canceling either but, right now, I'm also leaning against getting EAP. If reports about it improve a lot before early next year, I'll reconsider

There may be engineers who disagree with Tesla because they think what Tesla promise is impossible or unethical but Tesla has proven them wrong.

Please read the above example when Panasonic thought that Tesla was crazy to ask it producing more, not just more, but much more cells. It thought it's impossible to have that much of demand. It's been in the business along time and it is the expert of how much cells it should produce but Tesla was talking about a Gigafactory? It's just impossible.

Tesla sold Panasonic the idea and now Panasonic has admitted that it was wrong!

So every Elon pipedream must have come true or will come true because one did.

Yeah right.

 

[3Victoria]

This thread is mostly Panboys.

 

[Tam]

...Tesla has made plenty of mistakes...

Yes, it does makes mistakes but it does know how to learn from them and improve up on those experience.

 

[AnxietyRanger]

@Tam Best to agree to disagree.

 

[Tam]

...Yeah right...

In conclusion, Autopilot team may not believe in what it was doing and thought it was unethical so that could explain a high turnover rate.

So thanks for this thread that describes the situation as a turmoil, but I can see very concretely in my car that AP2 program has been progressing very well all this time.

 

[McRat]

Yes, it does makes mistakes but it does know how to learn from them and improve up on those experience.

If only that were true. Best I can tell, Tesla currently does not comply with ISO 9001 (any version). This requires you to validate metrics on your goals, your defect trends, and measure improvements in quality level. if they are not, they are not under a measured system of continuous improvement.

Or I am wrong. Prove me wrong. I cannot find them listed under any ISO Registrar.

 

[anticitizen13.7]

This thread is mostly Panboys.

The same thing goes on in Apple forums. A vocal minority of fans becomes slowly more disillusioned with the company and nitpicks and rants at everything. To hear people whine you'd think that Tim Cook is worse than John Sculley or Gil Amelio.

I don't agree with everything Tesla does, but reading the same rehashed complaints gets tiring. I think many people take for granted what Tesla has accomplished and is accomplishing. Anyone want an example of a company that threw away drive and ambition? Look at Honda. I have been a Honda customer for years. I have watched them slide from a company that used to surprise and delight with innovation, into an organization that is stuck in its mindset. They are great at one thing now: making really good boring cars or rehashes of 1990's fantasy. But they always deliver on time what they say they will deliver. It's real fun now. /sarcasm

 

[alcibiades]

The same thing goes on in Apple forums. A vocal minority of fans becomes slowly more disillusioned with the company and nitpicks and rants at everything. To hear people whine you'd think that Tim Cook is worse than John Sculley or Gil Amelio.

I don't agree with everything Tesla does, but reading the same rehashed complaints gets tiring. I think many people take for granted what Tesla has accomplished and is accomplishing. Anyone want an example of a company that threw away drive and ambition? Look at Honda. I have been a Honda customer for years. I have watched them slide from a company that used to surprise and delight with innovation, into an organization that is stuck in its mindset. They are great at one thing now: making really good boring cars or rehashes of 1990's fantasy. But they always deliver on time what they say they will deliver. It's real fun now. /sarcasm

Do you own a Tesla with HW2?

(By the way! I would happily stop complaining if you want to pay off my car and let me keep it. In that case, it wouldn't bother me so much that I feel defrauded.)

Also, I've never bought an iPhone or Mac that wasn't what it was claimed to be.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that whether or not Tesla was justified in advertising a car as FSD capable has nothing to do with Honda, Apple, drive, or ambition. It has to do with honesty. I bought a product advertised with certain capabilities. There are reasons to believe the advertisements were duplicitous and it will be eventually determined in court. First, with the already filed EAP suit, then with the inevitable and more costly FSD suit.

 

[Tam]

...ISO Registrar...

I have no idea what it is but a search yields a caption of a picture "Tesla Motors is ISO 9001 certified":

 

[McRat]

I have no idea what it is but a search yields a caption of a picture "Tesla Motors is ISO 9001 certified":

View attachment 243924

Which Registrar? I'm registered though DEKRA, formally KEMA.

Pretty much all high level mfr'g organizations are ISO 9001:2008 or 2015.

I searched hard and could not find any indication that Tesla Motors can prove they have a Quality Control System of any kind.

Things improve over time. Nobody used to let outside companies report on their quality control. And products sucked.
Today things are different. We don't just 'say' we have continuous improvement in quality, we can actually prove it.

 

[bonnie]

Which Registrar? I'm registered though DEKRA, formally KEMA.

Pretty much all high level mfr'g organizations are ISO 9001:2008 or 2015.

ISO 9001 is pretty generic. Isn't there an automotive ISO standard like ISO 16949? They'd need to have that in place in order to clear customs in various countries if automotive is anything like other products.

 

[McRat]

ISO 9001 is pretty generic. Isn't there an automotive ISO standard like ISO 16949? They'd need to have that in place in order to clear customs in various countries if automotive is anything like other products.

16949 is a subset of the full 9001. It allows you to focus your system on specific projects. ie- You get to decide if you can ignore quality aspects of a contract.

Asia demanded it. Go figure.

Is Tesla even 16949? Eh?

Best I can figure, is Tesla demands folk to be 9001 or 16949, but Tesla gets to ignore any outside QC validation themselves.

Comedy. They require their suppliers to be held to a higher standard than themselves, but when fan meets manure, they blame the subs.

Nice.

BTW - due to NDA I cannot say whether Tesla or SpaceX is a customer. If they were, I would I guess they weren't on parity with other organizations when it comes to quality control. And they would get puzzled when their vendors are skeptical of their organizational skill set.

I am allowed to say most major automakers are on our customer list, and so is ATK, NASA, JPL, and other orbital flight companies.

Truth? I admire what Elon Musk is trying to accomplish, and have acted accordingly. If my wife would not have vetoed a Tesla, there would be a P85DL or higher in the garage.

But I think Elon needs a pro to run Tesla EV Motorwerks. He's screwing up every time he Twitters, IMO.

 

[bonnie]

16949 is a subset of the full 9001. It allows you to focus your system on specific projects. ie- You get to decide if you can ignore quality aspects of a contract.

Asia demanded it. Go figure.

Is Tesla even 16949? Eh?

Best I can figure, is Tesla demands folk to be 9001 or 16949, but Tesla gets to ignore any outside QC validation themselves.

Comedy. They require their suppliers to be held to a higher standard than themselves, but when fan meets manure, they blame the subs.

Nice.

BTW - due to NDA I cannot say whether Tesla or SpaceX is a customer. If they were, I would I guess they weren't on parity with other organizations when it comes to quality control. And they would get puzzled when their vendors are skeptical of their organizational skill set.

I am allowed to say most major automakers are on our customer list, and so is ATK, NASA, JPL, and other orbital flight companies.

My personal experience with a number of notified bodies is that the certification may or may not mean anything. Even when a Notified Body is considered one of the top companies, there are still instances of shoddy quality systems that never should have been granted certification. But while it is accurate to say other quality standards are a subset of 9001, I'd argue that most are really supersets, requiring much more detail in areas specific to an industry.

If only their subs meet the appropriate ISO standard, they wouldn't be able to claim it for themselves.

 

[anticitizen13.7]

Do you own a Tesla with HW2?

(By the way! I would happily stop complaining if you want to pay off my car and let me keep it. In that case, it wouldn't bother me so much that I feel defrauded.)

Also, I've never bought an iPhone or Mac that wasn't what it was claimed to be.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that whether or not Tesla was justified in advertising a car as FSD capable has nothing to do with Honda, Apple, drive, or ambition. It has to do with honesty. I bought a product advertised with certain capabilities. There are reasons to believe the advertisements were duplicitous and it will be eventually determined in court. First, with the already filed EAP suit, then with the inevitable and more costly FSD suit.

No. I drive a beat up Honda.

Tesla's product descriptions have made it clear to me that the AP2 software was incomplete at launch and would gradually improve over time.

People can sue away if it makes them feel better. Tesla's incremental deployment of features over an uncertain timeline is not going to be taken well by some customers, but that's how they have always operated. Personally I don't like to be a Beta tester. Which is why I'm still driving my Honda.

 

[McRat]

My personal experience with a number of notified bodies is that the certification may or may not mean anything. Even when a Notified Body is considered one of the top companies, there are still instances of shoddy quality systems that never should have been granted certification. But while it is accurate to say other quality standards are a subset of 9001, I'd argue that most are really supersets, requiring much more detail in areas specific to an industry.

If only their subs meet the appropriate ISO standard, they wouldn't be able to claim it for themselves.

I exceeded 9003 before 1994. Some of their concepts come from my white papers. As does ISO 9001 and AS 9100. And D6-51991, digital mfr'g and inspection.

If Tesla Motors was in a loop of continuous improvement or even used preventative action systems, WTF happened to AP2???