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.

 

[Krugerrand]

False equivalency IMO.

I can think of ~one person on TMC saying AP2 matches AP1. I can think of ~100 saying it does not match AP1 yet.

I've read more than a few posts of people saying they match. I've also read several posts stating AP2 exceeds AP1 in a couple of areas and not quite up to AP1 capabilities in others. Basically, it appears that people are having different experiences and unhappy people are more vocal than happy ones. I suspect as well that information being posted on the topic has to do with people's bias, comprehension capabilities, interpretation skills etc... and I'm more apt to believe those that post impartially.

This is why we're talking, to keep Tesla accountable truth-wise. Understanding what happened, when and why and portraying it realistically amongst each other.

Let me correct that for you. SOME people are talking for the above reasons, while others are talking because misery loves company and there's nothing quite like a good ole fashion pile-on.

 

[alcibiades]

You cannot blame anyone but yourself for decisions you regret. There has been plenty of evidence available to make an informed decision regarding the timing and probability of FSD regulatory approval.

Please produce the "evidence" in October that EAP was not coming in December. Please also provide the "evidence" in October that the October FSD hardware capability announcement was based on dreams.

The regulatory approval excuse is completely irrelevant. I couldn't care less about the WHEN of FSD.

Also, you're rude.

I'd like to personally thank the angry, overworked engineers who worked on AP. I couldn't have driven endless miles in safety and relaxation without you!

You might want to post that on an Aurora Innovation message board!

 

[alcibiades]

I've read more than a few posts of people saying they match. I've also read several posts stating AP2 exceeds AP1 in a couple of areas and not quite up to AP1 capabilities in others. Basically, it appears that people are having different experiences and unhappy people are more vocal than happy ones. I suspect as well that information being posted on the topic has to do with people's bias, comprehension capabilities, interpretation skills etc... and I'm more apt to believe those that post impartially.

EAP doesn't show vehicles in adjacent lanes. It doesn't identify different classes of vehicles. It cannot read speed limit signs.

These are matters of fact, not experience.

And lastly, just because it's funny:

Nothing E about EAP.

Look, clearly the Tesla Team wrote the description while under the impression that they could work a deal with MobileEye to include AP1 in addition to the new board for EAP. When that fell through, they decided not to tell anyone until AFTER Q4 sales and the 2/17 earnings call.

"The original plan was to have a migration strategy where we have Mobileye and Tesla Vision operating at the same time, to have kind of a smooth process but But Mobileye refused to do that,” Musk said during an earnings call with investors on Wednesday. “So that forced us to re-spin the board and kind of cross the rubicon on Tesla Vision.”

Also, Elon says it was ready but not safe in 12/16. Of course, that's kind of a funny use of "ready".

 

[Krugerrand]

With the Model S in 2012, Tesla became the first automaker to provide over-the-air software updates. I would also contend that they have supplied far, far more added (and in a few cases, subtracted) features via software updates than any other vendor.

With the move to AP2 and the offering of FSD option in late 2016, they took another step... they began offering "future" options, where customers paid in advance for 'to be delivered' software features. It is pretty clear from this (and other) threads that there are some auto buyers who are not comfortable with this second step. Regarding actual liability, I believe the purchase paperwork has Tesla pretty well covered, but you never know what an individual judge or jury might decide regarding website or tweet content (vs. actual purchase contract). Regardless, I believe that any liability for advance software purchases is peanuts in the whole scheme of things, but the larger issue is how the broader market interprets and responds to this concept of paying in advance for 'to be delivered' features.

I believe in the case of AP2, Tesla had little choice. After they made the decision to move away from Mobileye, they were faced with a difficult transition. They wanted a new hardware suite, which would not have worked with Mobileye. In my mind, there were 2 options: continue with Mobileye software and hardware until AP2 software/hardware was perfected and tested - meanwhile shipping cars with hardware that was soon to be obsolete. Or what they did: ship the new hardware, and run like heck to provide the software. They could not market the car as 'regressing' from AP1, yet they knew it would take time to deliver AP1 parity. Musk's time projections were way off... as they frequently have been. Putting that aside, I am very confident they WILL deliver AP1 parity and more. So the only legit gripe for buyers is diminished software capability for some period of time. And, while people are free to say/do what they want, I think they are wasting their time tilting at this windmill.

In the case of FSD, I really wish Tesla would not pre-sell this capability, especially with the volumes coming in the 3. I believe that their contract will keep them pretty safe, since I believe regulatory approval for full FSD will be many, many years off. I also believe they will provide good value for the $3k in the form of progressive features that move down the FSD path. But, I do not think that they need the sideshow from that subset of customers who cannot handle this concept of future software delivery. It just opens up too many interpretations and expectations.

But, I do not run the company, and they have so far done pretty well with huge stretch goals and revolutionary practices... so I'll watch them do something I do not believe they should be doing... with interest.

FWIW, I will not pop for the extra $3k FSD in my two Model 3s. At risk of spending a little more, I will wait until there is some FSD functionality released so I know what I'm getting.

I agree with you with the exception I'm totally fine with them offering 'pre-selling' of features not yet available. It's right there in print for everyone to read. If Tesla can get some additional support through funds of not yet available features to further their plans, more power to them.

I'm passing on the FSD on my Model 3 and will be happy to pay the extra when the feature is available even if that happens to be 24 hours after I take delivery of my car. Someone did a poll asking who was taking the 3k option at configuration time and who wasn't. Last I saw it was something like 80% would not buy it at configuration time.

 

[alcibiades]

I agree with you with the exception I'm totally fine with them offering 'pre-selling' of features not yet available. It's right there in print for everyone to read. If Tesla can get some additional support through funds of not yet available features to further their plans, more power to them.

I'm passing on the FSD on my Model 3 and will be happy to pay the extra when the feature is available even if that happens to be 24 hours after I take delivery of my car. Someone did a poll asking who was taking the 3k option at configuration time and who wasn't. Last I saw it was something like 80% would not buy it at configuration time.

I know tomas has a hard time following this, but I would like to make clear to you that I do not have an issue with pre-selling features simplicitur.

The issue I have is being duplicitous in order to get people to buy the pre-sells. This is a distinction with a big ****ing difference.

 

[Krugerrand]

I miss the old days when people argued incessantly when Tesla took away the adjustable suspension option for a period of time. Oh, the discourse of Tesla protecting their customer's cars and lives. Then when Tesla gave everyone a free Titanium under shield on their car and gave back adjustable suspension height - crickets from the unhappy mass and forgotten like it never happened.

This too shall pass.

 

[Krugerrand]

I know tomas has a hard time following this, but I would like to make clear to you that I do not have an issue with pre-selling features simplicitur.

The issue I have is being duplicitous in order to get people to buy the pre-sells. This is a distinction with a big ****ing difference.

Tesla has never done anything with malice or intent to screw consumers. Ever. Tesla has always tried to fix their mistakes and make things right for their 'reasonable' customers. That's the big ....ing difference here. This isn't Diesel Gate, though I know there are some who want to make it so.

 

[alcibiades]

Tesla has never done anything with malice or intent to screw consumers. Ever.

You can't possibly know that.

 

[bonnie]

You can't possibly know that.

Sure Krug can know that. I know that also. I know what would happen internally to someone who deliberately tried to screw over a customer or acted in malice. Because I've seen it. Once you know a company's values and the people implementing those values, it's easy to make a statement like Krug made. That's not to say that mistakes have been made. But Tesla always has made things right.

 

[jgs]

So with the Tesla qualification of "in almost all circumstances", they can legitimately claim that their vehicles have "Full Self-Driving Capability" if they can fully take over the driving responsibilities from a human in selected driving situations, such as high speed driving.

Thanks for quoting the fine print. I'm willing to believe that with that set of caveats and hedges, it's not impossible for them to deliver with AP2. (The adjective "full" is undeserved for such a product, IMO, but whatever, it's marketing. No need to spill more gallons and hogsheads of virtual ink over it the way people have done about "autopilot".)

 

[alcibiades]

Sure Krug can know that. I know that also. I know what would happen internally to someone who deliberately tried to screw over a customer or acted in malice. Because I've seen it. Once you know a company's values and the people implementing those values, it's easy to make a statement like Krug made. That's not to say that mistakes have been made. But Tesla always has made things right.

When a court makes you do the right thing, you don't get to claim virtue.

How much is your stock worth and how many people do you personally know at Tesla?

I'll lay myself bare before you: I own no stock, I don't know anyone personally at Tesla, and I own a Model X 90D bought in Q4 2016 with EAP that still isn't enhanced despite claims it would be finished and delivered to my car in December 2016.

Your turn. I know you own one. But what else?

 

[ecarfan]

Tesla has never done anything with malice or intent to screw consumers.

You can't possibly know that.

My sense of Elon's character and of how Tesla management operates, is that I can know that. I've been watching the company very closely for at least 5 years.

 

[Krugerrand]

You can't possibly know that.

Really? And yet you can know the opposite? Give me a break. You're talking out an orifice because you're mad about some perceived slight.

There have been thousands of forum posts over the 6 years I've been following or posting on this forum that prove what I said. On top of that, I've seen every Elon Musk video/interview/TED talk/etc.., listened to every conference call, ER report, and read all Tweets, media comments etc... Elon Musk is ultra consistent with his views and words. He is for humanity, for his customers and their safety, and abhors anything that isn't fair. He goes out of his way to try and make things right. That is the culture he nurtures at Tesla.

Has Elon and Tesla made mistakes. Yep. And a few have been doozies. But there's never been one iota of evidence that he or Tesla have done anything with intent to deceive and hurt customers. That would go against their every fiber. Hasn't happened no matter how much you want it to be true to justify your anger.

 

[Krugerrand]

Your turn. I know you own one. But what else?

You have no idea. *this is me laughing so hard I'm crying*

 

[tomas]

Please produce the "evidence" in October that EAP was not coming in December. Please also provide the "evidence" in October that the October FSD hardware capability announcement was based on dreams.

The regulatory approval excuse is completely irrelevant. I couldn't care less about the WHEN of FSD.

Also, you're rude.

Your post I replied to was about FSD, not EAP. I don't conflate the two. If you want to talk about EAP, I'll agree with you that you had some cause to expect more sooner.

Sorry if you felt I was rude, that was not intent. I'm generally just frank...

 

[bonnie]

When a court makes you do the right thing, you don't get to claim virtue.

How much is your stock worth and how many people do you personally know at Tesla?

I'll lay myself bare before you: I own no stock, I don't know anyone personally at Tesla, and I own a Model X 90D bought in Q4 2016 with EAP that still isn't enhanced despite claims it would be finished and delivered to my car in December 2016.

Your turn. I know you own one. But what else?

I've owned more than one. But yep, one.

I know countless people at Tesla at various levels within the company, from top management to folks working on the floor to sales people to a shuttle bus driver to those in marketing to engineers - friendships formed over the last 7 years as problems have been handled by caring employees. Flat tire in a remote area? No worries, Jake overnighted a new set at no cost to me. No place to park for an event? Oh hey, Miki has arranged a shuttle for attendees based on my feedback. Sent various mgmt a link to threads here, where people couldn't get help? EACH and EVERY time they have handled appropriately. That's how I met people. By their superior response to an owner's problems. So not 'they only helped her because she knows people', but rather 'she got to know people as they handled her problems'. Big difference there.

I bought stock (respectfully, it's no one's business how much). You want to know why? That's easy. As part of my job for a Fortune 100 company, I evaluated potential acquisitions during due diligence activities. And I thought about the fact that I had never once seen a company I liked as much as Tesla. It remains the ONLY company where the mission statement is not just some babble put out by the CEO, but something believed by every single employee I've interacted with. You cannot buy that kind of inspiration. I saw a company growing way too fast and having to learn a lot of lessons the hard way. In other words, not perfect. But it was the most inspiring company I'd ever had the pleasure to witness and so yes, I went in on the stock. Because if I had any faith in my ability to evaluate companies, I'd be an idiot not to invest in the best one I'd encountered.

So you can twist that as to 'oh she's just trying to protect her investment' ... but the reality is that I MADE the investment because of the company and how they handled problems. And I've never regretted that. And again, I got to know people because they were the people who stepped in to resolve problems. And I consider them friends, yes. So when I say they'll do the right thing, that's based on seven years of personal experience.

 

[bonnie]

You have no idea. *this is me laughing so hard I'm crying*

Shhhh.

 

[alcibiades]

Bonnie, feel free to pass my info and concerns on to your friends at Tesla to make things right as you say they will. I have no problem with that.

Truly, I want to be a believer too. (I don't want to be the first with my back against the wall when the believers have their revolution. You guys are ruthless!)

I'm excited to hear what comes out in discovery of the EAP suit. Maybe then I will finally be a believer. We should be privy then to more views on what engineers thought. The WSJ article seems to indicate that there might be something there. Of course, there might not.

Alas, until then every passing day of my experience with EAP suggests that Tesla unjustifiably said what they said when I ordered -- especially given my position as a poor heretic.

 

[Krugerrand]

Shhhh.

I was just thinking about who's on your speed dial.

 

[Krugerrand]

We should be privy then to more views on what engineers thought.

Why? We're not privy to thoughts of RN's about the doctor doing surgery on us. We're not privy to thoughts of the cooks in the kitchens of our favorite restaurants. We're not privy to the thoughts of workers on the construction crew building the hotel we'll stay in when it's complete. We're not privy to the thoughts of lawyers when presenting cases in front of various judges. Indeed, you don't want to know what they think. You only think you do because you think it'll support your position.