4 ms·

I can understand the reticence in this situation. Lithium Ion batteries are dangerous. When they fail, they can release a lot of energy: https://www.youtube.co

by new299 9y ago

I can understand the reticence in this situation. Lithium Ion batteries are dangerous. When they fail, they can release a lot of energy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AAZ62tUtc0w https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AAZ62tUtc0w The PowerWall seems to be impressively safe: https://electrek.co/2016/12/19/tesla-fire-powerpack-test-safety/ https://electrek.co/2016/12/19/tesla-fire-powerpack-test-saf... But I can still understand a desire to keep in constantly monitored.

lucaspiller 9y ago
I'd like to know what sort of monitoring Tesla does before arguing either way. If they are actively monitoring for devices that are about to catch fire, and if so will call the fire department to come to your house, and your neighbours to evacuate, then sure it makes sense - but I assume they are just monitoring 'usage analytics', and the fault detection could work just as safely by shutting off the device and prompting the user for action, as another comment suggested. It's the same with their cars, although having a constant connection to HQ allows faults to be diagnosed quicker, I'd rather it just show a check engine light and go to a dealer (oh wait...).
- greglindahl 9y ago
  Well, the standard for the car is that they'll phone the owner a couple of minutes after an accident.
PinguTS 9y ago
But to maintain a functional safe state, you do not need Internet access. If you need Internet access to maintain a functional safe state, then you are doing it wrong. There is also no reason at all to make availability depending on Internet access. Especially, when you are providing a solution that is intended for a self-contained, self-sufficient use case: "Make" power, store power, use power.
- new299 9y ago
  I'd totally agree under most circumstances. However, putting a large number, of potentially very dangerous Lithium Ion batteries in peoples home is a new and novel application with potentially fatal consequences. I guess the risk is that there's some unknown failure mode, such as after X hours of continuous discharge there's a higher possibility of thermal runaway etc. Being able to disable a unit, or deploy an updated firmware seems valuable in those situations. At least, this is how I imagine it would be sold to management and users.
  - pdkl95 9y ago
    > the risk is that there's some unknown failure mode Estimating and mitigating those risks are part of the safety analysis that should be happening for every product before it's sold too the public. If there is still a legitimate concern about the possibility of future catastrophic failure, the product isn't ready to be sold. > possibility of thermal runaway etc It would be incredibly negligent If protection against thermal runaway[1] isn't already part of the design from the very beginning. > as after X hours If a completely novel problem happens is discovered, that's what recalls are for. > deploy an updated firmware The network is not reliable. Where did everyone get the idea that the internet is acceptable when safety must be guaranteed>? 0Everyone has experienced network outages. > seems valuable Video games demonstrate that the ability to fix problems after purchase causes laziness. "Search/test for problems before purchase becomes "that's a minor bug, fix it after-launch", and eventually "We don't fix bugs in old products". > sold to management I guarantee that the managers will be sold on the dream of monetizing everyone's "pattern of life" profit, which should be easy to infer from electricity usage rates.
colechristensen 9y ago
Having spent an entire summer as an intern doing little but study the dynamics of batteries, I'm well aware of the failure modes of lithium chemistry batteries. If they get too hot? Cut power. If voltage is too high? Cut power. If voltage ever goes below X? Permanently disable battery. It's not complicated. It's a few thresholds to keep track of. Every laptop does it without an Internet connection and as laptops are used, they're very capable of burning your house down just the same as a powerwall. It's just going to be code on some computer across the Internet watching the battery metrics anyway, adding a network doesn't add any value. I understand that companies really want constant telemetry from every product they produce. It's certainly possible these days, but it's ridiculous when a basic human necessity depends on your Internet working.

by new299 9y ago

lucaspiller 9y ago

I'd like to know what sort of monitoring Tesla does before arguing either way. If they are actively monitoring for devices that are about to catch fire, and if so will call the fire department to come to your house, and your neighbours to evacuate, then sure it makes sense - but I assume they are just monitoring 'usage analytics', and the fault detection could work just as safely by shutting off the device and prompting the user for action, as another comment suggested. It's the same with their cars, although having a constant connection to HQ allows faults to be diagnosed quicker, I'd rather it just show a check engine light and go to a dealer (oh wait...).

greglindahl 9y ago
Well, the standard for the car is that they'll phone the owner a couple of minutes after an accident.

PinguTS 9y ago

But to maintain a functional safe state, you do not need Internet access. If you need Internet access to maintain a functional safe state, then you are doing it wrong. There is also no reason at all to make availability depending on Internet access. Especially, when you are providing a solution that is intended for a self-contained, self-sufficient use case: "Make" power, store power, use power.

new299 9y ago
I'd totally agree under most circumstances. However, putting a large number, of potentially very dangerous Lithium Ion batteries in peoples home is a new and novel application with potentially fatal consequences. I guess the risk is that there's some unknown failure mode, such as after X hours of continuous discharge there's a higher possibility of thermal runaway etc. Being able to disable a unit, or deploy an updated firmware seems valuable in those situations. At least, this is how I imagine it would be sold to management and users.
- pdkl95 9y ago
  > the risk is that there's some unknown failure mode Estimating and mitigating those risks are part of the safety analysis that should be happening for every product before it's sold too the public. If there is still a legitimate concern about the possibility of future catastrophic failure, the product isn't ready to be sold. > possibility of thermal runaway etc It would be incredibly negligent If protection against thermal runaway[1] isn't already part of the design from the very beginning. > as after X hours If a completely novel problem happens is discovered, that's what recalls are for. > deploy an updated firmware The network is not reliable. Where did everyone get the idea that the internet is acceptable when safety must be guaranteed>? 0Everyone has experienced network outages. > seems valuable Video games demonstrate that the ability to fix problems after purchase causes laziness. "Search/test for problems before purchase becomes "that's a minor bug, fix it after-launch", and eventually "We don't fix bugs in old products". > sold to management I guarantee that the managers will be sold on the dream of monetizing everyone's "pattern of life" profit, which should be easy to infer from electricity usage rates.

colechristensen 9y ago

Having spent an entire summer as an intern doing little but study the dynamics of batteries, I'm well aware of the failure modes of lithium chemistry batteries. If they get too hot? Cut power. If voltage is too high? Cut power. If voltage ever goes below X? Permanently disable battery. It's not complicated. It's a few thresholds to keep track of. Every laptop does it without an Internet connection and as laptops are used, they're very capable of burning your house down just the same as a powerwall. It's just going to be code on some computer across the Internet watching the battery metrics anyway, adding a network doesn't add any value. I understand that companies really want constant telemetry from every product they produce. It's certainly possible these days, but it's ridiculous when a basic human necessity depends on your Internet working.