5 ms·

Apparently these Teslas log to the eMMC so much that after a few years the part wears out. The screen goes black and the car falls back into limp mode. https:/

Apparently these Teslas log to the eMMC so much that after a few years the part wears out. The screen goes black and the car falls back into limp mode. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o-7b1waoj9Q https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o-7b1waoj9Q

sschueller 7y ago
I saw that as well and I find that scarry. Something so basic that should never happen. I wonder what else was ignored or mismanaged and might kill someone one day.
- qball 7y ago
  >I wonder what else was ignored or mismanaged and might kill someone one day. https://i.redd.it/kv4y1j3gjut21.jpg https://i.redd.it/kv4y1j3gjut21.jpg This WILL kill someone. It's not a question of if, it's a question of when, and it's intentional. Maybe the people responsible for that decision will see the inside of a jail cell, or maybe they won't- but the fact of the matter is that the presence of this "feature" is negligence at best, much like this case where bricking your car when something unrelated to its core functionality dies.
  - sschueller 7y ago
    > Maybe the people responsible for that decision will see the inside of a jail cell Sadly I highly doubt that and if someone goes to jail it will be some poor engineer that was forced the implement it that way. Just look at what happened to Uber after they actually killed someone with their self-driving car because of their disregard for safety from the top in order to save time and money. Next up, Boeing.
    - hef19898 7y ago
      Especially the Boeing case shocks me. Uber is a start-up, so their culture is different. Boeing on the other hand, well they are old school aerospace and violated their own hard learned lessons here.
      - kkarakk 7y ago
        Same cut throat cost cutting MBAs are being hired in both companies tho
        hef19898 7y ago
        It is said because it is true. Same goes for all other companies like Airbus, too.
      - serf 7y ago
        >Boeing on the other hand, well they are old school aerospace and violated their own hard learned lessons here. Boeing has a pretty terrible history of safety violations, especially when money is involved. They also have a long history of trying to cover their involvement until the last possible second. I can think of a few incidents, but one of the really atrocious incidents was Boeings' response with regards to Lauda Air Flight 004.[0] If Niki Lauda hadn't been so assertive about Boeing making public demonstrations of the maneuver in question they would have never admitted fault. It wasn't until sufficient celebrity pressure was applied to them that they admitted to flaws that had been well known and swept under the rug to save cash. Now, cue the folks that compare the number of Boeing planes in the air with the number that have fallen out of the sky. This number is irrelevant when we're talking about a company with a history of 1) : ignoring problems, 2) : refusing fault for their own responsibilities, 3) : covering up flaws that are costly to repair , and finally 4): modifying or cleaning debris fields of downed planes before national inspectors, possibly with intent to reduce corporate blame.[1] [0] : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lauda_Air_Flight_004 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lauda_Air_Flight_004 wiki article mentioning Boeings' role in post-incident investigation, delay of public information, and fault refusal until Lauda asked for a demonstration [1] : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E42NN1rU93o https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E42NN1rU93o an interview with Niki Lauda where he mentions the behavior of the Boeing ground crew with regards to the debris field at the site of the Thailand LaudaAir Flight 004 reverse-thrust incident.
  - serf 7y ago
    as someone who had to drive a relative to a hospital during a heart attack and just about the worst travel conditions possible, the idea of an otherwise healthy car preventing that drive during a panick due to a flaw unrelated to the powertrain and core driving functions is extremely worrying. These are 'sports-car' problems. If I was shopping for a vehicle to fill the role as my primary transportation these flaws would exclude Tesla from my checklist, and I have a hard time believing that i'm the only one. A 500 dollar Geo Metro from the mid 90s will get me to the hospital when I need it to. It'll get me away from an evacuation area. It'll drive me away from the forest fire. A Tesla is more glamorous, but when dealing with transportation being a means to someones survival i'm gonna stick to KISS -- and I wish that Tesla had the same idea in mind with regards to many things about their cars. (keep the ambulance/911 comments to yourself. It was N/A in the situation I found myself in.)
  - wil421 7y ago
    I researched Tesla’s “bricking” and not starting after seeing that image on reddit. Turns out it can’t happen while driving and means something failed mid upgrade while the car isn’t in use. Maybe I’m wrong, but the Telsa forums were absolutely livid when a poster used the word brick. His car was in state where it couldn’t start or upgrade again.
    - forgottenpass 7y ago
      >Turns out it can’t happen while driving and means something failed mid upgrade while the car isn’t in use. Are the upgrades user initiated? I've had (or seen) enough productions and live events degraded or interrupted by the windows autoupdater to be terrified of the idea of "isn't in use" updates.
      - wil421 7y ago
        From my limited Telsa knowledge they were user initiated and your able to decline them. Meaning, you wouldn’t be stuck at the store if you come outside and all of the sudden your car has to update. Perhaps some updates need to be done overnight?
netsharc 7y ago
Makes me think of Macs/iPhones failing to boot if the device date is set to 1970...

sschueller 7y ago

I saw that as well and I find that scarry. Something so basic that should never happen. I wonder what else was ignored or mismanaged and might kill someone one day.

qball 7y ago
>I wonder what else was ignored or mismanaged and might kill someone one day. https://i.redd.it/kv4y1j3gjut21.jpg https://i.redd.it/kv4y1j3gjut21.jpg This WILL kill someone. It's not a question of if, it's a question of when, and it's intentional. Maybe the people responsible for that decision will see the inside of a jail cell, or maybe they won't- but the fact of the matter is that the presence of this "feature" is negligence at best, much like this case where bricking your car when something unrelated to its core functionality dies.
- sschueller 7y ago
  > Maybe the people responsible for that decision will see the inside of a jail cell Sadly I highly doubt that and if someone goes to jail it will be some poor engineer that was forced the implement it that way. Just look at what happened to Uber after they actually killed someone with their self-driving car because of their disregard for safety from the top in order to save time and money. Next up, Boeing.
  - hef19898 7y ago
    Especially the Boeing case shocks me. Uber is a start-up, so their culture is different. Boeing on the other hand, well they are old school aerospace and violated their own hard learned lessons here.
    - kkarakk 7y ago
      Same cut throat cost cutting MBAs are being hired in both companies tho
      - hef19898 7y ago
        It is said because it is true. Same goes for all other companies like Airbus, too.
    - serf 7y ago
      >Boeing on the other hand, well they are old school aerospace and violated their own hard learned lessons here. Boeing has a pretty terrible history of safety violations, especially when money is involved. They also have a long history of trying to cover their involvement until the last possible second. I can think of a few incidents, but one of the really atrocious incidents was Boeings' response with regards to Lauda Air Flight 004.[0] If Niki Lauda hadn't been so assertive about Boeing making public demonstrations of the maneuver in question they would have never admitted fault. It wasn't until sufficient celebrity pressure was applied to them that they admitted to flaws that had been well known and swept under the rug to save cash. Now, cue the folks that compare the number of Boeing planes in the air with the number that have fallen out of the sky. This number is irrelevant when we're talking about a company with a history of 1) : ignoring problems, 2) : refusing fault for their own responsibilities, 3) : covering up flaws that are costly to repair , and finally 4): modifying or cleaning debris fields of downed planes before national inspectors, possibly with intent to reduce corporate blame.[1] [0] : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lauda_Air_Flight_004 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lauda_Air_Flight_004 wiki article mentioning Boeings' role in post-incident investigation, delay of public information, and fault refusal until Lauda asked for a demonstration [1] : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E42NN1rU93o https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E42NN1rU93o an interview with Niki Lauda where he mentions the behavior of the Boeing ground crew with regards to the debris field at the site of the Thailand LaudaAir Flight 004 reverse-thrust incident.
- serf 7y ago
  as someone who had to drive a relative to a hospital during a heart attack and just about the worst travel conditions possible, the idea of an otherwise healthy car preventing that drive during a panick due to a flaw unrelated to the powertrain and core driving functions is extremely worrying. These are 'sports-car' problems. If I was shopping for a vehicle to fill the role as my primary transportation these flaws would exclude Tesla from my checklist, and I have a hard time believing that i'm the only one. A 500 dollar Geo Metro from the mid 90s will get me to the hospital when I need it to. It'll get me away from an evacuation area. It'll drive me away from the forest fire. A Tesla is more glamorous, but when dealing with transportation being a means to someones survival i'm gonna stick to KISS -- and I wish that Tesla had the same idea in mind with regards to many things about their cars. (keep the ambulance/911 comments to yourself. It was N/A in the situation I found myself in.)
- wil421 7y ago
  I researched Tesla’s “bricking” and not starting after seeing that image on reddit. Turns out it can’t happen while driving and means something failed mid upgrade while the car isn’t in use. Maybe I’m wrong, but the Telsa forums were absolutely livid when a poster used the word brick. His car was in state where it couldn’t start or upgrade again.
  - forgottenpass 7y ago
    >Turns out it can’t happen while driving and means something failed mid upgrade while the car isn’t in use. Are the upgrades user initiated? I've had (or seen) enough productions and live events degraded or interrupted by the windows autoupdater to be terrified of the idea of "isn't in use" updates.
    - wil421 7y ago
      From my limited Telsa knowledge they were user initiated and your able to decline them. Meaning, you wouldn’t be stuck at the store if you come outside and all of the sudden your car has to update. Perhaps some updates need to be done overnight?

netsharc 7y ago

Makes me think of Macs/iPhones failing to boot if the device date is set to 1970...