6 ms·

Tesla Accused of Cutting Corner That Makes Level 3 Self-Driving Impossible

21 points by davnn 4y ago

throwntoday 4y ago
It was my understanding that the second chip and component set was there purely as a backup before they decided they needed the extra compute that was essentially wasted. Wonder if they only nixed it from cars ordered without FSD at checkout.
olliej 4y ago
Ah yes, “full self driving” and “autopilot”, two technologies that clearly can’t possibly be confused with self driving systems :-/
klyrs 4y ago
> Musk... said during a recent earnings call ... "My personal guess is that we’ll achieve Full Self-Driving this year at a safety level significantly greater than a person..." Does this guy ever get tired of saying "this year" and "next year" every year and being wrong every single time? Do his investors?
- burnnn 4y ago
  As a developer, I completely understand this. loop: Manager: how long will this feature take? SWE: By lunchtime, tops 3 weeks later: Manager: feature complete, right? SWE (sweating bullets): We're just testing the final bits goto loop
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - bussierem 4y ago
    Except the part where you don't have people throwing _very_ large quantities of money at you based on these estimates, such that when/if you're wrong it could potentially spell disaster for an entire company costing shareholder money and peoples' livelihoods/jobs. I'm not trying to claim that each individual claim of Musk's has this potential behind it, but equating it to day-to-day situations of underestimating the difficulty of a small task at your day-job oversimplifies the matter way too much and just makes excuses for someone who should TRULY know better.
- phenkdo 4y ago
  The non-sinner line starts over there, and goes round the block.
  - klyrs 4y ago
    Loving the Bible-themed whataboutism. Musk has definitely paid for some extremely cool stuff to happen, but it's fair to point out that he's been making this particular promise since 2014. And nobody dies if I break a promise. Autopilot/FSD has claimed quite a few lives, in large part because it doesn't live up to the hype coming out of Musk's mouth.
    - panick21_ 4y ago
      So you count anybody that fell asleep or didn't pay attention as a 'kill' for Autopilot (and that number is very small) while you totally ignore all the times the same software prevented accidents (a very large number). I guess that one way to analyses issues if you already have a result that you want to happen.
- Gordonjcp 4y ago
  > at a safety level significantly greater than a person Have they actually achieved that yet? It seems like the Teslas can only do their Autopilot magic on more-or-less straight motorways with every other car travelling at the same speed in clear weather conditions. These are circumstances in which human drivers don't have accidents, either.
  - PlanckMeasure80 4y ago
    Have you ever driven one? I got to drive one for a few days. It handled heavy rain. It knew where the lines were even though I couldn’t even see them myself. It does really well even when there are no lines. It does turns and exits. It slows down automatically for curves. It even swerved out of the way when someone was merging into me. It was fine with drivers going faster and slower than myself. Frankly, I have no idea what you’re talking about, especially regarding a clear day and straight lines. It drove better than me. In my use case, the 2021 Model 3 is already practically self-driving. I legitimately felt less safe while manual operating the vehicle.
    - jackvalentine 4y ago
      > It handled heavy rain. It knew where the lines were even though I couldn’t even see them myself. It does really well even when there are no lines. It knew, or it guessed and presented it as it knew in the same way humans guess where the lines are and keep driving when they’re not visible?
    - slaw 4y ago
      If it drives better than you, why don’t you take back seat?
      - sidibe 4y ago
        "for legal reasons". After all that is the only reason there is a driver according to tesla.com/autopilot. And that's 5 years old, so surely we should feel comfortable in the back seat by now besides the law
    - 4y ago
- paulmendoza 4y ago
  He is restricting his statements more. I think what he said is probably possible this year.
- panick21_ 4y ago
  He himself says at least half that time his predictions are wrong. His predictions were always aggressive. He says what he believes, this topic is where he has totally miscalculated. And he recently admired that but said he just has to look at what he think the current fundamental problem is and when it will be solved. > Do his investors? Mhh as an investor I would say, no. Because for me its not about matching prediction but its about overall strategy and the competition. If there were millions of self driving taxis on the road from the competition I would suggest that is a big problem. However that is not case. Massive investment in this is the correct thing to do in my opinion. Their approach is correct in my opinion, they are trying to solve the hard problem. They have done many things that no competitor has even remotely done. So I am happy even if he miss predicts this for the next 4 years unless there is continues progress and the competition has not 100% solved the problem.
burnnn 4y ago
You can definitely smell the hater in this article. LOL From the article: "... removed one of two electronic control units ..." "... amidst a global semiconductor shortage. ..." "... drivers will need to take their vehicles in to get it retrofitted with a new chip if they want a level three self-driving ..."
barelysapient 4y ago
Topic should either be `Tesla Accused of Cutting Corners ...` or `Tesla Accused of Corner Cutting ...`.
- mwint 4y ago
  In this case, it’s a singular corner they are accused of cutting.
skellera 4y ago
Can we change the link to the referenced article? Blog does nothing to improve it. Actually leaves out most of the important parts. https://www.cnbc.com/2022/02/07/tesla-cut-a-steering-component-to-deal-with-chip-shortage.html https://www.cnbc.com/2022/02/07/tesla-cut-a-steering-compone...
throwawaygh 4y ago
Based on the CNBC article, here's my understanding. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, because this sounds... really bad with safety implications that are not at all related to self-driving. 1. Tesla vehicles are drive-by-wire. 2. The missing component is a backup chip in the steering system. 3. The backup was excluded in a time frame that precluded robustness testing. Are any of these items wrong? Because, if not, characterizing this as "oh well you have to bring your car in if you want our full self-driving magic" seems like a massive PR spin and a huge disservice to Tesla owners who every day bet their lives on Tesla's drive by wire system. (Missing/not using a backup chip on a safety-critical system is exactly what caused the failure of the flight characteristic modification software on the 787-MAX. Missing backups was also identified as a possible root cause in the Toyota deaths. Backups are important, and the history of safety-critical systems that ignored the need for backups is littered with human bodies. Shit happens at scale.)
- vardump 4y ago
  Tesla vehicles are not drive by wire, but have a direct mechanical linkage.
  - frosted-flakes 4y ago
    Of course it's drive-by-wire, it's an electric car. How could it possibly be drive-by-cable? Cars have been largely drive-by-wire since the early 2000s.
    - ternus 4y ago
      The confusion here is between throttle-by-wire (which, as you point out, is now ubiquitous) and steer-by-wire, which Teslas still aren't. There was some hope that the newest yoke-equipped Model S would be, but my understanding is that it's still a direct mechanical link, i.e. wheels still turn if you move the steering wheel when the car is off. The driver-assist functions use motors to move the steering linkage.
      - 4y ago
netsharc 4y ago
Well, they're removing hardware (due to shortages) for a feature that's still a few "this year, I promise!" lies away anyway, so what's the big deal. I'm biased against the dishonest car salesman CEO, but if you want to buy a bucket of lies, how's an extra lie going to hurt.
- throwawaygh 4y ago
  > Well, they're removing hardware (due to shortages) for a feature that's still a few "this year, I promise!" lies away anyway Here's why I'm confused: in that case why not just remove both chips? Having no backup for a component involved in the steering system seems like a bad idea for any level of ADAS, including L1, and possibly even fully manual depending on how the steering system works. At least without a very thorough analysis of system behavior in various failure modes, which... is that possible in 3 weeks? But then, Boeing convinced the FAA that backups weren't necessary for the 787-MAX sensors because a component that was modifying the flight characteristics could be over-ridden by a human and therefore wasn't safety-critical... so, WCGW, really?
ultrablack 4y ago
So, the extra chip was only needed in case the user bought the FSD package. In view of the chip shortage, Tesla decided not to install it, allowing them to produce twice as many cars. Of course, for those cumstomers who choose to purchase the $12.000 FSD package, Tesla will install the chip for free. … Seems pretty smart to me.
- paulmendoza 4y ago
  Yes, exactly. This is a dumb clickbait article.
jwitchel 4y ago
Hate Suzuki. Hate VW. Tesla is extraordinary. https://worstbrands.com/worst-car-brands/ https://worstbrands.com/worst-car-brands/
- yibers 4y ago
  Thank you for pointing me to a well researched article /s
foolzcrow 4y ago

21 points by davnn 4y ago

It was my understanding that the second chip and component set was there purely as a backup before they decided they needed the extra compute that was essentially wasted. Wonder if they only nixed it from cars ordered without FSD at checkout.

olliej 4y ago

Ah yes, “full self driving” and “autopilot”, two technologies that clearly can’t possibly be confused with self driving systems :-/

klyrs 4y ago

> Musk... said during a recent earnings call ... "My personal guess is that we’ll achieve Full Self-Driving this year at a safety level significantly greater than a person..." Does this guy ever get tired of saying "this year" and "next year" every year and being wrong every single time? Do his investors?

burnnn 4y ago
As a developer, I completely understand this. loop: Manager: how long will this feature take? SWE: By lunchtime, tops 3 weeks later: Manager: feature complete, right? SWE (sweating bullets): We're just testing the final bits goto loop
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- bussierem 4y ago
  Except the part where you don't have people throwing _very_ large quantities of money at you based on these estimates, such that when/if you're wrong it could potentially spell disaster for an entire company costing shareholder money and peoples' livelihoods/jobs. I'm not trying to claim that each individual claim of Musk's has this potential behind it, but equating it to day-to-day situations of underestimating the difficulty of a small task at your day-job oversimplifies the matter way too much and just makes excuses for someone who should TRULY know better.
phenkdo 4y ago
The non-sinner line starts over there, and goes round the block.
- klyrs 4y ago
  Loving the Bible-themed whataboutism. Musk has definitely paid for some extremely cool stuff to happen, but it's fair to point out that he's been making this particular promise since 2014. And nobody dies if I break a promise. Autopilot/FSD has claimed quite a few lives, in large part because it doesn't live up to the hype coming out of Musk's mouth.
  - panick21_ 4y ago
    So you count anybody that fell asleep or didn't pay attention as a 'kill' for Autopilot (and that number is very small) while you totally ignore all the times the same software prevented accidents (a very large number). I guess that one way to analyses issues if you already have a result that you want to happen.
Gordonjcp 4y ago
> at a safety level significantly greater than a person Have they actually achieved that yet? It seems like the Teslas can only do their Autopilot magic on more-or-less straight motorways with every other car travelling at the same speed in clear weather conditions. These are circumstances in which human drivers don't have accidents, either.
- PlanckMeasure80 4y ago
  Have you ever driven one? I got to drive one for a few days. It handled heavy rain. It knew where the lines were even though I couldn’t even see them myself. It does really well even when there are no lines. It does turns and exits. It slows down automatically for curves. It even swerved out of the way when someone was merging into me. It was fine with drivers going faster and slower than myself. Frankly, I have no idea what you’re talking about, especially regarding a clear day and straight lines. It drove better than me. In my use case, the 2021 Model 3 is already practically self-driving. I legitimately felt less safe while manual operating the vehicle.
  - jackvalentine 4y ago
    > It handled heavy rain. It knew where the lines were even though I couldn’t even see them myself. It does really well even when there are no lines. It knew, or it guessed and presented it as it knew in the same way humans guess where the lines are and keep driving when they’re not visible?
  - slaw 4y ago
    If it drives better than you, why don’t you take back seat?
    - sidibe 4y ago
      "for legal reasons". After all that is the only reason there is a driver according to tesla.com/autopilot. And that's 5 years old, so surely we should feel comfortable in the back seat by now besides the law
  - 4y ago
paulmendoza 4y ago
He is restricting his statements more. I think what he said is probably possible this year.
panick21_ 4y ago
He himself says at least half that time his predictions are wrong. His predictions were always aggressive. He says what he believes, this topic is where he has totally miscalculated. And he recently admired that but said he just has to look at what he think the current fundamental problem is and when it will be solved. > Do his investors? Mhh as an investor I would say, no. Because for me its not about matching prediction but its about overall strategy and the competition. If there were millions of self driving taxis on the road from the competition I would suggest that is a big problem. However that is not case. Massive investment in this is the correct thing to do in my opinion. Their approach is correct in my opinion, they are trying to solve the hard problem. They have done many things that no competitor has even remotely done. So I am happy even if he miss predicts this for the next 4 years unless there is continues progress and the competition has not 100% solved the problem.

burnnn 4y ago

You can definitely smell the hater in this article. LOL From the article: "... removed one of two electronic control units ..." "... amidst a global semiconductor shortage. ..." "... drivers will need to take their vehicles in to get it retrofitted with a new chip if they want a level three self-driving ..."

barelysapient 4y ago

Topic should either be `Tesla Accused of Cutting Corners ...` or `Tesla Accused of Corner Cutting ...`.

mwint 4y ago
In this case, it’s a singular corner they are accused of cutting.

skellera 4y ago

Can we change the link to the referenced article? Blog does nothing to improve it. Actually leaves out most of the important parts. https://www.cnbc.com/2022/02/07/tesla-cut-a-steering-component-to-deal-with-chip-shortage.html https://www.cnbc.com/2022/02/07/tesla-cut-a-steering-compone...

throwawaygh 4y ago

Based on the CNBC article, here's my understanding. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, because this sounds... really bad with safety implications that are not at all related to self-driving. 1. Tesla vehicles are drive-by-wire. 2. The missing component is a backup chip in the steering system. 3. The backup was excluded in a time frame that precluded robustness testing. Are any of these items wrong? Because, if not, characterizing this as "oh well you have to bring your car in if you want our full self-driving magic" seems like a massive PR spin and a huge disservice to Tesla owners who every day bet their lives on Tesla's drive by wire system. (Missing/not using a backup chip on a safety-critical system is exactly what caused the failure of the flight characteristic modification software on the 787-MAX. Missing backups was also identified as a possible root cause in the Toyota deaths. Backups are important, and the history of safety-critical systems that ignored the need for backups is littered with human bodies. Shit happens at scale.)

vardump 4y ago
Tesla vehicles are not drive by wire, but have a direct mechanical linkage.
- frosted-flakes 4y ago
  Of course it's drive-by-wire, it's an electric car. How could it possibly be drive-by-cable? Cars have been largely drive-by-wire since the early 2000s.
  - ternus 4y ago
    The confusion here is between throttle-by-wire (which, as you point out, is now ubiquitous) and steer-by-wire, which Teslas still aren't. There was some hope that the newest yoke-equipped Model S would be, but my understanding is that it's still a direct mechanical link, i.e. wheels still turn if you move the steering wheel when the car is off. The driver-assist functions use motors to move the steering linkage.
    - 4y ago

netsharc 4y ago

Well, they're removing hardware (due to shortages) for a feature that's still a few "this year, I promise!" lies away anyway, so what's the big deal. I'm biased against the dishonest car salesman CEO, but if you want to buy a bucket of lies, how's an extra lie going to hurt.

throwawaygh 4y ago
> Well, they're removing hardware (due to shortages) for a feature that's still a few "this year, I promise!" lies away anyway Here's why I'm confused: in that case why not just remove both chips? Having no backup for a component involved in the steering system seems like a bad idea for any level of ADAS, including L1, and possibly even fully manual depending on how the steering system works. At least without a very thorough analysis of system behavior in various failure modes, which... is that possible in 3 weeks? But then, Boeing convinced the FAA that backups weren't necessary for the 787-MAX sensors because a component that was modifying the flight characteristics could be over-ridden by a human and therefore wasn't safety-critical... so, WCGW, really?

ultrablack 4y ago

So, the extra chip was only needed in case the user bought the FSD package. In view of the chip shortage, Tesla decided not to install it, allowing them to produce twice as many cars. Of course, for those cumstomers who choose to purchase the $12.000 FSD package, Tesla will install the chip for free. … Seems pretty smart to me.

paulmendoza 4y ago
Yes, exactly. This is a dumb clickbait article.

jwitchel 4y ago

Hate Suzuki. Hate VW. Tesla is extraordinary. https://worstbrands.com/worst-car-brands/ https://worstbrands.com/worst-car-brands/

yibers 4y ago
Thank you for pointing me to a well researched article /s

foolzcrow 4y ago