Chris Lattner: “Turns out that Tesla isn't a good fit for me”
twitter.com
twitter.com
I'm entirely unremarkable, but looking back I would say most of my biggest personal and professional developments have been built upon some sort of failure or mistake.
You clearly haven't because you, in error, think it'll nuke job prospects.
It won't. They won't care. Trust me.
And it won't make one bit of difference If I answer right or wrong When you're succesfull they think you really know.
Yeah, just not in the field Chris Lattner works in. This thread seems to have him confused for Kim Kardasian.
If it's not a good fit, why can't it be a failure on the employer side?
(It is a wee more difficult to write LLVM than homebrew, though - so it might not have exactly the same impact. But I'm guessing that e.g. Apple would still hire him, if he wants to)
He did put it on his resume and it didn't matter one bit. Lattner got offers from Google without having to do the interviews. Max was subjected to the interviews and rejected. The lack of marketing and the fact nobody knows his name is a huge factor.
That's interesting. I've heard this too from people at three different self-driving car companies ("Tesla's autonomy group is melting down; we get a ton of resumes...blah blah").
But...it's from their competitors, and you're probably always getting resumes from folks at your competitors all the time (and your colleagues' resumes are heading in the other direction, perhaps yours too). So, though I'm no fan of Tesla, I have discounted such comments. Though perhaps I shouldn't have been?
> All Tesla vehicles produced in our factory, including Model 3, have the hardware needed for full self-driving capability at a safety level substantially greater than that of a human driver.
https://www.tesla.com/autopilot
It seems somewhat irresponsible to promise that you have enough hardware to achieve something that nobody has ever achieved before, with any hardware.
Tesla has plenty of impressive-looking videos on their website of autopilot working well, but if you Google for "Tesla autopilot fail" you can also find plenty of stuff like this, which is just surprisingly bad: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UZ1XLqc5IUg
Tesla strikes me as over-promising and under-delivering here. I wouldn't want to work in a division like that.
It's also the wrong bar to meet, because lawmakers are going to be much tougher on AIs than on human constituents. It's not enough to be better than a human, you have to be so much better than a human that it'd be irresponsible not to mandate self-driving cars.
Personally, I would trust a human driver over a Waymo car until strong statistical evidence shows that Waymo cars are safe in a wide range of conditions.
Adding vehicles operating at a higher skill level than the median to the pool of vehicles driving around should reduce incidents per mile driven.
And then if autonomous vehicles become prevalent, it becomes less punitive to raise the standards for licensing humans.
Marketing. The western world is mostly afraid of robots so they'll need to be at least 10x safer in a hybrid (human/autopilot) environment in order to gain adoption.
If someone wants to claim there's a problem with any auto pilot they better have a camera view showing they are not interfering with it in any way.
The idea that one can do things that are not seen on the various reflective surfaces isn't a new concept, television shows rely on camera and object placement all the time to ensure the camera and crew are not visible.
If I were to make a claim about the auto pilot I would have both my hands in plain view in a "look ma, no hands" stance right above the steering wheel for all to see. I would also have a second camera shooting from the side or farther back in order to make it visible that nothing is interfering with the steering, like my leg for example or someone pulling on strings from the back seat.
I don't have a problem with the idea of issues with any auto pilot software. I simply want to make sure claims are not falsified through the use of trickery.
https://www.tesla.com/modelx/design
"Enhanced Autopilot" as a $6,000 option. "Full Self-Driving Capability" is another $4,000 option.
/autopilot page seems very disingenuous.
His main work has been in languages, compilers and developer toolsets. Sure, Tesla makes use of those, and might even make a few of their own, but it's nowhere near their core interests.
Google maybe?
https://go.googlesource.com/gollvm/
Unclear to me in what capacity it is "recognized" or "official" though.
https://techcrunch.com/2017/06/20/tesla-hires-deep-learning-...
http://nondot.org/sabre/Resume.html#workhistory
"Tesla
VP Autopilot Software January 30 - June 20, 2017 When I joined Tesla, it was in the midst of a hardware transition from "Hardware 1" Autopilot (based primarily on MobileEye for vision processing) to "Hardware 2", which uses an in-house designed TeslaVision stack. The team was facing many tough challenges given the nature of the transition. My primary contributions over these fast five months were:
We evolved Autopilot for HW2 from its first early release (which had few features and was limited to 45mph on highways) to effectively parity with HW1, and surpassing it in some ways (e.g. silky smooth control). This required building and shipping numerous features for HW2, including: support for local roads, Parallel Autopark, High Speed Autosteer, Summon, Lane Departure Warning, Automatic Lane Change, Low Speed AEB, Full Speed Autosteer, Pedal Misapplication Mitigation, Auto High Beams, Side Collision Avoidance, Full Speed AEB, Perpendicular Parking, and 'silky smooth' performance. This was done by shipping a total of 7 major feature releases, as well as numerous minor releases to support factory, service, and other narrow markets. One of Tesla's huge advantages in the autonomous driving space is that it has tens of thousands of cars already on the road. We built infrastructure to take advantage of this, allowing the collection of image and video data from this fleet, as well as building big data infrastructure in the cloud to process and use it. I defined and drove the feature roadmap, drove the technical architecture for future features, and managed the implementation for the next exciting features to come. I advocated for and drove a major rewrite of the deep net architecture in the vision stack, leading to significantly better precision, recall, and inference performance. I ended up growing the Autopilot Software team by over 50%. I personally interviewed most of the accepted candidates. I made massive improvements to internal infrastructure and processes that I cannot go into detail about. I was closely involved with others in the broader Autopilot program, including future hardware support, legal, homologation, regulatory, marketing, etc."
The original version apparently ended with the text "In the end, Elon and I agreed that he and I did not work well together and that I should leave, so I did."
https://books.google.com/books?id=2kMIqdfyT8kC&pg=PA474&lpg=...
When this was published, it was widely circulated and no one at the time stepped forward to claim it was untrue or that the requirement didn't exist. Given the fact that you make reference to "old timers" in this context, I doubt you were at Google in 2011 and are merely asserting your assumption as a fact.
Because he doesn't like it there.
>nor what it announces it on Twitter before getting a new job.
Because it's his Twitter and he has nothing much to hide. It's not like he wont find employment (actually it might be not like he even needs employment that badly -- he could easily have a couple of million in the bank).
More likely the other way round.
Impetuous quitting over some specific issue he holds dear is only a thousand times more likely.
acting or done quickly and without thought or care. "her friend was headstrong and impetuous" synonyms: impulsive, rash, hasty, overhasty, reckless, heedless, careless, foolhardy, bullheaded, headstrong, incautious, imprudent, injudicious, ill-considered, unthought-out
If you reread my comment, it didn't say he didn't have a good reason, just that he might have acted quickly or emotionally. Like many of us do.
It's not necessarily rash, foolhardy or reckless, since those are synonyms. In this case they are similar, but not exactly the same.
"Chris just wasn’t the right fit for Tesla, and we’ve decided to make a change."
Still strange that a guy so super successful inside and out of Apple couldn't fit there. My guess is he was a bad fit for the role, Tesla said how bout we move you to another role that fits you better, and Chris said "no".