"Now they are claiming that the eMMC chip, ball-grid soldered to the motherboard, inaccessible without disassembling the dash, and not specifically mentioned in the owner’s manual, should be considered a “wear item”, and thus should not be subject to such scrutiny."
As a parent/child the first thing that comes from Tesla is a blog post and public statement on how your loved one allegedly was too stupid to use the car while Tesla goes into technical telemetry to grant themselves absolution.
> The currently enabled features require active driver supervision and do not make the vehicle autonomous.
It's in the fine print but it's brought up every time you talk about Autopilot and enabling it in the car (it's disabled by default) requires you accept a disclaimer saying that you need to be paying attention at all times.
It seems highly unlikely that Tesla is close to fully autonomous driving. The “Paint it Black” demo was over 4 years ago and we haven’t seen anything better since then. We were supposed to get an autonomous road trip from LA to NY by 2017. The videos that have come out of the FSD beta release make it clear that you couldn’t leave the car without intervention for 30 minutes without a major crash occurring.
Tesla doesn’t even have any autonomous miles to log in California, unlike dozens of other companies including GM and Waymo.
www.businessinsider.com/tesla-rolling-stones-song-latest-autopilot-video-2016-10
Not so much.
oh let's not forget how they dealt with engineers calling out problems before they actually happened too:
well, i am just going to link to a search because i learned now there were SEVERAL of them https://www.google.com/search?q=tesla+whistleblower
...Also, while we are not-forgetting... TSLA CEO defended trump calling the country to reopen in the middle of the pandemic, just like other CEOs that sell pillows or something. Funny how we only keep one of them accountable.
It’s almost as if you cannot stop a respiratory virus using extremely barbaric non pharmaceutical interventions.
very few countries had effective social isolation, most like the US were having both the economic and health negative side effects of closing and not closing because leadership was disagreeing on everything. For example, some cities had curfews and closed restaurants, but open airports and counted every business that was not a restaurant as "essential".
But the few countries that did things correctly, like NZ, did have a much better outcome with close to ZERO deaths.
Usual disclosures: We own Teslas and TSLA.
You absolutely can and should expect good behavior of corporations. You can't rely only on that expectation so agree if it's important, legislate it.
If you don't like the outcome, change the people.
In this case, though, I don't think the rules should be changed. I'm fairly certain that Tesla is not the first automaker to have come up with this kind of money-saving idea. This has to be well-trodden ground in consumer rights.
In this case, people should vote with their wallets, and the occasional class-action lawsuit, or, if things get too far out of line, expect the same kind of regulator intervention that would happen against any other car company. If regulators would not intervene against any other automaker trying this sort of thing, then I don't think they should intervene against Tesla.
If you expect (in the first sense) benevolent corporate behaviour, in the absence of incentives that align benevolence with self-interest, you're generally being naive. But if you expect (in the second sense) benevolent corporate behaviour, and act accordingly, you may be helping to create that alignment -- because corporations and the people who control them usually care about their public image (certainly when it directly affects consumer behaviour), and legislators are usually at least somewhat responsive to public pressure.
So having the first kind of expectation leads to unhelpful complacency; but lacking the second kind of expectation leads to unhelpful cynicism, cashing out as acquiescence to the status quo.
Thnx.
Note that many electronics are designed to last 10 years (i.e. electromigration). Obviously, use cases matter (24 hour use, high temp or lots of heat cycles).
"His vehicle had warned him about having hands on the steering wheel" (... fourteen minutes prior to the accident).
Leave aside the fact that if you have an accident in your Tesla you will need to go to court to subpoena telemetry data. But they'll happily publish your telemetry data without your (explicit, I know, I know, TOS) agreement if they think they're being painted in a bad light.
And if you disclose information about the vehicle, they'll happily force push neutered/old firmware to your vehicle to hide or prevent such activities, lock you from future upgrades, and disable ethernet and OBD ports in your vehicle.
Or a Douglas Adamsesque approach to right-to-repair, where there's a website with parts you can "order" (except everything down to the most commodity bolt says "Call Tesla" and they will tell you its unavailable to order via the website), that's if you know what parts you need, a process which required making an appointment with Tesla to look at the service manual, several months out, which required a fee, had a time limit, and put you in a room where you were not allowed a computer, phone or camera, just a notepad and pencil), all the while touting their "corporate commitment to transparency" as they pulled out of NHTSB testing.
Is this your idea of responsibility?
Plus combined with the fact Musk was forced to acknowledge that Tesla did not offer anything for FSD on trade ins and "will look into it" makes me wonder just how much they expect customers to put up with.
Still it beats out my previous Ford and even my Infiniti in both reliability and oddly interior quality. Paint wise the Infiniti was far better and paint on my Ford was far worse. Both my Ford and Infiniti also had more than one real recall and a few visits to fix stupid things.