The Retreat to Muskworld
niedermeyer.io
niedermeyer.io
This guy has lost confidence in Musk's promises.
I never really understood how Musk can claim to be so close to full autonomy when these cars clearly struggle with basic things using the exact same system that supposedly drives by itself. Automatic high/low beam or detecting rain does not work very well. You wold think that a system that cannot detect oncoming traffic (high/low beam), or actual rain has some other problems when it comes to self-driving.
The bag has clearly been designed to be easy to pick up, it's positioned on a custom made table top to perfectly space them out and make it easy and still the robot manages to lift two of them by mistake and topple a whole line of them with one ending up on the floor.
It was clever trick because many attendees did not even think the possibility hose were teleoperated interactions because Musk did not bring it up. Some investment firms were clearly not amused by it.
Luckily that's not one of the dirty or dangerous jobs it will soon take over :-)
Wipers, dunno, they used to be really bad but I have not noticed the issue in the past few months, maybe they have done something.
That said, I am still agreeing with you on "struggle with basic things", there are phantom breakings in the exact same spots this and other teslas have driven thousands of times. There are occasional cases where it would follow the wrong road-markings into a crash would I not intervene and so forth.
Yes, it works much better on my new Model Y (2024) than my old Model S (2014). But they didn't really solve the original problem, i.e. detecting oncoming traffic vs. street (or other lights) up ahead. The matrix led's darken these areas in any case, and neither street lights or oncoming cars complain of course. But it does not fill me with much confidence.
> Wipers, dunno, they used to be really bad but I have not noticed the issue in the past few months, maybe they have done something.
Then that software update has not come to Norway at least, here they still start wiping in dry conditions, and fail to detect actual rain; so they need to be manually started all the time.
> there are phantom breakings in the exact same spots this and other teslas have driven thousands of times.
Isn't this the problem with AI though? We've taken something we don't fully understand (neural networks) and applied them. We can give them a lot of training data to the point where they seem to be able to do stuff on their own. But when they fail, we really cannot do anything besides adding new nodes to our network and add more training data, and hope for the best. We cannot really say what went wrong, and fix it.
That's for safety if a flake of dirt or dust lands on the front window right over where one of the cameras are, it will do a wipe and try to get rid of the thing that is distorting the image. Or it will do it if you are driving straight into the sun sometimes, presumably because it's doing a best efforts action in case the visibility problem is further exacerbated by dust which can be cleared.
It's strange to me that actual helpful features are misinterpreted as flaws, but that's how it is with new technology I guess.
Failing to detect actual rain, yes I see that too a little sometimes. I think they should augment with audio detection. There is a microphone, obviously, for the speech button, and depending on how things are wired sometimes speaker cones can also be repurposed as microphones.
Not that dry conditions. I live in Trondheim, where it rains/snows well over 200 days a year, so it's not wiping off some dry dust of the camera area. It just starts wiping the clean window in perfectly fine weather. At other times it rains quite a bit and it does not come on.
The software update to soft click the left stalk to engage the wiper menu via the left steering wheel roller is a nice quick fix for these situations, so they are doing something.
I haven't tried the roller for the wiper menu, thanks for the reminder. Less rain around here.
I guess that could be the case; but they do seem quite random.
> I'm guessing they have birds in Trondheim.
We do, mostly seagulls where I park my car :-) But you're not dry wiping away anything they produce, that takes a good scrubbing.
> I haven't tried the roller for the wiper
It makes the experience fully controllable from the steering wheel using one hand, which is very good. One light press on the left stalk, and the menu pops up down on the left corner on the screen where you can roll to your preferred setting. I hate having to go into menus on the touch screen while driving.
https://www.tesla.com/ownersmanual/modely/en_us/GUID-A5C33F3...
FSD is a little too wild west. I also lump ACC and LKAS in here, too. Phantom brake and bad directional input exist for those way too often.
It happens rarely enough, and as I mostly drive on the same roads, I know where it happens as well, usually I disconnect the thing before it gets to the problematic place.
So no, it's so much stressful as annoying. But it does remind me that the claims of self-driving is just horse-shit.
I know what (and where) the problematic spots are for the lane-keeping, so I use it in situations where the benefit is large and the risk is manageable.
There are many places where I won't switch it on and just drive myself.
Also 99% vs 1% depends on how you look at it. The main road I drive is about 200km long, in one direction it does not have any problematic spots. In the other it has 2 lets say 10 meter spots. By distance it's 0.01% problematic. It's not like Desert Bus where it tries to get you all the time.
Audi first offered matrix LED headlights in 2013, so it's only taken Tesla a decade to catch up.
Yes. Not only that, my car had the matrix led hardware for 2 years before the matrix feature was enabled in a software update. TBF, I was never sold matrix leds so there was no marketing let down.
Also the auto-wipers on my 2003 Saab were working better than the Tesla ones of the current generation.
That said, it's also funny to think that the only things I could complain about owning a Tesla are: wipers, self-driving marketing and Elon being a nutcase.
Before the last one is solved, I would not buy another one, but other than that it's a very good car.
I read That was a NHSTA thing. Tesla weren’t allowed to enable them in North America despite having them in Europe.
The US regulations often lag Europe by a long way.
It's normal as a human to make predictions, and it's normal to come to the realization that some of one's predictions have been incorrect on the timelines. This is all just normal real life in the world of technology.
What actually is remarkable is the unstoppable progress that is being made. You can find counter examples, but look at the newer software versions this month, next month, and so on. Things are being fixed bit by bit.
It seem the whole planet has this obsession :-)
Both from the technical and the marketing point of view having a car that can do better than any human ever could, even in the most optimal of conditions would be a great thing.
Anyway, Tesla have supposedly recently bought a massive pile of Luminar sensors, so I expect them to be in one of these vehicles soon.
You control the hardware and software, you drive in real world conditions, you can deploy regionally and control the hours and conditions you operate in letting you gradually increase when you operate as you judge it safe.
And if the robotaxi makes a mistake, well it's still in testing phase/beta.
If Tesla comes out with FSD then it has to be damned near "perfect" in all conditions, which just is never going to happen out the gate?
Oh! Oh! And then for efficiency maybe you can chain a ton of robotaxis together, so you only need one drivetrain... wait a second...
I used to drive through torrential storms in Brazil, where the highest level of the wipers was barely enough to keep water out of the windshield, never had an issue when keeping safe speeds either (even though Brazilian traffic is murderous).
Haven't seen an equivalent snowstorm so far. Even in the worst case there's still at least 30 ft / 10 m visible range. Which is not great, but at least something.
In both cases, if at all possible, better to stay put!
LIDAR probably would help to make Phantom Brakes happen less often, simply because there would be another info source for "is there REALLY an object that is dangerous to me?".
Those who say that FSD is "pretty good" are living in a fantasy world. There is hard data on miles between critical disengagements (which really should be called "if the driver doesn't respond within a fraction of a second, people will die"), and depending on region, model, weather etc it's between 13 and 115 miles right now.
Over here in Germany there are statistics that a human driver will have the equivalent every 155,000 miles.
"Pretty good" just doesn't cut it when it's about the risk of killing people.
My Model 3 right now detects about 60-70% of school children crossing the road (keep in mind roads in Germany are narrow, and humans including kids are using the roads, too). 30%-40% of those I would kill every morning on my way to the office.
And the thing is: 70% isn't enough for this, 80% isn't, 90% isn't, 99% isn't, and 99,999% isn't.
Side note: People constantly claim that Waymo is autonomous. It's as autonomous as a tram. They only work because it the cities they operate every single road they use have been mapped by hand and is constantly updated. Send a Waymo into my city over here, and will also kill a couple of kids per day. Years ahead of Tesla? Yes. Good enough? Hell no.
It probably is, actually (and sadly).
Looking around at the percentage of drivers around me on the road with their face looking at a phone, while moving, is probably in excess of 5%. These people won't see the kids crossing the road, either.
The problem isn't that the sensors need to be added now, the problem is that without the sensors the cars are half blind and are more likely to make bad decisions and refusing to add them at all shows bad judgement.
Rain, snow, mist, fog, darkness -- these are things cameras are very bad at seeing through. Is that thing in front of us solid? Without extensive training on that particular type of object, the AI with the camera has to guess. I'm sure these aren't the best examples -- I am not an expert in LiDAR. But I do have experience with computer vision with camera systems, and they are woefully insufficient for life and death decision making systems when they haven't been trained on the exact specific scenarios they will encounter.
Given that the leading causes for road accidents are speeding, DUI and distractions [1], a car doesn't need to be better than any human reasonably can. It just needs to be on the same level as a well-rested, sober human without a phone in their hand.
The decision LIDAR vs cameras is the pareto principle in action: what matters is the 80% - the mass that causes the most accidents.
[1] https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/road-traffi...
The prosperity of technology basically solves the problem with the most terrible hardware possible.
For example, if you have a really good microprocessor that works, what you should do is shrink it until it barely works or speed it up until it barely works to get a similar version for cheaper or faster version for the same price.
Same goes with cars. If you have a car that works with ultrasonic and lidar and cameras, eliminate the expensive sensors and reduce the cost.
Reducing the cost will let more people afford the cars, and sell more cars.
To Musk that is basically his plan all along - to replace ICE cars with EVs. Just wish we could keep turn signal/wiper/headlight stalks.
Well... that conditional clause was never satisfied in the first place ;)
But the point Tesla didn't go through "FSD with ultrasonic + lidar + cameras", and then start to reduce the sensors. They went from "no FSD" to "broken non-working FSD, but now only with cameras". That is not how you strip down a working product to reduce costs.
If Musk had gone all-in on every sensor possible and put them all over the cars like strings of Christmas lights, I assume you would be defending that decision with just as much fervor.
They shrink their chips, they up their clock speeds and keep the costs the same.
They also remove hardware - they've relentlessly removed ports, intermediate interfaces (like removable batteries, memory and processor sockets) and changed screws into glue.
and applying this analogy to the current situation: do we?
normally you have to sell a product that works first, take the profits and then invest that into improving the components to make more profits. I think Elon has cracked the code: sell the product you don't have to people who would love to have it, and you don't even need to produce a version 1 that works - just move on to solving the problems that you want to. the market will pay you either way.
* much faster reaction times
* ability to model multiple possible trajectories
* ability to see in all directions simultaneously
* no distractions, no tiredness, no falling asleep, no health problems
That said, this particular big bet looks pretty bad for Musk. He's been confidently promising self-driving either "this year" or "next year" for the last several years, and so far Tesla appears nowhere close to getting L4/L5 driving down.
And yes, I know the EX90 is currently an absolute mess in terms of software and their LIDAR isn't even enabled for driving assists yet, but the hardware is there so it can be built on scale.
Specifically, loads of object detection with smaller objects, imagine an android cleaning off a table after dinner. Visual spectrum, camera identification is vital here.
So it's all one ball of wax. Tesla is not juet a car company, likely in 5 years the number of androids they sell will dwarf car sales.
But those cameras don't have to be simple visual spectrum cameras, do they? They could have, for example, in each eye, LIDAR, infrared, several focal lengths of visual, etc. Not to mention being able to augment those sensors at places humans just don't get sensor data (e.g: back of head; outward facing from shoulders, hips, etc.; constant presence monitoring via ultrasound / IR / 2.4GHz, etc.)
They do, if they want to do comparative analysis on the trillions upon trillions of existing photographs, and even motion picture frames.
Not to mention the entire AI industry is working full out for perfect image recognition, again in our visual spectrum. Something apparent to a person working with openai 5 years ago.
I have a robomop which does some pretty accurate scanning with its radar. I thought this is cheap, consumer appliance grade technology already.
Why would you ever want an unstable bipedal robot? Alternatives seem way more efficient.
Also are you predicting that Teslas sales will collapse and they’ll lose most of their EV market share? Because that’s a pretty bold take
It also simplifies the stack a lot to have a single set of sensors, so the software becomes mostly: getting good training data (iterative loops from failing production cases) and an efficient training algorithm.
This scales to more than just AD and also can leverage new breakthroughs from academia
No, humans do significant sensor fusion.
There's binaural audio: useful to detect and have a rough position of emergency services and/or high speeds cars(it's true that its a relatively unencumbered channel, but that makes it all the more valuables for emergencies)
And there's a working if imperfect IMU (performance can be altered if the power supply is set to an alternate mode) to sense all kinds of acceleration: for fine course correction on acceleration and bearing, for getting the road condition and adjust the driving profile accordingly, etc..
I don't doubt that it's possible with machine vision alone, but it makes the challenge substantially harder.
It also does away with one of the crucial aspects of "better than human safety" - driving in conditions where a camera is uselss - think moderate to dense fog, heavy rain etc. etc.
Perhaps. But isn’t Waymo way ahead of Tesla?
So it is Lidar + manual work for each area.
While Tesla is trying to go for a solution you can just drop in anywhere.
Also, should your eye cameras be in fixed position, you even more urgently should see a doctor. Mine can be turned 180° on the X-axis, and 120° on the Y-axis.
And finally: My eye cameras have working high-speed auto-focus, HDR, are protected against rain or snow, can operate at very low ISO, and have retina resolution.
:)
It makes no sense to say "humans can do it with only X, so machines should have to as well". Do cars run? Do planes flap?
I do agree that planning should be the hardest part of self-driving, but go and look at any Tesla FSD video on YouTube and it's clear they haven't solved the perception part yet either. Cars wobbling all over the place, morphing into vans, etc.
There's a certain amount of "movie magic" that goes into any tech demo to make it work well on stage but Tesla's demos never gave me a sense that what I was seeing would actually line up with how their cars will perform in the real world.
You have to be ambitious and aim high in the tech industry, but at some point you have to level out and stop getting high on hype.
Some people have a rather unhealthy obsession with Elon Musk, and ought to take a few hours off the Internet and get some sunlight.
That's an entry on
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aptronym
if I've ever seen one
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41807408
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41230320 also confuses the name/gender, Glenn vs. Gwynne
This tweet directly contradicts you:
However if Musk didn't found the company and it does well, then that's a very important thing. (Tesla)
Also What does that have to do with him (supposedly) being a talented engineer? He’s a brilliant strategist/visionary/CEO obviously but Cybertruck was a product of his engineering decisions then.. yeah.. probably he isn’t.
That doesn't change the fact the Cyber Truck is an inferior truck to just about any other truck in just about any metric. It's a testament to the sheer arrogance of Man and the failure of modern American education.
Tighter turning than everyone
Faster charging than Rivian or F150, 94 miles gained in 15 mins vs 83 and 68
Best API obviously
Best suspension
Best ADAS
Lighter than both
Longer bed, larger cargo volume, higher payload and towing capacity than either
of course not everyone is bothered by that. All the water/environment related issues (I guess you can get the “optional” coating) and the absurd repair costs seem like a bigger issue.
> Tighter turning than everyone
Doesn’t the Hummer EV have a 25% smaller turning radius? Also a removable roof.
There are water/environment issues?
Do you have any evidence of him ever being one? I mean he’s an extremely successful CEO and decision maker which is almost infinitely more important than just being an engineer.
I mean was Jobs ever considered an “engineer”? And I’d bet he was significantly more involved in the design of Apple’s most successful products than Musk was in SpaceX (and possibly even Tesla if Cybertruck was the result of him going of the reins).
You just don't want to believe that because it complicates your view of him as a purely worthless arsehole. You can't accept that he's an arsehole and a skilled engineer (or project manager if you want to gatekeep "engineering").
The marketing videos that he had made?
Imagine him coming up with the spaceship equivalent of the CyberTruck at SpaceX. Even Boeing would seem like being great at what they do at that point…
This is a fair and balanced view of him: https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=WYQxG4KEzvo
The video goes into criticism as much as it goes into praise. It's a very accurate portrayal of elon with journalistic integrity.
What about the PayPal stories? Or those are all supposedly “not fair and balanced”?
> It's well known and obvious he gets into the weeds
That’s why the Cybetruck looks like it was draw by a 3 year old?
> THATS why his companies are successful.
Why? You don’t have to pretend you are an engineer to build an extremely successful company as CEO while having significant impact on the products it designs. Just look at Apple.
What stories?
>That’s why the Cybetruck looks like it was draw by a 3 year old?
So? This doesn't serve to disprove my point. Elon gets into the weeds. Your opinion of it doesn't change the success of the company and the technology.
>Why? You don’t have to pretend you are an engineer to build an extremely successful company as CEO while having significant impact on the products it designs. Just look at Apple.
I never said anything about apple. I said that's why HIS companies are successful. There's plenty of reasons why other companies are successful.
It's a well known fact Elon Gets into the weeds of engineering and tech. Just watch the video.
Don't forget the colonisation of Mars. He's even more wrong on that one.
I mean, we have one of those right now (that we've known about since at least the 1980s) and ...
> they'll be a mass effort to take giant steps
That isn't happening. And climate change is an easy thing to deal with compared with the colonisation of Mars.
This is the reality. Musk made bets that have a lower chance of success then winning the lottery. If even one of the bets succeeds it means he's smarter than normal. That being said, Musk has succeeded in way more than one bet.
Not sure what you're getting at here. I just praised SpaceX, but you're acting like I downplayed its success.
I'm sure Musk is smart, or at least ambitious, but that doesn't mean your Tesla is gonna be able to drive itself.
[0]: the successful bets: paypal, tesla, spacex, starlink. Failures: twitter, self-driving. To be determined: ai.
his real victory was surviving long enough to make money from the merger and not get totally fleeced on the way out.
and given the number of Russians using Starlink, I suspect it's a matter of time before his clearance is revoked and the US FedGov backs away further from SpaceX. wouldn't be surprised if there are ITAR violations there, too...
Are you alleging that Musk is conspiring to assist the Russians?
Like all breakthroughs, he will be terribly wrong right up to the point he isn’t (see the fail compilation video of failed Falcon9 landings)
You only fail when you give up.
Tesla can never be the first to large-scale autonomous driving since Waymo is already delivering it. Sure, Tesla will probably deliver it eventually. Whether they can overtake Waymo's rollout is the open question.
Absolutely, he is well known for setting extremely optimistic stretch goal timelines, and is almost always late. In virtually every case he is still years or decades before the competition, with autonomous driving being the biggest miss to date.
He certainly does deliver though.
Given that Tesla are currently making 2 million cars per year and have 5 million on the road, I think it extremely likely they will have by far the biggest autonomous fleet.
Twitter people can go lots of places, both competing social networks, and also various other internet-related or software places. Tesla people can go to lots of different competing automakers. But I don't see anyplace nice for SpaceX people to go.
The list is actually pretty long: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_private_spaceflight_co...
And that's not counting nation states.
Going to work for the Chinese or Russians? Well.. as long as you’re not planning to ever go back home.
There aren’t that many options for people who want to be a part of a team that actually accomplishes something significant.
Rocketlab and others even have products which standardize the bus part of the sattellite or probe, so you just attach your science experiment or sensor.
Shockley probably thought the same in early '57...
He even deleted my comments when trying to argue on some of his statements. Lol.
"Ploy for credibility, retreating even deeper into fantasy, pretense of reality, pure fantasy, contained within a world of fantasy, retreating into misinformation-fuelled fantasy world, runaway ego, less palatable, self-soothing fantasy bubble, fake statistics, blown deadlines, litany of bullshit, chronic inability, unprecedented publish delusion or deception, having drawn a poor hand, financial-cognitive nightmare, it’s hard to imagine anyone seriously believing that a night of delusional Disney Adult cringe, too childish to call a fraud, Musk’s increasingly-degenerate gambling run is slouching toward one last big coinflip"
I admire some of the things Elon Musk has made happen, but the guy has obvious ego issues and acts often like a villain from a child superhero movie. If a blog post is "biased, one sided, bullshit" for calling this behavior and all the accompanying unkept promises, what they are, together with some creative words and interpretation, why do we have blog posts in the first place?
This is of course completely fallacious non-logic. Of course criticism comes from people critical of a thing.
Is there a name for this? I've seen this quite regularly, especially on Musk and Trump.
Arguing the failure to deliver self driving, even though it has been promised repeated and greatly failed is fine.
The political rage rant at the end is not. (This of course goes for any side in this election)
>"Ultimately, Musk’s increasingly-degenerate gambling run is slouching toward one >last big coinflip: the 2024 presidential election. With Musk going “all-in” on >Donald Trump, and musing that he will end up in a prison cell if Kamala Harris >is elected, it’s clear that his main political issue is his freedom to keep >rolling over his endless confidence game without legal consequences. If Trump >wins and delivers Musk the impunity he craves, the line between amusement park >fantasy and $700 billion self-driving juggernaut will all but disappear, and we >will all find ourselves living in Muskworld’s house of mirrors.
Root for the ambitious… The alternative is to ignore or tear them down. And it doesn't appear to be very fun to be in either of those camps.
I literally jumped for joy yesterday when SpaceX achieved a major milestone along their ambitious path. It's been fun following along and cheering for them.
I feel similarly excited for Tesla when they demonstrate robots with incredible dexterity. Even if they're not fully autonomous. They will still be a game changer for workplace safety. Imagine sending one up an electrical tower ladder in Alaska to replace a tranformer while an operator uses FPV goggles and gloves to control the robot from an office building in Fairbanks over a Starlink connection. Or a robot enabling a scientist to take ice cores in Antarctica from the warmth of McMurdo Station. This scenario would provide enormous quantities of training data as well.
The baseline AI-powered mobility and object avoidance subroutines are enough to make that viable while falling back to remote, human control for 'high resolution', less routine tasks. This same principle applies to robotaxis… And perhaps many Teslas already on the road if they can be retrofitted with the appropriate networking equipment.
How disconnected from reality are you to make this statement? https://waymo.com/blog/2024/06/waymo-one-is-now-open-to-ever... Waymo self-driving has been open to general public since June 2024 and Telsa still doesn't have full self driving technology and yet here you are claiming odds are stacked in Tesla's favor.
> I feel similarly excited for Tesla when they demonstrate robots with incredible dexterity.
Did you never hear about Boston dynamics? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tF4DML7FIWk This is 3 years old video and Tesla's robots don't have as much dexterity as the robot from the video. And unlike Tesla's robot, Boston Dynamics robot is fully automated.
I suppose we all live in our own bubbles. I've not been to SF in many years. I've never seen a Waymo on the street. However, I've sat in a Tesla myself and watched it navigate the roads in my hometown. As have many others across the US. And so I feel rather connected with reality in that small, tangible way.
I should have been more precise with my words. By 'make self-driving work', I meant deploy that technology cheaply and widely. But retroactively I understand my clarification appears like I'm moving the goal posts. I alluded to that though: 'They have more data and distribution than any of their competitors.'
>> I feel similarly excited for Tesla when they demonstrate robots with incredible dexterity. > > Did you never hear about Boston dynamics?
I have, and I am also excited for them. I believe you missed my point about being happy for people trying to do difficult things.
Maybe. I guess another possibility is some people deliberately ignore evidence that doesn't fit their worldview for reasons that are yet unknown to me.
> I've never seen a Waymo on the street.
Just because you don't see something doesn't mean it doesn't exist. https://techcrunch.com/2024/08/20/waymo-is-now-giving-100000... there are around 100k people using waymo self-driving every week.
> However, I've sat in a Tesla myself and watched it navigate the roads in my hometown.
https://www.tesla.com/en_gb/support/autopilot "Before using Autopilot, read your Owner's Manual for instructions and more safety information. While using Autopilot, it is your responsibility to stay alert, keep your hands on the steering wheel at all times and maintain control of your vehicle. "
This is not self driving.
> By 'make self-driving work', I meant deploy that technology cheaply and widely.
I see only one company deploying self-driving technology and that's not tesla.
Simply sharing the evidence that helped shape your own worldview does not necessarily invalidate mine. The first-hand evidence I shared supported my claim that Tesla has wide distribution, lots of data, and falls somewhere on the spectrum of self-driving (admittedly not fully autonomous).
The evidence you shared shows that Waymo has limited (but increasing) deployment, limited data (only the 3 metro areas), relatively little revenue, and—to its credit—fully autonomous driving capabilities under city-driving circumstances.
Waymo is taking a different development path and I'm rooting for them too.
But I'm still not convinced that the odds are in their favor. Can they build a relatively affordable car and especially their LIDAR system at scale? Will they be able to scale production before Tesla cracks the fully autonomous nut? I personally still think the odds are still in Tesla's favor. Note that I did not ever say: 'Tesla is the only one who can or will make self-driving work'.
> relatively little revenue
100k rides/wk * 4 weeks/mo * 12 months * $50/ride = $24m/year Yet Alphabet is investing $5 billion, hence 'relatively little'
Some resources are mostly zero-sum, support being one. That means that buying their product or even buying their stock means not supporting their competitors.
At this point, after so many hollow promises from Tesla, why shouldn't the money support plenty of other competitors as well?
I.e., I think you missed my point about being happy for people attempting to do something difficult and celebrating their successes. I can root for them as much as I please and it doesn't hurt a soul.
I'm afraid you're arguing against something I didn't say.
For the newer cars that do there was an awesome post on HN from someone who consulted with them and they had a single server at HQ with a single thread to capture all this data. They had no idea why it wasn’t working.
Sure. The robots could be used to distribute shoes and safety equipment to the less fortunate child laborers around the world.
You really don't? 8 years ago Tesla did a (fake) video of their car "self driving" on real streets. 8 years of promises and in effort to convice their investors that they are actually making progress towards that goal is.....a movie set with fake streets to drive on? While Waymo is delivering real self driving taxi rides in the real world? What isn't clear about this message to you, exactly?
"Tesla FSD Supervised Tops 1.6 Billion Total Miles Driven": https://teslanorth.com/2024/08/07/tesla-fsd-supervised-1-6-b...
Seems obvious that movie sets are like red carpets, no?
I don't really know what you're trying to say with the politics distraction, so I guess the answer to your last question is "apparently you can't."
So you're unaware of the AI day presentations about their driving training pipeline. Learning about their engineering in that regard really changed my perception of the likelihood that they could solve the problem. Give it a watch: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ODSJsviD_SU
> failure to keep up with competitors like Waymo
Looks like each of them lead in different ways to me. Waymo leads within certain specific city limits, Tesla leads on the open road. These seem to be direct consequences of their engineering decisions. Question is which will converge on working everywhere all the time.
Popularizing electric cars, while similarly noble, doesn’t qualify as revolutionary in my book. The move to electric is fundamentally just an increase in the energy efficiency of cars, which is great, but not a transformative leap. Furthermore, EV’s have been doing kinda bad here in the US as of late and automakers are having to scale back their rollout because of lacking demand. Maybe eventually we’ll be able to credit Musk with a big cut in car emissions, but in the best case scenario where we magically made the switch and powered every electric car with solar, we’d be cutting US emissions by a fifth.
Again, the parent comment compared Musk’s contributions to the industrial revolution, which saw a complete transformation in how humans do labor. It wasn’t a percentage gain in efficiency, it was a force-multiplier that spawned whole industries.
Ah yes, the never-ending corner.