Skip to content

Tesla bait-and-switch: Cybertruck owners won't get Autosteer feature they paid for

Technology
24 13 2
  • Isn't Supervised Full Self-Driving an oxymoron? How can it be both Supervised and Full Self-Driving?

    The actual answer: It should be Level 4 autonomy. It is capable of full self driving, but only in certain conditions.

    Do note that Tesla autopilot is actually only SAE level 2, so it's just a straight up lie 🙂

  • I don’t think they can, because they’re suffering so much from the rectal-cranial inversion that Musk started with his FSD.

    Muskrat insists on using computer vision entirely, and building it in-house. Tesla (probably EM) as I recall also insulted MobilEye so they refuse to do business with them. Mind you, I think lane keeping is generally a computer vision problem.

    FSD has lane-keeping in it. It’s not up for debate if they can do it or not, because they’ve been doing it for years.

    Also I’m not sure what other technology you think they would use for lane-keeping other than cameras and “computer vision”? Things like Lidar don’t work for this because lidar can’t see lane markers. The only way to do it is with cameras.

  • Tesla is the Fyre Festival of automotive manufacturers, except in this case Billy has managed to keep the kite in the air for an astonishingly long time.

    Come on now, why the stupid hot takes like this?

    Without Tesla electric vehicles would still be in the dark ages. Think whatever you want about Musk, but what he did for electric vehicles with Tesla cannot be understated or taken away. He revolutionised the entire industry and kickstarted the EV path we’re on.

  • Isn't Supervised Full Self-Driving an oxymoron? How can it be both Supervised and Full Self-Driving?

    No it’s not.

    It fully drives itself, but legally you need to “supervise” it. It’s called that because of the laws around driving a car.

  • FSD has lane-keeping in it. It’s not up for debate if they can do it or not, because they’ve been doing it for years.

    Also I’m not sure what other technology you think they would use for lane-keeping other than cameras and “computer vision”? Things like Lidar don’t work for this because lidar can’t see lane markers. The only way to do it is with cameras.

    Both. You can use both LiDAR and optical teaming, the technologies complement each other so you don’t fall for a Looney-Tunes ass painted wall, while the camera covers the one-dimensional recognition that LiDAR can’t.

    [Tesla] removed radars from its vehicle lineup and even deactivated already installed radars in existing vehicles. This strategy has not yet been worth it since Tesla’s systems are still stuck at level 2 driver assist systems.

  • Both. You can use both LiDAR and optical teaming, the technologies complement each other so you don’t fall for a Looney-Tunes ass painted wall, while the camera covers the one-dimensional recognition that LiDAR can’t.

    [Tesla] removed radars from its vehicle lineup and even deactivated already installed radars in existing vehicles. This strategy has not yet been worth it since Tesla’s systems are still stuck at level 2 driver assist systems.

    Lidar does not help with seeing lane markers. At all. Radar can’t see painted lines on a road.

    That looney tunes wall “test” was ridiculous and Rober was rightly raked over the coals and lost a lot of respect over it. It was basically a marketing stunt by his friends LiDAR company, and was full of dishonesty such as poorly photoshopped phones and lies such as not even using the self driving while smashing into the wall. These glaring flaws have been covered extensively.

  • Come on now, why the stupid hot takes like this?

    Without Tesla electric vehicles would still be in the dark ages. Think whatever you want about Musk, but what he did for electric vehicles with Tesla cannot be understated or taken away. He revolutionised the entire industry and kickstarted the EV path we’re on.

    what he did for electric vehicles with Tesla cannot be understated

    I think you meant to say “cannot be overstated.” “Cannot be understated” means the opposite of the point you’re trying to make.

    He definitely lit a fire under the asses of the traditional automakers, no doubt. But then he consistently threw away every advantage his company had, one after another.

    Had they developed a normal-ass pickup truck they could’ve beaten the Lightning F-150 to market. But no, because Musk wanted to make a car as stupid and ill-advised as the DeLorean DMC-12 it resembles, design time took so long that by the time the thing hit the streets it wasn’t what truck owners wanted or what Tesla owners wanted. There was already an EV version of the best-selling pickup truck in the world. And he had, by that point, thoroughly torched his image among the people most likely to buy his cars.

    Tesla definitely accelerated the development of EV models and infrastructure, but I personally think it’s easy to overstate Elon’s impact.

  • Lidar does not help with seeing lane markers. At all. Radar can’t see painted lines on a road.

    That looney tunes wall “test” was ridiculous and Rober was rightly raked over the coals and lost a lot of respect over it. It was basically a marketing stunt by his friends LiDAR company, and was full of dishonesty such as poorly photoshopped phones and lies such as not even using the self driving while smashing into the wall. These glaring flaws have been covered extensively.

    Honestly, while not a scientifically rigerous test, it does demonstrate through absurdity the real risks of computer vision only for driver assist features.

    Real world examples including of course the Tesla that plowed into a white truck on a foggy day because it mistook the truck for absolutely nothing among too many others

  • what he did for electric vehicles with Tesla cannot be understated

    I think you meant to say “cannot be overstated.” “Cannot be understated” means the opposite of the point you’re trying to make.

    He definitely lit a fire under the asses of the traditional automakers, no doubt. But then he consistently threw away every advantage his company had, one after another.

    Had they developed a normal-ass pickup truck they could’ve beaten the Lightning F-150 to market. But no, because Musk wanted to make a car as stupid and ill-advised as the DeLorean DMC-12 it resembles, design time took so long that by the time the thing hit the streets it wasn’t what truck owners wanted or what Tesla owners wanted. There was already an EV version of the best-selling pickup truck in the world. And he had, by that point, thoroughly torched his image among the people most likely to buy his cars.

    Tesla definitely accelerated the development of EV models and infrastructure, but I personally think it’s easy to overstate Elon’s impact.

    Elon Musk clearly has enourmous skillset at managing startups from their early stages though their explosive growth stages. He's successfully done so both with Tesla and SpaceX. Unfortunately his management skills are clearly incompatible with running a large company that makes up a notable portion of a market. He should have stepped away from Tesla about a decade ago (possibly as much as 15 years ago). He should have stepped away from SpaceX about 5 years ago. He should be known for growing a promising disruptive startup into a true market player then immediately handing the reigns away and moving onto the next startup, but his ego is simply too big for that, and he doesn't seem to have the introspection to see the damage he's doing to the companies he built up

  • Honestly, while not a scientifically rigerous test, it does demonstrate through absurdity the real risks of computer vision only for driver assist features.

    Real world examples including of course the Tesla that plowed into a white truck on a foggy day because it mistook the truck for absolutely nothing among too many others

    If only they didn’t fake it to get their desired result, then maybe it could have been useful.

    I agree that LiDAR and other technologies should be used in conjunction with regular cameras. I don’t know why anyone would be against that unless they have vested interests. For various reasons though I understand that it isn’t always possible - price being a big one.

  • Programming languages

    Technology technology
    1
    1
    0 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • Palantir’s Idea of Peace

    Technology technology
    12
    22 Stimmen
    12 Beiträge
    2 Aufrufe
    A
    "Totally not a narc, inc."
  • AI cheating surge pushes schools into chaos

    Technology technology
    25
    45 Stimmen
    25 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    C
    Sorry for the late reply, I had to sit and think on this one for a little bit. I think there are would be a few things going on when it comes to designing a course to teach critical thinking, nuances, and originality; and they each have their own requirements. For critical thinking: The main goal is to provide students with a toolbelt for solving various problems. Then instilling the habit of always asking "does this match the expected outcome? What was I expecting?". So usually courses will be setup so students learn about a tool, practice using the tool, then have a culminating assignment on using all the tools. Ideally, the problems students face at the end require multiple tools to solve. Nuance mainly naturally comes with exposure to the material from a professional - The way a mechanical engineer may describe building a desk will probably differ greatly compared to a fantasy author. You can also explain definitions and industry standards; but thats really dry. So I try to teach nuances via definitions by mixing in the weird nuances as much as possible with jokes. Then for originality; I've realized I dont actually look for an original idea; but something creative. In a classroom setting, you're usually learning new things about a subject so a student's knowledge of that space is usually very limited. Thus, an idea that they've never heard about may be original to them, but common for an industry expert. For teaching originality creativity, I usually provide time to be creative & think, and provide open ended questions as prompts to explore ideas. My courses that require originality usually have it as a part of the culminating assignment at the end where they can apply their knowledge. I'll also add in time where students can come to me with preliminary ideas and I can provide feedback on whether or not it passes the creative threshold. Not all ideas are original, but I sometimes give a bit of slack if its creative enough. The amount of course overhauling to get around AI really depends on the material being taught. For example, in programming - you teach critical thinking by always testing your code, even with parameters that don't make sense. For example: Try to add 123 + "skibbidy", and see what the program does.
  • WhatsApp is working on video and voice calls on the web

    Technology technology
    10
    1
    6 Stimmen
    10 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    A
    Worked well for me. Although all the people I care about had already Signal, Element or Threema installed, so I am not a great pull factor. And those everyday moms from child care or from wherever can reach me via SMS, for the two messages/year.
  • 116 Stimmen
    8 Beiträge
    2 Aufrufe
    S
    Common Noyb W
  • Large Language Models Are More Persuasive Than Humans.

    Technology technology
    3
    1
    11 Stimmen
    3 Beiträge
    2 Aufrufe
    D
    aka psychopathy is a natural advantage for managers.
  • 318 Stimmen
    45 Beiträge
    7 Aufrufe
    F
    By giving us the choice of whether someone else should profit by our data. Same as I don't want someone looking over my shoulder and copying off my test answers.
  • 0 Stimmen
    6 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    L
    Nah, you just select domain join. I did that a few weeks ago on a Win 11 enterprise install. But if you deal with new installs "all the time" you should really consider automating the setup and domain joining, instead of manually creating local accounts and then domain joining.