I recommend reading Alberto Savoia's book, "The Right It: Why So Many Ideas Fail and How to Make Sure Yours Succeed"
One of the examples that Savoia provides in his book is especially helpful to recall here:
Back in the 1960s, IBM was trying to figure out if they should make a massive investment in building a speech recognition product. Rather than betting the company on an expensive idea without being certain of the market for it, they simulated the speech recognizer by putting a secretary in another room with a mic, leaving the test subject with the impression that their commands were going directly into the computer in the room.
By doing this, IBM figured out that even if they made a perfect speech recognizer, their customers wouldn't use it! They were concerned about privacy, found typing to be faster and more precise, etc. Rather than investing huge sums of cash on a dud, they were able to put it towards the System 360 line, which turned out rather well :)
Right, this is really what's meant by the phrase "fake it until you make it" -- not that you should make claims that aren't true (even though they may be someday) but that you should simulate automating processes in a similar fashion to your anecdote before actually spending the time and money to automate them, even though up front you're likely to lose money on having humans do what you eventually want computers (or robots, in the case of Amazon warehouses) to do.
Here is a good timeline (complete with Elon's tweets) for Tesla's self driving capabilities.
He has been lying about it for 5 years now and has been stringing on Tesla customers with statements like, "It's almost there!" and "Next version will blow your mind!" etc
Agreed, imagine paying thousands of dollars for a software product that is never delivered and continues to be pushed forward to the next year for five years running - it's unbelievable a solid case hasn't been brought against the company. Only a performer like Musk with such an influence on his fans could pull something like that off.
Personally, I love being in command and control of 1000+ pounds of steel and liquid, seemingly propelled based on the angle of my foot. I wouldn't have it any other way!
I think autonomous travel would be a great experiment for locomotives on isolated tracks.
> The Drive could not reach out to Tesla to verify or contest the claims, as the automaker dissolved its communications and public relations department some time ago. The New York Times says that neither Musk nor a top Tesla lawyer responded to requests for comments over several weeks.
I always thought it funny that Musk saw this as some sort of 4D chess move and not a tacit admission that his company's products/behavior suck so much, he had to effectively nail a "No comment" placard on the front door.
You know what would be awesome? Say negative PR about Tesla comes up, and someone from Tesla calls/emails/tweets a reporter to provide a statement...the reporter ignores them, or tells them to go pound sand, because given Tesla does not have a communications or public relations department, someone from Tesla couldn't possibly be contacting them in an official capacity to provide an authorized statement.
> I always thought it funny that Musk saw this as some sort of 4D chess move and not a tacit admission that his company's products/behavior suck so much, he had to effectively nail a "No comment" placard on the front door.
That's one way of looking at it; another is that he's avoiding the spin and dishonest misleading nature of today's media. He doesn't have to deal with that BS and he probably feels a lot less stress because of it.
> You know what would be awesome? Say negative PR about Tesla comes up, and someone from Tesla calls/emails/tweets a reporter to provide a statement...the reporter ignores them, or tells them to go pound sand, because given Tesla does not have a communications or public relations department, someone from Tesla couldn't possibly be contacting them in an official capacity to provide an authorized statement.
Except Musk has plenty, plenty of reach thanks to his Twitter and other social media accounts, and in most peoples' eyes even though he has been misleading about the whole self-driving thing, hearing a statement directly from the horse's mouth most likely carries more legitimacy in their eyes than hearing it through the media. [0]
It makes for an "awesome" gotcha moment but thats about it. All it would really do is trash your newspaper's reputation while making tesla look like the victim. Asking for comment is a courtesy that professional journalists give to subjects. It's not some sort of reciprocal agreement.
Is "staged" the right description here? I was worried we were looking at a Nikola type event, but that's not what this is.
Just because the route was mapped with lidar, etc. doesn't make this a non-self-driving car. It drove itself under the supplied conditions. It wasn't like they had plotted the route with the stops and starts, etc. From what I understand the system just had prior knowledge of the route. This is in comparison to any other self-driving which MUST have prior understanding of the route, vs Tesla's current product which apparently can make all decisions on the fly.
Don’t know if staged is the right word, but it’s a little sketchy at least that the car drove using a method they’ve mocked other companies for using and have stated they have no intention to ever use in their consumer product.
I think the allegation is that Tesla’s current product cannot actually make all decisions on the fly, but they have been claiming it can—which is exaggeration at the very least.
[+] [-] maxharris|4 years ago|reply
One of the examples that Savoia provides in his book is especially helpful to recall here:
Back in the 1960s, IBM was trying to figure out if they should make a massive investment in building a speech recognition product. Rather than betting the company on an expensive idea without being certain of the market for it, they simulated the speech recognizer by putting a secretary in another room with a mic, leaving the test subject with the impression that their commands were going directly into the computer in the room.
By doing this, IBM figured out that even if they made a perfect speech recognizer, their customers wouldn't use it! They were concerned about privacy, found typing to be faster and more precise, etc. Rather than investing huge sums of cash on a dud, they were able to put it towards the System 360 line, which turned out rather well :)
[+] [-] empressplay|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] flatiron|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] stemlord|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] gadnuk|4 years ago|reply
He has been lying about it for 5 years now and has been stringing on Tesla customers with statements like, "It's almost there!" and "Next version will blow your mind!" etc
https://www.reddit.com/r/SelfDrivingCars/comments/n6nsmt/elo...
It's stunning how he has gotten away with lies for so long.
[+] [-] protoax|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] k12sosse|4 years ago|reply
I think autonomous travel would be a great experiment for locomotives on isolated tracks.
[+] [-] a9h74j|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] wilg|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] KennyBlanken|4 years ago|reply
I always thought it funny that Musk saw this as some sort of 4D chess move and not a tacit admission that his company's products/behavior suck so much, he had to effectively nail a "No comment" placard on the front door.
You know what would be awesome? Say negative PR about Tesla comes up, and someone from Tesla calls/emails/tweets a reporter to provide a statement...the reporter ignores them, or tells them to go pound sand, because given Tesla does not have a communications or public relations department, someone from Tesla couldn't possibly be contacting them in an official capacity to provide an authorized statement.
[+] [-] coolso|4 years ago|reply
That's one way of looking at it; another is that he's avoiding the spin and dishonest misleading nature of today's media. He doesn't have to deal with that BS and he probably feels a lot less stress because of it.
> You know what would be awesome? Say negative PR about Tesla comes up, and someone from Tesla calls/emails/tweets a reporter to provide a statement...the reporter ignores them, or tells them to go pound sand, because given Tesla does not have a communications or public relations department, someone from Tesla couldn't possibly be contacting them in an official capacity to provide an authorized statement.
Except Musk has plenty, plenty of reach thanks to his Twitter and other social media accounts, and in most peoples' eyes even though he has been misleading about the whole self-driving thing, hearing a statement directly from the horse's mouth most likely carries more legitimacy in their eyes than hearing it through the media. [0]
[0]: https://news.gallup.com/poll/355526/americans-trust-media-di...
[+] [-] gruez|4 years ago|reply
It makes for an "awesome" gotcha moment but thats about it. All it would really do is trash your newspaper's reputation while making tesla look like the victim. Asking for comment is a courtesy that professional journalists give to subjects. It's not some sort of reciprocal agreement.
[+] [-] pedalpete|4 years ago|reply
Just because the route was mapped with lidar, etc. doesn't make this a non-self-driving car. It drove itself under the supplied conditions. It wasn't like they had plotted the route with the stops and starts, etc. From what I understand the system just had prior knowledge of the route. This is in comparison to any other self-driving which MUST have prior understanding of the route, vs Tesla's current product which apparently can make all decisions on the fly.
[+] [-] kgin|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] snowwrestler|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] rce|4 years ago|reply