tesla , the future ?
Discussion
Yep of course they will start small and limited, still a lot to learn and confidence to build.
People will have to get used to self driving cars and them making mistakes and quite possibly killing people.
NHTSA investigated the Tesla fatal crashes , and whilst they had some issues with some aspects of autopilot (since changed) they concluded that its overall safer than people driving (in its limited scope).
People will have to get used to self driving cars and them making mistakes and quite possibly killing people.
NHTSA investigated the Tesla fatal crashes , and whilst they had some issues with some aspects of autopilot (since changed) they concluded that its overall safer than people driving (in its limited scope).
RobDickinson said:
People will have to get used to self driving cars and them making mistakes and quite possibly killing people.
NHTSA investigated the Tesla fatal crashes , and whilst they had some issues with some aspects of autopilot (since changed) they concluded that its overall safer than people driving (in its limited scope).
You'll have explain why people will need to get used to self-driving cars quite possibly killing people and why this is a tech worth pursuing?NHTSA investigated the Tesla fatal crashes , and whilst they had some issues with some aspects of autopilot (since changed) they concluded that its overall safer than people driving (in its limited scope).
rscott said:
If you actually read their report, you'd see you wouldn't need to be parked there for long..
The one minor wrinkle being that they aren't actually planning on building any. The study came to the blindingly obvious conclusion that it was much easier to centrally locate a massive power requirement on the outskirts of urban areas than it is to distribute 100kW power cables to every driveway and parking space. Still doesn't explain where the power is coming from though.Ali G said:
You'll have explain why people will need to get used to self-driving cars quite possibly killing people and why this is a tech worth pursuing?
Because they will kill far fewer per mile than us. The question is how much better they need to be to be acceptable to the public. Ten times? RobDickinson said:
Yep of course they will start small and limited, still a lot to learn and confidence to build.
People will have to get used to self driving cars and them making mistakes and quite possibly killing people.
NHTSA investigated the Tesla fatal crashes , and whilst they had some issues with some aspects of autopilot (since changed) they concluded that its overall safer than people driving (in its limited scope).
The biggest issue around Autopilot is that they sold it as self driving when it's really just a fancy cruise and lane keeping system. It's still meant to be under positive control of the driver at all times. The worst bit of it is the lane change system - trigger it with the indicator then let go of the wheel? Tech for techs sake, and still not self driving. People will have to get used to self driving cars and them making mistakes and quite possibly killing people.
NHTSA investigated the Tesla fatal crashes , and whilst they had some issues with some aspects of autopilot (since changed) they concluded that its overall safer than people driving (in its limited scope).
They oversold it as something it never was.
fblm said:
Ali G said:
You'll have explain why people will need to get used to self-driving cars quite possibly killing people and why this is a tech worth pursuing?
Because they will kill far fewer per mile than us. The question is how much better they need to be to be acceptable to the public. Ten times? And when the AI screws up, which party is pursued for recompense?
And there will be no possibility of any 3rd party ever hacking into the control of any self-driving system - no siree - since all tech is impregnable to hacking.
fblm said:
Ali G said:
You'll have explain why people will need to get used to self-driving cars quite possibly killing people and why this is a tech worth pursuing?
Because they will kill far fewer per mile than us. The question is how much better they need to be to be acceptable to the public. Ten times? No one in the main part of the industry is going to release a product where known shortcomings in design result in predicable deaths.
The Silicon Valley cowboys on the other hand have far looser morals.
Jonesy23 said:
No one in the main part of the industry is going to release a product where known shortcomings in design result in predicable deaths.
Lowering risk, we already have a lot of road deaths.Every major auto maker is heavily into self driving tech. it wont be perfect especially in the early years,
Jonesy23 said:
....
The problems are the issues with cashflow, profitability, regulation around their self driving efforts, their inability to get the 3 out of prototype and into series production, the bulls
t that is being issued to cloud this little problem, the Gigafactory difficulties, solar products that don't arrive, the endless endless delays with everything and so on and so on....
Reading the articles originally linked to this would seem like the crux to me. The problems are the issues with cashflow, profitability, regulation around their self driving efforts, their inability to get the 3 out of prototype and into series production, the bulls
t that is being issued to cloud this little problem, the Gigafactory difficulties, solar products that don't arrive, the endless endless delays with everything and so on and so on....Musk has entered an industry with relatively little experience in the key elements of manufacture, but with some really pretty good product ideas.
His issue will be (is?) that as the cars actually become more popular, the problems of that inexperience are highlighted. Inability to meet delivery targets, and also lights will get shone on quality and other issues that the early adopters will ignore to a degree.
As noted earlier, had they been cheaper I'd have seriously considered one. But an X (which would have been the option to replace our mk1 XC90) with range enough to get to the wilds of Yorkshire from the wilds of Essexshire would have been over 100k. That's simply dumb money. The mkII XC90 we bought was less than half that, and in many respects (most of the critical ones) is a better car.
Mind you, even that's a diesel as the T8 made no financial sense either
. Which is probably agreeing with TB - these cars need subsidies to make them even remotely viable at present...and even as a curious fan of them (EV's have some really interesting advantages over ICE cars, not least of which packaging - which Tesla don't seem to capitalise on - and torque), I'm not sure that's the best use of public money.Breadvan72 said:
It does look a bit like that, which seems a shame as you might expect some interest in emerging technologies; but many people seem to buy their opinions in package deals, so if you know what they think about, say, Brexit, you can probably guess what they think about, say, climate change...
More often than not I find your posts amusing, but this does go to show that no matter how much you read, it doesn't preclude you from talking utter pish Jonesy23 said:
Blah blah electric cars, chargers, fires, infrastructure blah blah.
The problems with Tesla are nothing to do with the basic sof the cars or the same old tired arguments.
The problems are the issues with cashflow, profitability, regulation around their self driving efforts, their inability to get the 3 out of prototype and into series production, the bullst that is being issued to cloud this little problem, the Gigafactory difficulties, solar products that don't arrive, the endless endless delays with everything and so on and so on....
Tesla has its own problems but to dismiss the lack of infrastructure for the widespread take up of EV's out of hand is to ignore the elephant in the room no?The problems with Tesla are nothing to do with the basic sof the cars or the same old tired arguments.
The problems are the issues with cashflow, profitability, regulation around their self driving efforts, their inability to get the 3 out of prototype and into series production, the bulls
t that is being issued to cloud this little problem, the Gigafactory difficulties, solar products that don't arrive, the endless endless delays with everything and so on and so on.... I take it you didn't read the last TSLA thread? I learned that trivial matters like cashflow are irrelevant and that for mentioning them you are a luddite who doesn't understand.
Ali G said:
And when the AI screws up, which party is pursued for recompense?
A topic Buffet (BRK second biggest insurer in US) has touched on. Insurance will shift from individuals to manufacturers, or a combination, liability depending on driver. Edited by anonymous-user on Monday 16th October 23:31
fblm said:
Ali G said:
And when the AI screws up, which party is pursued for recompense?
A topic Buffet (BRK second biggest insurer in US) has touched on. Insurance will shift from individuals to manufacturers, or a combination, liability depending on driver. http://fortune.com/2017/05/06/warren-buffett-berks...
300bhp/ton said:
I never referenced a source.
However pop on YouTube and look for Li-ion fire.
All they take is for a single cell to be punctured or crushed and they can go into thermal runaway. Which means a fireball.
Petrol has actually proven to be quite resliant. And doesnt explode if the tank gets punctured.
I suspect most Vehcile fires today are electrical in nature. It doesn’t take much logic to conclude if you include more electric items. As you have in an electric car. You increase this risk.
As for your numbers. I suspect any stat of in 1000 will be lower for electric cars at the moment. Simply because there are comparatively so few electric cars on the road. And no older ones, as they are all relatively new models.
So basically you have ZERO actual proof or statistics to back up your unsubstantiated opinion, fair enoughHowever pop on YouTube and look for Li-ion fire.
All they take is for a single cell to be punctured or crushed and they can go into thermal runaway. Which means a fireball.
Petrol has actually proven to be quite resliant. And doesnt explode if the tank gets punctured.
I suspect most Vehcile fires today are electrical in nature. It doesn’t take much logic to conclude if you include more electric items. As you have in an electric car. You increase this risk.
As for your numbers. I suspect any stat of in 1000 will be lower for electric cars at the moment. Simply because there are comparatively so few electric cars on the road. And no older ones, as they are all relatively new models.
Breadvan72 said:
Deptford Draylons said:
I like them. Also kinda hope it means old classics will be tolerated and mean plenty of petrol for the future. I never said I wasn't selfish.
It may be that once we have switched over to non fossil fuels for transport, some petrol vehicles will be tolerated as heritage items, subject perhaps to some form of certification and perhaps some limitations on use. By then people with early Teslas may be taking them to classic car shows.Turbobloke, do you want Tesla to fail? If you do, why?
Bit off topic, but the young guy in the USA with a P100D that drag races it against your traditional V8 muscle car fair is a fun watch on YT, with not everyone being that happy being about being beat.
No, there are absolutely no intrinsic benefits of a battery-powered EV drivetrain.....apart from:
Significantly more efficient due to regenerative braking capability and very low transmission/drivetrain losses.
Additional efficiency benefits of centralised power generation vs burning fuel in small engines.
Even more efficiency benefits of avoiding the need to generate electricity consumed by refining fuel; there is a suggestion that the electricity consumed by just the refining process of a gallon of fuel will power an EV on average for over 20 miles. Of course its a bit more complex than that as we don't really know whether that oil was going to be refined anyway for other purposes, but in all likelihood, this factor will have a meaningful benefit when EVs adoption is more mature.
Avoiding the costs and inefficiencies of extracting and distributing fuel on either side of the refining process.
Significantly lower emissions with the further benefit of being able to choose where those emissions take place.
Opportunities to utilise renewables and nuclear power to reduce emissions even more.
Vastly simpler vehicles to maintain and service.
Virtually zero vibration and noise, a good thing when compared to diesels, not the V8s that we all drive.
Widespread distributed battery energy storage will offer synergistic benefits where the grid and the vehicles that are being charged or connected but not in use can be controlled intelligently to work together to improve energy management on a macro scale.
Manufacturers and governments know all of this and have already decided that BEVs are the future and are dropping everything else.
And yes, the grid will cope.
Significantly more efficient due to regenerative braking capability and very low transmission/drivetrain losses.
Additional efficiency benefits of centralised power generation vs burning fuel in small engines.
Even more efficiency benefits of avoiding the need to generate electricity consumed by refining fuel; there is a suggestion that the electricity consumed by just the refining process of a gallon of fuel will power an EV on average for over 20 miles. Of course its a bit more complex than that as we don't really know whether that oil was going to be refined anyway for other purposes, but in all likelihood, this factor will have a meaningful benefit when EVs adoption is more mature.
Avoiding the costs and inefficiencies of extracting and distributing fuel on either side of the refining process.
Significantly lower emissions with the further benefit of being able to choose where those emissions take place.
Opportunities to utilise renewables and nuclear power to reduce emissions even more.
Vastly simpler vehicles to maintain and service.
Virtually zero vibration and noise, a good thing when compared to diesels, not the V8s that we all drive.
Widespread distributed battery energy storage will offer synergistic benefits where the grid and the vehicles that are being charged or connected but not in use can be controlled intelligently to work together to improve energy management on a macro scale.
Manufacturers and governments know all of this and have already decided that BEVs are the future and are dropping everything else.
And yes, the grid will cope.
Ali G said:
Well that should make for a spot of sudden awakening to the limitations of AI within the automotive CEO community!
Going to be interesting. Can an AI have a genuine accident, misadventure(?) or can the accident always be traced back to a negligent bug in the logic, or worse a deliberate 'him or me' logic? Presumably the manufacturers reinsurance will cover the former but not the latter two? Last time I checked googles autonomous cars had done something like 2m miles with a dozen accidents, only one of which was their fault and impact was at 2mph.... that's at least an order of magnitude better than humans, when will we be happy? 1000 times better? I can only imagine the uproar from the usual quarters when a car 1000 times safer than humans is involved in it's first fatal RTA... what if it was your child? Shut them all down! End the slaughter! Bankrupt the company!fblm said:
Ali G said:
Well that should make for a spot of sudden awakening to the limitations of AI within the automotive CEO community!
Going to be interesting. Can an AI have a genuine accident, misadventure(?) or can the accident always be traced back to a negligent bug in the logic, or worse a deliberate 'him or me' logic? Presumably the manufacturers reinsurance will cover the former but not the latter two? Last time I checked googles autonomous cars had done something like 2m miles with a dozen accidents, only one of which was their fault and impact was at 2mph.... that's at least an order of magnitude better than humans, when will we be happy? 1000 times better? I can only imagine the uproar from the usual quarters when a car 1000 times safer than humans is involved in it's first fatal RTA... what if it was your child? Shut them all down! End the slaughter! Bankrupt the company!This would be on an entirely different level to patch 27,000 on Win 10...
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff