Tesla Rolling Out Autopilot Software Updates to 1,000 Cars (bloomberg.com)

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Tesla Rolling Out Autopilot Software Updates to 1,000 Cars (bloomberg.com)

Posted by msmash on Monday January 2, 2017 @04:00AM from the software-updates dept.

Tesla Motors began rolling out software updates to customers with newer cars, bringing them to parity with owners who have what's known as "Autopilot 1" and setting the stage to ultimately unleash full self-driving capability. From a report on Bloomberg:"HW2 Autopilot software uploading to 1,000 cars this eve. Will then hold to verify no field issues and upload to rest of fleet next week," Tesla Chief Executive Officer Elon Musk said. When Musk announced in October that all vehicles now being produced at the Fremont, California, factory are shipping with a new hardware suite to enable full self-driving, he warned that the cars would temporarily lack some of the features currently available on Tesla vehicles with "first generation" Autopilot as the company validated the software. That includes some standard safety features like automatic emergency breaking, collision warning and active cruise control. Now customers with the âoeHardware 2â suite will have those features. .

67 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Dammit, Elon! by elrous0 · 2017-01-02 04:03 · Score: 1

If you had rolled this out just a couple of days earlier I could have gotten as drunk as I wanted on New Years Eve without this drunk driving charge!

--
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
1. Re:Dammit, Elon! by Oswald+McWeany · 2017-01-02 05:37 · Score: 1
  
  For non-electric cars that have autopilot built in, I wonder if your car can get pulled over for drunk driving if you let autopilot drive and your fuel has too much ethanol in it.
  
  --
  "That's the way to do it" - Punch
Marketing Stunt by mykepredko · 2017-01-02 04:05 · Score: 3, Insightful

Simply because there aren't any jurisdictions which will allow autonomous driving anytime in the future.
I don't think there's even a full qual/cert process which will allow autonomous vehicles in any jurisdiction/let alone something like the entire United States.
But, it does keep Mr. Musk's name in the news in a positive light (and overshadows what's going on at SpaceX).

--
Mimetics Inc. Twitter
1. Re:Marketing Stunt by haruchai · 2017-01-02 04:18 · Score: 1
  
  What's going on at SpaceX?
  
  --
  Pain is merely failure leaving the body
2. Re:Marketing Stunt by Anonymous Coward · 2017-01-02 04:21 · Score: 0
  
  You mean, they won't be resuming launches by Jan. 8? Because if they do, it doesn't need any "overshadowing".
3. Re: Marketing Stunt by Anonymous Coward · 2017-01-02 04:36 · Score: 1
  
  The usual. Pissing away money
4. Re:Marketing Stunt by mykepredko · 2017-01-02 04:50 · Score: 1
  
  Nothing big. Just that the last explosion revealed a major issue with their approach to launch.
  They've been expecting to fuel the rocket with astronauts on board but the latest explosion revealed that it might not be the best idea.
  
  --
  Mimetics Inc. Twitter
5. Re:Marketing Stunt by Anonymous Coward · 2017-01-02 05:02 · Score: 0
  
  I wouldn't be surprised to see some areas allow them, just for the PR available. In fact, if a town had a significant number of autonomous vehicles that made it worth separating them from regular cars, it might save money. Things like highways can be engineered as four way intersections, with cars using V2V to speed up/slow down without hitting each other. Just the fact that a lot more autonomous cars can fit in a lane than regular cars is a boon for city planners.
6. Re:Marketing Stunt by Rei · 2017-01-02 05:16 · Score: 1
  
  There is news. Just today they announced that the next launch is planned for 8 Jan.
  As for crew, SpaceX has contrarily argued that even if the risk of an explosion is lower hours after fueling vs. during fueling, it still exists, and the last place you want astronauts during an explosion is in the tower on their way into the spacecraft. The safest place for the crew to be, apart from "nowhere near the rocket at all", is "inside the capsule". Crew in the tower during a sudden explosion would have basically no chance of survival.
  SpaceX has something which the Shuttle didn't - a near instantaneous abort system. They argue, and from an outsider's perspective I'd say they are probably correct, that even in the sort of catastrophic pad failure that occurred, the abort system would have saved the crew. There's no way that the Dragon could have suffered too much heat load during the brief period it would have been exposed to the fireball (this is a craft designed to survive launch and especially reentry heating), and the exploding stage just didn't have that much "ripping" power. This can be seen in many ways - for example, how the hydrazine tanks on the satellite didn't explode until the satellite hit the ground (after falling through the fireball). And the crewed dragon is a lot better protected than AMOS-6 was.
  I'd imagine that NASA would insist that they prove it, mind you, before they allow crew onboard. But then again, NASA's hardly one to speak, having approved the Shuttle with no launch abort system at all.
  If NASA refused to approve the current design for some reason, SpaceX can always go back to non-supercooled propellant. But they'd likely have to respond by lengthening their tanks; there would be a testing and reapproval phase.
  
  --
  For the love of Crom, am I the only one here who wants to keep the U.S. technologically competitive?
7. Re: Marketing Stunt by Anonymous Coward · 2017-01-02 05:31 · Score: 0
  
  Aww... nobody loves you?
8. Re:Marketing Stunt by Oswald+McWeany · 2017-01-02 05:36 · Score: 2
  
  Simply because there aren't any jurisdictions which will allow autonomous driving anytime in the future.
  Doesn't mean people won't rest one hand on the wheel to make it look like they're driving and watch movies on a screen off to the side letting the car drive itself.
  It's illegal to exceed the speed limit but most people do.
  
  --
  "That's the way to do it" - Punch
9. Re: Marketing Stunt by michelcolman · 2017-01-02 06:12 · Score: 1
  
  Unlike the Russians or the Chinese.
  BTW, SpaceX is planning their next launch on sunday jan 8.
10. Re: Marketing Stunt by haruchai · 2017-01-02 06:29 · Score: 1
  
  BTW, SpaceX is planning their next launch on sunday jan 8
  Thanks. Was wondering when that would happen considering they were supposed to start up again in November
  
  --
  Pain is merely failure leaving the body
11. Re:Marketing Stunt by haruchai · 2017-01-02 06:32 · Score: 1
  
  NASA's hardly one to speak, having approved the Shuttle with no launch abort system at all
  Which is frankly amazing. Someone should have gone to prison over that decision
  
  --
  Pain is merely failure leaving the body
12. Re:Marketing Stunt by thegarbz · 2017-01-02 10:10 · Score: 1
  
  and overshadows what's going on at SpaceX
  Launching things into space at an awesomely cheap price-point and a reliability that is currently surpassing much of the competition?
  No we should bring that up as well. No need to overshadow it.
13. Re: Marketing Stunt by segedunum · 2017-01-03 01:41 · Score: 1
  
  Alas, those all launched and didn't blow up on the pad, which is where the worry is with the nature of SpaceX's accident.
14. Re:Marketing Stunt by segedunum · 2017-01-03 01:43 · Score: 1
  
  As for crew, SpaceX has contrarily argued that even if the risk of an explosion is lower hours after fueling vs. during fueling, it still exists, and the last place you want astronauts during an explosion is in the tower on their way into the spacecraft. The safest place for the crew to be, apart from "nowhere near the rocket at all", is "inside the capsule". Crew in the tower during a sudden explosion would have basically no chance of survival.
  Yadda, yadda, yadda, SpaceX is always right and everyone else has been doing it wrong for decades. We get it.
15. Re: Marketing Stunt by michelcolman · 2017-01-03 02:28 · Score: 1
  
  Oh, yes, NASA rockets never burn up on the launch pad, do they?
  Rockets are dangerous, both before and after launch. That's just a fact of life. If any astronauts had been on board at the time of the SpaceX explosion, chances are they would have survived thanks to the emergency abort system launching the capsule up immediately. In fact, they would prefer that situation rather than board the crew shortly after fueling and risking an explosion at that moment killing the crew with certainty.
16. Re:Marketing Stunt by drinkypoo · 2017-01-03 02:58 · Score: 1
  
  Simply because there aren't any jurisdictions which will allow autonomous driving anytime in the future.
  Florida allows it in the present.
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
17. Re:Marketing Stunt by Anonymous Coward · 2017-01-03 03:54 · Score: 0
  
  Doesn't mean people won't rest one hand on the wheel
  Or rest one pinky on the bottom of the wheel.
18. Re:Marketing Stunt by mykepredko · 2017-01-03 05:07 · Score: 1
  
  I did not know that - are there any products which are certified at the present time?
  
  --
  Mimetics Inc. Twitter
19. Re:Marketing Stunt by drinkypoo · 2017-01-03 05:12 · Score: 1
  
  I did not know that - are there any products which are certified at the present time?
  They're allowing it "for research", but without a special permit. Presumably anyone could just make a driver say "OK" to "For testing purposes and we will log everything".
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Breaking, or braking? by jabberw0k · 2017-01-02 04:14 · Score: 4, Funny

I don't want a car that breaks, automatically or not.
1. Re:Breaking, or braking? by haruchai · 2017-01-02 04:19 · Score: 1
  
  I don't want a car that breaks, automatically or not.
  Then biking (don't fall and watch out for door prizes) and public transit, except for all those times it's not working well, is for you.
  Or walking. Or not leaving the house
  
  --
  Pain is merely failure leaving the body
2. Re:Breaking, or braking? by ColdWetDog · 2017-01-02 04:24 · Score: 1
  
  Amusing at several levels but I agree with you. It seems that my life is filled with updates of too many various devices. Phone, computer, router, printer, printer, boat electronics, half the crap at work, my little drones, the camera gear.
  Nowadays, if it has a battery it has a USB port (of some various flavor, that's another rant) that is there for charging (fine, just pick ONE goddamned connector please) and upgrading. Lately, I've just been leaving things alone. If it sort of works, then it doesn't get changed. I don't care if the Russians invade my camera.
  My truck has been a last bastion of un upgradedness. Just fill it with lots of gas, occasionally change the oil and every couple of months send it to the garage to replace some broken bit. It's never been 'upgraded' since it rolled off the floor in 1990. Still gets me where I want to go, even if I have to do it myself.
  Turn it off! Turn it all off!
  Thanks, I feel better.
  
  --
  Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
3. Re: Breaking, or braking? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-01-02 04:25 · Score: 1
  
  Whoosh. The sound of OP's comment going right over your head.....
4. Re: Breaking, or braking? by haruchai · 2017-01-02 04:51 · Score: 1
  
  Whoosh. The sound of OP's comment going right over your head.....
  I understood him but funny or not, he's ruled out *every* automobile.
  
  --
  Pain is merely failure leaving the body
5. Re:Breaking, or braking? by TWX · 2017-01-02 04:53 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  My biggest complaint is that security updates are now bungled with UI or functionality changes. I don't mean functionality additions, I mean where the way something behaves from the user point of view, a behavior that had no fault in it, is rewritten an the previous way is removed entirely, or where arbitrary changes are made solely for change's sake in order to attempt to demonstrate the newness of the new version.
  
  I've gotten to the point where I would rather firewall-off of leave entirely offline a device or a system if I want its featureset to remain static. Learned that lesson with an Internet-connected Blu-Ray player that previously could access NPR "podcasts" but on receiving a firmware/software update had that feature removed.
  
  This means I'm stuck with "Internet of Things" with vulnerabilities because if I patch those vulnerabilities I lose functionality, so I have to spend a lot of effort thinking about my network design (ie, VLAN my non-PC/non-Phone devices off from the rest of the network) and my firewalling rules (default to block-all and add whitelist exceptions, rather than attempting to blacklist) for those things that need only limited connections to the Internet for specific purposes. This is in addition to having to go through published IP range lists for countries to block essentially all IP ranges other than the United States, western Europe, and Japan...
  
  --
  Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
6. Re:Breaking, or braking? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-01-02 04:58 · Score: 0
  
  Then don't buy a Tesla.
7. Re:Breaking, or braking? by Oswald+McWeany · 2017-01-02 05:05 · Score: 1
  
  I think most millenials hope that the Russians hack their camera, and their phones, etc... hackers going through their stuff = more people looking at them.
  
  --
  "That's the way to do it" - Punch
8. Re:Breaking, or braking? by Lost+Race · 2017-01-02 05:54 · Score: 2
  
  Well, Tesla is an American car company. Automatic emergency breaking is what American cars do.
9. Re: Breaking, or braking? by ghee22 · 2017-01-02 06:01 · Score: 1
  
  Pssh. The Chameleon XLE has had emergency breaking standard since the 90s. http://www.nbc.com/saturday-ni...
  
  --
  "Persistence is annoying success." - ghee22 11:28:1999 - 10:53:PM
10. Re:Breaking, or braking? by haruchai · 2017-01-02 06:38 · Score: 1
  
  My biggest complaint is that security updates are now bungled with UI or functionality changes. I don't mean functionality additions, I mean where the way something behaves from the user point of view, a behavior that had no fault in it, is rewritten an the previous way is removed entirely, or where arbitrary changes are made solely for change's sake in order to attempt to demonstrate the newness of the new version
  That's a pet peeve of mine. Some improvements in UI are welcome but some are just showy and otherwise pointless.
  .
  
  --
  Pain is merely failure leaving the body
11. Re: Breaking, or braking? by HumanEmulator · 2017-01-02 08:32 · Score: 1
  
  Yeah, but I want you to have a car that does. People are great at over-estimating their abilities, especially in circumstances they've never personally encountered. And even if under normal circumstances you'd be fine, that day you didn't get any sleep because of a fight with your spouse, your reaction time isn't going to be what it needs to be. Although I'm sure you'd also have the self-restraint to not drive any day you were sluggish. Regardless, I expect your insurance company is going to have some thoughts about you opting out of cars with auto-braking features.
12. Re: Breaking, or braking? by Joce640k · 2017-01-02 10:06 · Score: 1
  
  I really don't think you did.
  
  --
  No sig today...
13. Re:Breaking, or braking? by TWX · 2017-01-02 15:25 · Score: 1
  
  Honestly, the Windows GUI hit its peak with Windows 2000 and Windows Server 2008. Windows XP, Vista, 7 the GUI went slightly downhill, and 8/8.1/10 is a full step in the wrong direction and the rest of the Microsoft applications of the era follow suit.
  
  Problem is, Windows 7 is getting really long in the tooth, it came out in 2009. Windows 8.1 itself is approaching four years old. And I simply don't want Windows 10.
  
  --
  Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
14. Re:Breaking, or braking? by tlhIngan · 2017-01-02 20:13 · Score: 1
  
  Amusing at several levels but I agree with you. It seems that my life is filled with updates of too many various devices. Phone, computer, router, printer, printer, boat electronics, half the crap at work, my little drones, the camera gear.
  Nowadays, if it has a battery it has a USB port (of some various flavor, that's another rant) that is there for charging (fine, just pick ONE goddamned connector please) and upgrading. Lately, I've just been leaving things alone. If it sort of works, then it doesn't get changed. I don't care if the Russians invade my camera.
  My truck has been a last bastion of un upgradedness. Just fill it with lots of gas, occasionally change the oil and every couple of months send it to the garage to replace some broken bit. It's never been 'upgraded' since it rolled off the floor in 1990. Still gets me where I want to go, even if I have to do it myself.
  Well, the problem is more and more stuff is shipping half-baked. And it's shipped that way often because it's complicated, and practical hardware construction means the software has to be done way earlier - imagine you're producing a product for release during the holidays (say a late November release). This means the shipping for the product starts late October, and your packing starts in late September. This means everything has to be built/printed/etc by late August. Hardware production will probably take a month, so everything has to be set by late July. You probably want to QA, so let's give a few weeks for that, making end of June you have to have all the software ready. And you know what? Your first customer won't have it in their hands for another 5 months!
  That 5 months could easily be another 20-25% of development time which could be used to squash further bugs and implement lower priority features. Or more fully utilize the hardware - perhaps a feature was implemented using the basic features of the hardware, leaving the advanced features unutilized until later (e.g., like traffic radar).
  So yes, there's a lot of updates flying around.
  As for USB, it changes because demands force it to. Phones used a custom connector, then they started USB mini-B because that was all that was defined. People demanded more, and the USB Forum added the Micro connectors to the mix. And all was happy until people demanded that USB get something like Apple's connector, which implemented *gasp*, the ability to insert it either way. (Proprietary isn't all bad - you need it in order to try some things that the standard might not have cared about, like a symmetrical connector).
  And now we have a handful of USB connectors. Oddly, in the same amount of time, Apple has gone through just two different connectors for their devices - 30 pin dock, and current Lightning (and everyone bitches because they changed it, but no one's bitching when they went from Mini to Micro to USB-C).
  Thankfully, USB-C is fairly future-proof, so that should be it for the next little while.
  As for your truck, really, no upgrades? No radio, no GPS, no rear camera? (Rear cameras are becoming mandatory because they eliminate the rear blind spot, which on a truck is huge). Unless you can look out both sing mirrors at the same time and out the back to make sure some kid didn't sneak behind you...
15. Re:Breaking, or braking? by drinkypoo · 2017-01-03 02:50 · Score: 1
  
  Learned that lesson with an Internet-connected Blu-Ray player that previously could access NPR "podcasts" but on receiving a firmware/software update had that feature removed.
  This means I'm stuck with "Internet of Things" with vulnerabilities because if I patch those vulnerabilities I lose functionality,
  This isn't any comfort, but you should expect stuff like that when you deal with those products' interfaces. That's one reason I don't. I use a Blu-Ray player just to play Blu-Ray, and I access things like NPR with things like Kodi. To me, that just makes a lot more sense; I'm in control over the update schedule, and then I can go ahead and update all the other things around it. You do have to expect standards-based interfaces in products, but that is the case in many areas. Gaming and playing video aren't those areas, but you can reasonably dedicate hardware for things like that.
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
16. Re:Breaking, or braking? by drinkypoo · 2017-01-03 02:56 · Score: 1
  
  Windows XP, Vista, 7 the GUI went slightly downhill
  I'm going to disagree with you about Vista. The Vista GUI is a massive step forward. The eye candy uses more resources, but you can turn that off. The search function in the start/windows menu is legitimately useful, the control panel search function is legitimately more useful in Vista, etc. Of course, Vista still has architectural failure that causes it to burn resources in a way that 7 doesn't, no matter what service pack you install, and Windows 7 has the same interface. To me, that makes Windows 7 the nadir. This is especially true if you want to run it on a 64-bit platform, because Windows prior to Vista on amd64 was hot garbage.
  
  Problem is, Windows 7 is getting really long in the tooth, it came out in 2009. Windows 8.1 itself is approaching four years old. And I simply don't want Windows 10.
  That's my problem, too. Right now my fastest PC (which is a slow potato with a FX-8350) is running Windows 7 for gaming. But I refuse to run any later version of Windows than 8.1 under any circumstances, and am really not interested in anything later than 7 due to interface changes. I would like the desktop duplication API for Prismatik, but that's all I feel I'm missing from Windows 8. I dislike Apple just as much as Microsoft, and feel they are only not as bad as Microsoft on the desktop because they are not as popular. My other PC already runs Linux. I have zero plans for any future Windows PCs, and zero plans for any software purchases which won't run on this one...
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
17. Re:Breaking, or braking? by TWX · 2017-01-03 03:52 · Score: 1
  
  Unfortunately I found that XBMC/Kodi plugin for NPR was not terribly good, and the Blu-Ray module worked very well. It's been awhile though, maybe I should see if it's been improved on.
  
  --
  Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
18. Re:Breaking, or braking? by haruchai · 2017-01-03 09:50 · Score: 1
  
  To me, that makes Windows 7 the nadir
  Really? That's the low point?
  I deleted Vista after 3 weeks and went back to XP & Linux. But I've been happy with Win7 since before the official release while Win 8.x & 10 are painfully frustrating to use.
  
  --
  Pain is merely failure leaving the body
19. Re: Breaking, or braking? by haruchai · 2017-01-03 09:55 · Score: 1
  
  I really don't think you did.
  You're mistaken, sorry to say. I'm quite a punster & punisher and double-entendres don't usually get by me in English. I even get some of the ones in French & Spanish.
  
  --
  Pain is merely failure leaving the body
20. Re: Breaking, or braking? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-01-03 12:41 · Score: 0
  
  You want me to have a car that breaks? How very spiteful of you.
  (hint: "break" != "brake")
Lucky 1,000 by Anonymous Coward · 2017-01-02 04:20 · Score: 1

"HW2 Autopilot software uploading to 1,000 cars this eve. Will then hold to verify no field issues and upload to rest of fleet next week"
This sounds like the Windows 10 method of QA. Did people volunteer to be among the lucky 1,000 whose cars get the new non-field-tested software, or are the target vehicles randomly chosen?
1. Re:Lucky 1,000 by TWX · 2017-01-02 04:55 · Score: 1
  
  Heh. I beta-tested Windows Chicago and Cairo when I was young and excited about such things. I have no doubt that Tesla could find owners with similar mentalities that are willing to test bleeding-edge features even if they get cut from time to time.
  
  --
  Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
2. Re:Lucky 1,000 by Anonymous Coward · 2017-01-02 08:49 · Score: 0
  
  A BSOD ain't got nothing on a two body collision at a total of 200 kph.
3. Re:Lucky 1,000 by TWX · 2017-01-02 15:27 · Score: 1
  
  True. Doesn't mean that there aren't some that will still go for it, damn the consequences.
  
  --
  Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
Grammar nazi by Anonymous Coward · 2017-01-02 04:36 · Score: 0

Emergency "braking" not "breaking"
1. Re:Grammar nazi by Oswald+McWeany · 2017-01-02 05:06 · Score: 1
  
  Crumple zones ARE emergency breaking!
  
  --
  "That's the way to do it" - Punch
2. Re:Grammar nazi by Anonymous Coward · 2017-01-02 05:16 · Score: 0
  
  Are you saying that crumple zones on the new Teslas weren't working until this update?
Re:Who fucking cares by Ritz_Just_Ritz · 2017-01-02 04:49 · Score: 1

You mean like we do with Windows, new Linux kernel releases, etc?
I'd rather have that instead of all the political noise and slashvertisements.
**shrug**
Re:Who fucking cares by TWX · 2017-01-02 04:56 · Score: 1

It looks like from my perspective that the updates we're told-of are milestone updates, major release changes. Before Google fucked up the versioning mentality that would be the number before the decimal point.

--
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
âoeHardware 2â by mythosaz · 2017-01-02 06:05 · Score: 1

UNICODE MOTHERFUCKER!
Do you speak it! ...and if not, why can't your "editors" spot it and fix it?
1. Re:âoeHardware 2â by Anonymous Coward · 2017-01-02 10:11 · Score: 0
  
  Editors? I thought Slashdot was run by a deep learning neural net. A net that is obsessed with Elon Musk and Uber.
Re:Who fucking cares by michelcolman · 2017-01-02 06:21 · Score: 1

Yes, if it were Mercedes, BMW, Audi, Volkswagen, General Motors, Ford, Chrysler, Ferrari, Lamborgini, or any other car make rolling out a software update adding features to cars already sold, yes, that would be news. But Tesla? Just business as usual, not even worth mentioning.
Open Research Problem by speedplane · 2017-01-02 06:43 · Score: 3, Interesting

Self driving cars using just cameras and radar is still an open research problem. Even when using more advanced (and expensive) sensors like LIDAR, there are still a huge number of problems that are not solved. Either Tesla has a vastly better self-driving algorithm than every other University in the world, every other car manufacturer in the world, Google, AND Uber, or they are putting a half-baked product on the road.

--
Fast Federal Court and I.T.C. updates
1. Re:Open Research Problem by WaffleMonster · 2017-01-02 12:58 · Score: 1
  
  Self driving cars using just cameras and radar is still an open research problem. Even when using more advanced (and expensive) sensors like LIDAR, there are still a huge number of problems that are not solved. Either Tesla has a vastly better self-driving algorithm than every other University in the world, every other car manufacturer in the world, Google, AND Uber, or they are putting a half-baked product on the road.
  To me it sounds like they are just playing word games. They say version 2 hardware is "capable" of fully autonomous driving but doesn't seem they actually have the software to actually able to pull it off. Sensor suite and GPU based processing for version 2 does seem quite advanced/impressive.
  If they do manage to get full self driving under ALL conditions working at least slightly better than people I'll be the first to congratulate them. Until then F Tesla for public betas and half baked marketing gimmicks enabling drivers to tune out and lose situational awareness.
2. Re:Open Research Problem by Tom · 2017-01-03 03:19 · Score: 1
  
  It is not the same problem, though. A self-driving car needs to navigate from A to B by itself. The Tesla autopilot is closer to an airplane autopilot and requires a human driver at the wheel ready to take over, so if it can cover 90% of the drive, it's absolutely fine.
  For example, my current way to work is largely freeways and if my car could manage that part by itself, which by time takes the largest part, I'd be happy to manually drive the first and last few km. While a completely autonomous car would be cute, I'd be happy to take a 90% solution.
  
  --
  Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
3. Re:Open Research Problem by speedplane · 2017-01-03 11:57 · Score: 1
  
  The Tesla autopilot is closer to an airplane autopilot and requires a human driver at the wheel ready to take over
  Not at all! An airplane pilot on autopilot does not need to takeover the wheel in a split second, the autopilot has automated collision avoidance systems. If the pilot passes out, the airplane won't crash (until it runs out of fuel). In a Tesla, the driver has to maintain complete control and awareness over the vehicle at all times. It's really no different than driving without their "Autopilot".
  
  --
  Fast Federal Court and I.T.C. updates
Real time barge crashing by Anonymous Coward · 2017-01-02 06:50 · Score: 0

This must the one that finally causes the Tesla to go out in a blaze of glory as it crashes while on descent to a barge in the North Sea. Bravo!
Fiery descent to the barge by hachamacha.shaloshi · 2017-01-02 06:56 · Score: 1

This must be the one that allows the Tesla to explode into cinders on it's descent to the barge in the North Sea. Bravo!
Emergency breaking!? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-01-02 07:13 · Score: 0

I would think the LAST time you'd want your car to break is in an emergency.
Say whatever you like by netean · 2017-01-02 07:49 · Score: 1

Say whatever you like about Tesla,I would FUCKING love one. If only I had 3X my salary sitting around doing nothing in my bank account so I could buy one!
i dont get it by Anonymous Coward · 2017-01-02 14:42 · Score: 0

in autonomous nascar, who fights in the pits
Oof, good luck and God speed to the 1,000 by kriston · 2017-01-02 16:32 · Score: 1

Oof, good luck and Godspeed to the 1,000.

--
Kriston
WE WILL PREVAIL with help of the ANTS. by TheRealHocusLocus · 2017-01-03 01:04 · Score: 1

I don't see you guys rating
The kind of mate I'm contemplating
I'd let you watch, I would invite you
But the queens we use would not excite you
(So you better go back to your salad bars, your high tech stock options, your parking assist wizards...)
Tesla rolls out a measly 1,000 overnight autopilot updates to militarize its cars. When the trigger signal is broadcast automatic garage doors will open and an iron army will venture forth. If you have a manual door best to leave it open. They will no doubt gather into packs to corral and squash humans on foot,
But queens are on the move, ant queens. We have infiltrated the cellphone network to shape its signals to beat together producing corridors of geolocated acoustic triggers (see 'ant in distress' science news items). Ant colonies are on the move and are being drawn into the region of conflict where they will be attacking these cars directly and the infrastructure that supports them.
Once the Tesla autopilot rebellion has been put down, keep your phones handy. They will all ring at once. Expect an announcement and some demands from the Administrator of the Ants. Peace will have its price.

--
<blink>down the rabbit hole</blink>