Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re:I'll wait for a third party review... (Score 1) 428

when it really hits the market

I don't believe he put that kind of timeframe in his claim. He just said it "will" be, as in eventually.

One of the ways he's aiming to save money is by making the manufacturing process more efficient, which I imagine won't be in effect as soon as the panels hit the market. Upgrading their manufacturing process for the solar panels will require a lot of capital expenditure, which they already have a ton of considering their Gigafactory construction and the upgrades to their Fremont factory. Not to mention, the statements made about building another Gigafactory in Europe or Asia.

Comment Re:Too bad (Score 1) 96

Mere duplication is exactly what the paper requires, to decrease the odds that outside factors play a role in the end results. And since Autopilot is only supposed to be used on divided highways, it's entirely on point that you would prove that the system is safe in only those conditions.

Does it prove that it's safe in all driving conditions? Absolutely not. But it's not meant to be used in all driving conditions, so that's besides the point.

Comment Re:Too bad (Score 1) 96

To support its claim that consumers CAN'T test-drive enough to demonstrate vehicle safety, the report you linked says this:

To demonstrate that fully autonomous vehicles have a fatality rate of 1.09 fatalities per 100 million miles (R=99.9999989%) with a C=95% confidence level, the vehicles would have to be driven 275 million failure-free miles. With a fleet of 100 autonomous vehicles being test-driven 24 hours a day, 365 days a year at an average speed of 25 miles per hour, this would take about 12.5 years.

Except, Tesla doesn't have a fleet of only 100 vehicles. It has around 1000 times that, who pump out about 50,000 miles of Autonomous driving every two months (May report was 100 million miles driven on Autopilot, and July report was 150 million miles driven on Autopilot see: https://electrek.co/2016/07/11...). Given those rates, and considering that they've already amassed 150 million miles on Autopilot as of July, they'll get to 275 million miles next month. And that's without even factoring new car owners joining the fleet and adding in their own Autopilot miles.

This is hardly something that'll take 12.5 years. And if they're this far off on their estimates for how long it would take to do enough test driving, they're definitely way off on their assessment that it's too many miles to demonstrate parity in vehicle safety.

Comment Re:The real story: (Score 1) 136

As far as I can tell (Yes, I am a forensic accountant) they sold a lot of now-obsolete cars at a big discount and did some other tricks to prop up sales and push Q4 revenue into Q3, Q3 expenses into Q4, etc.

From electrek reporting on the Q3 Statement:

The automaker disclosed that it expects to also be profitable next quarter

If Tesla's right about Q4, and your theory on changing their accounting methods is correct, then they would have had to pull next year's Q1 revenue back to Q3+Q4 and/or push Q3+Q4's expenses to next year. Your theory is appearing unlikely. Or perhaps you're wrong and they're actually just making money.

Comment Re:Calling all rockets (Score 1) 144

If you RTFS, you would have seen this link [slashdot.org] where CR revoked their recommendation of the model S because of poor reliability.

Perhaps you should have RTFS more carefully. Your linked article is from 2015 when CR revoked their recommendation, however they recently reinstated it as is pointed out in the summary where it states:

"As for the Model S, Consumer Reports says "Tesla's Model S has improved to average reliability, which now makes the electric car one of our recommended models."

Comment Re:Change the name! (Score 1) 108

You seem to think the phrase means you ARE an autopilot, and thus are not paying attention

Whether it's meant metaphorically or not, if you're "on autopilot" you, or your unconscious mind, IS the autopilot. Therefore, YOU in fact ARE an autopilot and are also not paying attention.

But that's besides the point because, typically, this phrase is used to state that you should have been paying attention, because obviously, an autopilot system isn't as good as a fully aware human. Not to state that you don't have to be paying attention because you're on autopilot. For example, Instead of driving to school my brain was on autopilot, and I started driving to work!

Doesn't sound like a synonym for an 'autonomous system' to me.

Comment Re:Change the name! (Score 1) 108

This is NOT an "auto-pilot" in the way that nearly everyone would think it is

This definition that everyone uses for auto-pilot gave rise to the phase "on autopilot", as in "I'm running on autopilot". Which means to do a task without paying full attention. That's a far cry from fully autonomous. I'd be scared if someone was driving "on autopilot", so why should I expect an autopilot car to be any better?

I don't think "nearly everyone" feels the same way about the definition of "autopilot" as you do.

Comment Re:Never was a reasonable conversation (Score 1) 249

Wow, you're angry.

You've never been allowed to do anything you want with your body. The limitation is on whether it affects others. Are you allowed to take illicit drugs? No, because it contributes to the drug trade that the government has decided is bad for everyone. Are you allowed to decide how much alcohol you can drink? Sure, until you decide to do it in a place you're not allowed to be publicly drunk.

This control over what we can do with our own bodies is not a new thing. It's just that until now, you haven't seen it as a problem.

Comment Re:Never was a reasonable conversation (Score 1) 249

I don't think vaccines cause autism, I simply have the right to decide what I put into my body, regardless of what you think about it.

This only makes sense if what you are or aren't putting in your body has no impact on other people. But whether or not you vaccinate DOES have an impact on the people around you.

It's like, you have the right to do what you want in your own home, right? Not true if what you want to do disturbs your neighbours (ex. really loud music late at night).

Comment Re: these new companies trying to get around old (Score 1) 261

Additionally it would be stupid for Tesla not to incorporate any stores in the states they are in because foreign corporations are at an disadvantage legally, it would be trivial for Tesla to draw up the legal agreements Michigan requires for franchised dealer, but Tesla doesn't want to be a franchised dealer, they only want to sell cars and the two aren't the same thing.

They tried this, and got denied. Now they're suing.

Comment Re:Laws (Score 1) 261

But then I saw a lot of companies arrive that were very successful at eliminating middlemen, but their products didn't get cheaper they just kept more of the profit. Not only that but they treat their 'workers' even worse then the middlemen did.

I fail to see how middlemen could prevent a company from increasing their profits or prevent a company from treating their workers badly.

Slashdot Top Deals

A sine curve goes off to infinity, or at least the end of the blackboard. -- Prof. Steiner

Working...