teslamotorclub: Consumer Reports recommends Tesla disable Autosteer and make changes to AutoPilot part 1

Didn't see this posted here yet.
See article here:
Tesla's Autopilot: Too Much Autonomy Too Soon
�

Don't underestimate the dumb.
�

tomp said: ?

Didn't see this posted here yet.
See article here:
Tesla's Autopilot: Too Much Autonomy Too Soon
Click to expand...

I saw it on Yahoo News here:

Consumer Reports says Tesla should drop Autopilot name

I also commented:

What does CR think an autopilot should do? This is the definition I found on wikipedia as quoted from a chapter of an FAA manual entitled "Automated Flight Controls":

An autopilot is a system used to control the trajectory of a vehicle without constant 'hands-on' control by a human operator being required. Autopilots do not replace a human operator, but assist them in controlling the vehicle, allowing them to focus on broader aspects of operation, such as monitoring the trajectory, weather and systems.

This is exactly what the Tesla system does. I own a Tesla and have driven with the autopilot. It is not an autonomous driving system, it is an aid.
�

Autopilot's problems aren't all Tesla's fault, they're our own - Roadshow
�

This is what's absurd about modern media, everyone likes to pile on if they think it'll generate more clicks... CR is simply being opportunistic and it's just ridiculous...

Jeff
�

Consumer Reports calls for Tesla to disable Autopilot, Tesla says no
�

S'toon said: ?

Consumer Reports calls for Tesla to disable Autopilot, Tesla says no
Click to expand...

Tesla's response is spot-on. Kudos to them.
�

Consumer Report is now total *sugar* to me. Just jumping in with the boat of sensationalist lying media. Ignoring logic!
�

sandpiper said: ?

Tesla's response is spot-on. Kudos to them.
Click to expand...

Defiance has a cost. CR will be releasing their Model X review soon.
�

I also wrote a long comment on CR's post (I am a long-time member of CR). My point was essentially that the features that seem to be under investigation in the Florida crash are those for TACC, not autosteering. No one that I have read has suggested that the car should have steered itself out of that crash. And I said that TACC is a technology in wide use on many makes and models, not only Tesla. But CR has not suggested any limitations on TACC-like systems on other makes.
I think the various media outlets, in this case including CR, have failed to understand the distinctions among the various aspects of the Autopilot suite of features and have made rather sweeping conclusions about the whole system. I only hope the investigating agencies and the regulators are more careful to make those distinctions.
�

Issue clearer guidance to owners on how the system should be used and its limitations
No evidence is presented that the existing guidance is insufficiently clear. CR should cite specifics.

Test all safety-critical systems fully before public deployment; no more beta releases

CR is assuming, again without evidence, that it is (at least) the safety aspects of these systems that is "beta" and not merely
the functionality.
�

David29 said: ?

I also wrote a long comment on CR's post (I am a long-time member of CR). My point was essentially that the features that seem to be under investigation in the Florida crash are those for TACC, not autosteering. No one that I have read has suggested that the car should have steered itself out of that crash. And I said that TACC is a technology in wide use on many makes and models, not only Tesla. But CR has not suggested any limitations on TACC-like systems on other makes.
I think the various media outlets, in this case including CR, have failed to understand the distinctions among the various aspects of the Autopilot suite of features and have made rather sweeping conclusions about the whole system. I only hope the investigating agencies and the regulators are more careful to make those distinctions.
Click to expand...

I'm not familiar with all the other systems. Some have commented that other systems are more aggressive at ensuring hands are on the wheel. Would you still use the system if it required hand on the wheel at all times?
�

zer0cool said: ?

Consumer Report is now total *sugar* to me. Just jumping in with the boat of sensationalist lying media. Ignoring logic!
Click to expand...

You people all LOVED Consumer Reports when they rated the Model S "Best Car Ever!", and when they rated it off the charts ("highest score ever") for performance everyone was raving about CR and their unbiased credibility. Lots of people bought cars based on those CR ratings. Then last year they dropped their rating due to reliability issues and people jumped all over them, said you can't trust their evaluation. Now we have this. You can't have it both ways.
�

RogerHScott said: ?

Test all safety-critical systems fully before public deployment; no more beta releases

CR is assuming, again without evidence, that it is (at least) the safety aspects of these systems that is "beta" and not merely
the functionality.
Click to expand...

See my post here for an explanation. CR is certainly jumping on the "omg, beta" bandwagon.
�

David29 said: ?

I also wrote a long comment on CR's post (I am a long-time member of CR). My point was essentially that the features that seem to be under investigation in the Florida crash are those for TACC, not autosteering. No one that I have read has suggested that the car should have steered itself out of that crash. And I said that TACC is a technology in wide use on many makes and models, not only Tesla. But CR has not suggested any limitations on TACC-like systems on other makes.
I think the various media outlets, in this case including CR, have failed to understand the distinctions among the various aspects of the Autopilot suite of features and have made rather sweeping conclusions about the whole system. I only hope the investigating agencies and the regulators are more careful to make those distinctions.
Click to expand...

Excellent point. Although I think the gist of it all is:

a) Yes the trucker cut across into incoming traffic.
b) Autosteering enabled the driver to not pay attention to the road, and this resulted in the accident.
c) Without autosteering the driver would have seen the truck and could have reacted, potentially avoiding the accident.

So, while autosteering could not have avoided the accident, it partially enabled a situation that led to it, but without including a secondary system that was fully capable of preventing it.
�

msnow said: ?

You people all LOVED Consumer Reports when they rated the Model S "Best Car Ever!", and when they rated it off the charts ("highest score ever") for performance everyone was raving about CR and their unbiased credibility. Lots of people bought cars based on those CR ratings. Then last year they dropped their rating due to reliability issues and people jumped all over them, said you can't trust their evaluation. Now we have this. You can't have it both ways.
Click to expand...

A few things:

1) Their reviews were based on their actual experience with the car.
2) The reliability ratings I believe to be accurate, but misleading as they were skewed toward early builds. Having said that, the data is the data.
3) Their autopilot recommendations are based on nothing but speculation and misunderstanding of both events and the system. As are most of the media articles.

It is possible for me to pick and choose where I think CR is being thorough, where they are falling down in their analysis, and where they are being hyperbolic. So yeah, I don't think it's necessarily bias when critical thought is applied.
�

msnow said: ?

You can't have it both ways.
Click to expand...

But I want my sycophant media and I want it NOW!
�

Stoneymonster said: ?

A few things:

1) Their reviews were based on their actual experience with the car.
2) The reliability ratings I believe to be accurate, but misleading as they were skewed toward early builds. Having said that, the data is the data.
3) Their autopilot recommendations are based on nothing but speculation and misunderstanding of both events and the system. As are most of the media articles.

It is possible for me to pick and choose where I think CR is being thorough, where they are falling down in their analysis, and where they are being hyperbolic. So yeah, I don't think it's necessarily bias when critical thought is applied.
Click to expand...

Good points, that's fair.
�

sandpiper said: ?

the driver would have seen the truck
Click to expand...

This is contrary to claims that neither the car nor the driver could see the white truck against the light sky background.
I'm not sure I believe that, but that's the claim.
�

RogerHScott said: ?

This is contrary to claims that neither the car nor the driver could see the white truck against the light sky background.
I'm not sure I believe that, but that's the claim.
Click to expand...

I think the claim is the driver "didn't" see it, not he "couldn't". In this case he "didn't" because he was likely doing something else at the time. Even if you "couldn't" see it initially you'd likely have seen it at least several seconds before impact.
�

Just cancelled my renewal with CR.
�

msnow said: ?

You people all LOVED Consumer Reports when they rated the Model S "Best Car Ever!", and when they rated it off the charts ("highest score ever") for performance everyone was raving about CR and their unbiased credibility. Lots of people bought cars based on those CR ratings. Then last year they dropped their rating due to reliability issues and people jumped all over them, said you can't trust their evaluation. Now we have this. You can't have it both ways.
Click to expand...

I didn't bash CR when it lowered the reliability rating, but knew to take it with a grain of salt given that the car is completely new, with completely new drivetrain technology, and it would be expected to go through some growing pains. I didn't have much of an issue with that.

But I have an issue with how they pick on Tesla and only Tesla in this case. As is being discussed in a thread with the same topic here, other manufacturers have far worse performing steering systems on the market (as substantiated by tests by Car and Driver, Motor Trend, and some Norwegian car magazine), and some (MB) even claim their car is self-driving, but CR is saying nothing about those other manufacturers.

That's where the bias and BS is.
�

Xenius said: ?

I think the claim is the driver "didn't" see it
Click to expand...

Not to quibble (well, maybe to quibble a little ), if he (simply) didn't see it, what difference does it make what color the thing he
didn't see was?
�

Todd Burch said: ?

I didn't bash CR when it lowered the reliability rating, but knew to take it with a grain of salt given that the car is completely new, with completely new drivetrain technology, and it would be expected to go through some growing pains. I didn't have much of an issue with that.

But I have an issue with how they pick on Tesla and only Tesla in this case. As is being discussed in a thread with the same topic here, other manufacturers have far worse performing steering systems on the market, and some (MB) even claim their car is self-driving, but CR is saying nothing about those other manufacturers.

That's where the bias and BS is.
Click to expand...

Spot on. There is a lot of very bad stuff going on in the auto industry. For the focus to be on Tesla suggests reasons other than the substance and severity of the issues Tesla is experiencing.
�

I hope Elon mentions other car manufacturers in a rebuttal to CR and the media. Seriously, if the media is going to turn up the heat on Tesla, they should do it on other driver assistance packages as well. ESPECIALLY those that perform far worse.

Another point: This fatality had absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with autosteer anyway. Total CR fail here.
�

msnow said: ?

You people all LOVED Consumer Reports when they rated the Model S "Best Car Ever!", and when they rated it off the charts ("highest score ever") for performance everyone was raving about CR and their unbiased credibility. Lots of people bought cars based on those CR ratings. Then last year they dropped their rating due to reliability issues and people jumped all over them, said you can't trust their evaluation. Now we have this. You can't have it both ways.
Click to expand...

I don't know about you but I never give my unconditional "love" to any media corporation. In the real world, the media is a mixed bag. Sometimes I like a particular article, sometimes not. You really need to look at the content of any article and not just blindly accept the source. Is the article well reasoned and based on facts? This article from CR is just irrational ranting. The Model S review seemed to be based on careful analysis of facts.
I am not a blind cheerleader for anyone.
�

mspohr said: ?

I don't know about you but I never give my unconditional "love" to any media corporation. In the real world, the media is a mixed bag. Sometimes I like a particular article, sometimes not. You really need to look at the content of any article and not just blindly accept the source. Is the article well reasoned and based on facts? This article from CR is just irrational ranting. The Model S review seemed to be based on careful analysis of facts.
I am not a blind cheerleader for anyone.
Click to expand...

Agree, me either but when people make blanket general statements that CR as a media source is biased, unreliable and can't be trusted, that applies to the articles you agree with as well as the ones you don't. In the case of Tesla reviews many of the articles were written by the same person.
�

The only reason I bought a second MS was for AutoPilot (advertised functionality at the time). If they choose to disable or significantly neuter it; I'd like them to buy it back from me (the whole car, not just AP @ $2500)...
�

Autosteer did not cause this. Heck, autosteer is not the part of "autopilot" that needed to react when the driver failed to... Lost a lot of respect for CR today.
�

Well, releasing a grand, solemn pronouncement to the nation at 6:00 am so it gets picked up by as many outlets as possible is one way to attempt to stay relevant:

From 2013: "Consumer Reports is struggling to change as it faces new competition. Can it reverse this downward trend?

A memo to Consumer Reports top managers in February of 2012 was blunt: �CR is not growing revenues or subscribers, and we are losing money. We must right the ship.�

The ship began veering off course in 2011 after many blockbuster years....

The memo, titled �Next Steps,� outlined the nonprofit company�s goals, including: �Build a more compelling and differentiated brand,�

�We are currently losing money,� Bunin wrote his senior managers. �This is not acceptable going forward and we are going to have to reduce expenses. The lion�s share of our expenses are staff.�...

...many old-timers were slow to embrace online reader reviews. There was the attitude, �Users don�t know anything; we�re the experts.'�"

� �Change is hard�: Consumer Reports restructures to survive in the digital era JIMROMENESKO.COM
�

June 2015 - Consumer Reports appears to continue to lose staff:

"Consumer Reports has laid off 17 staffers this week, sources confirmed Wednesday. Six of those laid off were managers while 11 were members of the News Guild. The company�s editorial side has been in turmoil for several years now. It has gone through three editors in the past three years and has struggled to revamp its operations to focus more on digital."

Consumer Reports lays off 17 staffers - Talking Biz News
�

By the way, I actually had a chance last week to replicate part of the fatal accident - quite by chance.

A tractor trailer pulled out in front of me from my left while I was doing 55 and the trailer was across - right in front of me - while the driver very slowly then turned left and pulled in front of me. While perpendicular to me, I sat back, ready to intervene, to see if the car would react. As happened in Florida - it did not. So, it certainly appears to be a limitation of the hardware, AND, a decision by the Mobileye to ignore an overhead sign false positive.

Autosteer continued to do its job, but TACC did not react. However, I was alert and paying attention and certainly able to take over and stop. This is my job as the driver of my car.

As one who was drawn to Model S by autopilot, I do not want Tesla to give an inch here. It is an amazing aid to long distance driving, but the bottom line of responsibility rests in the driver's seat.
�

Consumer Reports does have a bias ... toward safety, reliability and value. That, along with independence and trust is their entire brand. That, in turn, makes them a very conservative organization and their recommendation is quite conservative as well. To me, that's perfectly acceptable. They are not news journalists and are acting as advocates in this situation. I disagree with their stance, but that's quite irrelevant

There are two components to their argument. The first is that the word Autopilot is misleading. While it's a meaningless distinction, perhaps, I would instead say that the general public misunderstands what the word autopilot actually means. This will be fought in the marketing, brand and risk arena and I predict that the word autopilot will be discontinued. There's too much risk of a misunderstanding based on a layman's understanding of the word.

The second is that it takes too long for someone to reengage with the task of driving if they become too complacent and that the auto steer component of the package encourages disengagement if there's no requirement to keep hands on the wheel. Because the failover mechanism is weak, this is deemed to be a fatal flaw. I'm suspicious of the hyperbole used with the 3-17 second claim in the study (which I haven't reviewed). Honestly, the 17s person must have been asleep.

We can all agree about what people should do but the reality is what people actually do. Tesla needs to either design for the reality or provide sufficient education to create a new reality. Otherwise this fantastic feature will be regulated out of existence.
�

Maybe CR feels after their last suggestion they have more influence than is believed.

Tesla to Fix Self-Parking Feature After Consumer Reports Raises Safety Concern

I specifically remember why Tesla is bothering with such nonsense when they have plenty of bugs within 7.1 to fix or improve yet they have a mass rollout for the firmware that addresses CR's needs.
�

JohnQ said: ?

Consumer Reports does have a bias ... toward safety, reliability and value. That, along with independence and trust is their entire brand. That, in turn, makes them a very conservative organization and their recommendation is quite conservative as well. To me, that's perfectly acceptable. They are not news journalists and are acting as advocates in this situation. I disagree with their stance, but that's quite irrelevant

There are two components to their argument. The first is that the word Autopilot is misleading. While it's a meaningless distinction, perhaps, I would instead say that the general public misunderstands what the word autopilot actually means. This will be fought in the marketing, brand and risk arena and I predict that the word autopilot will be discontinued. There's too much risk of a misunderstanding based on a layman's understanding of the word.

The second is that it takes too long for someone to reengage with the task of driving if they become too complacent and that the auto steer component of the package encourages disengagement if there's no requirement to keep hands on the wheel. Because the failover mechanism is weak, this is deemed to be a fatal flaw. I'm suspicious of the hyperbole used with the 3-17 second claim in the study (which I haven't reviewed). Honestly, the 17s person must have been asleep.

We can all agree about what people should do but the reality is what people actually do. Tesla needs to either design for the reality or provide sufficient education to create a new reality. Otherwise this fantastic feature will be regulated out of existence.
Click to expand...

Yes. Even though it seems irrelevant, changing the name of AP, requiring hands on the steering wheel at all times and better training for new owners are all inevitable. We may not like it but Tesla needs to get past this as soon as possible so we can all move forward with bigger and better things.
�

Consumer Reports acts like they are unbiased. My personal opinion is that when they hailed the Model S as "the best car ever tested", they received a ton of backlash from the big auto makers who depend upon CR to sell their cars for them. Once the management at CR got enough flack from traditional builders, they "recanted" their recommendation by saying the Model S was unreliable. Simple politics and lobbying influence. I believe CR is doing the same thing here. My opinion only. No facts to back it up, but I think theory is sound.
�

CuriousG said: ?

I specifically remember [wondering?] why Tesla is bothering with such nonsense when they have plenty of bugs within 7.1 to fix or improve yet they have a mass rollout for the firmware that addresses CR's needs.
Click to expand...

This was such an obvious fix I wasn't at all surprised to see them make it. I would hope it didn't actually take them very long.
I just wished they had gone one small step further and included the "ok, just go ahead and park now" button on the screen.
�

No mass market product can require training to be safe. Even requiring training to be useful or enjoyable likely dooms it to never
being mass market. Perhaps there'll be multiple "modes" of AP operation where the default requires no training and is very nanny-ish
but the more advanced modes, with (mandatory?) training, will allow significantly greater autonomy/inattentiveness.
�

RogerHScott said: ?

This is contrary to claims that neither the car nor the driver could see the white truck against the light sky background.
I'm not sure I believe that, but that's the claim.
Click to expand...

No... the the driver "didn't" see it. There was no implication that he couldn't were he watching.

My personal feeling is that people have to be adults and be responsible for their own conduct. Sadly that's not always the case, but if you start with the premise that people aren't responsible, then nothing good will ever get built.
�

sandpiper said: ?

No... the the driver "didn't" see it. There was no implication that he couldn't were he watching.
Click to expand...

See #23, above.
�

RogerHScott said: ?

Not to quibble (well, maybe to quibble a little ), if he (simply) didn't see it, what difference does it make what color the thing he
didn't see was?
Click to expand...

I think this was only brought up to so as not to confuse the the general public with the technical details of how the AP works; to make it more understandable to the general public that the AP system didn't notice the truck.

The reality ( I think ?? ) is that the camera isn't in the braking system loop at all. I believe that auto-braking is strictly controlled by the radar which can't see more than a few feet above ground.
�

sandpiper said: ?

to make it more understandable to the general public
Click to expand...

This seems like a variant on "lamp-posting": they're explaining what's easy to explain rather than what's relevant. The truth
is the truck could have been painted with fire-engine red diagonal strips and giant purple polka dots and the car still wouldn't
have "seen" it. Similarly, if the driver wasn't looking...
�

RogerHScott said: ?

This seems like a variant on "lamp-posting": they're explaining what's easy to explain rather than what's relevant. The truth
is the truck could have been painted with fire-engine red diagonal strips and giant purple polka dots and the car still wouldn't
have "seen" it. Similarly, if the driver wasn't looking...
Click to expand...

No disagreement. But, sadly, explaining simple technical concepts, to a large group is very very difficult. So I can forgive Tesla taking a bit of license on this one.
�

Some vindication here on the overreacting of CR:

Autopilot wasn�t on during Model X crash in PA and Musk says it would have prevented accident

One of the incidents contributing to the media frenzy snowball was a lie. Don't hold your breath waiting for the main stream media to correct this....
�

RogerHScott said: ?

This seems like a variant on "lamp-posting": they're explaining what's easy to explain rather than what's relevant. The truth
is the truck could have been painted with fire-engine red diagonal strips and giant purple polka dots and the car still wouldn't
have "seen" it. Similarly, if the driver wasn't looking...
Click to expand...

I have not followed the original thread(s) closely enough. Why would the car not have seen the truck, even if painted differently?
�

tomp said: ?

I have not followed the original thread(s) closely enough. Why would the car not have seen the truck, even if painted differently?
Click to expand...

The radar would not have acted due to the scenario, so next option is Mobileye. Mobileye has been told to ignore this sort of thing to avoid it being confused with overhead highway signs. A limitation of the current hardware, but by design and known to developers.
�

RogerHScott said: ?

No mass market product can require training to be safe. Even requiring training to be useful or enjoyable likely dooms it to never
being mass market. Perhaps there'll be multiple "modes" of AP operation where the default requires no training and is very nanny-ish
but the more advanced modes, with (mandatory?) training, will allow significantly greater autonomy/inattentiveness.
Click to expand...

Are you kidding?
Automobiles as a generic product class are certainly mass market, and they require training to be used safely. You demonstrate that you have sufficient training to use it, supposedly safely, by taking a test and getting a license to operate the things on public roads.
�

Brunton said: ?

Are you kidding?
Automobiles as a generic product class are certainly mass market, and they require training to be used safely. You demonstrate that you have sufficient training to use it, supposedly safely, by taking a test and getting a license to operate the things on public roads.
Click to expand...

What model- or brand-specific training have you received for any passenger vehicle you've ever owned or driven? You buy a car, you
drive it off the lot, you're on your own. We're not talking about "cars" in general, or even "EVs", or even "(semi-)autonomous vehicles" --
we're talking about one particular version of the AP system in one model of vehicle.
�

tomp said: ?

I have not followed the original thread(s) closely enough. Why would the car not have seen the truck, even if painted differently?
Click to expand...

Because the (TACC system in the) car doesn't "see" anything -- it doesn't employ visual information at all.
�

RogerHScott said: ?

Because the (TACC system in the) car doesn't "see" anything -- it doesn't employ visual information at all.
Click to expand...

Tesla's TACC most certainly uses MobilEye who's camera and chip is in the center of the Tesla AutoPilot system. It's that camera thing behind the rear view mirror.

Exclusive: The Tesla AutoPilot - An In-Depth Look At The Technology Behind the Engineering Marvel

�

sandpiper said: ?

Excellent point. Although I think the gist of it all is:

a) Yes the trucker cut across into incoming traffic.
b) Autosteering enabled the driver to not pay attention to the road, and this resulted in the accident.
c) Without autosteering the driver would have seen the truck and could have reacted, potentially avoiding the accident.

So, while autosteering could not have avoided the accident, it partially enabled a situation that led to it, but without including a secondary system that was fully capable of preventing it.
Click to expand...

Well, that is an excellent point. If it were not for the auto-steering, indeed the driver would more likely have paid more attention. (Which assumes that the driver was in fact not paying attention, as seems to be indicated by his lack of braking.)
�

Jalopnik actually posted a rebuttal to CR today, saying CR overreacted:
http://jalopnik.com/why-teslas-autopilot-isnt-the-menace-you-think-it-is-1783682751
�

I just posted my comments below but I guess it needs approval because it doesn't show up just yet:

To require drivers to keep their hands on the steering wheel might not solve the problem of watching Harry Potter movie while on Autopilot.

The problem is: Lack of knowledge.

People might not understand that no matter how good technology of today is, crashes can still happen.

That is not an isolated problem for Tesla but airplanes with aviation Autopilot can still crash too.

To fix that problem, drivers need to read their owner�s manual. But:

The problem is: Drivers may not read owner�s manual.

If they do read it, they may notice that there are about 19 instances where the word �death� is mentioned.

If they do read it, they wouldn�t wonder why Tesla Automatic Emergency Braking did not brake to avoid collisions in their own tests, including a test on real live human.

The best tool to prevent accident whether in the presence of Autopliot or not, is a qualified driver who is in control of the operation of the car at all time.

The problem is: Untrained drivers

�Handoff Problem� is not isolated in cars but also in airplane Autopilot as well. Some pilots seemed to forget how to fly their planes when Autopilot transferred the controls back to them which resulted in crashes too.

Thus, the effort should be focused on increasing the quality of a driver.
�

Nope, not going to happen.
�

woof said: ?

Tesla's TACC most certainly uses MobilEye who's camera and chip is in the center of the Tesla AutoPilot system. It's that camera thing behind the rear view mirror.

Exclusive: The Tesla AutoPilot - An In-Depth Look At The Technology Behind the Engineering Marvel

Click to expand...

This all sounds like auto-steer, rather than TACC. Just to confirm this, I'll have to try an experiment blocking the camera and seeing whether TACC still functions.
�

RogerHScott said: ?

This all sounds like auto-steer, rather than TACC. Just to confirm this, I'll have to try an experiment blocking the camera and seeing whether TACC still functions.
Click to expand...

It won't.
�

Well it took 3 accidents to get CR to freak out. I wonder how many severe injuries, attacks, and robberies it will take for the same response to this new Pokemon game?

Pok�mon Go Mania Leads To Dangerous Consquences
�

Tam said: ?

The problem is: Untrained drivers

�Handoff Problem� is not isolated in cars but also in airplane Autopilot as well. Some pilots seemed to forget how to fly their planes when Autopilot transferred the controls back to them which resulted in crashes too.

Thus, the effort should be focused on increasing the quality of a driver.
Click to expand...

The problem is similar to what, I understand, happened at the advent of cruise control. At first there was some excitement and concern that the car could drive itself without foot on the accelerator. And at some point, for sure, the first person died because they didn't hit the brake because they had their feet up on the dash or something similarly stupid.

Eventually the public came to grips with how and when to use the technology and everything settled down. And yet I'm sure that some people still die because they plow into the back of another car while cruise is enabled.

I think "training" is overkill. No amount of training will help the idiots on youtube. You can't fix stupid. But I think that the tendency to do stupid things will decline as the novelty of the technology declines. Nobody will want to watch you show off your AP when everybody has one. The idiots on youtube will have to find some other way to entertain others.
�

valkeriefire said: ?

Consumer Reports acts like they are unbiased. My personal opinion is that when they hailed the Model S as "the best car ever tested", they received a ton of backlash from the big auto makers who depend upon CR to sell their cars for them. Once the management at CR got enough flack from traditional builders, they "recanted" their recommendation by saying the Model S was unreliable. Simple politics and lobbying influence. I believe CR is doing the same thing here. My opinion only. No facts to back it up, but I think theory is sound.
Click to expand...

As someone who lives in prime anti-Tesla lobbyist country, definitely agree with this sentiment. At this point, they seem willing to do/print whatever they can to soften up their "BEST CAR EVARR!!" initial response

I get CR for (almost) free and I do use their recommendations, but mostly as a spring board to knowledge. For instance, I can't say I know a lot about refrigerator brands/models. Thus, I will look at the overall impressions by consumer reports to get a better idea of who/what is in the marketplace. Then once I've narrowed things down, I'll do further research on that smaller pool of candidates. In the case of Tesla, it's clear that they think the actual performance of the car is top notch (which is a consensus), but that the reliability is suspect. It doesn't take much searching to see that most complaints were with fit/finish and that overall customer satisfaction is high. In less that one month of owning the car, I've had a door handle replaced, so that would go under "reliability" as a negative for sure. As a potential consumer it's your job to determine how that affects you and your propensity to purchase. After all, it's called consumer "reports" not consumer "commandments."
�

Calm down everyone,

The hysteria over Tesla�s Autopilot has been completely blown out of proportion
�

Maybe instead Tesla should show individual driver's statistics and what percentage of the time they use AP and how well the software did react to various instances or circumstances . Hmm?
�

valkeriefire said: ?

Consumer Reports acts like they are unbiased. My personal opinion is that when they hailed the Model S as "the best car ever tested", they received a ton of backlash from the big auto makers who depend upon CR to sell their cars for them. Once the management at CR got enough flack from traditional builders, they "recanted" their recommendation by saying the Model S was unreliable. Simple politics and lobbying influence. I believe CR is doing the same thing here. My opinion only. No facts to back it up, but I think theory is sound.
Click to expand...

They are actually quite independent from automakers since they receive zero funding from them. In fact, they've even canceled magazine subscriptions from dealerships as it's a flow of money from automotive related companies to the magazine. When they do evaluate cars, they blind buy them from dealerships so that they don't get any kind of special treatment above and beyond a typical consumer.

Consumer Reports in the past has pointed out significant problems with other automakers' vehicles leading to sales suspensions and recalls so they aren't just picking on Tesla.
�

sandpiper said: ?

The problem is similar to what, I understand, happened at the advent of cruise control. At first there was some excitement and concern that the car could drive itself without foot on the accelerator. And at some point, for sure, the first person died because they didn't hit the brake because they had their feet up on the dash or something similarly stupid.

Eventually the public came to grips with how and when to use the technology and everything settled down. And yet I'm sure that some people still die because they plow into the back of another car while cruise is enabled....
Click to expand...

You know, I have been thinking in exactly those lines when I first heard some friends claim that they know some Tesla owners who were reading books on their commute to work. Does anyone recall any specific instances in the first days of cruise control, when a crash occurred because cruise control was not disengaged in time because the driver wasn't paying attention?
�

iffatall said: ?

You know, I have been thinking in exactly those lines when I first heard some friends claim that they know some Tesla owners who were reading books on their commute to work. Does anyone recall any specific instances in the first days of cruise control, when a crash occurred because cruise control was not disengaged in time because the driver wasn't paying attention?
Click to expand...

There's the old story about the RV and the sandwich. The whole story behind the urban legend is pretty amusing and interesting to look at how we discuss the AP situation: Cruise Control as Auto Pilot
�

Hota said: ?

They are actually quite independent from automakers since they receive zero funding from them. In fact, they've even canceled magazine subscriptions from dealerships as it's a flow of money from automotive related companies to the magazine. When they do evaluate cars, they blind buy them from dealerships so that they don't get any kind of special treatment above and beyond a typical consumer.

Consumer Reports in the past has pointed out significant problems with other automakers' vehicles leading to sales suspensions and recalls so they aren't just picking on Tesla.
Click to expand...

First off I like CR. It is a great source for buying just about anything. I don't believe they are picking on Tesla. But in this case they overstepped their bounds and contributed to the media hysterics. I expect more from CR and am disappointed they took this route. They look like amatuers, not the honest "independent" consumer source they claim to be. I expect this type of reaction from TV news which is why I never watch it. CR took a big hit in the Tesla/Tech community but to the uninformed it is an intelligent assessment. I agree with valkeriefire who feels they are inundated with pressure by the big automakers and maybe even oil barons etc.................
�

Hota said: ?

They are actually quite independent from automakers since they receive zero funding from them. In fact, they've even canceled magazine subscriptions from dealerships as it's a flow of money from automotive related companies to the magazine. When they do evaluate cars, they blind buy them from dealerships so that they don't get any kind of special treatment above and beyond a typical consumer.

Consumer Reports in the past has pointed out significant problems with other automakers' vehicles leading to sales suspensions and recalls so they aren't just picking on Tesla.
Click to expand...

Not only that but they have glorified Tesla in the past. Remember "best car ever"? Remember their performance rating of the Model S was so high it "broke the ratings system"? It's okay to pick and choose which CR articles you choose to accept or reject (including this last one) but they are independent and don't take money from car manufacturers or big oil unless you can prove otherwise.
�

It's not about proof. It is in appearances and it "appears" to me there may be an outside source who pressured CR. My opinion. Their articles are usually very good.This was not an article. This was CR getting on their high horse and telling an automaker what they need to do for "safety" w/o not having all the facts. Same as your local TV news. Like I said I expect better than that from CR
�

EVie'sDad said: ?

Nope, not going to happen.
Click to expand...

What I meant at the end of the letter to Consumer Reports is: Instead of acting like a legislator to make law to keep hands on steering wheel, the magazine can be more productive in the effort of making its readers a better driver.

That could be something as simple as doing an article on what the owner's manual says. People may hate reading a manual, but they may love to read magazine.

An example is Tesla Automatic Emergency Braking: Multiple owners have gone to youtube to test the feature and wonder why it didn't brake to a stop to avoid accident. One even tested that feature with a live person as a pedestrian.

The magazine could conduct those tests instead, then it can say read your manual because that's the way it says in the manual.

It could be something more involved like organizing an Autopilot conference.

Or the magazine could open up a hands-on Autopilot training class and so on...

But, you are right: "Nope, not going to happen."
�

EVie'sDad said: ?

Maybe instead Tesla should show individual driver's statistics and what percentage of the time they use AP and how well the software did react to various instances or circumstances . Hmm?
Click to expand...

While waiting for that, In the mean time, there's a graph of centering a lane by Autopilot vs. human, an it shows Autopilot does a better job:

�

Here is another example of what CR SHOULD be looking at more closely at this time. If Pokemon Go doesn't lead to more accidents and injuries in the very near future then CR/NHTSA/etc. are not doing their true 'due diligence' in protecting us from ourselves. In this short video, CNET attempts to find the best Pokemon Go car to go racing around the streets in. Imagine what this would be like if your friendly neighborhood teens were behind the wheel. Just listen to the instructions given to the drivers while they toodle around town:

The race is on for Pokemon Go - Roadshow
�

msnow said: ?

...they are independent and don't take money from car manufacturers or big oil unless you can prove otherwise.
Click to expand...

Chopr147 said: ?

It's not about proof. It is in appearances and it "appears" to me there may be an outside source who pressured CR.
Click to expand...

My theory is that CR is no longer independent, but not in the way you are thinking. CR appears to be hurting financially - see articles I posted earlier. Consumer Reports is now a slave to the media cycle in a way it wasn't before - because nobody gives a sh*t about CR any more or pays attention to it. What do both "breaking the ratings system" with the Model S, then "withdrawing" their recommendation, and now finally trying to command Tesla to obey them on some big hot button issue all have in common?

They got other publications (which people actually DO read) to mention Consumer Reports.

This is KEY - because nobody actually reads Consumer Reports any more, but they still exist in our collective memories as some supposedly wise, objective source of wisdom that our grandparents read. This is the indirect currency the magazine has - but how can they leverage it into obtaining dollars to survive?

Here is a bit of data from CR's own Twitter feed:

Insight number one - nobody reads CR's Tweets - look at their retweet numbers - they're pathetic - in general less than 5 retweets unless the item is a hot button issue paid attention to in the wider culture. A quick comparison with Road & Track shows that many R&T tweets about items not of interest to the public generate 10 times more retweets than CR's.

Until you come to Tesla - CR has pinned their "Obey us now, Mr. Musk!" tweet to the top of their feed - and it has 64 retweets - a bononza by CR's usually pathetic standards. Move over to Musk's feed and you see his pronouncements generating retweets in the thousands.

I am sure CR's editors have figured out by now that one way to generate views (and hopefully subscriptions) is to say something so outrageous that the mainstream media quotes CR as a source of wisdom and generates traffic - because Consumer Reports has become so irrelevant to young people that they no longer have the power to be self sustaining.

How else can you explain CR's bizaare relationship with Tesla? First, praise so over the top it was silly. Then the equivalent of a pouting lover - withdrawing the recommendation. Finally, a last gasp for attention from a partner who doesn't care about you with an outburst of condemnation.

If CR was a person a psychiatrist would likely diagnose this behavior as consistent with borderline personality disorder. Highly dramatic relationships - bad for one's personal life but great for traffic from a once-respected, now starving publication.
�

Hota said: ?

[...]so they aren't just picking on Tesla.
Click to expand...

In this instance they appear to be, since Autopilot, and not similar driver assist features from other automakers, is under scrutiny.
�

I will grant CR this - their CEO, Marta Tellado, has an impressive resume. She has a phd in political science from Yale - unlike most CEO's she appears to have a background of thinking deeply about the world's problems. This fact makes CR's naked attention grabs with Tesla all the more disappointing.
�

The response by Tesla says a lot about how CR has forgotten its roots as a data-driven organization. CR is supposed to be an antidote to speculative media not a supporter of it.

"While we appreciate well-meaning advice from any individual or group, we make our decisions on the basis of real-world data, not speculation by media.

Hopefully this statement by Tesla provokes some soul searching by CR..... they need to get back to their impartial data-based analysis instead of reacting to half-baked news stories.
�

CR really does need to explain why they only deem autopilot to be a public safety issue. C&D tested systems from several other companies and found Tesla's considerably better, and C&D aren't the only ones that have done this. So, if Tesla's system has been shown to be the best currently available then it would appear that the systems in use from other manufacturers would pose an even greater risk to the public.

So, what was the purpose in leaving them out of the article? Would they go with ignorance...or what?
�

CR has been trashing the iPhone and iPad forever propping up instead questionable alternative like android Samsung tablets. Remember that overheating IPad story? Did apple make any changes to address that? Or it was not an issue to begin with?

Then comes the model S.. From best car ever tested to not even recommended
�

I think CR is something of the past. There is not really a need for anything like that in the Internet world, where we have forums like this one or Amazon etc..

Most cars enthusiasts despise their reviews.
�

jeffro01 said: ?

This is what's absurd about modern media, everyone likes to pile on if they think it'll generate more clicks... CR is simply being opportunistic and it's just ridiculous...

Jeff
Click to expand...

Clicks are great for sites with ads on them. Like this one.
Unless CR has started accepting advertising, I don't believe they are "in it for clicks" as every other web page would be.
�

calisnow said: ?

My theory is that CR is no longer independent, but not in the way you are thinking. CR appears to be hurting financially - see articles I posted earlier. Consumer Reports is now a slave to the media cycle in a way it wasn't before - because nobody gives a sh*t about CR any more or pays attention to it. What do both "breaking the ratings system" with the Model S, then "withdrawing" their recommendation, and now finally trying to command Tesla to obey them on some big hot button issue all have in common?

They got other publications (which people actually DO read) to mention Consumer Reports.

This is KEY - because nobody actually reads Consumer Reports any more, but they still exist in our collective memories as some supposedly wise, objective source of wisdom that our grandparents read. This is the indirect currency the magazine has - but how can they leverage it into obtaining dollars to survive?

Here is a bit of data from CR's own Twitter feed:

Insight number one - nobody reads CR's Tweets - look at their retweet numbers - they're pathetic - in general less than 5 retweets unless the item is a hot button issue paid attention to in the wider culture. A quick comparison with Road & Track shows that many R&T tweets about items not of interest to the public generate 10 times more retweets than CR's.

Until you come to Tesla - CR has pinned their "Obey us now, Mr. Musk!" tweet to the top of their feed - and it has 64 retweets - a bononza by CR's usually pathetic standards. Move over to Musk's feed and you see his pronouncements generating retweets in the thousands.

I am sure CR's editors have figured out by now that one way to generate views (and hopefully subscriptions) is to say something so outrageous that the mainstream media quotes CR as a source of wisdom and generates traffic - because Consumer Reports has become so irrelevant to young people that they no longer have the power to be self sustaining.

How else can you explain CR's bizaare relationship with Tesla? First, praise so over the top it was silly. Then the equivalent of a pouting lover - withdrawing the recommendation. Finally, a last gasp for attention from a partner who doesn't care about you with an outburst of condemnation.

If CR was a person a psychiatrist would likely diagnose this behavior as consistent with borderline personality disorder. Highly dramatic relationships - bad for one's personal life but great for traffic from a once-respected, now starving publication.
Click to expand...

I respect your opinion but you have to admit that your main argument; that CR blew this up and piled on to make themselves relevant, is speculative. The number of tweets or retweets really aren't proof. We shall see how this plays out.
�

msnow said: ?

I respect your opinion but you have to admit that your main argument; that CR blew this up and piled on to make themselves relevant, is speculative. The number of tweets or retweets really aren't proof. We shall see how this plays out.
Click to expand...

Yes it's definitely speculative - for sure. And I don't mean that CR staff literally sits around thinking "What can we do now to be relevant and get people to look at us."
�

Obviously I can't prove CR got "leaned on", and I stated that clearly. In politics it is easier to trace the flow of the money, but in business we would be naive to assume it isn't happening just the same. Here in Nevada the Public Utilites Commision (all of whom were appointed by the "pro-solar" Republican Governor) recently voted to increase rates on customers who have solar panels on their residential home roofs. Prior to the rate change, it took roughly 7 years of operating your solar panels to pay off your investment. Now it takes over 10. The net effect was a huge gift to Nevada Power/Burkshire Hathway/Warren Buffet and Solar City laid off hundreds of Nevada employees due to reduced demand for solar. When the you look into the backgrounds of the Utilities Commision, they are mostly former energy company lobbyists. The Utilites Commision even had paid government employees who were using their personal social media accounts to attack solar energy. The Utilities Commision is supposed to be "unbaised" and balance the needs of state citizens with corporate interests. I don't see any objective balance there.

I'm a little jaded. This has nothing to do with CR and nothing directly with Tesla but I firmly believe there are a lot of powerful players who want Tesla to fail and fail big. They'll use money to buy negative press. I bought my MS just to fight those people.
�

CR has a little program, "build and buy" I think via True-Car or something.

You pay a little extra, configure the car you want, enter it, and they will spit out a list of dealers in your area that have the car. With a CR "negotiated" price. I have to wonder if they get some extra revenue from that.

I've used it in the past. It will give you only certain dealers, guess not all of them participate.
�

I remember years ago paying $20 to get receive a report on the invoice price of a car. When I realized that they charged $20 for something that was available for free at edmunds I called and requested a refund.
�

Good refute Consumer Reports Calls Out Tesla's Autopilot, Tesla Doesn't Care

I trolled the CR Facebook page with it and you should too, also the comments on the link to the article on their FB page
�

sandpiper said: ?

The reality ( I think ?? ) is that the camera isn't in the braking system loop at all. I believe that auto-braking is strictly controlled by the radar which can't see more than a few feet above ground
Click to expand...

I don't know about auto-braking specifically, but others have pointed out and I have independently confirmed that TACC does, in fact,
use the front-facing cameras.
�

RogerHScott said: ?

Because the (TACC system in the) car doesn't "see" anything -- it doesn't employ visual information at all.
Click to expand...

I was mistaken here -- believed another post w/o sufficient independent confirmation.
�

RogerHScott said: ?

This all sounds like auto-steer, rather than TACC. Just to confirm this, I'll have to try an experiment blocking the camera and seeing whether TACC still functions.
Click to expand...

My experiment confirms that I was mistaken and TACC does rely on the front-facing camera.
�

RogerHScott said: ?

What model- or brand-specific training have you received for any passenger vehicle you've ever owned or driven? You buy a car, you
drive it off the lot, you're on your own. We're not talking about "cars" in general, or even "EVs", or even "(semi-)autonomous vehicles" --
we're talking about one particular version of the AP system in one model of vehicle.
Click to expand...

Not with a (new) Tesla. They spend close to an hour walking you through every aspect of the car (even getting you to succeed in plugging it in to charge.) Also, while it was pointed out that this is a TACC, rather than AP related issue, since the whole "beta" thing got mentioned, it is worth pointing out that AP is not on by default when you get the car - you have to find it in the options, you have to enable it, and you are warned before and after that this is in beta, and that you are still in charge.

Of course... Do not push this button!
�

When I got my car delivered at the factory in Dec 2013 (of course non Auto Pilot), the walk through was not much really. In most aspects, I already knew more than what he was telling me (thanks to TMC research while waiting), and at many points I even corrected him!

I am sure there are all kinds of delivery specialists. Some may be good enough that I would even consider their walk through a qualifying training session for AP. But I also wouldn't be surprised if there are other kinds who are not as knowledgeable, and may even mislead.
�

Here is the message I left on the CR forum in response to their poor comment:

TACC or Traffic-Aware Cruise Control (TACC) or like systems are installed on multiple brands of cars - please revisit your article - autosteer had nothing to do with this accident, multiple companies use the same/similiar technology to control distance from the object in front their vehicle. As an owner of two Model S's with a cumulative total of 100,000 miles on the ODO, I wouldn't want to be in any other car during an accident. I would also ask you to review the term Auto Pilot and reference that in your article too. It's disappointing to see comments like this from such a highly regarded source. What has happened to CR over the last five years? Safety used to mean something - now one reckless driver who had a record of excessive speeding gets killed in a pretty common crash and we must disable the safety features of the car? Really? I am stunned - I thought your charter was to provide value, safety and advocacy for the consumer - when did that change at CR? I have been an avid follower of CR for several decades - that loyalty was really shaken by this article.

Also as a motorcyclist I have faced this exact accident scenario and only survived because I laid my bike down and rode under the trailer and survived. Unfortunately cars don't have a low enough profile to slide under the semi-trailer and survive. I'm not sure what other car would have stopped either, Toyota's DRCC would have done the same thing, Adaptive Cruise Control on the Cadillac - would have done the same too. I'm glad NHTSA is investigating... hopefully they can clear up the click bait media shower that is going on.

How do I cancel my online subscription?
�

Cebe said: ?

Not with a (new) Tesla. They spend close to an hour walking you through every aspect of the car (even getting you to succeed in plugging it in to charge.)
Click to expand...

Maybe with your delivery experience -- certainly not mine. Mine consisted of a truck driver unloading the car in a grocery store
parking lot, saying "bye", and driving off. No Tesla employees were involved. I was rather surprised based on what I'd heard
about others' delivery experiences. That aside, do you think Tesla's (traditional) "high-touch" model really scales up to a mass-market
product?
�

HookBill said: ?

Here is another example of what CR SHOULD be looking at more closely at this time. If Pokemon Go doesn't lead to more accidents and injuries in the very near future then CR/NHTSA/etc. are not doing their true 'due diligence' in protecting us from ourselves. In this short video, CNET attempts to find the best Pokemon Go car to go racing around the streets in. Imagine what this would be like if your friendly neighborhood teens were behind the wheel. Just listen to the instructions given to the drivers while they toodle around town:

The race is on for Pokemon Go - Roadshow
Click to expand...

�Pokemon Go� players fall off 90-foot ocean bluff
�

I'm fearful that CR will recommend that the throttle control on my original 1931 Ford coupe be disabled. What is next, my Ford F-250 cruise control. If I don't pay attention to what the vehicles are doing and where they are going I will run into something. Warning, warning, danger approaching.....
�

RogerHScott said: ?

Maybe with your delivery experience -- certainly not mine. Mine consisted of a truck driver unloading the car in a grocery store
parking lot, saying "bye", and driving off. No Tesla employees were involved. I was rather surprised based on what I'd heard
about others' delivery experiences. That aside, do you think Tesla's (traditional) "high-touch" model really scales up to a mass-market
product?
Click to expand...

I think your delivery experience was atypical. Was it because you couldn't or didn't pick it up at a SvC?
�

msnow said: ?

I think your delivery experience was atypical. Was it because you couldn't or didn't pick it up at a SvC?
Click to expand...

Based on what I've read here I would agree it seems atypical. The nearest real service center is nearly three hours away.
But given that they're willing to send Ranger service out (and did so a couple of days later for a relatively minor issue) I was
surprised they didn't send someone at delivery time. It's not like I was asking for a big red bow on my car or anything crazy like
that
�

RogerHScott said: ?

Based on what I've read here I would agree it seems atypical. The nearest real service center is nearly three hours away.
But given that they're willing to send Ranger service out (and did so a couple of days later for a relatively minor issue) I was
surprised they didn't send someone at delivery time. It's not like I was asking for a big red bow on my car or anything crazy like
that
Click to expand...

What did you expect for spending over $100k on a car? You are so demanding sheesh!
�

RogerHScott said: ?

What model- or brand-specific training have you received for any passenger vehicle you've ever owned or driven? You buy a car, you
drive it off the lot, you're on your own. We're not talking about "cars" in general, or even "EVs", or even "(semi-)autonomous vehicles" --
we're talking about one particular version of the AP system in one model of vehicle.
Click to expand...

Talk about trying to obfuscate!

You initially said "No mass market product can require training to be safe." I replied that, as a generic product class, automobiles disprove your statement completely. Just look at the number of states that require formal Driver's Ed in order to obtain a first license. And at this point the Tesla Model S does not qualify as a mass market product, I believe - it's a niche market product. The 3 may be a different story.

If you want to look at the subclass of EV's only being a mass market product, fine - they still disprove your statement. They require over an hour of special training in order for first responders to safely extricate individuals, otherwise there is the potential for a fatal electrical shock.

Sorry it took so long to reply - I was on a 1500 mile road trip over the weekend, during which I safely and effectively used the autopilot functionality about 90% of the way, on both uncontrolled-access two lane and limited-access divided highways. The training I received to allow me to do this? I read the part of the owner's manual that talks about autopilot.
�

GoTslaGo said: ?

CR has a little program, "build and buy" I think via True-Car or something.

You pay a little extra, configure the car you want, enter it, and they will spit out a list of dealers in your area that have the car. With a CR "negotiated" price. I have to wonder if they get some extra revenue from that.

I've used it in the past. It will give you only certain dealers, guess not all of them participate.
Click to expand...

Yes they get a fee but not from dealers and they use the money to fund research. Here's what it says on the CR website about this service:

"The Consumer Reports Build & Buy Car Buying Service (the "Service") is provided to Consumer Reports users by TrueCar.com. TrueCar operates the Service�s dealer network and the Service�s website. Consumers Union collects a fee from TrueCar for vehicles purchased from a TrueCar dealer. Consumers Union applies these fees to fund our testing programs. Consumers Union has no financial relationship with any dealer."
�

Brunton said: ?

You initially said "No mass market product can require training to be safe." I replied that, as a generic product class, automobiles disprove your statement completely. Just look at the number of states that require formal Driver's Ed in order to obtain a first license.
Click to expand...

What portion of that training is specific to a particular brand or model of vehicle? None. Are you suggesting that Tesla-style AP will
(or should) be put in enough vehicles that the generic driver's training you refer to will cover it? If you want to have an "interesting"
experience, try taking a driver's exam in your Tesla and using AP.

And at this point the Tesla Model S does not qualify as a mass market product, I believe - it's a niche market product. The 3 may be a different story.
Click to expand...

I thought we were talking about scalable solutions that would fit in with Tesla's vision of becoming a mass-market automotive company.
Was I mistaken?

[the subclass of EV's only] require over an hour of special training in order for first responders to safely extricate individuals
Click to expand...

Wait, what? We're talking about driver/operators here -- where do first responders come into the picture? Or are we talking about
obfuscation again?

Brunton said: ?

The training I received to allow me to [safely and effectively use[] the autopilot functionality]? I read the part of the owner's manual that talks about autopilot.
Click to expand...

Such training is usually not targeted at average-to-above-average users, which I assume includes you. Most of the people who will need
more training to use AP safely don't even own Teslas yet. The current owners are something of a self-selecting group.

Glad you were able to use and enjoy it. I, too, recently took a 1500-mile trip and made good use of both AP and, most impressively
(to us, at least), the SpC network. I think trips like this really convert people into die-hard Tesla fans.
�

RogerHScott said: ?

Maybe with your delivery experience -- certainly not mine. Mine consisted of a truck driver unloading the car in a grocery store
parking lot, saying "bye", and driving off. No Tesla employees were involved. I was rather surprised based on what I'd heard
about others' delivery experiences. That aside, do you think Tesla's (traditional) "high-touch" model really scales up to a mass-market
product?
Click to expand...

Back in 2013, that was the delivery experience here in Hawaii since the SC didn't open for 6 mos after the first delivery. Even then, new owners had to run around and pay their own taxes and get their own registration. But we didn't care, we were just excited to have the car. But we knew that's what would happen...you would think Tesla would be more proactive in at least letting you know the delivery process? I also wonder if the exceptional SC experience will be lessened when the 3 comes out.
�

People seem to think that the Tesla �autopilot,� better called Driver Assistance, gives a driver freedom to ignore their surroundings. In my experience, it allows the driver to keep looking around at the traffic in the way pilots are trained to do, scanning for approaching hazards such as kamikaze lane-changers.

A Tesla is not autonomous in the manner of Google�s off-road test vehicles; it does not allow the driver to watch movies. Its large display can show a web page but its video content will not play. If you don�t occasionally move the steering wheel manually to resist the autosteering, warning beeps and chimes will remind you to pay attention; ignore them long enough and the car will gradually slow to a stop. So naps and movies are prevented but the driver can now safely look at a passenger for a few seconds in many situations.

Driver Assistance also adjusts your speed to that of the vehicle ahead, freeing you to look at other lanes without the fear of rear-ending a slowing car up front. The autosteering keeps you centered even as the road curves; best of all, there is no more drifting into another lane when twisting in the driver�s seat to check clearances or the back seat passengers. This is progress.

Should a mishap occur, the car sends Tesla the data; the accumulation helps indicate what is relatively safe and what is chancy. Consumer Reports� call for Tesla to remotely disable everyone�s Autosteer until it can be reprogrammed to their editors� arbitrary specification (no data offered) needs to be balanced against the loss of such safety advantages for existing Tesla owners. First, do no harm.
�

RogerHScott said: ?

What portion of that training is specific to a particular brand or model of vehicle? None. Are you suggesting that Tesla-style AP will
(or should) be put in enough vehicles that the generic driver's training you refer to will cover it? If you want to have an "interesting"
experience, try taking a driver's exam in your Tesla and using AP.

I thought we were talking about scalable solutions that would fit in with Tesla's vision of becoming a mass-market automotive company.
Was I mistaken?

Wait, what? We're talking about driver/operators here -- where do first responders come into the picture? Or are we talking about
obfuscation again?

Such training is usually not targeted at average-to-above-average users, which I assume includes you. Most of the people who will need
more training to use AP safely don't even own Teslas yet. The current owners are something of a self-selecting group.

Glad you were able to use and enjoy it. I, too, recently took a 1500-mile trip and made good use of both AP and, most impressively
(to us, at least), the SpC network. I think trips like this really convert people into die-hard Tesla fans.
Click to expand...

Well Roger,

I think we've reached the end of our useful dialog on these points (and perhaps a couple of posts ago).

At least we appear to be in agreement on the long-distance viability of Tesla automobiles and the usefulness of properly used Autopilot.
�

My 2 cents.

What irks me about CR's take on AutoPilot is that they have a database of Tesla drivers/subscribers as evident by how many are saying they are cancelling their subscription.

Instead of coming out with blanket statements built up from the generalities and rumors in the press shouldn't they have, as a "Research" institution, contacted Tesla owners? Shouldn't they have done some research and asked Tesla owners what their experience is, and how we use AP?

Sad to say, I've been using CR less and less these days. Most of the data I need about products are better found with a Google search. When I have turned to CR about products I wanted, they had no information: Specifically driver assisted features which I was researching in 2014 to 2015. Not Tesla at that time, but MB, Audi, Volvo, etc... Nada. I had to turn to YouTube and German websites (I don't speak or read German, but useful nonetheless).

So suddenly they're very interested in it now, and are such an expert in it, but never bothered to mine their own database. IMHO, the best and simplest research they could do is ask good relevant question about products and technology, instead of their old tired boilerplate list of questions that "fit" their established metrics.
�

Now that Consumer Reports has posted its comments, my favorite is from a pilot:

Tesla Autopilot kills driver? No, it didn�t.

The article cites limitations of airplane Autopilot:

"But there are several things that all of these tools cant�t do. They won�t keep you from hitting a mountain, flying off the end of the runway, hitting another airplane in mid-flight or flying through a thunderstorm. All of those things require somethings that computers, at least today, can�t do, Make complex decisions that require human intervention."

Bottom line, as of today, human is in control whether there's an Autopilot or not.
�

X Yes? said: ?

I'm not familiar with all the other systems. Some have commented that other systems are more aggressive at ensuring hands are on the wheel. Would you still use the system if it required hand on the wheel at all times?
Click to expand...

Good question but I am not sure. Would have to try it and see. Might still reduce stress if you can keep one hand on the wheel but trust the car to keep the car moving safely while you momentarily looked at the center screen to adjust the audio or navigation, etc.
�

S'toon said: ?

Consumer Reports calls for Tesla to disable Autopilot, Tesla says no
Click to expand...

Right on, Tesla.

Decades ago I had a fair degree of confidence in CR. I am no longer as impressed with them as I used to be.
�

I don't care what a magazine thinks.
�

I will not be renewing my subscription which runs out in November. When they resort to non researched sensationalism it is no longer an objective source of information for me.
�

teslamotorclub

Thứ Hai, 23 tháng 1, 2017

Consumer Reports recommends Tesla disable Autosteer and make changes to AutoPilot part 1

Không có nhận xét nào:

Đăng nhận xét