• inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    358
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    Judkins said that after the finger test, a lead cybertruck engineer at Tesla said he did the video wrong.

    The engineer told him the frunk increases in pressure every single time it closes and detects resistance, Judkins said. It’s going to assume you want to close the frunk and maybe something like a bag is getting in the way, which would make it close harder.

    Are you kidding me? You did the test wrong on a safety critical feature? No you dumbass engineer, you designed it wrong. Why in the holy fuck would you make a safety critical algorithm keep applying more pressure on subsequent attempts??? That’s literally the opposite of what you do for safety.

      • inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        85
        ·
        9 months ago

        Yeah, I’m an embedded software developer myself and yeah, when we architect our code we have safety critical sections identified with software safety reviews and we always go with the assumption that we’re going to run into that one guy who’s the living embodiment of Murphy’s law and go from there with that design to minimize the potential for injury and death.

        Can’t imagine who the hell is in charge of the software safety reviews there that let that pass.

          • Serinus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            40
            ·
            9 months ago

            They did, but Elon asked one of them for a latte and they brought him one with 2% instead of oatmilk so he gutted the whole department.

            /s, because it might be to be specified.

        • best_username_ever@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          26
          ·
          9 months ago

          Same in the medical devices industry. We have whole teams of non-developers whose job is to find out when and why a surgeon can be a moron. The code is more difficult to write, but it’s way better and more robust.

      • hersh@literature.cafe
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        48
        ·
        9 months ago

        “Smart” may as well be synonymous with “unpredictable”. I don’t need my computer to be smart. I need it to be predictable, consistent, and undemanding.

      • rottingleaf@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        And also every additional kind of complexity (which stacks BTW) makes you more dependent on the vendor (good for them, bad for you) and on doing things exactly as their imagined user (because it’s disproportionately your problem as laws don’t seem to work in making it theirs).

        Distributism is actually a very good political ideology. Sad it’s associated with Catholic religion, because it correctly generalized the principles making democracies and markets and cultures work.

      • toofpic@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        “Oh my, the cake box/finger/dog was in the way, but thanks for automation, the door didn’t close!”

    • Ech@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      111
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      The engineer told him the frunk increases in pressure every single time it closes and detects resistance, Judkins said. It’s going to assume you want to close the frunk and maybe something like a bag is getting in the way, which would make it close harder.

      What the fuck kind of idiots are leading things over there? “Something’s in the way. Better crush it!” What a bunch of morons putting everyone in danger.

      • barsquid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        33
        ·
        9 months ago

        “If it encounters resistance, the brushless motor increases in pressure until it closes fully.” Guess the company:

        1. DeWalt
        2. Milwaukee
        3. Makita
        4. Tesla
        • T00l_shed@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          9 months ago

          The sane people were fired or left. I’m sure most of who’s left are either stuck or like to lick elons taint.

    • barsquid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      63
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      Why the hell would it close harder if there is something in the way? That’s not the correct behavior for a lid, that’s the correct behavior for powered shears.

      • rottingleaf@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        Maybe because they want the degradation of some mechanism to be less noticeable over time. And because they’re dumb.

      • gian @lemmy.grys.it
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        Never tried to force the closing of your trunk lid because there is a bag that is slightly over the limit and you need a little more pressure, even if the bag is a little pressed down ?

        The assumption here is that if it is your finger which is in the way, you take it out the way and you are not that stupid to try to close it again if for some reason you are not able move it away, which to me seems to make a lot of sense.

    • jonne@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      49
      ·
      9 months ago

      I wonder if the guy that designed autopilot had the same idea. “So when the car detects resistance up ahead in the form of a crowd or wall, it will accelerate to make sure it goes through!”

    • Maggoty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      We deliberately made it fail critical. It’s your fault for expecting fail safe!

    • Plopp@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      9 months ago

      I know I’m old school and all that, but why do people want to pay for automatically closing doors of any kind? Automatic opening of cargo spaces I get, if you have your bags full of hands or whatever, but once you put the stuff in there… Seem like such an incredibly unnecessary and costly feature, that also have a high chance of failing in the future. I don’t get it.

        • toofpic@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          9 months ago

          Except when the stuff is in, you have free hands to close doors and hatches

          • CerealKiller01@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            9 months ago

            I think we’re on two different wavelengths.

            Put stuff in: Stand next to closed car with no free hands, could use automatically opening doors.

            Take stuff out: Open car. Pick up stuff out of the car. Stand next to open car with no free hands, could use automatically closing doors.

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        Good question. My wife’s RAV4 has a rear door that will only close if you press a button. You can’t close it manually. Furthermore, it’s on the door while it’s open and my five foot tall wife can barely reach it. It’s ridiculous.

          • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            9 months ago

            You know, that’s true and it didn’t even occur to me. I guess she just wouldn’t have bought it? (I would have been fine with that, I hate SUVs, even hybrids.)

            • Zier@fedia.io
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              9 months ago

              On older Toyotas the rear door has a strap inside that hangs down for people to grab onto and pull the door down to close.

            • jaamesbaxterr@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              9 months ago

              We’ve got a 2019 Rav and I can’t remember how, but you can adjust the height that the door opens to by some series of button pushes. We had to lower it so that it doesn’t hit the frame of the garage door when opening it inside the garage. Maybe just adjust it so that it doesn’t open all the way and it’ll be easier for her to reach the button?

    • ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      9 months ago

      Safety critical? I’d rather have a trunk I can get to close than one I can stick my finger into four times in a row without pinching it. What do you think happens when you slam down a normal trunk on someone’s finger?

        • ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          Lol. Nah, the trucks are super dumb. I just know I’d want a trunk that would be able to close more than an overly sensitive pressure detection permanently preventing it. For that matter, I think it’s dumb to attach a motor to a trunk.

          • inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            9 months ago

            It’s like you didn’t read or did read and didn’t actually comprehend what the article or linked video was actually taking about.

            You sure would make a great fit at Tesla’s engineering and safety team.

            • brbposting@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              9 months ago

              Friendly challenge: respond to that user again, in no more words than the first time, but address his question :)

              • inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                9 months ago

                No thank you. I refuse to engage with a person trying to straw man and change topics from a software safety argument to a personal preference that goes nowhere but you feel free to engage if you wish.

      • nocturne@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        29
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        Is this the dipstick that tried it with a carrot, it cut the tip off and then said he was going to try it with his finger to be sure?

        • essteeyou@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          9 months ago

          I don’t see “dipstick” in the wild very often, but I always appreciate it. Are you English by any chance?

      • Gormadt@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        arrow-down
        36
        ·
        9 months ago

        A baby carrot

        It takes about the same force to bite through a baby carrot as it does to bite through a finger

        As long as the carrot is pretty close to the size of the finger you’re wishing to stimulate

        I wish I didn’t know that

    • CleoTheWizard@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      45
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      He did demonstrate it that way, specifically with a carrot. And it somewhat worked. The problem is they programmed it to do more and more pressure every time it fails meaning that doing the carrot first actually caused a safety issue. He only moved onto his finger because the safety feature seemed to be working.

      • Sanctus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        23
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        The engineer told him the frunk increases in pressure every single time it closes and detects resistance, Judkins said. It’s going to assume you want to close the frunk and maybe something like a bag is getting in the way, which would make it close harder.

        Geniuses.

        • toofpic@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          9 months ago

          Because I am the bag commander. If I want the bag to fit, and it doesn’t fit, I’d better crush it!

        • rottingleaf@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          With that association - can Apple, Tesla etc marketing be generalized into something to be put into law?

          To fucking ban those companies and make their patents public domain (or make them expire, not sure of the term).

          I don’t care if a Google or two get stomped as a bonus.

    • LesserAbe@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      Then he wouldn’t get nearly as many views. Or have articles written about him

  • tedu@azorius.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    98
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    9 months ago

    There’s plenty of dumb to go around, but the word frunk by itself is the dumbest thing about this story.

  • NeoNachtwaechter@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    91
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    9 months ago

    A Tesla engineer said the test was done wrong because the frunk increases in pressure every time.

    “You are holding it wrong!” 🤣

    • EdibleFriend@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      62
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      Of course it just keeps hitting harder when things are in the way.

      Literally Tesla’s response

    • Chozo@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      37
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      He did the test wrong because he’s experimenting with “safety” algorithms that the manufacturer has provided little-to-no documentation on and is having to come up with answers on his own. Maybe he wouldn’t be “doing it wrong” if Tesla hadn’t over-engineered every aspect of their piece of shit truck in the first place. This thing is a solution in search of a problem, and it’ll chop your fingers off until it finds it.

    • ozymandias117@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      34
      ·
      9 months ago

      If it increases in pressure every time, I’m now curious how many times you need to close the trunk to cut a finger off

      • Nepenthe@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        9 months ago

        That was very nearly my exact same thought. Maybe not for curious children with carrot-sized fingers, but for adults, how convenient! Business competitor’s body won’t quite fit in your fancy frunk? Just while away on your phone for about 10 minutes, let the cat do its magic, and off go the legs! Travel-sized!

      • oleorun@real.lemmy.fan
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        9 months ago

        I wonder if you can get the frunk to critical velocity at the touch of a fly by constantly pumping it up like a pump action gun.

  • Possibly linux@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    39
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    The cybertruck is the dumbest tech product and that’s after you compare it to the Vision Pro and AI pin

    • barsquid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      It could be a lot better if it were able to get through tough terrains like wet beach sand. Or if the body didn’t rust after touching moisture. Or if it was able to survive a car wash.

      Also it would have been neat if they had some automotive professionals working there to tell them that the accelerator pedal needs to come back up when your foot is off it.

    • ChickenLadyLovesLife@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      9 months ago

      I saw my first cybertruck in person the other day. It looks incredibly dumb in promotional photos, but it’s astonishing how much stupider it looks in traffic surrounded by normal vehicles.

  • ShortFuse@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    Judkins said that after the finger test, a lead cybertruck engineer at Tesla said he did the video wrong.

    • realitista@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      If you read the article, it’s not a statement with entirely no merit.

      The engineers prioritized an algorithm which is far more likely to be useful in real world scenarios where you keep trying to cram a bunch of stuff in the frunk and close it (who hasn’t done this?) rather than the edge case of repeatedly testing it with vegetables until you stick your finger in it.

      Anyway, I suppose it’s back to the drawing board.

      • cooltrainer_frank@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        This is why you keep your safety features consistent. If they want bag close mode, then make it where you hold instead of press a button or something. It “happening automatically” is just unpredictable to most, not magical

    • cerement@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      9 months ago

      “Cave Johnson here. Fact: the key to any successful cooperative test is trust. And as our data clearly shows, humans, cannot be trusted. The solution? Robots!”

  • Passerby6497@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    What person with an automated cargo door closure mechanism has thought “stop protecting my stuff and just fucking close”?

    I’ll admit it annoys me when there’s something in the way that keeps my door from latching and it reopens, but I’d rather have to clear the door and shut it manually than it force itself closed and jams the door or break my shit.