Hint: Not everything is SV-like "we'll fix it in production"...
1. There's a structural issue that affects camera systems which can't be fixed in a shop; for instance, something which may cause the camera to come loose which results in blind spots, that's due to the structural issue of the car itself. Tesla has to replace 2 million customer's actual cars, destroying the old ones (or perhaps selling them as "refurb but no autopilot").
2. There's an issue that affects camera systems which can be fixed in a shop; Tesla has to pay for repairs for 2 million cars.
3. There's an issue which affects Autopilot which can be fixed in software. They push an over-the-air update automatically and everyone is fine.
These each have very different properties in terms of costs to Tesla and hassle for owners; so it makes sense that there be a different word for them. "Recall" literally means "call back"; I'd argue for only using it in the case of #1.
A recall is a mandatory fix that the manufacturer is obligated to provide at no charge and to proactively notify customers of. It comes with reporting obligations and long term warranty implications.
It might be that industries should not reuse common words, but IMO it’s a little silly to insist that they only use the most literal and etymologically correct terms for each individual action rather than defining categories that have clear meanings even if a specific action doesn’t perfectly match the most literal reading of the name of the category.
This does make sense; but I would nonetheless suggest to the auto industry that they change the wording somehow. Fifty years ago any such mandatory fix certainly did mean making manual modifications to each individual car, whether in a service shop or by replacing the whole thing. That's no longer the case, and risks significant public misunderstanding.
Here in the UK they have loads of "archaisms":
- pavement: A place for pedestrians to walk on the side of a road; what Americans call a "sidewalk". Named because 200 years ago, the roads were dirt but sidewalks were paved. Now the roads are paved too, but they kept calling it "pavement"
- public school: A very posh private school; e.g., Eton. Named (as I understand it) because your children were taught in public, rather than in the home by a private tutor / governess / whatever.
I am not so sure. Take Linux kernel log levels:
0 = emergency
1 = alert
2 = critical
3 = error
4 = warning
As soon as I saw this I showed it to multiple people, and none of them understand how a log level of "alert" can be more severe than "critical". Now, there is probably some greybeards that decided these words way way back and we decided to stuck with them. But if you tell someone "damn, the kernel is giving off alerts", their thought will be "well, at least the system isn't in a critical state or error out, right?".
Intuition matters.
That it is straightforward is nice for them I guess, but it's less relevant to describing it than it being ordered by the government.
Writing means to carve but you wrote this post without a metal stick and a hammer.
>hassle for owners
"Recall" is used to signify the severity of the flaw not the inconvenience fixing it caused owners. I feel "software update" doesn't do it justice at all and "recall" is appropriate.
model y (20-23) model x (16-23) model s (12-23) model 3 (17-23)
NVM the fact that customers will get them months after the work has automatically been done. :facepalm
Here’s what they’re required to do:
> In the case of a notification required to be sent by a motor vehicle manufacturer, by certified mail, verifiable electronic means such as receipts or logs from electronic mail or satellite distribution system, or other more expeditious and verifiable means to all dealers and distributors of the vehicles that contain the defect or noncompliance.
No. "recall" is a term with a meaning, it means:
- the manufacturer has been obligated to fix this
- they must fix it for all listed cars
- they must fix it for free
The term "recall" doesn't imply anything about the implementation details how the above is going to be accomplished.
Whether you have to take it to a dealer, or it's done over the air, or even if they have to ship the car back to the factory, makes no difference to that fact that it is a recall.
iPhones 12 were banned for a short period in France because they emitted too much electromagnetic radiation.
Now how did the media called this 'recall' ?
https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-66795175
An update.
The French system for radio emissions uses different terminology for the same ideas. The English term they used was a “temporary withdrawal” with a full recall if Apple couldn’t update the devices:
https://www.anfr.fr/liste-actualites/actualite/temporary-wit...
This does mean that news coverage used the same language as the subject of the story, but that’s no more unfair than complaining that the BBC referred to a game as football even though you think they should have said soccer.
Autopilot is probably actually quite a good term for it if you actually compare it to a plane Autopilot - you don't expect pilots to be inattentive or away from the controls, and you expect them to intervene in certain scenarios and disengage autopilot if there is danger.
The airline system requires thousands of hours of training total (and many hours on a specific type/model of plane) to operate.
Driving a car requires no such training.
The aircraft requires hundreds of hours to operate without autopilot. Autopilot isn’t what imposes the training requirement.
I disagree with calling the top level of Autopilot "FSD" by the way - I think that is misleading. But Autopilot - I think that's a fair term personally considering the context and historical use.
Pilots need to get training and certification for autopilot before they can use it.
At the level of airline pilots???
This discussion has happened many, many times here on HN. Tesla's marketing is extremely misleading (and it's not the only case).
Because if so, it sounds like Autopilot would be a good word.
I think the term "Full Self Driving" is misleading, but comparing it to an Autopilot (i.e. a system which requires pilot input and care) seems correct.
In the US? No, we don't. Even ignoring that a driver's license is treated more as a right than a perk... Consumers are absolutely NOT trained on the nuances of any particular car's UI, systems, etc.
An airline pilot absolutely IS trained on those nuances and can ONLY operate planes in which they've trained. And they get periodic check-rides from FAA examiners. And, as we saw with the 737Max, failure to train on those nuances can have deadly consequences.
Is the argument "You can't call it Autopilot because Autopilot refers to a complex system that requires a skilled operator and needs people to pay constant attention"?
I'm not aware of similar reports of crashes/deaths with systems like Subaru's EyeSight or Honda's SensingSuite. Or, on the other end of the spectrum, Mercedes's Drive Pilot.
I’m just talking about the name because that’s what this thread was about.
Let's check the first paragraph of the Autopilot section in the manual:
Autopilot is a suite of advanced driver assistance features that are intended to make driving safer and less stressful. None of these features make Model 3 fully autonomous or replace you as the driver
And on the same page:
Warning Basic Autopilot is a hands-on feature. Keep your hands on the steering wheel at all times and be mindful of road conditions, surrounding traffic, and other road users (such as pedestrians and cyclists). Always be prepared to take immediate action. Failure to follow these instructions could cause damage, serious injury, or death.
The earliest autopilot for boats was built in the 1800s.
You can get the certificate after taking training but I imagine there is some way to test out of it.
--
The training doesn't need to be months long though. Try renting a jet-ski; they'll give you a very quick training but it's still present. Although jet-skis are probably not long enough to qualify as motorized boats in a lot of states.
https://www.americasboatingcourse.com/lawsbystate.cfm?lid=50
They are comparing it to piloting, which as you point out, requires a trained and skilled, responsible and attentive person.
Calling something an autopilot implies you can do essentially whatever you want while the machine operates itself.
Airplane autopilots are usually disengaged for landing because the failure mechanism is to return control to the human pilots, but in the event of a failure during landing there is usually insufficient time for that.
Tesla "Autopilot" is basically the landing portion of a flight, all the time. It has the same failure window: seconds, or less, for the human to take over and prevent an accident. And Tesla's AP is uniquely bad compared to comparable advanced cruise control systems: Tesla has more than 17x as many crashes than the next crashiest automaker, and more than 60x as many crashes as the safest major automaker. Given that Tesla has far fewer cars on the road, scaled up for fleet size, Tesla's AP system is the most dangerous advanced cruise control system in the world. (And the fatalities bear that out; FSD alone has more fatalities than the combined fatality count of every other automaker in the world combined.)
If you were a prospective buyer in the past, the autopilot link would take you to a page which very prominently says this:
> Full Self-Driving Hardware on All Cars. All Tesla vehicles produced in our factory, including Model 3, have the hardware needed for full self-driving capability at a safety level substantially greater than that of a human driver.
Way down the page, you get this:
> Enhanced Autopilot adds these new capabilities to the Tesla Autopilot driving experience. Your Tesla will match speed to traffic conditions, keep within a lane, automatically change lanes without requiring driver input, transition from one freeway to another, exit the freeway when your destination is near, self-park when near a parking spot and be summoned to and from your garage.
Finally, you get a bit more realistic warning after a bit of misdirection intended to make you think the product was ready but government red tape was delaying availability:
> Tesla’s Enhanced Autopilot software has begun rolling out and features will continue to be introduced as validation is completed, subject to regulatory approval. Every driver is responsible for remaining alert and active when using Autopilot, and must be prepared to take action at any time.
https://web.archive.org/web/20190101050434/https://www.tesla...
Contrast with Nissan’s page which is very clear that it assists you in hands-on driving. There’s nothing on there which sounds like the vehicle can drive itself (e.g. who reads the smart summons description and thinks it can’t reliably stop or identify pedestrians?)
I know a lot of people who don't update their phones because they believe it's getting slower and their battery degrades faster. In some cases, they might be right because when new futures are added the device can indeed become slower.
It would be nice if we can get fixes and security updates, without adding any new functionality so we can preserve the original workload of the device. I would love to have my iPhone 4s running iOS 6, just secured enough, so I can use it the way it was when I purchased it(I wouldn't care much if Apple services don't work anymore).
Sure, Apple does security only updates for old phones but I actually would like to have the option to do this on the current phones too.
[0] https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/interactive/2023/t...
Tesla software is.
Also how many lives has it saved?
It is not used in the context of your average update that might give you new eye candy or features, it is just for safety related issues and usually at the behest of a regulator (though a manufacturer can decide to do a voluntary recall to avoid the regulators stepping in).