freerobby

I still use Cursor and am still very happy with it.

I've found the grok-4.5+ variants to be quite suitable for powerhouse work, and I have a legacy plan with a Third Party model allowance, so I can throw the occasional harder planning tasks at e.g. Fable when needed.

I like that I can run any model from the major labs (or anything on Bedrock), instead of being fully tethered to a single vendor. I'll occasionally run the same task through several models/vendors to understand what's most cost effective to achieve a given outcome (and also to keep my grok calls -- which are very cheap through Cursor -- honest and within the limits of what it can do well).

I run most tasks through Cloud agents, with exceptions for Mac-native stuff (iOS builds, app store I/O etc).

You don't have to like Musk but words do mean things.

Agreed. Also pretty telling that Ashlee Vance refused to collaborate or share his recordings with Gibney.

This is what happened. Tesla security received tons of bug reports that required root access to identify, yet they got a vanishingly small number of root vulnerability reports. This policy fixes that misincentive.

> Nope, they gave up on that and moved them to the driver's seat.

FWIW, Tesla disputes this claim: https://x.com/robotaxi/status/1963436732575072723

Yeah I think their early success with Tesla Vision was faster than expected, it went to their heads, and they underestimated the iteration and fine tuning needed to solve the edge cases. It's difficult to predict how many reps it will take to solve an intricate problem. That's not to excuse their public timeline -- their guidance was naive and IMO irresponsible -- but I don't think it was in bad faith.

I haven't closely followed which rides have drivers where, and what is driven by Tesla vs what is regulatory -- but I thought some "drivers" were still in the passenger seat in Austin?

At any rate, I don't think they are revoking their prior promises. I expect them to deliver L4 autonomy to owners as previously promised. With that said, I'm glad they are ceasing that promise to new customers and focusing on what the car does today, given how wrong their timelines have been. I agree it's shitty if they don't deliver that, and that they should offer buybacks if they find themselves in that position.

Yeah, Tesla did themselves no favors with how they initially marketed FSD, and all the missed timelines amplified the brand cost of that. I'm glad to see them focus on what it can do today. Better to underpromise and overdeliver etc.

As an aside, it's wild how different the perspective is between the masses and the people who experience the bleeding edge here. "The future is here, it's just not evenly distributed," indeed.

The first one.

> Tesla has changed the meaning of “Full Self-Driving”, also known as “FSD”, to give up on its original promise of delivering unsupervised autonomy.

They have not given up on unsupervised autonomy. They are operating unsupervised autonomy in Austin TX as I type this!

People never learn. The haters always think this time will be different.

This is clickbait from a publication that's had it out for Tesla for nearly a decade.

Tesla is pivoting messaging toward what the car can do today. You can believe that FSD will reach L4 autonomy or not -- I'm not wading into that -- but this updated web site copy does not change the promises they've made prior owners, and Tesla has not walked back those promises.

No, they never had LIDAR.

Thanks.

Any recommended article/link to get the backstory on this situation?

I led a migration from Mongo to Riak at Shareaholic about 12 years ago: https://www.slideshare.net/slideshow/migrating-to-riak-at-sh...

It was successful at first, but ultimately we traded one set of problems for another (how novel, I know).

In particular, I underestimated the pain of troubleshooting the database itself. Riak was a new product, we were a small team that had never run anything on BEAM, and ultimately we lost too many days debugging and trying to make sense of Erlang stacktraces.

The Basho folks were great, and to this day I appreciate how quickly they fixed a number of bugs for us. But ultimately it wasn't enough -- we found problems faster than they could be patched.

FWIW most people mean the Lansing book when referencing Endurance (the book).

I'd suggest Lost in the Funhouse. It's a collection of short stories and showcases a wide range of his authorial style. I'd suggest a paper copy for reasons that will be clear by page two (maybe page one).

Damn. He was my favorite living author. Got introduced to his "Lost in the Funhouse" in senior seminar in high school, was hooked immediately. His stories (and especially his writing style) changed how I approach literature and writing at large. RIP.

What's this in reference to? WhatsApp, Signal, and many others are in the App Store.

There's lots of research here in the Tesla hacker community. The car continues to function. The easiest (not trivial, but easiest) way to test it yourself is to remove the SIM and disable wifi -- the non-network features of the car continue to work indefinitely. There are even some third parties who support early Tesla vehicles, on stock firmwares, in part by fully blocking comms with Tesla.

Tip for the future: you can upvote the submission and then go to "upvoted submissions" in your HN profile.

This only affected pre-BLE models when the owner did not have the key. It's no worse than when an ICE vehicle owner loses their key; it's just that typically with a Tesla, you can start it from the app in that situation.

The info dialog is the screenshot on the left in the embedded tweet.

https://twitter.com/_bennettm_/status/1720287612664217758

I agree (generally) about vigilance tasks, which why I think the hypothesis that "you're going to have a bad time" with a system like Autopilot was reasonable. But there is clearly more at play, because it's not shaking out that way -- Autopilot (and similar lanekeeping + adaptive cruise systems from other manufacturers) aren't killing people left and right.

So, I was sharing my own hypothesis for why that may be: that the benefits of reduced fatigue are outweighing the drawbacks of distraction and complacency.

With specific respect to ADAS systems reducing fatigue:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S13698...

> We investigated the effects of ACC and HAD on drivers’ workload and situation awareness through a meta-analysis and narrative review of simulator and on-road studies. Based on a total of 32 studies, the unweighted mean self-reported workload was 43.5% for manual driving, 38.6% for ACC driving, and 22.7% for HAD (0% = minimum, 100 = maximum on the NASA Task Load Index or Rating Scale Mental Effort).

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S136192092...

> Interviewees reported being less mentally and physically tired—though most focused on the former—both while in transit and upon arrival at their destination. Twelve (12) interviewees mentioned this. The reduction in tiredness seems to be because, from the interviewees perspective, partial automation takes over a substantial portion of the driving task.

I don't have any independent data, just what Tesla reports: https://www.tesla.com/VehicleSafetyReport

I've read the many critiques of Tesla's analysis, and I tend to agree the benefits are overstated, but I haven't seen any reasonable empirical case that Autopilot hurts safety on net.

> Humans are terrible at vigilance tasks, and if you ask them to passively monitor a system that gets things right 98% of the time, you're going to have a bad time.

I understand this as a hypothesis but it hasn't been borne out by any of the Autopilot usage data. I suspect the reason is that humans suffer greatly from fatigue and ADAS systems reduce fatigue.

You need to sign in with a Tesla account. Once you sign in, the service manuals are free for all vehicles. The paid subscriptions are for their proprietary software.

I think the suit is just referencing the rated range meter. The trip planner (which is what predicts how much battery you need to get to your destination) uses real world conditions, not rated range.