• saigot@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years ago

      Well apparently it’s programmed to bypass the safety system after 3 attempts under the assumption that the user knows best.

      This seems like a really dumb choice, but I can see why an engineer would want to point out that it’s not incompetent engineering but an incompetent business department.

      • Miaou@jlai.lu
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        If you’re implementing it, it’s your responsibility, end of story.

        • OrekiWoof@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 years ago

          if you don’t implement it, it will get implemented by someone else anyway and you’re putting your job at risk

          • Miaou@jlai.lu
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 years ago

            That’s called accountability and that’s why engineers get paid extra. Ethic classes are not the part of engineering degrees in the USA very obviously, I shouldn’t be surprised

            • ShepherdPie@midwest.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 years ago

              How can you talk about personal responsibility while blaming engineers for the fact that this guy intentionally closed his finger in a car door?

                • ShepherdPie@midwest.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  2 years ago

                  I did read it and I’m also reading it in the context of the article and the rabid group-think here claiming that a potential injury after closing your hand in a door four times in a row is somehow the companies fault or the fault of the engineering department.

  • Emerald@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 years ago

    The crazy part to me is that he tried a carrot and it didn’t open for it. Yet he thought it was a good idea to try his finger which it about the same size.

  • puppy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 years ago

    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’s next? When you press the brake padel the car is going to assume that you want to slow down? Wow, that’s some fantastic wisdom from Tesla!

    • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      By tesla’s logic, it’ll assume that you want to slow down, and will speed up to make you slow down faster

      • Red_October@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        The harder you push the pedal the more you want your speed to decrease, obviously. But if you push it hard enough then the decrease from your current speed to Zero is no longer enough. So now the engineers need to decide if you’ll speed up first, so the decrease from the new speed to zero is larger, or if it’ll slam you into reverse instead.

  • filister@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    Are there any crashes already involving pedestrians? I really wonder how broken those pedestrians are after the hit. I think the chance to survive a hit from a Cybertruck is minimal.

    And I am even surprised that it is allowed on your streets.

    • TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years ago

      To be fair, the survivability of being hit by any big US pickup is pretty small. Perhaps the cybertruck is even worse though.

      Pickups are explicitly exempted from a lot of crash/pedestrian safety laws in the US (I think related to them being classed as commercial vehicles), despite every other car on the road there being a pickup.

    • riodoro1@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years ago

      Murica, vehicles with sharp edges and assault rifles at walmart is where freedom is at.

    • Hemingways_Shotgun@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years ago

      We live in an age where the notion of “thinking something through before doing it”, also known as “common sense” has been replaced with the need to get it out there onto the internet as fast as possible before someone else beats you to it. The need for social gratification on the internet beats the need for self-preservation.

      The first time I recall realizing this what when another YouTube dipship picked up a Portuguese Man-o-war and people got pissy when it was pointed out how lucky he was to not have been stung and how it was sheer dumb luck that he was still alive

      People defended him saying “He didn’t know it was dangerous, he didn’t know what it was…” And that’s the whole fucking point… We used to live in a society were people were smart enough to not touch shit that they don’t know if it’s dangerous or not. The concept of erring on the side of caution is now abandoned because of stupidity and social media credits.

      • Halosheep@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        “we used to” No the fuck we didn’t. Humans have always been dumb, shortsighted, and curious. The internet just makes it really easy to see the ones that fuck up enough to be entertaining.

        • Hemingways_Shotgun@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          2 years ago

          Yeah. You’re right that we’ve always been dumb and stupid and would do stupid shit to impress our peer group

          But I firmly believe social media has inflated the definition of “peer group” to include “internet followers”, which jacks the whole stupidity up to 11.

          For example, you’re a nineties kid walking through the mall with your friends in your JNKO jeans and your slap-it watch. One of your friends decides he’s going to be an idiot by balancing on the railing of the second floor and you all have a good laugh. Edit: If his friends hadn’t been there, would he have done it? I doubt it. But now his “friends” don’t have to be there, because they’re just random followers to give him social media points.

          That’s sort of what I meant. Its not the we didn’t do dumb shit as kids, its that social media credit has motivated people to do dumb shit when they normally wouldn’t.

          Edit: also, WE grew out of it. Nowadays they are socially and financially incentivized to NOT grow out of that phase.

          • Ryru Grr@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            2 years ago

            Truth. As an 80s kid / 90s teen, I feel pretty lucky to be alive. I’m grateful for the few times in my life when common sense kicked in, and I said no.

            • Hemingways_Shotgun@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 years ago

              Same. Was thirteen in 89. Graduated in 94. Hit Y2K at 23. Basically peak Clerks/Dazed and Confused generation.

              To make matters worse I grew up in a small town where there was nothing better to do THAN do stupid shit with friends.

    • bitchkat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years ago

      He used a banana, an organic dildo, and a carrot. It snapped the carrot and then he decided to try with his arm, hand, and finger.

        • matlag@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 years ago

          That’s why you get “don’t put living animals in the microwave oven” in the instructions.

          If Tesla didn’t explicitely wrote “don’t put your f***ing finger in the way on purpose after multiple attempts to close it!” he may have a chance.

          He will plead a trauma from the loss of trust in his beloved car brand and the credibility damage on his Youtube channel and ask for M$.

      • Laurel Raven@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        It snapped the tip of the carrot, which wouldn’t be a lot of resistance

        Based on what it didn’t cut through, his finger should have been safe but apparently Tesla designed the thing to keep increasing the pressure if it detects resistance each time until it can close, which is absolutely baffling. I don’t know of any other safety feature that turns down the safety the more it activates. The fact that it reacts to the exact same conditions differently each time should, in itself, be deeply concerning for any safety feature.

        It might have been dumb of him to try it, but that doesn’t change that it’s still unsafe.

        • Everythingispenguins@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 years ago

          Not say I agree but here is the logic. Self closing trunks are pretty common on many vehicles. A problem that is/was (I think a lot of manufacturers have mostly fix it) happen was the trunk lid would detect the resistance from a grocery bag or something. You know the stuff that in the past you could have just shut the lid with a little force. When this resistance was felt the lid would open back up. A good thing for safety but it can lead to the trunk never closing.

          I bet when Tesla wrote the code they forgot to give it a maximum pressure it could close with regardless of how many times it closed. Or they set the maximum pressure way too hard.

        • postmateDumbass@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 years ago

          I wonder if FSD backs up after running over a pedestrian to confirn that ‘Yup, it was something with the road there’ before continuing to drive forward again.

        • bitchkat@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 years ago

          So you’re confirming that it snapped the carrot? And then he tried it with body parts.

          • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 years ago

            Yes, it snapped the thin tip of the carrot. I didn’t watch the video, but it sounded like he went from safest to least safe, so produce first and body parts afterward (arm, then hand, then finger).

  • ShortFuse@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 years ago

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

    • Dkarma@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years ago

      Our truck doesn’t work as advertised but that kids video skills are just shit.

      -tesla rep

    • realitista@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years 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
        0
        ·
        2 years 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

      • Zoot@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        Youre constantly forcing your trunk closed? That doesn’t sound normal to me actually, and sounds like the opposite of what I would want. Hello, groceries, important things, stuff I don’t want stolen so goes in the trunk?

      • CaptPretentious@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        There should be no algorithm. It should be done by a human. There are no amount of lines encode I will ever make up for knowing intent and what the current situation is.

        If it’s going to be closed by software it needs to prioritize safety 100% of the time. If more pressure is needed and that pressure needs to come from a human.

  • Wispy2891@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 years ago

    Oh no I saw a video where it chopped a carrot without stopping

    I don’t have the courage to click the link….

    • EdibleFriend@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years ago

      THAT’S THIS!!!

      He went through a bunch of vegetables and, admittedly, it was pretty impressive how it handled them. But then with no hesitation it took off the tip of the carrot and he still decided to try his finger

  • Passerby6497@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 years 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.

    • Agent641@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years ago

      Its just like elevators, really. You put your hand in to stop the doors closing, they open again before touching your arm. Next time they close gently on your arm. Third time, the doors snap shut and the elevator ascends without further warning, resulting in traumatic amputation.

      • reinei@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        Wait what? Are there actually elevators “programmed” this way‽ (can this behavior even be changed in the controller?)

        Because I have never “tested” this behavior per se (I mean you mostly want your elevator to move anyway so you ideally remove the obstruction the first time it didn’t fully close…)

        • erwan@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 years ago

          I’ve seen cases where it takes some time to the group of people in the elevator to figure out the obstruction. Because it won’t even touch the object, just reopen again and again.

          So no, elevators don’t do that, and I assume the parent comment is sarcastic.

          • Kedly@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 years ago

            Thats what I was hoping, but it was presented so deadpan that theres enough countries in the world that this could theoretically be true for some of them

            • Agent641@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              2 years ago

              I was joking, commenting on the absurdity of a safety system that deliberately gets less safe each time it triggers. Can you imagine the crush injuries and lawsuits if that were true? Not to mention all those movie scenes where someone repeatedly stops the elevator so they can confess their love to someone? They would end in tragedy.

              No, elevators are infinitely patient, and will never close the doors on any object large enough to be a crush hazard. Dog leashes, yes sometimes, but not arms and feet.

            • Clandestine@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 years ago

              It’s a joke about how the safety system on the car works. From another comment in this thread:

              Based on what it didn’t cut through, his finger should have been safe but apparently Tesla designed the thing to keep increasing the pressure if it detects resistance each time until it can close, which is absolutely baffling. I don’t know of any other safety feature that turns down the safety the more it activates. The fact that it reacts to the exact same conditions differently each time should, in itself, be deeply concerning for any safety feature.

  • nfsu2@feddit.cl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 years ago

    I get the idea automation, its great when it saves time and effort but when it represents a minuscule chance of chopping a limb off you it should never be implemented to the public.

    • ChickenLadyLovesLife@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years 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.

      • nutsack@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        The stupidest thing about it to me is that it’s not really functional as a truck but look at it

        • ChickenLadyLovesLife@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 years ago

          I love when owners show off how “practical” that truck bed is - when it has about the same carrying capacity as my roadster’s trunk.

    • CleoTheWizard@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years 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
        0
        ·
        2 years 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.

        • rottingleaf@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 years 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.

        • toofpic@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 years ago

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

      • nocturne@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years 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
          0
          ·
          2 years 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
        0
        ·
        2 years 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