• inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    5 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.

    • MamboGator@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      5 months ago

      This is why, as a software developer, I’m against designing any system that assumes what the user wants and tries to do it for them automatically. On the occasions where the assumption is right, it’s a mild convenience at best. When it’s wrong, it is always infuriating if not dangerous.

      • hersh@literature.cafe
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 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.

      • inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 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.

    • Ech@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      5 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.

        • T00l_shed@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 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
        1
        ·
        5 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
    • ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 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
          1
          ·
          5 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
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            5 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
              ·
              5 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
                0
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                5 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.

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

              Maybe you didn’t comprehend it? The close force attempt increases with each unsuccessful attempt at closing. That way seems better than it eventually not working at all a few years down the line as all the electronics get more jankety be cause something gets a bit bent or worn out and it always detects a small amount of resistance so it quits closing all together.

              • ShepherdPie@midwest.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                5 months ago

                Nobody wants to discuss the logic involved with having to open the door and then close it again for it to attempt to close harder and why that isn’t the dire safety hazard that people are trying to make it out to be. These people are the reason why we have to have “no smoking” signs at gas pumps because apparently they’d leave their hand in the door after attempting to close it 3 or 4 times.

    • barsquid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 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.

      • gian @lemmy.grys.it
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 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
      1
      ·
      5 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!”

    • Plopp@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 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.

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        5 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
            1
            ·
            5 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.)

          • CerealKiller01@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 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.