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

      • Zoot@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months 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
        ·
        5 months 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.

    • bitchkat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months 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
          ·
          5 months 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$.

        • bitchkat@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 months 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
            ·
            5 months 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).

      • laurelraven@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months 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
          cake
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 months 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.

    • Adderbox76@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months 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
        ·
        5 months 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.

        • Adderbox76@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months 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.

  • Possibly linux@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 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
      0
      ·
      5 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.

  • tedu@azorius.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

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

  • Wispy2891@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months 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
      ·
      5 months 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

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

    • ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      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
          0
          ·
          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.

            • ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              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
                0
                ·
                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.

            • brbposting@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              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
                ·
                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.

    • froh42@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      5 year old me after it bounces back from my finger I accidentally put there- agaaaain! agaaain!

      And the stupidest of all car owners is not smarter than a 5y old kid.

    • Ech@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      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
          0
          ·
          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
        0
        ·
        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
    • barsquid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      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.

      • rottingleaf@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 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
        ·
        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.

    • cerement@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 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!”

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

  • nfsu2@feddit.cl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months 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.