And how does that change anything about my statements?
Yeah, they have QA. But for the problem they claim they’re solving (robotaxis) and speed of pushing stuff to customers (on the order of days) it vastly, vastly insufficient. And it lacks any safety lifecycle process regards - again, just look at the timelines. Even if you’re super efficient, you cannot possibly claim you can even such a basic things like proper change management (no, commit message isn’t that) or validation.
> speed of pushing stuff to customers (on the order of days)
this is also false and doesn't happen
> you cannot possibly claim you can even such a basic things like proper change management (no, commit message isn’t that) or validation.
you know absolutely nothing about the internal timelines of developments and deployments at tesla and to suggest it's impossible without that knowledge is just dishonest
> > it lacks any safety lifecycle process
> completely demonstrably false
Head of AP, testified under oath, that they don't know what's Operational Design Domain. I'll just leave it at that.
> > speed of pushing stuff to customers (on the order of days)
> this is also false and doesn't happen
Never ever Musk tweeted about .1 fixing some critical issues coming in next few days? I must live in a different timeline.
> > you cannot possibly claim you can even such a basic things like proper change management (no, commit message isn’t that) or validation.
> you know absolutely nothing about the internal timelines of developments and deployments at tesla and to suggest it's impossible without that knowledge is just dishonest
Let's assume I have no internal information. If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck.
> Never ever Musk tweeted about .1 fixing some critical issues coming in next few days? I must live in a different timeline.
Lets say you have a baby which is being born. You tweet, birth in ten days! You can't then say, look: here is a tweet, it proves that baby development in tweeters actually has a several day lifecycle and moreover it proves that baby having mother's don't do proper pre-birth routines, because the tweet isn't the process that created the baby.
It is separate.
> If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck.
Right. So the fact that we have video evidence of internal processes, including QA processes, is much more like looking, swimming, and quacking like a duck much like having video evidence of a mother with a round belly for months before the tweet would be evidence that the babies don't take weeks to develop.
So when Elon has also tweeted that a launch was delayed, because of issues that were discovered - which does happen, as I'm sure you know if you follow his tweets as you imply - then that would be evidence congruent with the video evidence we have of QA processes existing within the company.
Even AP is is "autosteer (beta)" so I sure do feel like part of their QA team. And it drives like a slightly inebriated human.
I do have high hopes that the work they've done on the FSD stack will make for a significant improvement to basic AP whenever they get merged (assuming it ever happens; it has been talked about for years). That'd be nice.
what do you call them? there's no way possible that they can make changes to the software and have them thoroughly vetted before the OTA push. Tesla does not have enough cars owned by the company driving on public roads to vet these changes. The QA team at best can analyze the data received from the customers. That makes the customers the testers in my book.
the fact that you don't know how tesla vets these changes, very extensively, prior to any physical car receiving the update reinforces that you have no idea what you're talking about
tesla does extensive, meaningful vetting of these updates. i'll let you do the research yourself so that maybe you can quit spreading misinformation
so well vetted that issues keep happening, so well vetted that a OTA "software patch" is raised to the level of automotive recall. if you call that misinformation, then, "boy, i don't know".
Yeah, they have QA. But for the problem they claim they’re solving (robotaxis) and speed of pushing stuff to customers (on the order of days) it vastly, vastly insufficient. And it lacks any safety lifecycle process regards - again, just look at the timelines. Even if you’re super efficient, you cannot possibly claim you can even such a basic things like proper change management (no, commit message isn’t that) or validation.