• Blass Rose@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    18 hours ago

    It’s surprising how they were kinda the first to promise this sort of thing, but they’re SO FAR BEHIND the other companies who got into it. Sure, the other companies don’t claim that they’ll be anything beyond really advanced cruise control, but even then, a lot of them are really close to breaking out of that.

    • Blass Rose@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      18 hours ago

      I also love their charger network as a non-rivian owner. Seamless, sleek, fast, no faffing with an app…

      But also their app has a route planner for EVs to account for charging stops?! And it lists all chargers, not just their own. I’m actually pleasantly surprised.

  • Rooskie91@discuss.online
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    77
    ·
    2 days ago

    Hits Blunt Bro what if we put the cars on a special road that only took them where we wanted them to go, and strung a bunch of cars together to increase their capacity? Wouldn’t that fix the problem?

    • rem26_art@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      44
      ·
      2 days ago

      bro we could run the electricity above the special road, and then they wouldn’t have to stop to charge. You’re on to something!

      • fizzle@quokk.au
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        2 days ago

        You wouldn’t even need a whole road, just the two strips where the wheels would run. You could call them road strips or road lines or maybe road rails.

    • takeda@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      Nope, it doesn’t work in hyper loop either.

      (Yes, I know where you going, but I find the above hilarious, as it is essentially taking the worst part of cars (inefficiency) and worst part of trains (fixed route) and mashing them together into useless product. Also hyper loop supposed to be alternative to bullet trains, not a tunnel)

  • Janx@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    1 day ago

    Well, what other option was there? Not let Musk make baseless, impossible lies to defraud customers, or have him face consequences for them!? Be serious…

  • reddig33@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    2 days ago

    Well, good thing cities keep approving Tesla’s self-driving taxis then. What could possibly go wrong?

    • nickiwest@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      1 day ago

      I don’t understand this. I have to pass a written exam and a driving test to be allowed to drive, and I am licensed by my state.

      But a company can just say, “Trust me, bro,” and any municipal government can just respond, “Yeah, go ahead and put your cars on our roads”?

      • hex_m_hell@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 day ago

        Show up to the DMV with several million dollars and I guarantee you can find someone who let’s you skip the test. Same deal.

  • John@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    2 days ago

    All my data scientists coworkers who look at the map data that is supplied to these self-driving companies also say the same thing. Our Stanford PhD Data Scientist drives a 20 year old Toyota 😆

    • fizzle@quokk.au
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      2 days ago

      Elon is a conman, but this is pretty standard strategy for the current era.

      Promise unsolvable. Spend VC building tomorrow’s picks and shovels. Become right wrong nutter. Sell off stock holdings before the plebs revolt.

  • astro@leminal.space
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    2 days ago

    While it would be awesome if the probability of it driving into a lake were 0%, the important criterion is whether or not that probability is smaller than that of my wife doing it.