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

    • riodoro1@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

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

    • TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year 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.

      • Gormadt@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year 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

      • nocturne@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year 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
          ·
          1 year ago

          I don’t see “dipstick” in the wild very often, but I always appreciate it. Are you English by any chance?

    • CleoTheWizard@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year 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
        ·
        1 year 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.

        • toofpic@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

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

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

  • tedu@azorius.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

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

  • NeoNachtwaechter@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    A Tesla engineer said the test was done wrong because the frunk increases in pressure every time.

    “You are holding it wrong!” 🤣

    • ozymandias117@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      If it increases in pressure every time, I’m now curious how many times you need to close the trunk to cut a finger off

      • Nepenthe@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        That was very nearly my exact same thought. Maybe not for curious children with carrot-sized fingers, but for adults, how convenient! Business competitor’s body won’t quite fit in your fancy frunk? Just while away on your phone for about 10 minutes, let the cat do its magic, and off go the legs! Travel-sized!

      • oleorun@real.lemmy.fan
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        I wonder if you can get the frunk to critical velocity at the touch of a fly by constantly pumping it up like a pump action gun.

    • Chozo@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      He did the test wrong because he’s experimenting with “safety” algorithms that the manufacturer has provided little-to-no documentation on and is having to come up with answers on his own. Maybe he wouldn’t be “doing it wrong” if Tesla hadn’t over-engineered every aspect of their piece of shit truck in the first place. This thing is a solution in search of a problem, and it’ll chop your fingers off until it finds it.

      • cley_faye@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’m sure these “engineers” were confused everytime they saw an elevator door not mercilessly crush people.

        • barsquid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          This breakthrough technology could finally provide a way to teach people on the MTA not to hold the doors.

        • gian @lemmy.grys.it
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Nope, but they probably know that an elevator doors and a car lid are two completely different thing with different use cases and security concerns.

            • gian @lemmy.grys.it
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              Obviously.

              But let’s face it: if the car lid would never close if something is in the way, some other dumb youtuber would have made a video about it and here there would be a discussion about how stupid are the engineers to not let the lid close even if a bag in slightly on on the way and the user know what they are doing.

              • cley_faye@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                You’re missing the point of a safety feature. The car shouldn’t, by itself, close the lid if something’s in the way. It should allow the user to push it down, or disable it temporarily, to do so.

                The point of a safety feature in any system is to prevent unexpected situation from having unexpected consequences, not to be a magic solution that accommodate for brainless people. In one direction, you can make the judgement call and force the thing down, in the other direction you lose a finger.

                • gian @lemmy.grys.it
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  You’re missing the point of a safety feature. The car shouldn’t, by itself, close the lid if something’s in the way. It should allow the user to push it down, or disable it temporarily, to do so.

                  I get the safety feature. The point is that here I am saying to the car to close the lid even if something is in the way. I made a conscious decision to do so, and more than one time, so I expect the car to do it. But I agree that it could have been designed in a better way.

                  The point of a safety feature in any system is to prevent unexpected situation from having unexpected consequences, not to be a magic solution that accommodate for brainless people. In one direction, you can make the judgement call and force the thing down, in the other direction you lose a finger.

                  Which is exactly what happened here. He made the judgement call to ignore the safety feature (and probably ignored how the feature works)

  • Bonesy91@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    This is sad. The cybertruck is a deathtrap on wheels and somehow “money” got it to pass any “money” to safety tests is beyond me…

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

      When I initially heard about the Cybertruck I was really hoping it would stay a concept and never get made.

      • You999@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Imo manufacturers need to do the opposite and release more concept cars. Some of the coolest looking cars you can never own. Just look at these masterpieces

        Hyundai N vision 74

        Mazda Furai (rip)

        • Psythik@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          I was so upset when Hyundai said that they weren’t actually going to release the N Vision. I was really excited for that one cause they put so much work into making it look like an actual car you’d see on the road. I thought for sure it was coming out.

          There’s always the new 400Z if you want a modern sports car with retro styling. But even that one still looks too modern… :/

    • Reddfugee42@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      somehow “money” got it to pass any “money” to safety tests is beyond me…

      This sentence brought to you by Stroke™️. Have you had a stroke lately?™️

      • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Saw a video of the other day of some guy that bought a cybertruck, and his review can basically be summarized as “it has a ton of issues, there’s rust all over it, it’s incredibly dangerous, definitely worth the $100,000”

  • inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year 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.

    • PrinceWith999Enemies@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      It strikes me as exactly the kind of engineering call that Elon has tended to make, time after time. With zero training in an area, he gets a solution in his head crufted up from some set of pre-existing notions or points of view and then pushes to have them implemented. He will also go on to fire anyone who disagrees with him. I spoke with an engineer who worked on the gull wing doors, which the team had objected to, and not only did he force them through, he burst in on one of the finalization meetings where they had finally reached a design consensus and insisted they change the hinge. Given similar reports on his behavior regarding other products (including especially twitter), I have no reason to disbelieve this person.

    • barsquid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year 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
        ·
        1 year 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
        ·
        1 year 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.

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

          • CerealKiller01@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year 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.

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year 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.

        • kibiz0r@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          My Subaru has a similar setup, and there’s a feature for changing the max height of the tailgate. You might wanna see if the same thing exists for you.

          • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year 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.)

            • Zier@fedia.io
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              On older Toyotas the rear door has a strap inside that hangs down for people to grab onto and pull the door down to close.

            • jaamesbaxterr@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              We’ve got a 2019 Rav and I can’t remember how, but you can adjust the height that the door opens to by some series of button pushes. We had to lower it so that it doesn’t hit the frame of the garage door when opening it inside the garage. Maybe just adjust it so that it doesn’t open all the way and it’ll be easier for her to reach the button?

                • BaseModelHuman@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I actually sell these. You can manually lower the door to the height that works comfortably, then hold the automatic door button down for about 3 seconds. That should program the door to a new maximum height.

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

                  How do I set the height on my vehicle’s adjustable power liftgate?

                  When the liftgate reaches the desired height, push the rear liftgate close-button once (button is located on the doorjamb of the rear liftgate, and only accessible when the liftgate is open). Press and hold the button until it beeps 4 times. Click here to view a video.

                  😎

      • inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Because like you said, it’s a nice to have feature. I like my wife’s auto closing hatch for when I have a handful of boxes for that final grocery run and just walk away and it closes. It’s literally just really nice convenience feature and if it fails, you go back to closing it manually.

    • Ech@lemm.ee
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year 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.

    • froh42@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year 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.

    • jonne@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year 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!”

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

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

        • best_username_ever@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Same in the medical devices industry. We have whole teams of non-developers whose job is to find out when and why a surgeon can be a moron. The code is more difficult to write, but it’s way better and more robust.

      • rottingleaf@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        And also every additional kind of complexity (which stacks BTW) makes you more dependent on the vendor (good for them, bad for you) and on doing things exactly as their imagined user (because it’s disproportionately your problem as laws don’t seem to work in making it theirs).

        Distributism is actually a very good political ideology. Sad it’s associated with Catholic religion, because it correctly generalized the principles making democracies and markets and cultures work.

      • hersh@literature.cafe
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year 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.

      • toofpic@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        “Oh my, the cake box/finger/dog was in the way, but thanks for automation, the door didn’t close!”