Musk endeavours

[BobbyD]

BobbyD
...because some people consider taking a system which occupies a dangerous no mans land between machine control and human control, running on insufficient data, putting it in to the hands of real people on real roads and telling them it is an autopilot to be incredibly irresponsible. But hey, health and safety gone mad right?

You mean like human drive cars and all the folk they have killed.

All Tesla cars have human drivers. Teslas are not Autonomous. They are arguably more dangerous because at Level 2 the locus of control sits on a blurred edge, good enough for a human to get bored monitoring it, not good enough to spot a stationary car and decide not to drive in to it.

At Level 0 the human is engaged, they are driving. At Level 4 and above, there is a clean delineation of responsibility if the car is driving then the car is driving, and if the human is driving then the human is driving. The imbetween is dangerous, particularly when the car involved isn't suitabl;y kitted out with sensors.

There is a point were one looks at the greater good as well as the downside.

The greater good is being pursued who are chasing level 4/5 in a responsible manner, not selling an overdeveloped cruise control as an executive toy.

[odysseus2000]

This article discusses some aspects of auto-drive technology, the problems with vision only systems, the unreliability & cost of Lidar etc:

https://www.wired.com/story/tesla-autop ... ash-radar/

Kind of interesting how humans can tell the difference between stationary stuff that can be ignored & that which can't while AI struggles.

Intuitively one thinks that this problem ought to be solvable by the algorithm assessing size & whether the car has a free path by it in the same way that a human does. The AI in a tesla has radar to help it too, but apparently this is not enough. Kind of interesting why the AI is having problems with this whereas a child would be instantly able to make a correct call.

Regards,

[PeterGray]

I think there's a recurring theme on this thread of confusion between new technology, which is coming and which may prove beneficial, and Tesla.

Bearing in mind this is an investment site, some people seem to think that electric cars and future self driving cars are some sort of Musk breakthrough, and that Tesla has the potential to achieve a paradigm shifting market breakthrough, which could benefit investors significantly.

The facts are that lots of manufacturers have been making electric cars in increasing numbers for some time, Tesla is just one of them. The others have decades of experience of putting reasonably reliable cars on the road - slipping in a different drive chain is a small part of the process, and not one most of them will find difficult. Tesla had an advantage for performance electric cars, but they are now up against Jaguar, and no doubt others following suit (and while Trump is helping Tesla's US market, he is killing their European and Chinese ones). Tesla's autopliot is way short of the best available, which given the inevitable difficulties with putting something approaching self driving cars on the roads - to share with human driven ones - seems like a major strategic mistake, since any error is going to be heavily publicised. Better not to have it than to have a gimmick that will just produce bad publicity.

None of that means that there isn't money to be made in investing in Tesla, for those who can handle it the inevitable share price volatility that follows from Musk's approach, creates opportunities. But to invest thinking that Tesla is going to create a niche that is in anyway unique, and grow exponentially as a result, seems seriously mistaken to me.

Peter

[BobbyD]

Kind of interesting how humans can tell the difference between stationary stuff that can be ignored & that which can't while AI struggles.

Is it a flaw of AI, or of L2 driver assistance systems like Tesla's?

Volvo's semi-autonomous system, Pilot Assist, has the same shortcoming. Say the car in front of the Volvo changes lanes or turns off the road, leaving nothing between the Volvo and a stopped car.

...and yet fully autonomous cars and busses have been pootling around our roads for some years now without developing a fetish for stationary fire trucks or immobile police cars. Google/Waymo have millions of logged miles, autonomous busses run in for example Switzerland and Sweden, APTIV ran autonomous taxis at CES this year, there are autonomous trials going on all over the place and a strange absence of badly damaged public service vehicles or concrete infra-structure.

From your link:

The long term solution is to combine a several sensors, with different abilities, with more computing power. Key amongst them is lidar.

...now where have I heard that before?

It may well be that L2/3 autonomy is actually harder to safely implement than Level 4/5 because the human brain is incredibly bad at performing long mundane tasks with little perceived risk at any particular moment. The economies of sensor lite set ups may well be false, and seeing how much tech you need to add before your cars stop hitting things on real roads with real innocent bystanders is the wrong way to go about it.

I think there's a recurring theme on this thread of confusion between new technology, which is coming and which may prove beneficial, and Tesla.

This.

[ReformedCharacter]

It may well be that L2/3 autonomy is actually harder to safely implement than Level 4/5 because the human brain is incredibly bad at performing long mundane tasks with little perceived risk at any particular moment. The economies of sensor lite set ups may well be false, and seeing how much tech you need to add before your cars stop hitting things on real roads with real innocent bystanders is the wrong way to go about it.

I think you make a good point. Looking to the future a bit, it seems likely that there will be a convergence of technologies, and the development of standards for vehicles to communicate with each other. To me this seems like a logical progression and would in itself make a huge contribution towards safety. It could (for example) enable a vehicle to 'see' what a vehicle half a mile ahead can 'see' or at least the likely hazards. My expectation is that eventually all transport will be 'networked', the potential for energy and time efficiency improvements in traffic dense road systems would make this almost inevitable IMO.

RC

[odysseus2000]

ThIs is an interesting Wiki article discussing robot cars:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autonomous_car

The desire to have robot driving is a long one & there are many potential technological approaches & companies working on systems.

This is how it always is with new technology.

At some point it is likely that someone emerges with a technology that works & which is affordable & they will make a lot of money.

The job of an investor/trader is to monitor the field & make profits as the market moves through the many stages of emotion as these systems are developed.

It may not be the best system that emerges triumphant & there will likely be boom & busts certainly endless opinions.

For most people this is likely too difficult a process, but for the folk who get it right there are substantial profits to be made.

Regards,

[odysseus2000]

PeterGray
None of that means that there isn't money to be made in investing in Tesla, for those who can handle it the inevitable share price volatility that follows from Musk's approach, creates opportunities. But to invest thinking that Tesla is going to create a niche that is in anyway unique, and grow exponentially as a result, seems seriously mistaken to me.

This is exactly the same thing that was said about Amazon & about the iPhone.

Both of these were seen as easily copied products that existing folk like Barnes & Noble, Nokia etc would destroy.

Why didn't Amazon & Apple get destroyed? In my opinion it was due to their CEO's having the business skills to defeat competitors.

Whether Tesla will follow this lead or crash & burn we do not know.

Every investor/trader has to make up their own mind.

Regards,

[BobbyD]

I think you make a good point. Looking to the future a bit, it seems likely that there will be a convergence of technologies, and the development of standards for vehicles to communicate with each other. To me this seems like a logical progression and would in itself make a huge contribution towards safety. It could (for example) enable a vehicle to 'see' what a vehicle half a mile ahead can 'see' or at least the likely hazards. My expectation is that eventually all transport will be 'networked', the potential for energy and time efficiency improvements in traffic dense road systems would make this almost inevitable IMO.

RC

Vehicle to everything, and everything to vehicle, seems like an obvious and cheap benefit of the tech advances we are currently seeing, and things like the Audi traffic light countdown are the first signs of this tech being implemented.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IhTWM11Lqpo

As you say safety implications are massive, imagine for example knowing that the car 4 ahead of you has just slammed on it's brakes, and imagine what car to car and infrastructure to car communication could do to smooth traffic flow and increase efficiency. Proper traffic management, where cars know the optimum speed for navigating the congestion ahead without lots of pointless stop/start, and sit happily in their lane at that speed until they pop out the other end and can put their foot down again.

Yet more reasons why a cheap go it alone approach isn't going to unlock the benefits of autonomous.

[BobbyD]

PeterGray
None of that means that there isn't money to be made in investing in Tesla, for those who can handle it the inevitable share price volatility that follows from Musk's approach, creates opportunities. But to invest thinking that Tesla is going to create a niche that is in anyway unique, and grow exponentially as a result, seems seriously mistaken to me.

This is exactly the same thing that was said about Amazon & about the iPhone.

Both of these were seen as easily copied products that existing folk like Barnes & Noble, Nokia etc would destroy.

Why didn't Amazon & Apple get destroyed? In my opinion it was due to their CEO's having the business skills to defeat competitors.

Whether Tesla will follow this lead or crash & burn we do not know.

Every investor/trader has to make up their own mind.

Regards,

Neither Amazon nor Apple occupy a niche.

They are aggressive competitors in a competitive marketplace.

Many of the points being made in this thread are that Tesla needs to be run like a competitive business if it is to prosper and concern itself with the fundamentals like actually producing product rather than spreading its resources so thinly across areas already full of specialists.

Other people sell web services and other people make smart phones. Other people will and do make electric cars and other people will make autonomous cars. The idea that Tesla are set to inherit the electric market niche is ill founded fantasy.

[odysseus2000]

BobbyD
Neither Amazon nor Apple occupy a niche.

They are aggressive competitors in a competitive marketplace.

Many of the points being made in this thread are that Tesla needs to be run like a competitive business if it is to prosper and concern itself with the fundamentals like actually producing product rather than spreading its resources so thinly across areas already full of specialists.

Other people sell web services and other people make smart phones. Other people will and do make electric cars and other people will make autonomous cars. The idea that Tesla are set to inherit the electric market niche is ill founded fantasy.

This is hindsight bias.

When Amazon launched they were a niche player.

When Apple lauched the iPhone they were a niche cell phone player.

One can not use how things now are as an argument for business at much earlier stages in their life.

Regards,

[BobbyD]

One can not use how things now are as an argument for business at much earlier stages in their life.

Regards,

Whatever you want to believe.

[Howard]

Really interesting suggestion by Elon Musk to consider inserting nylon tube into the Thai caves and inflating like a bouncy castle to displace water and allow boys to walk/crawl through the tube.

See BBC news site for more detail.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-44735412

regards

Howard

[redsturgeon]

Really interesting suggestion by Elon Musk to consider inserting nylon tube into the Thai caves and inflating like a bouncy castle to displace water and allow boys to walk/crawl through the tube.

See BBC news site for more detail.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-44735412

regards

Howard

I believe a similar idea was used in a "Lost In Space" plot from the recent Netflix series to save two crew members from a tar pit. It could work, if the nylon tube could be constructed in time and be strong enough to survive the sharp rocks etc. I guess if it fail during use though it would be catastrophic.


John

[odysseus2000]

Really interesting suggestion by Elon Musk to consider inserting nylon tube into the Thai caves and inflating like a bouncy castle to displace water and allow boys to walk/crawl through the tube.

See BBC news site for more detail.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-44735412

regards

Howard

Yes, this is the sort of thing that one finds from the most successful people, whether it is their wealth that allows them to have a big audience for their ideas or these gifts that make the wealth is oft debated, but I side with it being the gifts that allow them to get rich.

Many people who are successful have a very narrow focus. One particularly sees this in Universities where folk get to thinking they are special, but get them out of their tiny little eco sphere & they are very weak & ineffective.

The best people tend to be wider looking appealing to a wide strata of society & to have a sense of public duty & an ability to inspire folk & attract good people to help them.

These qualities are extremely difficult to teach & although institutions that teach MBA & similar argue that what matters is the training they offer, my Studies indicate that many of the folk who make it big time don't even bother with a full formal education.

An investment in Tesla is as much an investment in Musk as in electric cars/ solar company, just like buying Berkshire has been an investment in Buffett & Munger, or in the formative years an investment in Standard oil was an investment in Rockerfella, for Amazon Bezos etc.

In the world there are likely thousands of people who could have thought up the air tunnel idea, but Musk had the profile & audience, tools & the people to do it & promoted this novel solution whereas others didn't or didn't have the resources.

Musk story remains, imho, one of the most interesting & exciting of our age bringing forward in many cases respect and admiration, in others almost a jealous hating & loathing, endlessly trying to paint him as a charlatan or worse, always folk wanting to attack & tear him down, relentlessly trying to say there are much better ways to do what he is doing, but never doing anything themselves. In some strange way it is the contest between the haters & Musk's ability to overcome them, at least so far, that makes him so remarkable.

Regards,

[tjh290633]

I wonder if Musk contemplated the possible consequences. First the displacement of water as the tube inflates, which might require some pressure, secondly the increased pressure at the open end of the tube, which would displace still more water.

I understand that an air line has been fed into the cavern, to replenish the air which has been depleted of oxygen.

TJH

[Howard]

I'm guessing that a tube (or a series of tubes) would have to have an airlock at each end.

The problem of potential tearing on a sharp rock is a big one, but from what I have read, the bottom of much of the caves is mud or similar, which might reduce this risk.

Personally, I'd prefer to crawl/walk through a tube with a torch, even one that was very constricted in places than to have to wear a mask and be pulled through zero visibility muddy water.

Let's hope some creative thinking like this will come up with a solution.

regards

Howard

[odysseus2000]

The situation is moving rapidly now. Click on this link to see some of the dialogue on Twitter:

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1015105500105412610

Now they are talking of escape pods, and pipes of kevlar, others are suggesting using space suits, many amazing ideas being shared real time via Twitter.

It is almost like an episode of International Rescue, amazing really the parallels between Jeff Tracy's Thunderbirds and the world wide effort now going on to rescue these people.

Kind of magical how useful Twitter is in this type of situation which only reinforces my belief that Twitter stock even after its recent moves is still far from its zenith.

Regards,

[redsturgeon]

The situation is moving rapidly now. Click on this link to see some of the dialogue on Twitter:

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1015105500105412610

Now they are talking of escape pods, and pipes of kevlar, others are suggesting using space suits, many amazing ideas being shared real time via Twitter.

It is almost like an episode of International Rescue, amazing really the parallels between Jeff Tracy's Thunderbirds and the world wide effort now going on to rescue these people.

Kind of magical how useful Twitter is in this type of situation which only reinforces my belief that Twitter stock even after its recent moves is still far from its zenith.

Regards,

While this is going on in the Twittersphere, back in the actual caves they are starting the rescue process.

John

[odysseus2000]

Seems some boys now out, happy news!

https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/ ... -boys-live

Seems Musk's preparations were a backup & they have not used any of his tech.

Regards,

[ReformedCharacter]

Now they are talking of escape pods, and pipes of kevlar, others are suggesting using space suits, many amazing ideas being shared real time via Twitter.

Certainly seems to bring out the armchair engineers, my favourite (courtesy of the Independent):

Could silicone absorbent material on a large scale be used to absorb the water and then dug out as a gel solid?

RC