www.bbc.com/news/technology-53666222
Wondered how long before something like this happened.
Does beg the question, why did he feel the need to override Tesla’s sensors dictating what speed they should go?
|
My two cars with auto wipers (stick-operated) occasionally need adjustment in the wrong type of rain. I can just rotate the same ring that adjusts the interval when on manual to change the sensitivity, or I can choose my manual speed. In very heavy rain I just whizz the knob round to maximum speed - I don't risk it suddenly deciding it's not raining. At least I have the choice and the practical means to exercise it.
Tesla's screen is not for the driver's benefit, it's for Tesla's. Not fit for purpose. I wouldn't have one given unless I could sell it and buy something else. I wonder if they will pay his fine.
|
>> Wondered how long before something like this happened.
>> Does beg the question, why did he feel the need to override Tesla’s sensors dictating
>> what speed they should go?
>>
I have had auto sensing wipers on my last 3 or 4 cars which can be slow to react to light rain, just needs a bit of road dirt on the sensor area on the screen.
On the other hand potting basic controls on a touch screen in a car sounds to me like a solution to a problem that didn't need fixing in the first place.
Last edited by: commerdriver on Fri 7 Aug 20 at 11:17
|
If basic controls make the car dangerous, then surely it shouldn't be on the road?
|
>> If basic controls make the car dangerous, then surely it shouldn't be on the road?
That is a sensible view, I suppose the question is do they make it dangerous or is the the nut behind the wheel? I would say the car is dangerous, so perhaps somebody needs to review type approval if that's what governs these things.
|
If the nut behind the wheel was adjusting the radio then no sympathy, but wipers are key. If they are not doing the job then then need adjusting.
Last edited by: VxFan on Fri 7 Aug 20 at 20:26
|
If it's that tricky he could just have pulled over.
|
>> If it's that tricky he could just have pulled over.
Precisely.
No better than the morons who claim they drove off a cliff / into a flood because their Sat Nav told them to.
|
>> No better than the morons who claim they drove off a cliff / into a
>> flood because their Sat Nav told them to.
Not so easy if you’re in the fast lane of the autobahn and you can’t see where you are going!
Last edited by: VxFan on Sat 8 Aug 20 at 20:10
|
>> Not so easy if you’re in the fast lane of the autobahn and you can’t
>> see where you are going!
He wanted to adjust the speed, not switch them on. However, it was still his decision to make and if he couldn't see then he should have pulled over.
|
>> He wanted to adjust the speed, not switch them on. However, it was still his
>> decision to make and if he couldn't see then he should have pulled over.
>>
I suppose the level of adjustment is key here. If they were working on the slowest setting when a much faster setting was needed urgently then I can understand the want to change the speed ASAP to basically be able to see out.
Pulling over may not be an option on a dual carriageway without hard shoulder for example and you can’t drive blind.
Should be a hardware control via stalk or rotary dial.
Last edited by: zippy on Sat 8 Aug 20 at 11:59
|
'I'm sure you are right but there are probably millions of Teslas (and possibly other brands) sharing a similar design and to me it seems a but much they the car needs to be re-engineered just because one user manages to have an accident for which was at least partly to blame.
I'm also sure that there are many people who have to take their eyes off the roads to adjust stuff which is on their steering wheel, to see which switch to play with.
Really, it was hardly even newsworthy let alone a conversation piece.
|
Tesla (the company) are technocrats who, like geeks everywhere, put style before function.
And many buyers are also geeks - they enjoy optimising the performance of their laptop, downloading apps onto an overpriced smartphone etc. It (for them) is wondrous to behold.
For the normally balanced, IT and tech is only worth having if it adds to the experience and/or functionality in a useful way - it is not an end in itsself.
Cars are for driving from A to B in reasonable comfort, and sometimes having fun. Its rather sad that many drive a beautifully equipped car that they use for (perhaps) an hour a day - and often go back home to a cranky central heating system, leaky gutters, tired furniture, time served decor etc. Bizarre isn't it!
|
>> Its rather sad that many drive a beautifully equipped car that they use for (perhaps) an hour a day
I don't know that I think it's said. As long as it suits them.
My cars in total don't get used an hour a day, though perhaps not far off. But since I have more than one then it works out quite considerably less than an hour per day.
I must say that I get closer and closer to the mindset that cars are little more than transport. I don't have the enthusiasm for them that I used to and definitely not in-car tech. I'm not really sure why.
A far cry from the day, and I remember my excitement well, when I first got a car with electric windows.
|
Sort of with you there. I used to get very excited about cars, and I've definitely spent way too much time and money on them over the years.
But now, increasingly, I'm really only concerned about whether they are suitable/comfortable/reliable enough to transport me, my family/friends and, in particular my/our mountain bikes, to interesting places where I/we can ride them.
Maybe it's a function of my age, or where I live, or just changing times, who knows, but the concept of just going out for a drive for no reason other than the drive itself, is no longer much of a thing for me.
The old question of what would be my "money no object" car is quite easy to answer now, it wouldn't be a track day car, a supercar, or a limousine, it would be a spacious, comfortable estate of some kind. Very similar in fact to what I have now.
Not that I wouldn't enjoy a drive round a track in someone else's fast car now and then of course!
Same with motorbikes, it occurs to me that more often than not now, mostly on a Sunday morning, you see slightly lonely looking middle aged blokes lurking in a layby having a smoke, standing next to their over specified motorbike, apparently wishing that someone would talk to them.
|
"having a smoke"
I sometimes wonder whether smoking goes with the territory on some peoples' past-times. Mate of mine used to go fishing so he could smoke his heart out without being nagged. Not that I have a wealth of experience but bookies and pubs seem to have probably more than their fair share of smokers ( - I used to bet AND smoke and I also think there is something about an addictive personality). But this is less noticeable over the past few years as more and more people give up the weed.
|
My requirements in a car are for something reliable, comfortable, and reasonably quick with decent storage space. I'm happy to control cruising speed, braking and traction by my own efforts and I have no interest in something full of electronic bling, most of which seems to be there for no other reason than to impress people I have no interest in impressing.
When you need to consult a manual or an onboard menu to turn on the radio or set the clock my heart sinks in despair.
|
>>A far cry from the day, and I remember my excitement well, when I first got a car with electric windows.
Similarly with my first rear screen washer. Showing it off to friends and it didn't work, meanwhile they were falling about laughing as it piddled on their drive - pipe had come off.
|
... and how much did those stick-on heated rear windows cost? But I loved it...
|
>> ... and how much did those stick-on heated rear windows cost? But I loved it...
>>
Never had one for my first car.
I saw a UK Corsair with a pukka HRW. Knowing it was the same glass as my 1600E I searched for and found one of 200 proper HRWs so I had it swaped for the plain glass version. ( they were not available at the time the car was made).
I certainly loved it.
|