Skip to content
Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Mashable)   A subscription service is now available for car driving   (mashable.com) divider line
    More: Asinine, Automobile, Electric vehicle, electric car maker, Tesla's website, Electric car, Full Self-Driving, Time, suite of more advanced driver assistance features  
•       •       •

1073 clicks; posted to Business » on 18 Jul 2021 at 6:50 AM (12 days ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



45 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2021-07-18 5:22:52 AM  
And even at that rate, it won't be enough to pay for all the lawsuits.
 
2021-07-18 6:56:37 AM  

Jesus McSordid: And even at that rate, it won't be enough to pay for all the lawsuits.


seems like companies make sure they will make lots of profit as well as have lawsuit money for the families of the dead. been this way since before i was born and i'm old enough to remember Captain Kangaroo. it still blows my mind how some people can manage to sleep at night. they KNOW people will die and they are okay with it.
 
2021-07-18 7:25:28 AM  
This is a preview of the future.  WHEN full self driving cars are traveling the road, you know that car companies are going to charge a subscription fee.
That said, anyone paying for fully automated driving at this stage is an idiot with more money than sense.
 
hej
2021-07-18 8:06:38 AM  
Thank goodness you have the option not to buy it.
 
2021-07-18 8:39:28 AM  
You didn't think Musk was doing this for altruistic reasons, did you?
 
2021-07-18 9:20:48 AM  
I do believe we are at the point where at least two suckers are born every minute. Maybe 3-4?
Anybody have an accurate citation?
 
2021-07-18 9:34:02 AM  
Remember when ignorant farkers on this very STEM tab would argue that self-driving cars would lower the death and injury rate of the USA? And there was just no way to get them to see the problems with that claim? They were ignorant, or just bigoted, enough to even claim Tesla (and AI developers in general) never target certain group to die baed on socioeconomic hierarchies? Yeah, good times, good times. The $199 monthly subscription service is a really interesting way to kill people based on their monthly expenses.
 
2021-07-18 9:46:06 AM  
"Well officer, I was midway in the Holland Tunnel when my subscription expired. And that's when everything started. The screaming, the shooting, the fires...."
 
2021-07-18 9:57:46 AM  

Benevolent Misanthrope: You didn't think Musk was doing this for altruistic reasons, did you?


Do they take Earth cash on Mars?
 
2021-07-18 9:59:17 AM  
How about no?
 
2021-07-18 10:19:34 AM  

Bennie Crabtree: Remember when ignorant farkers on this very STEM tab would argue that self-driving cars would lower the death and injury rate of the USA? And there was just no way to get them to see the problems with that claim? They were ignorant, or just bigoted, enough to even claim Tesla (and AI developers in general) never target certain group to die baed on socioeconomic hierarchies? Yeah, good times, good times. The $199 monthly subscription service is a really interesting way to kill people based on their monthly expenses.



Just because the first X implementations of something isn't a good answer, doesn't mean this won't be answered later on in a fashion that works. Personally I've always felt that something more centralized - rather than trying to make each car a "smart" driver individually was the better approach, but hey, it will get there eventually. 

Do I find subscription based services evil and would I like it to be a shooting offense to introduce them? yes, but that's outside of your position.
 
2021-07-18 10:25:50 AM  

Catlenfell: This is a preview of the future.  WHEN full self driving cars are traveling the road, you know that car companies are going to charge a subscription fee.
That said, anyone paying for fully automated driving at this stage is an idiot with more money than sense.


Keep farking that chicken.
 
2021-07-18 10:47:21 AM  

ChrisDe: "Well officer, I was midway in the Holland Tunnel when my subscription expired. And that's when everything started. The screaming, the shooting, the fires...."


the pop-up notifications, and hidden pop-ups....the ones with audio.  It was horrific!
 
2021-07-18 10:53:23 AM  

snocone: I do believe we are at the point where at least two suckers are born every minute. Maybe 3-4?
Anybody have an accurate citation?


Idiocracy_family_tree.jpg

I'd say it's way higher at this point.
 
hej
2021-07-18 11:31:58 AM  

Benevolent Misanthrope: You didn't think Musk was doing this for altruistic reasons, did you?


I expect him to give it away for free just like all the other auto makers with this feature.
 
2021-07-18 11:39:26 AM  

Xavier99: Bennie Crabtree: Remember when ignorant farkers on this very STEM tab would argue that self-driving cars would lower the death and injury rate of the USA? And there was just no way to get them to see the problems with that claim? They were ignorant, or just bigoted, enough to even claim Tesla (and AI developers in general) never target certain group to die baed on socioeconomic hierarchies? Yeah, good times, good times. The $199 monthly subscription service is a really interesting way to kill people based on their monthly expenses.


Just because the first X implementations of something isn't a good answer, doesn't mean this won't be answered later on in a fashion that works. Personally I've always felt that something more centralized - rather than trying to make each car a "smart" driver individually was the better approach, but hey, it will get there eventually. 

Do I find subscription based services evil and would I like it to be a shooting offense to introduce them? yes, but that's outside of your position.


No, you are setting boundaries on my critique that are, in fact, you moving goalposts. The relevant question about the AI is "What is it for?" the answer has to do with the system of updates and maintenace that are the basis of corporate IP. The question, "What defines safety in the epistemologies of the developers and customers, which will define the range of outcomes when it is implented?" help us to choose ways if interrogating what the promise of safety means, at a practical level. You're begging my questions with your answers.

I realize I did not post the subtance of my critique. So I deserved a reply that could've been much more terse, or just saltier, than you gave.

The subscription service is part of the cars and their systems engineering, though, just as much as the social construction of self-driving vehicle, and the social constructions that permeate engineering and render unethical or predatory technologies.
 
2021-07-18 11:52:30 AM  

Xavier99: Bennie Crabtree: Remember when ignorant farkers on this very STEM tab would argue that self-driving cars would lower the death and injury rate of the USA? And there was just no way to get them to see the problems with that claim? They were ignorant, or just bigoted, enough to even claim Tesla (and AI developers in general) never target certain group to die baed on socioeconomic hierarchies? Yeah, good times, good times. The $199 monthly subscription service is a really interesting way to kill people based on their monthly expenses.


Just because the first X implementations of something isn't a good answer, doesn't mean this won't be answered later on in a fashion that works. Personally I've always felt that something more centralized - rather than trying to make each car a "smart" driver individually was the better approach, but hey, it will get there eventually. 

Do I find subscription based services evil and would I like it to be a shooting offense to introduce them? yes, but that's outside of your position.


The problem with having the self-driving AI centralized is that you would need to have low-latency internet connectivity available everywhere there is a road if you wanted true Level 5, which isn't really happening in the United States. There are a lot of rural areas where you would want to use self-driving that have bad to no internet connectivity. You really have to put the self-driving smarts into the vehicle unless you want to be restricted to Level 4. Even in urban areas cellular internet can be spotty, with weird pockets of slowdowns and no service.
 
2021-07-18 12:00:53 PM  

Xavier99: Bennie Crabtree: Remember when ignorant farkers on this very STEM tab would argue that self-driving cars would lower the death and injury rate of the USA? And there was just no way to get them to see the problems with that claim? They were ignorant, or just bigoted, enough to even claim Tesla (and AI developers in general) never target certain group to die baed on socioeconomic hierarchies? Yeah, good times, good times. The $199 monthly subscription service is a really interesting way to kill people based on their monthly expenses.


Just because the first X implementations of something isn't a good answer, doesn't mean this won't be answered later on in a fashion that works. Personally I've always felt that something more centralized - rather than trying to make each car a "smart" driver individually was the better approach, but hey, it will get there eventually. 

Do I find subscription based services evil and would I like it to be a shooting offense to introduce them? yes, but that's outside of your position.


Depends on the service. Is it like netflix or a phone plan, where I am being provided with access to a service? That seems reasonable depending on service & price. Now is it to acess a feature on something I already bought, pay for the upkeep/maintains and the fuel/power? Then that's bullshiat.
 
2021-07-18 12:01:46 PM  
All I want is a TV with volume buttons on the farking TV again, is that too much to ask?
 
2021-07-18 12:04:01 PM  
Have any of you watched Ghost in the Shell?

It starts with a hacker taking over the self-driving car network and holding everyone hostage.

This will happen if we get a network of AI cars. We can't prevent it. Our software engineering skills are not that good and we have no reason to expect them to improve in the near term. Distributed, trusted computing is just too hard when you don't control all the nodes.

Even one car giving off false readings can bring traffic to a standstill by confusing the other cars. And that doesn't even have to be intentional; it can be a piece of faulty hardware.

If self driving cars are to have any chance of working, they need to be completely independent of all other cars. And even then, individual cars can still be hacked and turned into weapons.

I would be surprised if the first act of terrorism with a self-driving car doesn't occur within a year of them becoming commercially available. We already have hackers attacking cars with lane and breaking assistance.
 
2021-07-18 12:19:20 PM  

tricycleracer: Benevolent Misanthrope: You didn't think Musk was doing this for altruistic reasons, did you?

Do they take Earth cash on Mars?


Muskbucks
 
2021-07-18 12:22:24 PM  

Mad_Radhu: The problem with having the self-driving AI centralized is that you would need to have low-latency internet connectivity available everywhere there is a road if you wanted true Level 5, which isn't really happening in the United States. There are a lot of rural areas where you would want to use self-driving that have bad to no internet connectivity. You really have to put the self-driving smarts into the vehicle unless you want to be restricted to Level 4. Even in urban areas cellular internet can be spotty, with weird pockets of slowdowns and no service.


I agree that we're a long way off, in terms of even communication technology, of an effective centralized AI.  I do think there's definitely a place for a sort of centralized "traffic control" system.

Individual cars report what they're planning, and the network notifies nearby cars to be ready for the maneuver.  On small scales, that can probably be done with cars communicating directly with each other - e.g., a vehicle broadcasting a message locally that it's about to change lanes.

On larger scales, cars can report their destination and be routed proactively to avoid possible congestion areas - sort of a load balancer for highways.  By definition that would only be needed in densely populated areas, where reasonable communication networks would already be in place.
 
2021-07-18 12:42:31 PM  

tyyreaunn: Mad_Radhu: The problem with having the self-driving AI centralized is that you would need to have low-latency internet connectivity available everywhere there is a road if you wanted true Level 5, which isn't really happening in the United States. There are a lot of rural areas where you would want to use self-driving that have bad to no internet connectivity. You really have to put the self-driving smarts into the vehicle unless you want to be restricted to Level 4. Even in urban areas cellular internet can be spotty, with weird pockets of slowdowns and no service.

I agree that we're a long way off, in terms of even communication technology, of an effective centralized AI.  I do think there's definitely a place for a sort of centralized "traffic control" system.

Individual cars report what they're planning, and the network notifies nearby cars to be ready for the maneuver.  On small scales, that can probably be done with cars communicating directly with each other - e.g., a vehicle broadcasting a message locally that it's about to change lanes.

On larger scales, cars can report their destination and be routed proactively to avoid possible congestion areas - sort of a load balancer for highways.  By definition that would only be needed in densely populated areas, where reasonable communication networks would already be in place.


The challenge with that approach is how does the system deal with a mix of regular vehicles and self-driving ones for the 20 or so years it would take for the transition to take place? The advantage of Telsa's system and similar systems like Super Cruise is that it can handle sharing the road with non-autonomous vehicles.
 
2021-07-18 1:28:10 PM  

sinko swimo: Jesus McSordid: And even at that rate, it won't be enough to pay for all the lawsuits.

seems like companies make sure they will make lots of profit as well as have lawsuit money for the families of the dead. been this way since before i was born and i'm old enough to remember Captain Kangaroo. it still blows my mind how some people can manage to sleep at night. they KNOW people will die and they are okay with it.


Its called run amuck capitalism

And rent seeking behavior
 
2021-07-18 1:29:48 PM  

tricycleracer: Benevolent Misanthrope: You didn't think Musk was doing this for altruistic reasons, did you?

Do they take Earth cash on Mars?


Nope

Only crypto
 
2021-07-18 1:32:49 PM  

IHadMeAVision: All I want is a TV with volume buttons on the farking TV again, is that too much to ask?


How about the TVs that used to limit the volume when a commercial came on

Now commercials blow u out of your recliner
 
2021-07-18 1:58:16 PM  
I have a subscription service for my apartment, and a separate subscription for electricity, another for internet, and yet another for my phone.
 
2021-07-18 2:42:50 PM  

Mad_Radhu: tyyreaunn: Mad_Radhu: The problem with having the self-driving AI centralized is that you would need to have low-latency internet connectivity available everywhere there is a road if you wanted true Level 5, which isn't really happening in the United States. There are a lot of rural areas where you would want to use self-driving that have bad to no internet connectivity. You really have to put the self-driving smarts into the vehicle unless you want to be restricted to Level 4. Even in urban areas cellular internet can be spotty, with weird pockets of slowdowns and no service.

I agree that we're a long way off, in terms of even communication technology, of an effective centralized AI.  I do think there's definitely a place for a sort of centralized "traffic control" system.

Individual cars report what they're planning, and the network notifies nearby cars to be ready for the maneuver.  On small scales, that can probably be done with cars communicating directly with each other - e.g., a vehicle broadcasting a message locally that it's about to change lanes.

On larger scales, cars can report their destination and be routed proactively to avoid possible congestion areas - sort of a load balancer for highways.  By definition that would only be needed in densely populated areas, where reasonable communication networks would already be in place.

The challenge with that approach is how does the system deal with a mix of regular vehicles and self-driving ones for the 20 or so years it would take for the transition to take place? The advantage of Telsa's system and similar systems like Super Cruise is that it can handle sharing the road with non-autonomous vehicles.


20 years?

There will still be half a million 1993 Camrys on the road in 20 years.
 
2021-07-18 2:57:50 PM  

Chief Superintendent Lookout: Catlenfell: This is a preview of the future.  WHEN full self driving cars are traveling the road, you know that car companies are going to charge a subscription fee.
That said, anyone paying for fully automated driving at this stage is an idiot with more money than sense.

Keep farking that chicken.


I have no doubts that self driving cars will come along in the future.  I assume that it's still a decade out from mass adoption.
 
2021-07-18 3:09:18 PM  

Koodz: Mad_Radhu: tyyreaunn: Mad_Radhu: The problem with having the self-driving AI centralized is that you would need to have low-latency internet connectivity available everywhere there is a road if you wanted true Level 5, which isn't really happening in the United States. There are a lot of rural areas where you would want to use self-driving that have bad to no internet connectivity. You really have to put the self-driving smarts into the vehicle unless you want to be restricted to Level 4. Even in urban areas cellular internet can be spotty, with weird pockets of slowdowns and no service.

I agree that we're a long way off, in terms of even communication technology, of an effective centralized AI.  I do think there's definitely a place for a sort of centralized "traffic control" system.

Individual cars report what they're planning, and the network notifies nearby cars to be ready for the maneuver.  On small scales, that can probably be done with cars communicating directly with each other - e.g., a vehicle broadcasting a message locally that it's about to change lanes.

On larger scales, cars can report their destination and be routed proactively to avoid possible congestion areas - sort of a load balancer for highways.  By definition that would only be needed in densely populated areas, where reasonable communication networks would already be in place.

The challenge with that approach is how does the system deal with a mix of regular vehicles and self-driving ones for the 20 or so years it would take for the transition to take place? The advantage of Telsa's system and similar systems like Super Cruise is that it can handle sharing the road with non-autonomous vehicles.

20 years?

There will still be half a million 1993 Camrys on the road in 20 years.


I'm reasonably certain my 2005 Corolla will outlive me.
 
2021-07-18 4:19:56 PM  
I suspect by the time my wife wants to replace her Kia, automatic emergency braking and adaptive cruise control will be standard on everything. Beyond that, we don't much care.

/Love TSLA, not so hot on Tesla's toys.
 
2021-07-18 4:40:52 PM  

hej: Thank goodness you have the option not to buy it.


If you mean a Tesla, I'm right with you.
 
hej
2021-07-18 4:48:39 PM  

jjorsett: hej: Thank goodness you have the option not to buy it.

If you mean a Tesla, I'm right with you.


Nope.  I meant the subscription service that this thread is about.  But you knew that already.
 
2021-07-18 4:54:12 PM  

Bennie Crabtree: Remember when ignorant farkers on this very STEM tab would argue that self-driving cars would lower the death and injury rate of the USA? And there was just no way to get them to see the problems with that claim? They were ignorant, or just bigoted, enough to even claim Tesla (and AI developers in general) never target certain group to die baed on socioeconomic hierarchies? Yeah, good times, good times. The $199 monthly subscription service is a really interesting way to kill people based on their monthly expenses.


It was just clear they hadn't worked in automation or been exposed to it at all.

Automation gets exponentially more difficult as the number of edge-case scenarios increase. Driving is 99% mundane, but 1% weird shiat. With that 1% being a enormous variety of things.

The other problem is advocates who think it just needs to be better than the average driver, but a majority of accidents aren't due to poor driving skill, it's down to speed, distraction and drunk driving. So for FSD to be a realistic replacement for human driving it needs to be better than someone who isn't on their phone, isn't drunk and drives generally close to the speed limit, and they're a decade or better away from that.
 
2021-07-18 6:14:37 PM  

ethernet76: The other problem is advocates who think it just needs to be better than the average driver, but a majority of accidents aren't due to poor driving skill, it's down to speed, distraction and drunk driving. So for FSD to be a realistic replacement for human driving it needs to be better than someone who isn't on their phone, isn't drunk and drives generally close to the speed limit, and they're a decade or better away from that.


I don't follow you - your conclusion seems to exclude the reality that human drivers go too fast, get distracted, and drive while impaired. Sure, if you rule all of those out, humans are pretty great at driving. That's exactly the kind of stuff I expect automated driving to avoid. It's not that computers will have meaningfully quicker reactions or anything. They just won't do the incredibly stupid shiat that all drivers do at least a little bit.

FSD doesn't need to be better than the best driver (on her best day). It will just need to avoid being as bad as we all are at our worst.
 
2021-07-18 6:57:51 PM  
SAE, NHTSA, and the insurance industry need to get together and set an industry standard of autonomous vehicle terms, and enforce the hell out of them. No company should be able to call a package "Full Self Driving" in the title, then later on in fine print say the driver shouldn't expect to relinquish full control.

Tesla is playing word games and the result will be less trust in the technology for the near future.
 
2021-07-18 7:22:07 PM  
I don't want to participate in any business model where you take a huge chunk of money from me up front, and then try to get a monthly fee on top of that. It just feels like buying a furnace, but then having to pay a monthly fee to have it listen to a thermostat. If I wanted to lease a car, I would lease a car. If I want to buy a car, you get your money on day one, not "that same money", and a monthly fee for the next 20 years.
 
2021-07-18 10:00:47 PM  
Ahahahahahaha
 
2021-07-18 10:56:58 PM  
Who do they think they are? BMW?
 
2021-07-19 3:31:59 AM  

Russ1642: I have a subscription service for my apartment, and a separate subscription for electricity, another for internet, and yet another for my phone.


Those are ongoing services.  When you buy a car you should get the whole farking car.
 
hej
2021-07-19 4:58:28 AM  

Raoul Eaton: Russ1642: I have a subscription service for my apartment, and a separate subscription for electricity, another for internet, and yet another for my phone.

Those are ongoing services.  When you buy a car you should get the whole farking car.


Do you also expect all software that you use on your computer, phone, and the internet to be free?
 
hej
2021-07-19 5:02:20 AM  

Al Tsheimers: I don't want to participate in any business model where you take a huge chunk of money from me up front, and then try to get a monthly fee on top of that. It just feels like buying a furnace, but then having to pay a monthly fee to have it listen to a thermostat. If I wanted to lease a car, I would lease a car. If I want to buy a car, you get your money on day one, not "that same money", and a monthly fee for the next 20 years.


It can also be permanently purchased, just like options on any other car.
 
2021-07-19 6:12:40 AM  

Bennie Crabtree: Remember when ignorant farkers on this very STEM tab would argue that self-driving cars would lower the death and injury rate of the USA? And there was just no way to get them to see the problems with that claim? They were ignorant, or just bigoted, enough to even claim Tesla (and AI developers in general) never target certain group to die baed on socioeconomic hierarchies? Yeah, good times, good times. The $199 monthly subscription service is a really interesting way to kill people based on their monthly expenses.


The fark is this unhinged craziness. This is crazy even for you
 
2021-07-19 9:54:42 AM  

Raoul Eaton: When you buy a car you should get the whole farking car.


If you want it, then you can buy it straight up.

Even as a subscription, how is it any different than OnStar or any other connected service you pay a recurring fee for?

$199 a month seems like a rip off, but I don't get the negativity around the subscription model, unless you hate all subscriptions.
 
2021-07-19 4:44:27 PM  

Joey Jo Jo Jr Shabadu: Raoul Eaton: When you buy a car you should get the whole farking car.

If you want it, then you can buy it straight up.

Even as a subscription, how is it any different than OnStar or any other connected service you pay a recurring fee for?

$199 a month seems like a rip off, but I don't get the negativity around the subscription model, unless you hate all subscriptions.


I hate all subscriptions.
 
Displayed 45 of 45 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.