I dunno, man. There’s one threshold of safety where you need a safety driver, and another threshold where you need a safety monitor, and another where you don’t need anyone at all. They decided they were comfortable with the middle option. Eventually they’ll go with the third. There have been no safety-critical interventions so far so it seems it was the right choice.
That’s a generous take from someone who’s been generous to Tesla.
That’s all. I think I’ve said what I can say.
I’ve read every issue cover to cover since the late 90s (I actually kept the first 18 years or so until the wife talked me into tossing them). It’s a magazine about the relationship between technology and culture, both of which have evolved (mostly in sync with each other), so it’s not surprising that the magazine evolved with them. They themselves will tell you that they’re not simply a tech magazine, as they came about when PC Mag, Byte, and the like covered pure tech.
They will absolutely cover the bad side of tech, but they cover the good as well. That they’re against ubiquitous CCTV cameras in London, Crypto scams, and Elon’s many broken promises doesn’t make them anti-tech, it just makes them journalists.
You think they have an issue with AI due to a single article, when they have been pushing it for a very long time.
How ChatGPT and Other LLMs Work—and Where They Could Go Next
The WIRED Guide to Artificial Intelligence
The second link above even has a line that truly shows where they stand…
There’s evidence that AI can make us happier and healthier. But there’s also reason for caution.
Sounds like pretty balanced journalism to me.
You then claim that an article which correctly notes that super high end EVs are having sales problems is evidence of their bias against EVs, but they don’t have such a bias…
How Elon Musk Turned Tesla Into the Car Company of the Future
Then Elon started his back to back to back fuck ups.
The Definitive Story of Tesla Takedown
How Rivian is pulling off its 45k elective SUV
How the ‘Dead Zone’ Could Help This Car Take on Tesla
Electric Cars Could Last Much Longer Than You Think
They will happily cover the good and the bad, even of the same technologies. As I noted earlier, they first found Theranos to be an awesome technology.
This Woman Invented a Way to Run 30 Lab Tests on Only One Drop of Blood
Two years later, when things started to unravel, they covered that as well.
Everything You Need to Know About the Theranos Saga So Far
Looks like a pretty balanced approach to handling the intersection between technology and culture. Maybe you should read the magazine more often.
With the caveat that we have no way of knowing if those miles under FSD were identical to what a human driver faces, or if people mostly engage FSD in areas they consider “safe” to do so. Elon has thus far refused to share that sort of data. Without controlling for all of the variables, we have no way of knowing how safe it is, or isn’t.
While that is indeed a simple neural net diagram, I didn’t work in the self-driving space. Hell, 10 years ago, I assumed we were 10 years away from solving the problem, as I never really thought about the edge cases too deeply.
I’m now of the opinion that I won’t live to see true FSD, even though I’d love to be wrong.
I agree that that argument is specious. Can you point to anyone in this thread who has said anything like that?
Well, you’ve certainly read more than me. I am a subscriber, though admittedly the sole reason is for Ars Technica, which I find to be the far better site, and in particular for Eric Berger’s space coverage.
Then? That first article is from 2010. Since then they have had unimaginable, unprecedented success, first with the Model S and then the 3/Y. The Model Y was the best selling car of any kind in the world in 2024. In 2010 they sold 1300 cars.
There must have been positive articles about Tesla in Wired since 2010, but I find it funny that you basically said “here’s a positive article from 2010, and then Elon did a bunch of fuckups, and then here’s an article about a bunch of anti-Tesla protests in 2025”. All while the company grew by roughly 1000x.
Anyway, the decline in Wired is just my perception, partially due to the types of articles I see suggested via Google News and the like, which may not be representative. But I do visit the home page every so often and it usually looks like it does today, which is mostly bad. The change in political tone certainly didn’t help.
scabpicker said:
I don’t need my car to work in snow. I can’t recall the last time I drove in it. Probably at least 100M Americans live in a place where it never snows, and much of the rest live where it’s rare enough that it doesn’t matter. Like Portland, which has an average of 4 snow days per year, and just a few inches total.
scabpicker, apparently, lives in a place where snow performance is very important–enough that the feature would be “pretty useless” without it. He’s welcome to that opinion but it just doesn’t apply to large chunks of the US.
By your own number, it seems to apply to 2/3rds of the US. My wife needed to be taken to the hospital for surgery this year, and yep it snowed that day. So yeah, for that trip it would have been completely useless.
Again the current iteration only works in fair weather. Quit acting like I’m limiting my criticism to snow.
That’s also an overstatement. It has worked well for me in the rain and even a hard rain. I can’t speak to snow as it’s not unreasonable to guess that I will never see snow in person ever again.
I shouldn’t do your homework for you since it was you who made the original (wrong) claim, but here we are…
The Mystery Vehicle at the Heart of Tesla’s New Master Plan
Tesla’s Supercharger Strategy Starts a Winning Streak
Elon Musk Says a Cheaper Tesla Model Is Coming in 2025 as Chinese Competition Intensifies
Tesla’s Cybertruck Is Here and It Costs $61,000
Tesla Wins EV Charging! Now What?
Tesla’s Cheaper Long-Range Model 3 Is Back
I Own a Chevy Bolt, and Superchargers Are a Total Game Changer
None of those articles are more than a couple of years old and I wouldn’t consider any of them negative (they absolutely also have negative articles about the stupid shit Tesla and Elon do).
There are plenty more where those came from, but you can do your own research now. Or you can retract your claim.
Seriously? The current lead article is:
Microsoft Says Its New AI System Diagnosed Patients 4 Times More Accurately Than Human Doctors
How in the flying fuck is that anti-technology?
They do have negative articles, such as ones about “Make America Healthy Again” and J.D. Vance, but again, the magazine covers things at the crossroads of technology and culture and our culture is in the shits right now.
But you are using the supervised mode. I am talking about the “unsupervised” trial they are running right now. It runs in it’s restricted area and only in fair weather. If the folks who developed the software aren’t confident to run it in bad weather, I assume it’s not capable of running in it.
Ah. I see your point now.
Google tells me that Waymo only operates in Phoenix, LA, SF. Atlanta and Austin and will cease operations in certain weather situations so they are probably facing the same issues.
Yeah, it seems to be a limitation at the moment no matter what software/hardware you’re using. My guess is that poor weather significantly increases the number of edge cases you have to train for.
It’ll be interesting to see if this one was actually in some mode.
SINKING SPRING BORO., Pa. - Western Berks Fire Commissioner Jared Renshaw said a Tesla was in self-driving mode when it made a left at a railroad crossing.
He said it happened on South Hull Street in Sinking Spring around 5:30 a.m. Saturday.
“Went down the tracks approximately 40-50 feet. They all exited the vehicle, got their belongings out,” said Commissioner Renshaw.
I’m not sure if this was the direction of travel, but I can absolutely see thinking that was a moderate left turn. [though I’m not sure how mapping comes into play]
You need to recognize you are in religious debate. Being critical of Tesla or SpaceX is, essentially by definition, anti technology for them. Wired is doubting the word of the prophet.
If they were coming the other way I could see it biting off on that paved access path just before the tracks. Which leads immediately to a dead end on the railroad’s right-of-way. Rather than the street that parallels the tracks on the opposite side. It’d only take a small amount of GPS error to make that mistake.
No assurance that’s what did happen. But it might’ve.
Oh yeah, look at that, that makes more sense, that puts the car adjacent to rather than directly on the tracks.
If it did make my proposed mistake…
Once it got to the end of the pavement abeam the railroad signaling shack it might have chosen to see the rails as lane lines and climb onto the tracks. Cue bail-out from the humans.
In the military we had the concept of “self-critiquing behavior”. Like touching a hot stove, the action inherently taught you not to do that again.
IMO the Tesla learned its lesson. Whether it passed its terminal learning to its littermates is unknown to me. 
I didn’t get an answer when asking Dr.Strangelove, but have you seen that in any post in this thread? If there is such a poster here, I’ll happily call them out as well.