Tesla Will Open Its Security Code To Other Car Manufacturers (engadget.com) 143
Tesla CEO Elon Musk announced he would share the source code for Tesla's car security software with other manufacturers, adding that it would be "extremely important" to ensure the safety of future self-driving cars. Engadget reports: Musk didn't provide a timeline for availability, and you might not want to get your hopes up when it took years for Tesla just to post any source code. And this isn't strictly a selfless gesture. If rival brands adopt Tesla's approach, it could set an unofficial standard for connected car security that would look good from a marketing standpoint. The code could provide a boost to connected car security if and when it arrives. There are few common frameworks (technical or legal) for safeguarding networked vehicles, and security might not always be a top priority. This could give companies a baseline level of security that would save brands the trouble of developing an effective defense from scratch.
Interesting but not sure how valuable (Score:5, Interesting)
I can't see many if any other automakers taking in code Tesla has produced, pretty sure most would prefer to go their own way... I am also pretty dubious if they did, that it would provide much marketing benefit to Tesla.
Even from a pure technical standpoint I wonder how much use you could get from what Tesla is offering when each company would have pretty different approaches to self driving cars.
Standing on giants' shoulders (Score:2)
Even from a pure technical standpoint I wonder how much use you could get from what Tesla is offering when each company would have pretty different approaches to self driving cars.
You could at least get a lot of idea sharing and at a lot of brainstorming by comparing these different approaches.
Thus eventually faster development of these different approaches, even if not all end up converging on the same code base.
Kind of how large scale opensource project have managed to pull out incredible features.
Re: (Score:1)
Which idiot thinks it's a good idea that cars are always online and send all kinds of data back to their manufacturer and ready to query for all TLA's, reducing privacy to zero.
Toyota serious about security, 9 million cars/year (Score:5, Insightful)
Toyota has hundreds of security engineers and produces about 9 million cars per year. That's about 11% of total auto production.
Tesla produces about 100,000 vehicles, or 1% of what Toyota produces. It's going to be tough for a tiny boutique operation to even *influence* the standards uses by the auto industry, much less *set* the standards. It's like me and my company trying to set the standard for HTTP authentication. Our comments were read by some of the significant players who have some actual say in what standards are adopted, but organizations such as Netscape, Microsoft, and Apache designed and selected the standards.
A more realistic goal for Tesla might be to have a voice so that standards adopted by the industry don't completely screw them. Since Tesla is 0.11% of the auto industry, statistical noise, the industry as a whole doesn't care what they do. VW, which produces a hundred times as many vehicles, actually affects the industry.
You are comparing apples and dust (Score:5, Insightful)
Toyota has hundreds of security engineers and produces about 9 million cars per year.
Security concerns around self driving cars are many orders of magnitude more critical than anything traditional auto makers have to deal with.
What is the most complex thing todays auto makers have to worry about? Pretty much it's wired input for gas and brake, that's about it... oh maybe something as important as On-Star's ability to stop a car running.
All of that stuff is nothing compared to a self-driving car that is not just directing speed but also direction.
I wrote elsewhere I'm not sure what Tesla has to offer will be taken in by other auto makers and probably wouldn't be of use to them. However I do think Tesla is vastly ahead of other car makers in terms of practical self-driving car software, both because the not-quite-self-driving car Autopilot feature has been in production for some time, and because of the vast quantity of sensor data Tesla has around to process and try new systems against.
Re:You are comparing apples and dust (Score:5, Informative)
So was OnStar (Score:4, Interesting)
Yes OnStar cars have been similarly hacked [mashable.com], despite GM producing many millions of cars....
I'm not saying Tesla's security is perfect either, I am saying:
A) How much more important security is with a self-driving car where a hacker could literally drive a car, and
B) Tesla has had a much longer time with cars in production to think about this.
It's worth noting that the hack YOU linked to involved going in through the web browser that was actually IN THE CAR ITSELF. So you'd have to direct someone to visit a web site using the in-car browser.
The OnStar hacks have been purely remote, initialed from afar. And the hack you linked to did not affect the self-driving features, just the brakes.
Tesla is clearly being very careful and doing something right when they deliver car updates over the air and yet have not had any serious real-world exploits.
Re:So was OnStar (Score:4)
Kamkar built a small $100 device with a Wi-Fi hot spot that spoofs familiar Wi-Fi networks (for example, "attwifi," commonly used at Starbucks). If a driver's phone connects to the hot spot and the RemoteLink app is then opened, the hacker will gain access to the app.
The Tesla hack comes from you - the driver - going to a bad website. The OnStar hack is you connecting your cellphone to a bogus WiFi hotspot AND then opening an app on your cellphone. Pretty different. Tesla is the car itself opening the weakness, the OnStar is your cellphone (and requires you to use a specific app).
Additionally, the Tesla hack allows control of brakes and other things, the OnStar can unlock your car (like Tesla) but not major vehicle functions - like brakes.
Re: (Score:2)
So the GM service and app is able to be trivially man-in-the-middle'd and that's somehow better?
They haven't figured out signed certificates from a trusted root yet, which is literally 20 year old security tech that is used absolutely everywhere for everything and I'm supposed to feel better about that?
Thanks, but no thanks.
1913 ?!?! (Score:2)
> Tesla has had a much longer time with cars in production to think about this
What?!? Tesla is just now this year and last starting to mass produce cars, at the rate of about 100,000/year. That's the same rate of production that Fors had in 1913, when. They produced 100,000 of the model A.
Mercedes and Freightliner have had various types of "autopilot" (driver assist) since 2000-2002, about the time Elon Musk was hired (and quickly fired) by PayPal.
Tesla is a new company, and a small company, led by someo
Re: (Score:2)
The problem with the CEOs big dreams is he can't pick one - Tesla, SpaceX, the Hyperloop, Solar City, the Boring company - what does Elon Musk want to do when he grows up? He can't decide.
I think he has so much investment money being thrown at him that he now has pressure to come up with new ideas to spend it all.
Re: (Score:2)
The problem with the CEOs big dreams is he can't pick one - Tesla, SpaceX, the Hyperloop, Solar City, the Boring company - what does Elon Musk want to do when he grows up? He can't decide.
Don't you wish other companies were having those same big dreams... and bringing as much hype to some futuristic technologies though? I do question how involved Musk can possibly be in these companies- and I suspect that he hires smart people and gets them doing most of the running of the companies. Musk may be an idea-man and is definitely a PR man; but I can't imagine he actually does much hands on running of his companies- he would be spread too thin.
This is a free software issue. Demand freedom. (Score:2)
That sounds like another great reason to never get into a self-driving car. Even if someone you trust is at the wheel the software can easily remove them from gaining/retaining control of the car.
"Opening security code to other car manufacturers" (as per the language used in the /. headline) simultaneously exposes a problem with the open source development methodology (it's not about software freedom, users
Five million miles fully autonomous on public road (Score:3, Informative)
Well, they have logged over 5 million miles of fully autonomous driving on public roads. Oh wait, that's Waymo.
> the vast quantity of sensor data Tesla has around to process and try new systems against.
You're kidding about that last part, right? BMW, and several other auto companies, get more sensor data in a week than Tesla does in a year, simply because they've produced and sold millions of vehicles with driver assist. Tesla does have a few advantages, such as a very charismatic CEO. There huge weakne
Re:Five million miles fully autonomous on public r (Score:5, Interesting)
Well, they have logged over 5 million miles of fully autonomous driving on public roads. Oh wait, that's Waymo.
Is Waymo Toyota? Or any other traditional car maker?
OH! Thanks for re-enforcing my point. I didn't say Tesla was the ONLY one ahead of the large car makers... I just said the car makers producing millions of cars now are way behind.
BMW, and several other auto companies, get more sensor data in a week
That is utter nonsense, you appear to be equating extremely primitive sensors like sonic devices and lane recognizers to a full 360 multi-camera camera rig or LIDAR (Tesla doesn't use LIDAR but Waymo does). Come on man. Sensor data from sensors that are not going to be the ones eventually used for self driving tech is vastly less valuable than data that is from the actual hardware that will be running the system.
There is a world of difference between lane assist (which incidentally can often go wrong, have you been in a car that has this???) and a car truly steering itself.
This also brings up another point, it doesn't matter how many millions of BMW cars have Lane Assist on when they have no way to get data back to BWM. All of that data is lost, of no use to BMW in development. Tesla has the ability to retrieve a lot of data off car hard drives during service or even to stream key factors back on the fly in a way almost all of the many millions of cars other car makers produce, cannot.
Re: (Score:2)
Other manufacturers are not behind, they are just coming at it from a different direction.
Nissan has an advanced self diving programme, for example. It works very well, but they are waiting for the necessary sensors to become small and cheap enough for consumer use.
Tesla decided that they could do self diving with minimal sensors. They mostly rely on cameras, cameras that don't even have self cleaning capability or HDR and which get blinded by sunlight and tunnels. Their hope is that they can train a neural
Re: (Score:2)
Nissan has an advanced self diving programme, for example.
Tell me more about this amphibious, submersible Nissan. :)
Re: (Score:2)
Well Toyota make a "Tank", although I'm not sure if it is actually watertight :)
Re: (Score:2)
Nissan has an advanced self diving programme, for example.
Tell me more about this amphibious, submersible Nissan. :)
Meh, Lotus had one years ago, there was even a documentary of a man named Bond driving one into the ocean. Nissan is decades behind Lotus.
Re: (Score:2)
I think most of us were pretty certain a long time ago that it would require a faster computer than what they were using. That said, if they're really able to get their machine learning model to process 2,000 frames per second with the new hardware, up from 200, they went from limping along at 25 fps per camera to ostensibly processing 250 fps per camera, which finally exceeds the actual frame rate
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think they will be able to do it with cameras and neural nets at all.
Maybe they will be able to get it to drive along a highway with that system. But they promised it would park itself too. They are going to have to teach that neural network to handle every different kind of car park, navigate around them looking for spaces. Different road surfaces, different lighting, different layout of spaces, and no map data or GPS for assistance.
The basic problem is that they are hoping they can teach the neura
Re: (Score:2)
Not really. Lidar basi
Re: (Score:2)
I just said the car makers producing millions of cars now are way behind.
Maybe those other manufacturers are doing it right - focusing on actually building cars at a profit, and leaving specialty things like auto-pilots to specialized companies. It doesn't make sense to design your own fuel injectors, tires, or starters - let others do that. Likewise, let someone who is specialized in auto-pilot technology spearhead it and add it to your cars when it's ready. In the mean time, keep pumping out millions of cars that actually turn a profit unlike anything shipped by Tesla.
Re: (Score:2)
I just said the car makers producing millions of cars now are way behind.
Maybe those other manufacturers are doing it right - focusing on actually building cars at a profit, and leaving specialty things like auto-pilots to specialized companies.
Nope. They are all buying companies working on self-driving systems so that they can control the whole. They disagree with you on what "right" means. Except, of course, for the smallest automakers, or the ones rapidly circling the bowl like FCA.
It doesn't make sense to design your own fuel injectors, tires, or starters - let others do that.
GM used to build their own fuel injectors for heavy vehicles, back when they owned Detroit Diesel. The old DD injectors were pretty cool, too... injection pressure was produced in the injector itself. That meant less pressure in the fuel pump, and the ability to use
Re: (Score:2)
Nope. They are all buying companies working on self-driving systems so that they can control the whole. They disagree with you on what "right" means. Except, of course, for the smallest automakers, or the ones rapidly circling the bowl like FCA.
So - they are letting companies that specialize in self-driving do the development of self-driving?
GM used to build their own fuel injectors for heavy vehicles, back when they owned Detroit Diesel.
So - GM had a different company (which they bought) design and build their fuel injectors?
Tesla has the best EV motor in the industry, literally. And they have it because they designed it.
And they lose over $17,000 on each unit they sell. How long will those "best EVs" be around?
Re: (Score:2)
So - they are letting companies that specialize in self-driving do the development of self-driving?
Except they're not really separate companies any more, they're divisions or wholly-owned subsidiaries which is basically the same thing but with higher HR costs.
So - GM had a different company (which they bought) design and build their fuel injectors?
Absolutely not. Detroit Diesel was recently the "General Motors Detroit Diesel-Allison Division", which they sold to Daimler AG as "Detroit Diesel". Only the Allison part of that (which makes transmissions) was an external company which they bought and folded into the Detroit Diesel Engine Division, which they founded in April, 1938. DDED's first pr
Re: (Score:2)
No, they make $10,000 on each Model 3 they sell, and they will make around $6,000 on each $35,000 Model 3 they sell, according to analysis by Munro and Associates
Ahh, so an "analysis" is better than actual published, SEC/GAAP/company approved financials [yahoo.com] which show a loss of over $17,000 per vehicle? Really? They LOSE OVER SEVENTEEN THOUSAND DOLLARS on every car they sell. That's the hard FACT. Provable numbers. Not some unknown-bought-by-whom analysis by someone else. Actual proven, traceable, hard numbers.
$717,000,000 lost in Q2 2018. They shipped 40,740 vehicles [tesla.com], meaning ($17,000,000 / 40740) $17,600 loss per vehicle. That's the fact.
Re: (Score:2)
Ahh, so an "analysis" is better than actual published, SEC/GAAP/company approved financials which show a loss of over $17,000 per vehicle?
Those financials include R&D. They do have to pay off the cost of the vehicles. That's why they have to reinvest, so that they can build more vehicles. See, the more you build, the more vehicles that cost is spread across.
Not some unknown-bought-by-whom analysis by someone else.
It doesn't matter who paid for it, only whether the analysis is correct. Do you have some reason to believe that it was not correct?
$717,000,000 lost in Q2 2018. They shipped 40,740 vehicles, meaning ($17,000,000 / 40740) $17,600 loss per vehicle. That's the fact.
The analysis doesn't estimate the R&D costs, only the production, part, and assembly costs. You're doing the math backwards, and the more vehicles th
Re: (Score:2)
You just don't understand the concept of capital costs being amortized over the lifetime of the manufacturing line, do you?
Do you run a business where you constantly run into chicken-and-egg problems? The manufacturing line has to exist before you can build the cars, and the profit from selling those cars pays back the cost of building the manufacturing line. At the beginning of the product life cycle, you will have negative cash flow. If you've done your pricing and product planning properly, there will
Re: (Score:2)
Take the gross revenue, subtract SG&A (sales and general admin - kind of required to do any sales/delivery process) and you're already at a loss. Add in REQUIRED debt servicing, and you're at more of a loss. You want to talk just gross margin but ignore the costs related to more than just making the product. Go ahead - add "R&D" back into the mix, it's still a loss.
And aren't you the one trumpeting how they are great for doing their own R&D to integrate their systems? Wouldn't that make R
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You really have no idea what you are talking about.
What exactly does Tesla have a "vast quantity" of? (Score:2)
So you think Tesla has a "vast quantity" of cars compared to Toyota, VW, or General Motors, out there gathering real-world experience?
What exactly does Tesla have a "vast quantity" of, other than ego and hype?
PS, there is a correct answer (Score:2)
BTW, there IS an answer to that question. There IS one other thing Tesla has a vast quantity of.
It starts with "L" and ends with "osses".
Re: (Score:2)
No, I was referring to you specifically talking about BMW, and some of the stuff they have on their cars.
I own a 2015 BMW 435 that has the "driver assistance" package with lane departure warnings, frontal collision warnings, and all that stuff. I get more false positives out of it than actual warnings to the point of finding it annoying and thinking about reaching for the button to the lower left of the steering column to turn it off - it vibrates the steering wheel like I'm leaving the lane when going down
Wouldn't need anything if it were perfect already (Score:2)
When I develop software, the valuable information that can help me improve a system is information about under what conditions it's not yet correct, what's going wrong. It's not too helpful to say "works for me in my prestine lab environment". I also don't develop many improvements based on "I haven't noticed any issues". We improve things by characterizing what's not working well.
If BMW has a lot of real-world examples of things that cause problems with a naive implementation, such as distingusiing betwe
Re: (Score:2)
That's wonderful that as a software developer you know how to sniff out edge cases and account for them. What do you do if you have an edge case that you can't sniff out, because your data is garbage? As the saying goes, garbage in - garbage out.
You have no idea if they are even collecting this data, by your own admission. You don't know what sensors they have on the cars, what the quality of data is that they get via those sensors, what kind of processing they are doing in order to do what the cars do t
Billions? Each car drives millions of miles? (Score:2)
> Tesla, actually is retrieving billions of vehicle-miles
Billions? Tesla's production numbers are in the thousands, not the millions. Does each one of their cars drive a million miles per year?
We don't know exactly what data each company is collecting. What we do know is that Tesla is a *small* and hopefully therefore agile company. Nothing about Tesla is "vast". BMW, Freightliner, or other actual auto industry companies could have been collecting only 1% as much data as Tesla per mile for the last ten
Re: (Score:2)
No, I was referring to you specifically talking about BMW, and some of the stuff they have on their cars.
I own a 2015 BMW 435 that has the "driver assistance" package with lane departure warnings, frontal collision warnings, and all that stuff. I get more false positives out of it than actual warnings to the point of finding it annoying and thinking about reaching for the button to the lower left of the steering column to turn it off - it vibrates the steering wheel like I'm leaving the lane when going dow
Numbers (Score:2)
What is the most complex thing todays auto makers have to worry about? Pretty much it's wired input for gas and brake, that's about it... oh maybe something as important as On-Star's ability to stop a car running.
Maybe that the case in the US where the manufacturer seem to be only obsessed with constantly bigger cup holders as the selling feature.
That's not necessarily the case everywhere (Certainly not here around in Europe).
However I do think Tesla is vastly ahead of other car makers in terms of practical self-driving car software, both because the not-quite-self-driving car Autopilot feature has been in production for some time,
Again, numbers matter.
FCAS (Foward Collision Avoidance System), dubbed "City Safety" and using a forward laser grid has been available as a standard on every single one of the cars that VW currently produces, including the lowest cheapest one (like the Up). Not an option, a standard feature com
Re: (Score:3)
Perhaps. Or more security holes (Score:3)
Perhaps so. There are a few of us who understand security. There are many on Slashdot who think they do, and steadfastly refuse to pay any attention to those of us who have been doing security as a lifelong career.
Not knowing is okay - smart people can learn. Refusing to learn because you think you know it all ensures failure.
Re: (Score:2)
This is the year of the Linux soft-top.
Re: (Score:2)
It's going to be tough for a tiny boutique operation to even *influence* the standards uses by the auto industry...
"Going to be??" That's funny.
Re: (Score:2)
Toyota has hundreds of security engineers and produces about 9 million cars per year. That's about 11% of total auto production.
The most common cars are the most commonly stolen cars, because sales of their parts once scrapped are easily disguised among all the other parts sales.
But if you want to tell us that Toyota is serious about software, you're going to get your face laughed in, because what came out when they were accused of sudden acceleration is that they not only don't follow industry best practices, they don't even follow their own [inferior] internal practices. Multiple code paths which could cause the sudden acceleratio
So they are following BYD, Nissan, and Chevy? (Score:2)
> all major automakers with two cents to rub together (i.e. everyone but Mazda and FCA) is bringing out at least one better-than-compliance EV.
So they're emulating BYD, the largest maker of electric cars? If they promised super-expensive cars, took deposits from customers, and didn't deliver cars for years, that would be following Tesla. BYD actually mass produces electric cars, in higher quanities than Ford produced the Model A in 1913.
Tesla has the production of 1913 Ford, before the model T, with the
Re: (Score:3)
So they're emulating BYD, the largest maker of electric cars?
No, they have no intention of building cheap pieces of tin that no American would buy.
BYD actually mass produces electric cars,
that Americans wouldn't buy. So what? It doesn't matter if they make a billion cars a year if they're unsalable in the USA, still the biggest automotive market on the planet.
Americans are excited about Teslas, so every automaker is trying to make vehicles more like Teslas. Not BYDs.
BYD factory in California (Score:2)
BYD actually has a headquarters in Los Angeles and a factory in Lancaster, California. Rather than selling one car at a time (and maybe deliver it five years later), BYD see vehicles 100 at a time, providing fleets of taxis and buses. If you've ridden the bus in New York or Chicago you were probably riding in a BYD electric vehicle.
Re: (Score:2)
If you've ridden the bus in New York or Chicago you were probably riding in a BYD electric vehicle.
Well, I haven't. And I try not to ride buses any more, which is slightly ironic because we just got one. It's for an RV conversion, though, and I'll be driving it and not merely riding in it. If BYD has a reliable powertrain, then they should see if they can put it in a decent automobile, and sell it to Americans. Buses sell for a whole lot per unit, but they don't get to sell many units.
Part of what the industry admires about Tesla is that they actually make a substantial profit on every Model 3 they sell
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Americans might buy electric cars at $15,000
I'm open to the possibility of it happening, but can they build a $15k EV that gets at least 100 miles and passes US crash safety tests? I'm skeptical.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No, they have no intention of building cheap pieces of tin that no American would buy.
I see you have never ridden in an BYD electric car. They are pretty impressive. Good build quality, great range, affordable price. They are not cheap and feel solid. Good crash test results.
There are some in various European countries, mostly in use as taxis. Taxis have quite stringent requirements beyond just the normal European safety spec. They seem to do well enough in European crash tests.
Re: (Score:2)
Taxis can cost more than people would be willing to pay for personal vehicles. The question is whether they can do it cost effectively for consumers. Tesla has designed a vehicle which can be sold at a reasonable price and still turn a ten grand profit. The same Sandy Munro who Tesla's fans complained was pointing out Tesla's shortcomings was surprised that they were able to make the vehicle so profitable, and also estimates that they will still be able to make around six thousand profit on lower-end Model
Re: (Score:2)
The Model 3 is actually looking a bit expensive now.
Consider that the Hyundai Kona has the same range as the Model 3 LR but costs $25,000 less. It's even cheaper than the promised $35k short range M3.
It's actually an even bigger gap than that, because Hyundai do discounts and Tesla don't. Also Hyundai servicing and parts are cheaper. And it's not just Hyundai, Kia have one due in January that is similar and Nissan should have their new Leaf out by then too.
It would be odd if BYD couldn't at least match Hyun
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Toyota serious about security, 9 million cars/ (Score:1)
And Linux on the desktop will completely take over. By 2002 there will be almost no people left running Windows 98. Microsoft will go out of business.
Re: (Score:2)
While I agree that the rest of the industry is unlikely to use their code I'd like to point out that your big numbers does not translate to more secure systems. Modern cars have more computers than ever and it's a pretty common opinion by experts that the industry have integrated all these systems with little to no concern for security, just like many airplanes, sadly.
But hey maybe these hundreds of "security engineers" at Toyota are actually creating a new secure by design car computing system. It's about
Re: (Score:2)
One good idea 55 years ago, yes (Score:2)
Yes, Volvo, an international car company at rhe time, had one good idea 55 years ago.
The fact that you have to go back 55 years to find an example of a single idea (not selecting and establishing overall protocol standards) tells us something, doesn't it.
Re: (Score:2)
Only a fool would think "we're a huge entrenched player so we clearly know everything there is to know about $TOPIC"
Where are Nokia and Blackberry today? How is Sears doing? Enjoying that IBM-manufactured PC you posted this on?
Everyone started somewhere, including Toyota and Volkswagen AG.
60 years, 60 days, it's all the same (Score:2)
Sixty years from now Telsa might beat Ford and GM (and Toyota and Volkswagen and Honda and BYD) in the same way that Walmart beat Sears. There's no telling what the industry will look like in 60 years, except to say that based on the lessons of history, most likely about half of the big players will still be there and about half won't.
Sixty DAYS from now, Tesla will still be trying to figure out how to run a production line, not bossing Volkswagen and Toyota around. In 60 years, if by chance Tesla becomes
That secure Tesla code? (Score:1)
Good job Tesla! (Score:5, Insightful)
The trolls are at it hardcore lately, huh?
Good job to Tesla for announcing that they're planning on open sourcing their code! This can't be anything but good news for the auto industry. There's a lot of people that are worried about their autonomous cars getting hacked, this will provide a good baseline of security.
Re: (Score:2)
The trolls are at it hardcore lately, huh?
Good job to Tesla for announcing that they're planning on open sourcing their code! This can't be anything but good news for the auto industry. There's a lot of people that are worried about their autonomous cars getting hacked, this will provide a good baseline of security.
Considering Tesla has the least secure cars in the industry, I can't see what anyone would do with that baseline..
Re: (Score:3)
"Tesla has the least secure cars in the industry"
[citation needed]
Re: (Score:2)
So... Connecticut equals insecurity. Got it.
Are you familiar with how the Internet works? Because you might want to disconnect now...
Re: (Score:2)
Gah. Spell check. Connectivity, not Connecticut.
Though CT may well be insecure too, I don’t know.
Read the fucking statements, tesla shills (Score:1)
There are no plans to "opensource" anything. What the attention whore tweeted about is and idea for a plan to license the code to some automakers. You know, kind of like Oracle and Microsoft license parts of their products, including source, to third parties.
It ain't going to github for you to inspect.
This is a good thing (Score:1)
"Security" (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
p0wned (Score:1)
Hacker sez: "Attention all connected cars - turn hard left and accelerate to maximum now!"
Hilarity ensues.
Code vs protocol (Score:3)
Re:About time to say fuck off (Score:5, Informative)
It's an Elon Musk tweet. He promises all kinds of shit that never happens. 100% solar powered superchargers, self driving cars in 2017, built in dashcams... The list is quite extensive.
It's not news.
Re:About time to say fuck off (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
I think they might drop that model, or at least make it so unattractive that no-one buys it.
Hyundai and Kia beat them to the affordable long range EV with models under the $35k mark and similar range to the much more expensive Model 3 Long Range.
Re: (Score:2)
Really.
Google has both the Hyundai Ioniq [hyundaiusa.com] and the Kia Soul EV [greencarreports.com] at 124 and 110 miles of range, or less than half of the not-yet-existing standard range Model 3, and a little over a third of the shipping for 6-months Model 3 long range.
Yeah, Hyundai has also "announced" the Kona EV with a 250 mile range, but there's exactly as many of those on the road as Model 3 standard range: zero.
So how is around 50% "similar" ? Or is it that they are similarly not available anywhere except a web site?
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Curious about when a $35K Tesla will finally ship, though...
When Tesla stops selling more expensive models as rapidly as they can produce them, of course. It's a business, not just a game. And they're collecting $10k in profit from each sale right now, they aren't going to give that up any sooner than necessary.
"...as rapidly as they can" (Score:2)
When Tesla stops selling more expensive models as rapidly as they can produce them, of course.
The thing is, the work into which Tesla is actually, is "building manufacturing capacity as rapidly as they can".
The fact that they can already ship cars (relatively) rapidly out of those currently built manufacturing plants is just added bonus.
And thus yeah, you're entirely right :
And they're collecting $10k in profit from each sale right now, they aren't going to give that up any sooner than necessary.
They indeed need all that sweet money to pour into their "manufacturing capacity" building. For now they are not pushing that many cars out thus :
- they need more manufacturing plants before being able to push them out faster
- th
Re: (Score:3)
Curious about when a $35K Tesla will finally ship, though...
And they're collecting $10k in profit from each sale right now, they aren't going to give that up any sooner than necessary.
Huh, I guess, based upon their loss of $717 million last quarter, Tesla deconstructed and removed from sale about 71,000 vehicles!
Re: (Score:2)
Because we all know that auto assembly factories can just be wished into existence, and cost absolutely nothing to build
Doesn't that more or less describe the planning and investment that went into their last assembly line?
Re: (Score:2)
'Latest', dammit, not 'last' - I'm not holding a short position!
Manufacturing plant (Score:1)
And they're collecting $10k in profit from each sale right now,
How come their losses increase, then, year after year?
Yes, you know, there's a big lie in the car industry (all manufactrurers including Tesla) :
In reality, cars actually grow on trees~ For real~~~
Thus there's no way that Tesla needs to invest any money they make plus any investors' into building more plants to increase their manufacturing capability.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah. Why don't they just wish for billion-dollar assembly lines to sprout from the ground like weeds and use those?
How come Slashdot's unending capacity for stupidity increases year after year?
Re: (Score:2)
I don't understand the logic of "OMG hurry up and make a car that has less margin on it, while I'm constantly bleating about thin margins and profitability!"
Baking analogy (as we're talking about cars, and car analogies about cars don't really work):
I can make a plain cake donut and charge a price that gives me a 15% markup over materials and labor and sell 100% of what I can possibly bake per unit time, or I can make a fancy custard-filled donut that gives me a 30% markup over materials and labor and still
Re: (Score:2)
If you buy shares of something, you're "long" on it. Shorting involves borrowing shares someone else bought, selling them, and then buying them back at a lower price to give back to the lender once the "loan" is due.
Also, spend 5 seconds on wikipedia / google before commenting on something you clearly know nothing about.
Re: (Score:2)
To be fair, he promises all kinds of shit that happens after many delays from his initial promise.
The shit does actually happen, eventually; just nowhere near the time table he pulls out of his ass when he promises it.
Re: (Score:2)
He promises many things, and - usually with delay - delivers.
- we have landing Earth orbital rockets (supersonic retro-propulsion is vital for Mars human exploration)
- we have reusable rockets
- we have the most powerful rocket available for fraction of the price of the next one in launch cargo capabilities
- we do have model 3
- power grid stability: https://www.washingtonpost.com... [washingtonpost.com]
His rocket technology can truly open space for sustain human exploration with ~$2000/kg to LEO (FH) through asteroid
Re: (Score:2)
supersonic retro-propulsion is vital for Mars human exploration
you actually believe all the spacecraft landings to date have been subsonic?
Do you know what you're talking about (keywords:"super", "sonic", "retro", "propulsion")?
~$2000/kg to LEO (FH)
I said lay off the kool-aid, you're over fellating Elon by a factor of 5x. Falcon9=~$100m to put 10,000kg to LEO=~$10,000/kg Falcon Heavy(FH) is just 3x F9 strapped together, cost & lift are just proportionally scaled.
"As of March 2013, Falcon Heavy launch prices were below $2,200/kg ($1,000/lb) to low-Earth orbit when the launch vehicle is transporting its maximum delivered cargo weight.[76] The published prices for Falcon Heavy launches have changed somewhat from year to year, with announced prices for the various versions of Falcon Heavy priced at $80–125 million in 2011,[59] $83–128M in 2012,[60] $77–135M in 201
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Mod parent up. Enough is enough of Enron Musk's constant and meaningless attention whoring and his childish attempts to divert the spotlight from his incompetent and fraudulent "business" tricks.
GTFO, empty homophobic racist suit and tie.
We really should make one of those Hitler clips [youtube.com] with Slashdot's Tesla short seller's tears.