All things Tesla

[circuits 311]

59 minutes ago, keith2011 said:

 

Curious to understand what is going on here? Is it that the larger rims use low profile tyres, if so why?

 

Larger rims are usually heavier and require more energy during acceleration. This impact on range is more noticeable whenever there's start and stop traffic but has less of a range impact on long, constant highway driving.

 

As you mentioned, larger rims require lower profile tires which have less shock absorption but stiffer sidewalls which improves grip and steering response. So, better handling but a bumpier ride.

 

Furthermore the extra weight means increased unsprung mass and requires more damping. For example, when going over a bump the suspension needs more stiffness to push a heavier wheel down on the rebound so as to maintain optimal contact with the road:

 

 

 

[catjones 1,702]

I can't speak to 'utility', but this is a cool vehicle.  I don't know how many pickup trucks are used to pick up.

 

Watch the Tesla Cybertruck run suspension tests at the Fremont factory

 

https://www.businessinsider.com/tesla-cybertruck-runs-suspension-test-at-fremont-factory-drone-video-2023-4

[MikeMelga 7,325]

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2023-04-04/how-tesla-tsla-elon-musk-are-helping-australia-quit-coal-power#xj4y7vzkg

Australia Is Quitting Coal in Record Time Thanks to Tesla

[MikeMelga 7,325]

Don't have time to go in details, but for sure very interesting read, at very least from ecological perspective.

https://www.tesla.com/blog/master-plan-part-3

Master Plan Part 3

 

Edit: had some time now. It's basically what they presented a month ago.

Key point is full transition to a sustainable energy economy is possible, will require half the energy, there are enough natural resources, and requires less investment that the current Oil & Gas investment.

So, no excuses.

[Keleth 9,321]

Hmm

https://gizmodo.com/tesla-elon-musk-car-camera-videos-employees-watching-1850307575

[Janx Spirit 11,331]

On 4/6/2023, 9:11:20, MikeMelga said:

Don't have time to go in details, but for sure very interesting read, at very least from ecological perspective.

https://www.tesla.com/blog/master-plan-part-3

Master Plan Part 3

 

Edit: had some time now. It's basically what they presented a month ago.

Key point is full transition to a sustainable energy economy is possible, will require half the energy, there are enough natural resources, and requires less investment that the current Oil & Gas investment.

So, no excuses.

 

 

Interesting reading, thanks.

 

The conclusion:

Quote

Conclusion

A fully electrified and sustainable economy is within reach through the actions in this paper:

1. Repower the Existing Grid with Renewables

2. Switch to Electric Vehicles

3. Switch to Heat Pumps in Residential, Business & Industry

4. Electrify High Temperature Heat Delivery and Hydrogen Production

5. Sustainably Fuel Planes & Boats

6. Manufacture the Sustainable Energy Economy

Modeling reveals that the electrified and sustainable future is technically feasible and requires less investment and less material

extraction than continuing today’s unsustainable energy economy.

 

[catjones 1,702]

14 hours ago, Keleth said:

Hmm

https://gizmodo.com/tesla-elon-musk-car-camera-videos-employees-watching-1850307575

 

seems like a lot of "former employees" were being watched as well.

[MikeMelga 7,325]

18 hours ago, catjones said:

 

seems like a lot of "former employees" were being watched as well.

Where? Your link doesn't say anything about it.

In general, the issue is a typical data protection problem. If Tesla did have proper data protection process, if formal training was done, if employees still decided to ignore the rules, then it's liability of employees.

If there is no such data protection process or if there is and people signaled the issue and the company did nothing, then Tesla is liable.

 

The fact that Tesla employees watch the data is NOT illegal nor wrong. The problem is if they share it outside the data protection purpose. By default all Tesla have their inner cameras OFF. Owners have to explicitly activate them and agree with data protection conditions. These videos are viewed by human labelers, so that's perfectly legal.

[Krieg 15,072]

In order to use the cameras you have to accept to share the data with Tesla?

[MikeMelga 7,325]

2 hours ago, Krieg said:

In order to use the cameras you have to accept to share the data with Tesla?

No, you have the option to share with Tesla your camera's images. By default it's off.

The idea is that Tesla can use the data to train the NNs. 

I can't recall if you have a separate agreement for the internal camera, but I believe so.

The internal camera is used to train detection of inattentive drivers and other things.

 

These images used to be 100% human labelled, but recently most of them moved to the auto-labeler. There are a few human labelers left, and I guess as this article is based on former workers, they're not so happy to have been replaced by an algorithm.

 

Again, if the process is broken, fine Tesla. If the process is not broken, but the employees ignored it, fire them and prosecute them. Same as any other data protection issue. Pretty sure many of you have your yearly compliance and data protection training. That's for cases like this.

[Krieg 15,072]

Thanks.  It was not clear to me from your first post if you could use the cameras without passing data to Tesla. Otherwise that wouldn't fly with GDPR.  Plus the data obtained from such cameras can't be stored in servers outside the EU.

[MikeMelga 7,325]

Correct. GDPR is really tricky and in my previous company we had a few situations, even when you do everything with the best intentions.

Still, it's possible that Germany might demand Tesla do demonstrate that the GDPR process was not compromised.

I highly doubt Tesla doesn't have a process for EU states, as they were last year investigated by Netherlands and a small software update made it again compliant, so the charge was dropped.

 

Independent of that, whoever reads the article thinks Tesla is illegally accessing the cameras, which is false. It's all about what you do with the data beyond the legitimate purpose.

[fraufruit 42,468]

5 hours ago, MikeMelga said:

By default all Tesla have their inner cameras OFF. Owners have to explicitly activate them and agree with data protection conditions.

 

I can imagine that all Tesla owners don't fully understand the process. My brother has had a Tesla for some years and I'm sure he wouldn't understand the fine print or what the consequences can be if he uses his internal cameras.

[catjones 1,702]

22 hours ago, MikeMelga said:

Where? Your link doesn't say anything about it.

 

It was a deduction.  The ones who shared the videos are all "former" employees.  Yes,the article doesn't say how/why the employees left, but my failed touch of irony thinks they were being watched too and thus, fired.

[MikeMelga 7,325]

1 hour ago, catjones said:

 

It was a deduction.  The ones who shared the videos are all "former" employees.  Yes,the article doesn't say how/why the employees left, but my failed touch of irony thinks they were being watched too and thus, fired.

Ok, so in your opinion they were fired because of data protection breach?

Which is a very valid reason. On my former company a top dog was fired immediately after placing sensitive employee data on an unsecure network share. It's the safest approach for companies, to fire immediately, so they show they are taking care of.

[catjones 1,702]

22 minutes ago, MikeMelga said:

Ok, so in your opinion they were fired because of data protection breach?

 

Yeah.  It would be quite the coincidence that the guys who shared the videos are also "former" employees.

I would bet they all signed NDA's and this could be considered such a breach.  The job description was clear from the beginning.  It was deliberate.

As you know, the IT world is relatively small.  These guys will have their stupidity to explain for the rest of their careers if they remain in this market.

[CryptoAndBeyond 6]

When I charge Model-Y to 100% the last one percent sometimes takes really long to charge. When its 99% charged it shows 40 minutes sometimes for 100%. Is it normal and does it make sense to wait 30 mins for getting 100%?

 

Also, the full range Tesla mentioned was 455 kms for SR and it always shows me 418 kms even after 100% charged. Is there something I need to do to calibrate the battery?

[murphaph 9,843]

It's entirely normal that the last 20% takes as long as the first 80%. It's the way batteries work. The internal resistance increases with state of charge so it gets harder and harder to "push" charge into the battery the more you charge it. It is also not recommended to go over 80% too often anyway, usually only the night before a long journey. You will reduce the lifetime of your battery charging it to 100% all the time. Don't hog public charging stations trying to get to 100% or you will be as popular as a fart in a lift.

[yesterday 2,027]

While most manufactures recommend during between 20 % and 80 %, I have also seen stuff, saying that the least damage is caused to the battery by always keeping the battery in balance or as close to it as possible, ie 50 %, leaving the battery out of balance will cause more damage.  Try to think what you are doing to do the next day or days, and charge it, to go from 60 % to 40 % before the next charge, then charge it to 50 %, if you think you are not going to use it for a while. Having said that, the 20 % to 80 % rule will proabably see your battery condition in better shape after 10 years than the rest of the components on your car.

 

#You will get to your destination quicker ( if you need to charge ), by charging 20 to 80% several times, rather than charging to 100 % and cause less damage to your battery.

 

Your car computer, will manage charging for you, its normally better to trust it rather, than you trying to out smart it. 

 

 

[MikeMelga 7,325]

19 hours ago, CryptoAndBeyond said:

When I charge Model-Y to 100% the last one percent sometimes takes really long to charge. When its 99% charged it shows 40 minutes sometimes for 100%. Is it normal and does it make sense to wait 30 mins for getting 100%?

1) It's normal

2) No, it's not worth unless you have the time. My target on long trips is to start at 100% and then recharge on the trip up to 70-80%

3) the last 1% takes a lot of time because it's basically re-balancing charge between cells. This is actually a good thing to do once a year

4) NEVER let the car sit for more than a couple of hours with 100%. Exception for LFP batteries, which might be your case

 

Quote

 

Also, the full range Tesla mentioned was 455 kms for SR and it always shows me 418 kms even after 100% charged. Is there something I need to do to calibrate the battery?

Are you using 19 or 20inch wheels? 20inch should have lower than 455km.

 

Also I think Tesla in Europe displays EPA range instead of WLTP range. I've heard contradicting stories. Another guy says it's based on your consumption profile. Unsure what to trust. Mine always displayed exactly EPA range.