posted in Technology
Teslaâs Cybercab has been deployed, and itâs already under investigation
arstechnica.com/cars/2026/09/teslas-cybercab-has-been-deployed-and-its-already-under-investigation/posted in Technology
Teslaâs Cybercab has been deployed, and itâs already under investigation
arstechnica.com/cars/2026/09/teslas-cybercab-has-been-deployed-and-its-already-under-investigation/Replying to @â¨vegeta@lemmy.worldâŠ
Oh awesome. They donât have steering or pedals so when the cloud service fails in 5 years, the entire car will be complete e-waste.
Replying to @â¨otacon239@lemmy.worldâŠ
Okay, look. Iâm picking on this comment because it appeals to the lowest common denominator.
Before I pick on it, please know:
So with that in mind:
Oh awesome. They donât have steering or pedals so when the cloud service fails in 5 years, the entire car will be complete e-waste.
First of all, these cars would not depend on âthe cloudâ. âThe cloudâ refers (or at least originally referred) to a method of storing data on servers where you donât really care about how many servers it takes or where they are or managing them, you just get a blog of space to shove data.
Even if you extend the definition of âthe cloudâ to include controlling these cars⌠thatâs⌠really a huge stretch. And if you DO extend the definition, what you are saying at that point is âif the internet stops workingâ which is not going to happen. I donât care what anyone thinks about the state of usability of social media or whatever, the internet itself is not just going to disappear.
The vehicles will not magically go bad. Maybe the business might choose to destroy them if they stop the service or something like that, but that would be a stupid business-type decision, not a technical one.
I just get tired of people saying things out of emotion that are just completely off-base. So Iâm picking on this one as an example of what I see all day on Lemmy.
And Iâm sure I say shit that qualifies as such. I do try to keep an open mind. I have been persueded on subjects before - by facts from sources and such. Or just good ways of thinking about things that I didnât know before.
Thereâs plenty to rail against, but when we use boneheadedly wrong information to do so, itâs really much less effective.
And again, Iâm just using this comment as one example of things I see day in and day out. And once again I emphasize that I know Iâm probably guilty of it myself - and I get called out and sometimes I agree and sometimes I donât (sometimes someone calling me out is wrong, too - like⌠MSG, for a completely different topic. Itâs been studied. Itâs a safe ingredient. Maybe thereâs EXTREMELY rare problems, but 99.999% of people who say theyâre allergic definitely arenât. Itâs bullshit, and the myth was built on racism.)
Anyway.
Replying to @â¨daychilde@lemmy.worldâŠ
All it takes is a software update for these to be bricks. If (and when) Tesla goes under, I doubt they will allow driverless cars that are no longer owned by a company. They will inevitably lock their firmware down as much as possible. It will, for all intents and purposes, just stop working the day the company stops existing.
Or the new model will come out and theyâll just stop supporting them. Or any number of other cynical tactics that Tesla and companies like it have shown time and again that they are totally open to doing.
How are these going to be any different than the e-waste scooters and bikes that have to be Frankensteined (Berm Peak YT link) to barely get working? And these canât even be used as traditional cars as a fallback. They are made only to be driven by wire.
Now any minor stoppage is a journey ender. Need to go around an accident and an officer is directing but your car is confused? Canât. Need to interrupt it as it starts approaching an animal or child it doesnât see? Canât. Need to pursue in rough weather because someone is injured in the passenger seat? Canât.
Sure, you might say, âBut you wouldnât hire one of these vehicles in those scenarios.â But now that vehicle is destined for a short life as an upscale taxi that will never be used for anything practical. No second chance to do literally anything practical or useful.
These are all things every single car up to this point has been expected to be able to do. Itâs a machine at the end of the day. The new standard is to start taking those things away and finding a ways to make us pay a premium to get them back. Trust me when I say the end goal in these peopleâs minds is that we all sit in cars that we pay for but never get to drive.
So yes, I am cynical because every one of these companies has given me nothing but reason to be cynical.
Itâs going to be like everything where where you will own nothing and be forced to pay a subscription.
Morning commuter subscription: $500 a month. Oh but wait, itâs demand based so $700 a month depending on your area.
Replying to @â¨daychilde@lemmy.worldâŠ
âThe cloudâ refers (or at least originally referred) to a method of storing data on servers
The cloud is more than storage. Itâs also compute. Itâs Web apps. Itâs virtual machines. Itâs all kinds of things.
what you are saying at that point is âif the internet stops workingâ
No one is saying that. Tesla is selling these cars so people can earn money selling taxa services. What happens if Tesla decides this wasnât profitable anyway? They shut down the service that enables people to book the car. Can you still hail the cap? Can you make it drive if itâs not connected?
that would be a stupid business-type decision, not a technical one.
Like when Sonos decided they didnât need to support 1st devices because they now needed to do more than they were capable of, so they just wanted to brick them (but ultimately didnât because of massive backlash)? How long will it be in Teslas best interest to support this particular platform? What if they include a new sensor in a later model and decide that the old model isnât relevant any longer? Will we see 1st gen cybercabs in 30 years, like we do other cars?
Replying to @â¨daychilde@lemmy.worldâŠ
As someone else pointed out, âCloudâ is a buzz word that also means rented compute. Pull the plug, cars die. IDK how exactly. They could get confused and attempt to ALL drive back to their parking lots I guess. Although it sounds like they will be wasted to me, still.
Replying to @â¨diaphragmwp@discuss.tchncs.deâŠ
Theyâll probably just stop and do nothing if the software is designed anything like the hardware.
Replying to @â¨PattyMcB@lemmy.worldâŠ
Hmmm, from what Iâve heard Elon had the least influence over the software (apart from âlol just make it a computer and hire Qt devsâ), so itâs actually not that bad. Well, in comparison to some other cars, that is⌠So yeah, would not at all be impressed if that will be the case.
Replying to @â¨daychilde@lemmy.worldâŠ
As already was said, the cloud is and always has been composed of âcloud storageâ AND âcloud computeâ. We may see way more compute these days of course with tokenized work or services like GeForce Now or Shadow that let you play games and stream the video back to you, but theyâve both always been available. Tesla using Cloud compute is not a new decision, theyâve always been processing all of that data remotely as well, even if the car is doing some and eventually all of the work. Youâre trying to be weirdly pedantic here for some reason, and are just way off base anyways. Even if 100% of the compute is being done in the car, the ride hailing service is all that needs to disappear to brick these cars and Tesla owns access to the service and can shut it down any time.
Iâm so happy for you that you havenât had your soul properly crushed by corporate America this decade. Thereâs nothing logical about how corps operate - the market never judges anyone appropriately for awful practices, government almost never holds them accountable for awful practices, and so they keep doing worse and worse shit that turns a quick buck. âBad business decisionsâ are repeatedly rewarded in the market:
And this doesnât even start down the path of private equity buying up companies, strip mining their assets, ruining everything that gave the brand itâs good reputation (because itâs expensive to do things right) , and selling them once they have turned them to utter shit.
The worldâs politicians are failing us - the fact that any of this shit is legal is obscene. The internet doesnât need to âstop workingâ for some dipshit with a balance sheet at Tesla to decide, âwell, we sold all our Cybercab hardware and have no liabilities here - and software dev and server hardware is costing us too much, shut that shit down.â After all, theyâve been claiming autonomy for so long, yet they have not achieved it. They donât have the ability to do what they claim, yet theyâre STILL selling the product today on the promise of future updates.
This is the same company that sold $50,000 pre-orders for a Roadster that a decade later STILL has not been released, fraudulently sold FSD for $15k to drivers for 2 decades with a promise all their cars would be upgraded as necessary (they havenât), artificially created a monopoly and actively blocks independent shops from working on their vehicles, manipulates their odometers digitally, and shuts off its FSD system moments before it causes a crash so that they can legally blame the driver for fucking up and take zero responsibility. So youâre saying the only logical reason for cybercab to die is âthe internet stops workingâ, that THIS company who has repeatedly overpromised and underdelivered for their entire existence would NEVER just shutter the whole project and leave owners holding the bag? That THIS company who has yet to âsolveâ autonomous driving (despite claims) somehow has no technical hurdles that could destroy this project?
Bull. Shit.