Tesla charging for speed updates now...

[Bombastinator]

4 minutes ago, akio123008 said:

I think that's true for most parts of the world. 

Could be.  I’ve only been to a few places.

[jagdtigger]

25 minutes ago, Bombastinator said:

The only time a rear end collision is your fault is if you actually reverse into a stationary vehicle.

Or when you can prove that the driver in front of you brake-checked you.

[Bombastinator]

6 minutes ago, jagdtigger said:

Or when you can prove that the driver in front of you brake-checked you.

There would be an example of differences.  Brake check would not be an out in all places.  Not in places I’ve taken driving tests anyway.  Very well could be elsewhere though. Would be demonically difficult to prove. 

[akio123008]

21 minutes ago, jagdtigger said:

Or when you can prove that the driver in front of you brake-checked you.

 

13 minutes ago, Bombastinator said:

There would be an example of differences.  Brake check would not be an out in all places.  Not in places I’ve taken driving tests anyway.  Very well could be elsewhere though. Would be demonically difficult to prove. 

At the end of the day it doesn't matter whose fault it is; the point is if some distance was kept the whole accident could have been prevented. 

[jagdtigger]

2 hours ago, Bombastinator said:

rake check would not be an out in all places.

Then those places are moronic beyond hope, how would you defend against someone pulling in front of you with practically 0 distance and immediately emergency break in front of you.......

[Bombastinator]

8 minutes ago, jagdtigger said:

Then those places are moronic beyond hope, how would you defend against someone pulling in front of you with practically 0 distance and immediately emergency break in front of you.......

That’s an illegal cut off.  Different violation.   I dont worry much about how the different traffic laws fit together.  Lots of people have thought about it for a long time.

[jagdtigger]

3 minutes ago, Bombastinator said:

That’s an illegal cut off.  Different violation.

IDK why but here we just call that, and the unjustified sudden braking brake checking........  Either way the one who rear ends the brake checker is in no way at fault for it.

[TomvanWijnen]

On 9/25/2020 at 11:13 PM, Trik'Stari said:

I find it amusing that we concern ourselves with things like this, when most people can't figure out where the fucking gas pedal is in the first place.

 

Seriously. People these days seem to have this weird idea that they need to wait until the car in front of them has gone through the light, before they themselves start moving, be it a straight line or turn.

 

If you are going below 30mph, you do not need more than a car length of space between you and the car in front of you. I don't care what the government or some safety guide says, they're fucking wrong. If you can't stop on a dime at below 30mph you should not be driving.

 

God I have so much road rage. Sometimes I just wish I could install a train horn on my car and blow it at people that anger me.

 

For the record I've been driving like this for 16 years, and I've had one accident, which I was not at fault (although I did receive a speeding ticket for that accident).

 

Unless we're going to count deer that ran into me. Because deer are fucking stupid like that.

Ah, seems like you're part of the group of drivers I'd like to avoid at all costs.

 

8 hours ago, Trik'Stari said:

16 years of driving experience with zero accidents that were my fault, disagrees with your physics, and I've always driven basically the same.

That's just anecdotal evidence.

[Guest willies leg]

I just got fallout shelter for free on my Tesla 3! Didn't even require an update, just showed up!

Of course, gotta love the free updates too!

[Drama Lama]

On 9/25/2020 at 11:39 PM, airborne spoon said:

So like buying a 3090 only to have the whatever they call the higher one come out later. Or updating the drivers for more performance? Its all the same but they found a way to charge for the driver update.

Does that make it good?

[CarlBar]

On 9/27/2020 at 5:52 PM, akio123008 said:

 

At the end of the day it doesn't matter whose fault it is; the point is if some distance was kept the whole accident could have been prevented. 

 

Yes and no. In general i'd agree, but there are definitely cases where various rules of the road can force cars to bunch up in such a way as to make adequate distancing impossible.The example that springs to mind is going from a roundabout, (or other continuous flow traffic location), onto a motorway, (highway for you from the US), can create issues as the rules on the roundabout require everyone to get onto the slip-lane leading to the motorway rapidly, but the rules of the motorway require them to merge at a reasonable speed. That can easily create a situation where you have a large number of cars bunched up on the slipway accelerating. if one of them decided to randomly break hard everyone behind them is SOL, (i had a family member witness an example of this, one of those "stupid stuff you see other people do" stories).

[Doqtori]

On 9/26/2020 at 1:58 AM, TetraSky said:

Even if it was $5, it would be $5 more than what I'd be willing to pay for half a second.

So it's not for you.

  

On 9/27/2020 at 7:03 PM, Bombastinator said:

The rule is you’re supposed to maintain adequate distance to stop in case the vehicle in front of you stops suddenly.

TBF, that sounds like a really horrible law when someone get's angry and decides to brake check you. Please tell me you can at least argue the ticket if you have dash cam footage showing the other car continuosly braking at random spots?

[RejZoR]

9 minutes ago, Doqtori said:

So it's not for you.

  

TBF, that sounds like a really horrible law when someone get's angry and decides to brake check you. Please tell me you can at least argue the ticket if you have dash cam footage showing the other car continuosly braking at random spots?

Yeah, laws are often shit and it's by default always assumed car behind needs to keep a sufficient distance to prevent rearending someone even if they are brake checking assholes. I don't think your dashcam would dismiss that in court. It wouldn't be the first time video evidence would get dismissed because of some lame arbitrary reason.

[akio123008]

4 hours ago, CarlBar said:

there are definitely cases where various rules of the road can force cars to bunch up in such a way as to make adequate distancing impossible.

True, but that's no excuse to do it all the time.

[jagdtigger]

3 hours ago, RejZoR said:

It wouldn't be the first time video evidence would get dismissed because of some lame arbitrary reason.

On the other hand by us the police started several investigation based on videos from the internet (mainly FB and YT channels, they ask for the uncensored version). And courts will take into account if the car in front had proper reason for the sudden brake.....

[Velcade]

On 9/25/2020 at 3:50 PM, TVwazhere said:

$2000 for a tune? Ouch. 

2k to shave 0.5 second isn't ridiculous. 

[Velcade]

On 9/25/2020 at 3:46 PM, Lord of Flies89 said:

My thoughts

 Cars as an service here we come...micro-transactions...loot boxes (look you got a new wallpaper to put up on your car screen). Hope they aren't getting ideas from EA...lol

Ford sells factory superchargers that knock 0.6 seconds off the 0-60 of a Mustang GT.  How is this any different??  The only difference is the Ford 'acceleration boost' costs 8,000 not including labor.

[TVwazhere]

59 minutes ago, Velcade said:

2k to shave 0.5 second isn't ridiculous. 

Depends on % of shaving off, not raw time. $2000 to go from 4 to 3.5 seconds is a lot different than 6.5 to 6 seconds. 

 

So while it's a good deal in that perspective, usually that $200 involves more than just software. Usually some sort of supporting mod or upgrade at that price is included. But this is a new type of consumer performance vehicle (even if it isnt the performance vehicle for Tesla) so I cant exactly use tradition logic. But still...

[RedRound2]

On 9/26/2020 at 3:13 AM, Blademaster91 said:

What the heck? A $2000 software tune to unlock something the car was already completely capable of doing.

It's not like a internal combustion engine car that you have to adjust air/fuel ratios, and make sure the engine can handle it so that I can understand costs money.

Tesla is copying Apple not just in anti-consumer practices against repair, but overpriced software.

 

I’m sorry, when did Apple start selling paid software upgrades? IOS and macOS have been always free (and mind you completely developed in house OS as opposed to buying Windows and taking android for free).

 

Even their professional apps aren’t as expensive compared to the competition. As I said, some people just love to bring Apple into completely unrelated things as an excuse to hate on.

 

Topic at hand, someone sat their and developed the tune for increased motor and battery output. And it’s not an insignificant increase. Also with regular cars, you don’t get any software updates in the first place once you take it out of the dealer. With Tesla, you do get after sales support with frequent software updates. That’s why Tesla owners love their cars. And that believe it or not, isn’t free for Tesla to do

 

So I don’t understand why this is an huge issue. First of all, it’s not like not having this extra oomph makes you car unusable. And it’s not going to make a difference to most people. This is for that one percent who goes out of their way modding regular cars to get 0.3s faster acceleration. For them, this is a steal + it includes warranty

[miagisan]

As other posters have said, I don't really see a problem with this.  You can have a mechanic tune your engine for a few grand just by changing some parameters in the computer of most newer cars.  People spend 10s of thousands of dollars to shave off a half second.  

[airborne spoon]

3 hours ago, TVwazhere said:

Depends on % of shaving off, not raw time. $2000 to go from 4 to 3.5 seconds is a lot different than 6.5 to 6 seconds...

once you get down to 4 seconds and below it gets exponentially more expensive for every .1 second you want to shave off. Pulling off .5 seconds at 6.5 is like $300 worth of parts. pulling off .5 seconds at 4 is between $2k and $5k easily.

[cj09beira]

On 9/25/2020 at 10:34 PM, RejZoR said:

It's not even a tune. It's not like you can magically increase the electric motor capacity/volume or bolt a remote turbocharger on it. It's literally unlock of something that was there the entire time and now they are charging $2000 for it. It's literally an automotive ripping of content from final version and then selling it to consumers as a DLC. And people are dumb enough to pay 2k for it.

you kinda can though, when they make the motor, the inverter etc, they made it to a certain spec, 500Kw for example, with time and testing they can later find out that they can push it to 600Kw for short periods of time, then they send that new tune to the cars, its the overclocking of the automotive world 

[CarlBar]

9 hours ago, akio123008 said:

True, but that's no excuse to do it all the time.

 

Oh wasn't arguing that. just raising the point that it's never as simple as one absolute rule. Rules tend to require extra's tacked on in the real world because things are never as neat and tidy as a single rule would make seem.

[Spotty]

Moved to Off-Topic

 

Tech News means news regarding technology or gaming. Please don't post topics in this forum that don't have a strong relation to technology/games.

 

You're welcome to discuss cars on the forum but please do so in the correct forum (Off-Topic).

[Praesi]

As long People still buy MacBooks and IPhones, nothing surprises me.