That there are opinions on both sides seems like it must come with the territory. How would you describe a "good" rollout of a self-driving AI? Would it have no bugs, no updates, no disputes? Not on this planet or universe. Ask a guy who "creates, tests, debugs and delivers software and AI all day long" and he's bound to say everyone els…
That there are opinions on both sides seems like it must come with the territory. How would you describe a "good" rollout of a self-driving AI? Would it have no bugs, no updates, no disputes? Not on this planet or universe. Ask a guy who "creates, tests, debugs and delivers software and AI all day long" and he's bound to say everyone else's software is released with too many bugs. I just don't find this stuff compelling.
I'm retired now but I used to run a software company. The issue of how much testing must be done before release is a very real issue for me. Customers are always outraged that a company would release software with bugs. As I used to tell my programmers, they don't pay enough for our product for us to guarantee it is bug free. It's not like it is going up in the Space Shuttle." Of course, lives DO depend on the FSD software but that just means the break-even point on the tradeoff is placed differently. It does not mean that customers should expect zero problems.
According to Dan O'Dowd, Tesla puts software that isn't even up to Beta standards on out public roads. Mr. O'Dowd has seen the code as part of negotiations with Musk. Musk agreed to stop doing that but reneged, just like he does with all his agreements, so the negotiations failed. Mr. Dowd felt he could not risk the reputational damage.
There's no definitive meaning to terms like "beta standards". Every company gets to make it up as it goes. With many software companies, "alpha" means a trial release with only internal distribution, whereas "beta" refers to a trial release given to those customers who have indicated that they are willing to work with trial software, understanding that it almost certainly has bugs but also has functionality that they want to try out. The alpha/beta terminology usually refers to the extent of distribution, and the quality only indirectly. Even when the customers acknowledge the conditions under which the beta is provided, they still complain when things don't go well. Such is life.
Mr. O'Dowd did not take on the expense of gubernatorial race whose only purpose is a public awareness program because of different views of what beta means . When I said "not even up to Beta standards," I was talking about Alpha. I was trying to be comprehensible to laypersons who might think Alpha is better than Beta.
That there are opinions on both sides seems like it must come with the territory. How would you describe a "good" rollout of a self-driving AI? Would it have no bugs, no updates, no disputes? Not on this planet or universe. Ask a guy who "creates, tests, debugs and delivers software and AI all day long" and he's bound to say everyone else's software is released with too many bugs. I just don't find this stuff compelling.
I'm retired now but I used to run a software company. The issue of how much testing must be done before release is a very real issue for me. Customers are always outraged that a company would release software with bugs. As I used to tell my programmers, they don't pay enough for our product for us to guarantee it is bug free. It's not like it is going up in the Space Shuttle." Of course, lives DO depend on the FSD software but that just means the break-even point on the tradeoff is placed differently. It does not mean that customers should expect zero problems.
According to Dan O'Dowd, Tesla puts software that isn't even up to Beta standards on out public roads. Mr. O'Dowd has seen the code as part of negotiations with Musk. Musk agreed to stop doing that but reneged, just like he does with all his agreements, so the negotiations failed. Mr. Dowd felt he could not risk the reputational damage.
There's no definitive meaning to terms like "beta standards". Every company gets to make it up as it goes. With many software companies, "alpha" means a trial release with only internal distribution, whereas "beta" refers to a trial release given to those customers who have indicated that they are willing to work with trial software, understanding that it almost certainly has bugs but also has functionality that they want to try out. The alpha/beta terminology usually refers to the extent of distribution, and the quality only indirectly. Even when the customers acknowledge the conditions under which the beta is provided, they still complain when things don't go well. Such is life.
Mr. O'Dowd did not take on the expense of gubernatorial race whose only purpose is a public awareness program because of different views of what beta means . When I said "not even up to Beta standards," I was talking about Alpha. I was trying to be comprehensible to laypersons who might think Alpha is better than Beta.