On 2017-03-27, Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> wrote:> On Mon, 27 Mar 2017 18:45:09 -0000 (UTC), Simon Clubley ><clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> wrote: > >>On 2017-03-27, Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote: >>> >>> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2017/01/16/tesla-driver-stranded-desert-smartphone-app-failure/ >>> >> >>Unbelievable. :-( >> >>That's a failure on so many levels, starting with Tesla for designing >>such a fragile system without any obvious backups and ending with the >>driver who never thought of this. > > > But this *was* the backup system. The primary system was the key fob. > This let you drive you car in most cases even if you forgot to > actually take you car keys with you. >Oh, I see, thanks. I wonder if the driver knew that a usable signal was required for his mobile phone and I wonder if Tesla made that explicit in their manuals and user training. (Not everyone would think to ask these types of questions unprompted.)> > Tesla's failure was in not realizing that a backup system might become > the primary system, because users are creative like that. That error > has bitten many designers - "we don't have to actually monitor X, > because the emergency limit sensor will shut it down when it goes too > far", "we don't have to handle the gun safely, the safety is on", "I > don't have to check the coolant level every day, because the backup > cooling system will kick in if the primary system runs low", "I can > take safety #1 and #2 off, because safety #3 is still there".Perhaps it might be better if we all just went back to using physical keys instead. :-) Thanks for taking the time to do the above writeup. Simon. -- Simon Clubley, clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP Microsoft: Bringing you 1980s technology to a 21st century world
Cloud? IoT? How to start
Started by ●March 23, 2017
Reply by ●March 28, 20172017-03-28
Reply by ●March 28, 20172017-03-28
On Tue, 28 Mar 2017 17:59:28 -0000 (UTC), Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> wrote:>On 2017-03-27, Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> wrote: >> On Mon, 27 Mar 2017 18:45:09 -0000 (UTC), Simon Clubley >><clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> wrote: >> >>>On 2017-03-27, Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote: >>>> >>>> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2017/01/16/tesla-driver-stranded-desert-smartphone-app-failure/ >>>> >>> >>>Unbelievable. :-( >>> >>>That's a failure on so many levels, starting with Tesla for designing >>>such a fragile system without any obvious backups and ending with the >>>driver who never thought of this. >> >> >> But this *was* the backup system. The primary system was the key fob. >> This let you drive you car in most cases even if you forgot to >> actually take you car keys with you. >> > >Oh, I see, thanks. I wonder if the driver knew that a usable signal was >required for his mobile phone and I wonder if Tesla made that explicit >in their manuals and user training. (Not everyone would think to ask >these types of questions unprompted.)That's a good question, I have no idea how explicit Tesla's training was/is. I suspect they emphasize that point more now, though... I also suspect it was not really a failure mode in the forefront of Tesla's engineer's minds. Sure, "it won't work if there's no phone service" is obvious, but getting from there to "what if a user starts the car with their phone and then drives someplace without phone service and shuts it down" goes a couple of steps past the problem they were trying to solve. Of course it *is* their responsibility to think about that sort of thing. So I'd assume it was mentioned, but not really emphasized. IOW "this won't work if you don't have phone service" was probably mentioned, or at least implied, but "don't use this to start your car and then drive off into the desert" was not, and the user didn't make that connection either. As I mentioned, Nissan has most of the same features (although I'm not sure it has everything you need to create this particular problem), and they certainly didn't go out of their way to even emphasize that unlocking or starting my car from my phone wouldn't work if I didn't have phone service. It might well have been in the fine print in the click through license agreement, but how often do those actually get read. I suspect it'll be less than effective in any event - when was the last time you could get a user to pay attention to a lecture on how the primary system works, much less the peculiarities of the backup system... I still can't convince my mom that she can actually unlock all the doors by double tapping the button on her key fob. She insists on just opening the driver's door, then hunting* for a while for the door unlock button on the driver's door armrest. Usually while I'm standing in the rain on the passenger side. *I once got a call a couple of days after one of those events that none of the windows worked anymore (the driver's window might still have, I don't remember). She had hit the window lock in the process of hunting for the door unlock...>> Tesla's failure was in not realizing that a backup system might become >> the primary system, because users are creative like that. That error >> has bitten many designers - "we don't have to actually monitor X, >> because the emergency limit sensor will shut it down when it goes too >> far", "we don't have to handle the gun safely, the safety is on", "I >> don't have to check the coolant level every day, because the backup >> cooling system will kick in if the primary system runs low", "I can >> take safety #1 and #2 off, because safety #3 is still there". > >Perhaps it might be better if we all just went back to using physical >keys instead. :-)The traditional approach, where the key was physically locked into the ignition certainly had the advantage that you couldn't drive the car anywhere without taking the ignition key with you! But that was only the ignition key. GM, for example, was (in)famous for decades for having different* door and ignition keys. So if you had some way to *lock* the door without the door key (and that was possible with at least some cars - sometimes via the hold-up-the-latch-while-closing-the-door trick), you could have lost the door key after unlocking the door, and then driven off with the ignition key, and then gotten yourself locked out of the car, despite having the ignition key. Of course most users just kept both keys on the same keychain, which usually prevented that problem. Most people, myself included, would be loathe to give up keyless entry just because it introduces a few new (rare) failure modes. It is darn convenient. *They built steering columns and doors in different plants, and it took them decades to figure out how to coordinate those assemblies so the same key was configured for both. Most people, myself included, would be loathe to give up keyless entry just because it introduces a few new (rare) failure modes. It is darn convinient. *They built steering columns and doors in different plants, and it took them decades to figure out how to coordinate those assemblies so the same key was configured for both.
Reply by ●March 29, 20172017-03-29
"pozz" wrote in message news:ob09tq$qj2$1@dont-email.me...>I'd like to start learning the modern paradigm of IoT and Cloud. My >first impression is that they are "empty words" without a precise >meaning: you can fill the "word" as you want."IoT" has actually be defined by the ITU in Recommendation ITU-T Y.2060 See https://www.itu.int/rec/T-REC-Y.2060-201206-I Friendly, Robert Lacoste www.alciom.com
Reply by ●March 31, 20172017-03-31
On 3/28/2017 1:59 PM, Simon Clubley wrote:> On 2017-03-27, Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> wrote: >> On Mon, 27 Mar 2017 18:45:09 -0000 (UTC), Simon Clubley >> <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> wrote: >> >>> On 2017-03-27, Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote: >>>> >>>> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2017/01/16/tesla-driver-stranded-desert-smartphone-app-failure/ >>>> >>> >>> Unbelievable. :-( >>> >>> That's a failure on so many levels, starting with Tesla for designing >>> such a fragile system without any obvious backups and ending with the >>> driver who never thought of this. >> >> >> But this *was* the backup system. The primary system was the key fob. >> This let you drive you car in most cases even if you forgot to >> actually take you car keys with you. >> > > Oh, I see, thanks. I wonder if the driver knew that a usable signal was > required for his mobile phone and I wonder if Tesla made that explicit > in their manuals and user training. (Not everyone would think to ask > these types of questions unprompted.)Trust me, people don't have a clue about cell coverage not extending across every corner of the globe. I kayak and many people bring their cell phones to use the GPS. Trouble is they don't work out of range of a tower. My hand held GPS continues to work as long as I have a battery. They also don't understand a cell phone is a poor emergency distress signal for the same reason. If you need to use it you are likely too far from a cell tower. -- Rick C
Reply by ●April 5, 20172017-04-05
rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> writes:> Trust me, people don't have a clue about cell coverage not extending > across every corner of the globe. I kayak and many people bring their > cell phones to use the GPS. Trouble is they don't work out of range > of a tower.Weird. Even Google Maps these days has an offline mode (and can navigate offline too.) Of course, they'd need to download offline maps for the area they want beforehand and at least in my experience Goog's maps aren't that useful anywhere outside a road... But other apps provide maps for that too.
