Where’s the “TeCHnICaLLy” crowd that always comes out in force to defend Autopilot Branding on this bullshit?

Please no.

It’s incredibly busy. You shouldn’t design a car that only looks really good in black.

“brass unit that will likely warp”

this seems worse since the pandemic has let up.

The high beams is either laziness to not replace their burnt out low beams or they are literally that incompetent.

I’m sure it’s a confluence of factors, but the Trump years really seem to have let the bridle off of that “type” of reaction. Like just being a walking talking angry reaction to your general environment as some sort of acceptable way to navigate life.

Yea, there are a lot of subjective CP votes on the merits (or lack thereof) of this vehicle’s design. Objectively, this is a good price for a car that has a lot of miles left in all likelihood.

I mean literally no one is suggesting a solution *without* a camera. It’s the most capable sensor. The ceiling of a Camera, Radar, LiDar *fused* system is much higher than any sensor set based on a single sensor.

That’s not the goal, it has to be vastly better than a human driver. Because of the morale question and ambiguous liability, having a system that will kill a xx% of drivers/pedestrians/animals/etc. comparable to a human driver is not a saleable system. I mean clearly the laws and regulations lag the system…

I’m not the target market (middle age dad with kids), but I hate the design. Front end is butt ugly and the rear looks cheap/old - not retro in a good way. They’re mismatched design directions imo. The headlights suck too, they look goofy not aggressive (they could have copied a million existing LED DRL patterns for a…

That still doesn’t solve the imager limitations (blocked/degraded view) regardless of the having even the best image processor available. Additional/redundant cameras also adds cost.

Standalone Camera systems with ACC/LKA/AEB have been around a decade. These tests are idealized scenarios (no weird lighting/weather/high noise environments/etc.). They’re not capable of self driving.

There are multiple posts above in the chain you can read if you want to learn how cover songs actually work legally.

Exactly, I could see this hitting a few grand in sales the first MY or two then dwindling down to effectively zero. Unless they were building up a performance nameplate, then it makes no sense at all to pay the engineering cost to “luxurize” the chassis/vehicle and to develop or tune a new powercube. They’ll never…

Lol, this seems like the kind of sales trend that has Lexus drooling:

Playing the sheet music someone else wrote. It’s illegal since Ubisoft could monetize it.

That’s not how covers work, bud. You need a mechanical (album/digital sales) or synch (in a TV show) license honored by the original artist to publish a cover you intend to monetize. And that generates royalties or maintains ownership to the original artist. That’s the legal way to do it, whether that is pursued or…

I mean, this is like playing someone else’s music on a different instrument and making money off it. Write your own music.

Engineering campuses don’t do this, or don’t enforce it. This is a manufacturing thing and more so a reflection of the manufacturing employee base.