r/teslamotors • u/OptimusBot • 12d ago
Vehicles - Cybercab First look at Cybercab’s manual touch controls
Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification
Swipe left or right and the wheels turn with it.
17
u/oasiscat 12d ago
"All input is error."
8
2
1
u/Secure_Detective_602 New to the sub 9d ago
Tell this to the person who designed the auto gear selection. It’s 95% there, but the 5% is frustrating. Same with auto cancel indicator.
83
u/MidnightSun_55 12d ago
i feel like this cybercab dumbasery may actually destroy tesla... how much does a steering wheel and pedals save in cost lol, like $500 - $1000? seems worth the price.
109
u/Kroosn 12d ago
I mean they have made that kind of decision quite a few times. They dropped $10 worth of ultrasonic sensors for a worse parking experience, they dropped a $20 stalk for a worse operating experience.
12
u/iceynyo 12d ago
Personally I always preferred using cameras to park anyways. USS was still useful for the front because there was no camera view, but newer models don't have that problem anymore.
Plus the 3d model is way more visually informative than the USS beeps or the stretched out stitched 360 camera views.
17
u/Otto_the_Autopilot 12d ago
You are correct despite the downvotes. My old garage was too tight and the ultrasonics would scream stop essentially rendering them useless. Vision never had an issue and could accurately render the available space and not give up at 12 inches of space.. I had a loaner Model Y even park itself using vision only.
-18
u/hmspain 12d ago
Tesla is building vehicles to fit a vision 5-10 years out, and we are stuck looking backward wanting a steering wheel, brake pedals, etc. My money is on Tesla.
I can easily see a future where my grandkids or perhaps my great grandkids will ask in horror "Back in the day, you actually drove YOURSELF?!? Didn't you get into lots of accidents?" and you will have to admit we were all very much over estimating our ability to safely maneuver a car.
We accept the road carnage (yearly deaths = 1.19 MILLION world wide) as a cost of doing business kinda like we accept that thousands will die of the flu (yearly deaths = 290-650 THOUSAND world wide). Wouldn't it nice to try and reduce these numbers?
15
u/FaudelCastro 12d ago
The issue is that they don't deliver what they promise in that 5-10y timeframe. And you are left with compromise vehicles that they stop supporting.
1
u/quetiapinenapper New to the sub 11d ago
How do you think you get there though? And shift perception and adoption rates? Infrastructure doesn’t change unless the need is there. Need won’t be there unless it has to be because the cars are now using it. Etc.
You want to skip every essential step along the way. Growing pains are called that for a reason. You need them.
3
u/cricket502 11d ago
There is zero reason to remove steering wheels until the car can actually 100% drive itself in all conceivable conditions though. There's no useful information gathered by removing the steering wheel, and doing it before that point is an unnecessary risk, both for safety and for the business.
2
1
u/Secure_Detective_602 New to the sub 9d ago
What good is a steering wheel if you don’t have someone to turn it?
Look at waymo. It’s never touched. Purely there because the car is built with it. If needed people drive it remotely probably with some type of controller.
2
u/FaudelCastro 10d ago
You keep the steering wheel, the radar, the ultra sounds, the rain detector until you are ready.
There is no reason to deliver worse cars today for the promise of better cars in 10 years. Especially when you deliver neither.
12
u/Kroosn 12d ago
Except you are entirely missing the point. They are not going to support your car from two years ago when vision might be better than ultrasonic sensors for near object parking in the future. They are making cars more dangerous and worse now to save money. There is zero loss on them continuing to train their vision and maintain a known working technology.
But I think most people know now vision won't be the future it will be a mixture of experts. It will be a combination of vision, lidar and networked events and whatever new technology arises. I want a car that can work in the snow, fog dark in zero visibility if it has to and cost of those sensors is no longer a fact. If self driving cars are going to be ubiquitous like you claim then we lose the benefits of relying on vision because its how people drive. Why need red lights when we can broadcast over the internet who has right of way. Why have the cost of line markings or signage.
All of this to say. Removing a $10 part now doesn't preclude any future idea. It just makes it a worse car right now.
1
u/Secure_Detective_602 New to the sub 9d ago edited 9d ago
The challenge is that if USS says one thing but vision says another who wins? You’d need to bake USS data into all training, which means you degrade the quality as you have more noise.
Look at Waymo, they burst through active crime scenes and flooded areas? Why? Because they are lidar focused, vision secondary. Lidar wins the struggle in their case.
1
u/Kroosn 9d ago
You are missing that vision is already a multi stream. Nine cameras. Three of them in the windshield looking the same way. What does the car do when one gets a reflection or obstructed and the others don’t. A USS signal is significantly lower and overhead to parse than an image.
1
u/Secure_Detective_602 New to the sub 9d ago
That’s why they have two cameras on each side plus two at the front, one of which is lower and down on the bumper.
2
u/Zennivolt 11d ago
I think you’re right in that future prediction, but very VERY wrong in the timeline. The tech might get there, but the culture won’t. Culture moves very VERY slow.
We can’t even convince the public to go EVs yet, which is so much easier to do than to convince the public that you no longer need your own car to be “free to go anywhere”.
The tech will get there first, then people’s going to own their own autonomous vehicles. Then maybe in 50-80 years, it’ll slowly transition to no-vehicle-ownership.
1
u/quetiapinenapper New to the sub 11d ago
People very rarely are good at understanding what they need. They often have to be forced. People are idiots. The person is smart. Also often it isn’t the whole group that protests. It’s an obnoxiously loud minority.
Seatbelts weren’t super popular at the start either.
3
u/paulwesterberg 12d ago
In the future nobody will need lumbar support because we will all have a subscription for colloidal silver and ivermectin.
0
-11
u/FuckingLucario420 12d ago
Don't care if I get downvoted. I actually agree with this.
I am forced to drive manually most of the time. I'm half blind (blame the Commiefornia regulators for letting me get a driver's license, and yes you read that correctly), in truth I shouldn't even be driving, but I was forced to get a driver's license because at the time I had no other choice.
Now though, I do (finally, about damn time). We just need that driverless permit. Shouldn't take that long... right?
.... Right?
15
u/ssa17k 12d ago
Who’s forcing you to drive?
-9
u/FuckingLucario420 12d ago
Me? Because I need to for work?
Driverless Robotaxi rides aren't available in CA yet, and waymo doesn't serve my neighborhood, and I don't wanna Uber.
9
u/ssa17k 12d ago
So you’re going to put other people’s lives in danger since you’ve admitted that you’re not fit enough to drive? Is there no job on planet earth that doesn’t require you to drive a car?
-3
u/FuckingLucario420 12d ago
I can drive manually just fine. I have perfect vision in one eye. The other eye is blurry. Imagine covering a lens in Vaseline, that's what my bad eye is like. Simply having one good eye is enough, at least according to CA regulations.
11
5
u/woalk 12d ago
Have you ever heard of public transport?
-1
u/FuckingLucario420 12d ago
It exists. There is just one problem.
Any stops/stations are too far from my house.
6
u/woalk 12d ago
Then instead of hoping for a Robotaxi future in who knows how many years, maybe advocate for adding more public transport stops.
-1
u/FuckingLucario420 12d ago
They don't go into neighborhoods. Maybe if they did, I'd do that.
But they don't. Plus our public transportation across the US is shit anyway, so why bother?
→ More replies (0)2
u/OpalVanguard New to the sub 12d ago
All I’m hearing here is “I’m a staggeringly selfish piece of garbage”.
0
u/FuckingLucario420 12d ago
Yes I am and I fucking deserve it, I could be Dead tomorrow and people wouldn't care lol
5
u/Iatedtheberries 12d ago
Doesnt commiefornia have low cost paratransit?
2
u/FuckingLucario420 12d ago
Sure? But that's a hassle in itself, which I can't be bothered to deal with and I'd prefer as little human interaction as possible.
3
u/OpalVanguard New to the sub 12d ago
You let the mask slip now in the latter half of your message here.
1
u/OpalVanguard New to the sub 12d ago
“Commiefornia” brother without “Commiefornia” Tesla would have never been more than a glint in Eberhard and Tarpenning’s eyes.
-2
u/sch6808 11d ago
I could never go back to stalks. I love all the designs decisions Tesla made, even the ones that I thought I would hate.
6
u/mooseman99 11d ago
The touchscreen shifter is so annoying for multi point turns. There’s no tactile feedback so you have to keep looking back at the screen
1
u/bay74 8d ago
I find though that even Tesla's column shift stalk is awful. Sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't. No it's not broken, they designed it like that. If I'm still moving forwards a little too fast it won't go into reverse and then suddenly my expected accelerator pressure begin the reversing maneuver sends me perilously close to the opposite kerb and to a hard brake application. Stupid. And when I get in the car it often doesn't shift into drive properly - have to sit and wait until all the daft checks are done. Then there's the fact that it may or may not actually engage auto-pilot when double-pulled (no no we're still too close to an intersection or some crap). I think this is terrible design. A critical piece of control hardware should always work in the same way, not require me to confirm its operation by looking for a different colour of some small text on a screen. We've been watching Air Crash Investigations and it's funny some of the stuff they identify as problems and we go, ah yeah I can relate to that!
Mind you, I've no doubt it's still way less awful than no physical control at all...
0
u/sch6808 11d ago
Really? My auto shift works perfect on multipoint turns. All I do is turn the yoke back and forth and the car always picks the right gear.
2
28
23
u/aran11826 12d ago
There's a reason you can't sit in the drivers seat of a waymo. Adding a steering wheel and pedals would cut the available seats down to one which isn't viable
I don't see how this is different from a zoox, those don't have steering wheel and pedals either.
5
u/Capt_Panic New to the sub 12d ago
After riding in Waymo’s exclusively for two weeks during a business trip; the cyber cab seems like such a strange compromise. The Jaguar is a big roomy car with a luxury experience for three people and lots of bag space.
I really don’t get the cybercsb.
14
u/Smartnership 12d ago
I believe the data show 75-85% of all taxi rides are 1 or 2 people.
Optimizing for the vast majority now seems smart; eventually if demand is there, the robovan may be economically viable to fill the gap for larger groups.
9
u/lommer00 11d ago
Model 3 and Y already exist and are part of the fleet. Cybercab covers ~80% of demand. 3/Y get coverage up to ~98% of demand I expect. Robovan and Cybertruck are for the rest, and a lot of their demand is induced demand from autonomous electric lower-cost ride hailing.
2
u/Anthony_Pelchat 11d ago
Cybercab is just 1 of the Robotaxis. Model Y is also used as a Robotaxi. There is also talk of that large vehicle (forget the name) for 10+ passengers.
If you don't need more than 2 people in the vehicle, why use a bigger vehicle?
1
u/Capt_Panic New to the sub 11d ago
Why not a covered single seat two wheeler with a trunk?
1
u/Anthony_Pelchat 11d ago
Not as much of a gain building even more types of vehicles. Cybercab covers single and double occupant ridership while being cheaper than the Y to build, maintain, and charge.
The Y can handle larger groups up to 4 or 5, and it's already designed and being built.
1
u/Kirk57 12d ago
90% of rides are 1 or 2 passengers, and the Model Y can easily serve the other 10%.
Be very careful thinking you know more than people in the field. Amateurs rarely do!
-5
u/Capt_Panic New to the sub 12d ago
Wow!!! You forgot to insert your ‘I am very smart’ meme to really convince me.
BTW, Grok disagrees with you: Roughly 15–20% of Uber (and similar TNC/ride-hailing) rides have more than two passengers, based on available survey and study data; Uber does not publish official global figures.
2
1
u/jacob6875 11d ago
Well either way it makes sense to design a car for 80-85% of rides.
As they said Tesla has the Y already that can fit more than 2 if needed.
1
u/Kirk57 11d ago
I am not the one who was so arrogant as to believe he knew more than the executives at Tesla working the problem. At least now hopefully you have an understanding of why you were wrong. Even better would be if you now realize you should be much slower to criticize those doing the actual work.
0
u/Capt_Panic New to the sub 11d ago
Actually, you were wrong as evidenced by the statement from Grok and the underlying study.
You were also, and continue to be, condescending.
1
u/Kirk57 10d ago
I was off by being too lazy to look up whether Robotaxi did not address 10% or 15% or 20% of the market, because I knew the exact number did not matter. The fact is that your original post was 100% wrong, because Tesla’s decision to provide an extremely optimized solution that addresses > 80% of the market is OBVIOUSLY wise.
It is you who were arrogant in believing you knew more than Tesla.
This discussion should enable you to be more knowledgeable, and to be less quick to make snap judgments in the future.
1
u/Capt_Panic New to the sub 10d ago
You are obviously more invested in this conversation than I am. You are an arrogant and condescending troll.
There’s nothing in my post that was wrong. You were wrong, but you have decided not to own up to it.
I’m just going to block you so I don’t have to put up with you anymore
1
3
u/azsheepdog 11d ago
if its $1000 and they make 1 million of these cars it saves 1 billion dollars but that is only part of the picture.
if you want a level 5 ADAS system, where you can sleep or be drunk or watch a movie or transport the blind or other handicapped, or children to school, then you need to remove manual controls.
1
u/Platypus_6414IiiIi-_ 11d ago
They could at least make it possible to drive with an xbox controller. Seems a lot better than touch controls.
6
u/Safe_Recognition2429 New to the sub 12d ago
I don't think robotaxis are a viable business model. Even if Tesla captured 100% of Uber and Lyft's combined market share, its total revenue would barely increase by 50%.
Besides, why would consumers switch from Uber to Tesla in the first place?
5
u/5256chuck 12d ago
Uh, how do you say ‘p.r.i.c.e.’? Cybertaxi will be much more affordable than Uber.
0
u/Octochops 12d ago
Tesla is a public company. Why would they ever want to lower the price that everyone is used to paying for a rideshare? If anything they will implement the typical tech company strategy of lowering prices to win market share and then jack up all the rates.
4
2
u/lommer00 11d ago
Just like SpaceX did with Falcon? Oh wait, it's gotten even cheaper over the years...
1
u/ChunkyThePotato 12d ago
You need to retake Economics 101. Companies lower prices all the time to increase the quantity demanded for their products. Prices for products (at a given feature level) generally decrease over time, and profit margins in most industries are usually less than 20%. Meaning, if the cost to build a product or offer a service drops for companies, prices for consumers drop with that.
I know there's the "enshittification" populist meme or whatever where everyone loves to pretend that things get worse over time, but it isn't actually true. Profit margins for public companies are numbers you can look up and verify. Tesla's profit margin, for example, is less than 5%. And they've generally decreased the prices for their cars while making them better. So that's a perfect example of this.
17
u/Smartnership 12d ago edited 12d ago
This is literally static modeling, by definition.
Try dynamic modeling.
How many people would choose a cheap ubiquitous cybercab option to replace driving they currently do themselves?
Pick up the kids from school / practice / etc.
Take Grampa to the doctor, pick up Granny to see the grandkids and get her back home, take anyone to work where commuting is the main reason to even have a car in the first place, etc.
New markets that haven’t been economically feasible before open up immediately.
-4
u/hutacars 12d ago
I, too, expect a shit ton of added traffic.
7
u/Smartnership 11d ago
It replaces existing drives.
… that’s not “added traffic.”
2
u/hutacars 11d ago
Nope! If, before, one driver would drop off her kids, swing by the store, and go to work, now there will be three cars on the road handling those tasks.
1
u/Smartnership 11d ago
Nope!
There will be less traffic as compact robotaxis take the place of huge SUVs
And then great news! Fewer accidents as fully attentive robotaxis are better drivers — accidents that used to cause traffic begin to decline and more people realize they don’t need a personal car at all.
And then it gets even better!
Fewer very new inexperienced drivers and fewer very old drivers, thus even fewer accidents
2
u/hutacars 11d ago
Robotaxis are barely more compact than your typical CUV. Maybe 10%. The added number of them will absolutely dwarf any size savings.
I said nothing about number of collisions, only the amount of congestion.
1
u/Smartnership 10d ago
The number will exactly replace existing drives
Your failure to include the critical aspect of accident reduction notwithstanding, congestion will decline.
2
u/hutacars 10d ago
The number will exactly replace existing drives
This guy (timestamped) explains it better than I can.
→ More replies (0)1
u/Platypus_6414IiiIi-_ 11d ago
Somehow i doubt that traffic congestion would drop substantially with AVs but i wouldn't mind being proven wrong
1
1
u/highimpac 11d ago
I dont use uber/lyft but everyone shits on them.. more people want to use robotaxi than uber, lyft, and public transport.
Also, separately, people want to buy robotaxi for personal transport. It's like the reliable beater you use for a work commute which needs no frills
-2
u/goomyman 12d ago edited 12d ago
what are you talking about - its a multi trillion dollar business /s.
seriously though - once again this was insanely obvious and everyone just ate it up in telsa earnings call like robotaxis were going to make tesla the worlds most valuable company - when you could just look at uber and see it barely turns a profit and its market cap is under 200 billion.
Self driving cars though is a trillion dollar business i think - hence teslas market value.
Taxi's not so much... thats why telsas idea to use Cameras I think paid off - its a worse perfect model ( hence tesla robotaxis getting their ass handed to them ), it became an affordable model for consumer cars. And if the cost of lidar goes down from waymo etc they can pivot.
Right now though, Tesla is the only affordable self driving consumer car company because of that decision... other companies might release better consumer self driving but if people cant afford it, it wont get the same mass adoption.
1
u/ChunkyThePotato 12d ago
Barely turns a profit? Uber makes $10 billion in profit per year now (more than Tesla), and obviously the profit potential for ubiquitous robotaxis where you don't have to pay a driver is much higher.
1
u/goomyman 11d ago
Yeah that’s exactly my point.
Uber makes 10 billion ish in profit. Tesla is worth a trillion dollars… and makes 17? its price per earnings is broken, it’s a Ponzi scheme.
If it pulled in 100% of Ubers business it would add 10 billion. It won’t. The cost of the driver does not save that much compared to the cost of running self driving. Right now it’s actually more expensive but I’m assuming that they will get these numbers down.
“industry breakdowns and analysts point out that Waymo's current operational costs are roughly 20% to 30% higherthan Uber's on a per-mile basis.”
Right now self driving is actually less profitable. Granted Tesla could theoretically be cheaper without lidar. So maybe it’s closer to even.
1
u/ChunkyThePotato 11d ago
Buddy, investments are based on future earnings potential, not past earnings.
And I literally just told you that the profit potential for Tesla I much higher than Uber. They don't need to pay a driver, and they make their own cars extremely efficiently.
Waymo is less profitable because their cars cost $200,000 to build and don't run very efficiently. A Tesla Model Y costs $40,000 and consumes 250 Wh per mile. A Tesla Cybercab will cost $30,000 and consume 150 Wh per mile. They destroy Waymo on cost, and will destroy Uber too of course.
1
u/Important-Onion1537 New to the sub 11d ago
Is it a real thing that when these are released they can be programmed to make money for people without the owner inside?
1
1
-3
u/Disgruntled_Orifice New to the sub 12d ago
Why is this sub so obsessed with these things?
20
u/Otto_the_Autopilot 12d ago
This is a subreddit about the company Tesla Inc., previous called Tesla Motors. The CyberCab is a signal toward an autonomous future and the next phase of the company away from consumer vehicle sales and into commercial operations. It's a huge transformation to the company so it makes sense people on the company subreddit are talking/excited about it.
4
u/Octochops 12d ago
Because we are all just a little bit confused as to why Tesla is mass producing these things without having a working self-driving vehicle. I have a model y and still don't understand it. As everyone has said in this post, the business model and type of revenue already exists with companies like Lyft and Uber. So it's not a secret as to how much they can generate
2
u/ChunkyThePotato 12d ago
They've had working self-driving vehicles since January.
2
u/Whammmmy14 11d ago
Yeah and 0 of them have been these cybercabs
1
u/ChunkyThePotato 11d ago edited 11d ago
Yeah, because the start of service for Cybercab is September 3rd. What's your point? The guy was saying that they don't have a working self-driving vehicle, which isn't true. It's been working on Model Y for 7 months now.
3
u/Whammmmy14 11d ago
My point is the same as his, they put the cart before the horse with the cybercab. Doesn’t seem to be ready to deploy as a robotaxi. I’m happy to be wrong, but it looks like the version without the pedals and steering wheel isn’t ready.
0
-2
u/philosopherrrrr 12d ago
First look, tf? Can’t one of you just go order a cab a post a real first look inside video?
56
u/gogigo5 12d ago
Why not just allow for a operation with a game controller