Results 1 to 10 of 842

Thread: DSG woes in The Age

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Sydney, NSW
    Posts
    92
    Users Country Flag
    Quote Originally Posted by GippsCC View Post
    RoknRob you missed my point, yes the DSG is a complex box of tricks, but the problem cannot be random. Whether errant code or mechanical failure (and the suggestion is errant code, from what has been said), such a state should be able to be replicated or at the very least recorded - yes, there might be multiple factors involved, but the Volkswagen is full of monitoring units constantly checking the operating state of the vehicle and logging faults - not to mention anyone can plug into VCDS and do their own sophisticated logging of vehicle behaviour realtime should they choose.

    I don't believe in ghosts in the machine - either something exists or it does not, and if it exists it can be recorded and logged. More than a few people have said that this "sudden loss of power" has happened to them repeatedly, so surely someone somewhere can back up these claims with real evidence. I don't say this to discredit anything said, but if no-one can do better than "This happened to me" then this matter seems to lack supportive substance - certainly I doubt anyone anywhere will do anything on such a basis.

    Machines and their software, unlike philosophy or religion, are hard science quantifiable measurable and recordable objects - they do not act randomly (unlike humans) as they are bound by their design and coding, given the same set of circumstances they repeat the same actions (even when those actions are not the ones the designers/coders intended!). That is my point, and right now there seems to be nothing but conjecture, a shakey basis for claiming "death trap".

    I don't work for VW, nor do I have an investment in the issue (beyond owning a VW myself and having driven a VW since 2006). I read The Age story, and what's been said here by some - particularly the claims that somehow VW, the ACCC or the Government are somehow failing the driving public - and I'm befuddled how some of these things can be said on the scant lack of any real evidence. Some are drawing a very, very long bow indeed. As to the problem existing, it's possible, but possible is probably all it will remain until something more is offered up.
    you have no idea what your talking about.

    as a programmer, (and i take it that your not a programmer), you have no idea how complex software is. I am surprised everyday that humanity has yet to destroy itself from a software / computer glitch, we've had close calls during the cold war with bad nuclear denotation detection sensors. you can spend all the money in the world and debug forever, any software that performs any complex function will never be 100% and will not be able to handle all possible scenarios. The DSG/EPC software is not simple, its very complex, and since it replies on sensors to compute physical factors (i.e. unlike operating system software or isolated app with no physical input) the complexity increases even more, why? Because physical input becomes unpredictable. In software talk, its the difference between pseudorandom and random, you can also refer to the halting theory. Basically to sum up, anything with a computer and software involved, you can't predict like something which is mechanical.

    do a computer science degree, work in software for 10-20 years, and then you will appreciate how complex software is. consumers moan on about ATM failing, this and that. but consider that a typical program can contain millions of lines of code, worked on by dozens if not hundreds of programmers, costing millions of dollars, tested all day and night. and even then, programmers will tell you that usually, you will still have 1-2% of the code buggy, hence 'software updates'.

    haha "Machines and their software, unlike philosophy or religion, are hard science quantifiable measurable and recordable objects"...
    ok a few problems:
    1) software is not just 1+1, the logic goes way way more complex
    2) maths is not complete, refer to halting problem: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halting_problem
    3) refer to software bugs: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_bug
    "Finding and fixing bugs, or "debugging", has always been a major part of computer programming. Maurice Wilkes, an early computing pioneer, described his realization in the late 1940s that much of the rest of his life would be spent finding mistakes in his own programs.[16] As computer programs grow more complex, bugs become more common and difficult to fix. Often programmers spend more time and effort finding and fixing bugs than writing new code. Software testers are professionals whose primary task is to find bugs, or write code to support testing. On some projects, more resources can be spent on testing than in developing the program.

    Usually, the most difficult part of debugging is finding the bug in the source code. Once it is found, correcting it is usually relatively easy. Programs known as debuggers exist to help programmers locate bugs by executing code line by line, watching variable values, and other features to observe program behavior. Without a debugger, code can be added so that messages or values can be written to a console (for example with printf in the C programming language) or to a window or log file to trace program execution or show values.

    However, even with the aid of a debugger, locating bugs is something of an art. It is not uncommon for a bug in one section of a program to cause failures in a completely different section,[citation needed] thus making it especially difficult to track (for example, an error in a graphics rendering routine causing a file I/O routine to fail), in an apparently unrelated part of the system.

    Sometimes, a bug is not an isolated flaw, but represents an error of thinking or planning on the part of the programmer. Such logic errors require a section of the program to be overhauled or rewritten. As a part of Code review, stepping through the code modelling the execution process in one's head or on paper can often find these errors without ever needing to reproduce the bug as such, if it can be shown there is some faulty logic in its implementation.

    But more typically, the first step in locating a bug is to reproduce it reliably. Once the bug is reproduced, the programmer can use a debugger or some other tool to monitor the execution of the program in the faulty region, and find the point at which the program went astray.

    It is not always easy to reproduce bugs. Some are triggered by inputs to the program which may be difficult for the programmer to re-create. One cause of the Therac-25 radiation machine deaths was a bug (specifically, a race condition) that occurred only when the machine operator very rapidly entered a treatment plan; it took days of practice to become able to do this, so the bug did not manifest in testing or when the manufacturer attempted to duplicate it. Other bugs may disappear when the program is run with a debugger; these are heisenbugs (humorously named after the Heisenberg uncertainty principle.)

    Debugging is still a tedious task requiring considerable effort. Since the 1990s, particularly following the Ariane 5 Flight 501 disaster, there has been a renewed interest in the development of effective automated aids to debugging. For instance, methods of static code analysis by abstract interpretation have already made significant achievements, while still remaining much of a work in progress.

    As with any creative act, sometimes a flash of inspiration will show a solution, but this is rare and, by definition, cannot be relied on.

    There are also classes of bugs that have nothing to do with the code itself. If, for example, one relies on faulty documentation or hardware, the code may be written perfectly properly to what the documentation says, but the bug truly lies in the documentation or hardware, not the code. However, it is common to change the code instead of the other parts of the system, as the cost and time to change it is generally less. Embedded systems frequently have workarounds for hardware bugs, since to make a new version of a ROM is much cheaper than remanufacturing the hardware, especially if they are commodity items."

    Maybe also take a course in physics 101: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncertainty_principle

    So give it a break, expect bugs and errors in life and stop talking about certainty. **** happens, and physics proves that there is no certainty. At the end of the day, its about how they deal with and fix problems. Not saying that they couldn't do a better job, just saying that nothing is perfect.

    That is what warranty is for. One death is terrible, but there is a difference between murder and accidental death, even if it was a result of manufacturing / design flaw. Unless someone knew and did it on purpose. Watch air crash investigations and you realize how unlikely and sometimes how unpredictable a chain of events can be. In some cases even the regulator had no idea what caused a part to fail. but your are less likely to die in a air plane than sitting at home. you are less likely to die from a car fault than a moron tailgating truck driver, P plater, young driver, drink driver! There was no intent, and there is no evidence of negligence on the part of VW. Sure their PR could be better, they could provide more answers on what the problem is and better provide fixes and services.

    maybe if people drove better there would be less death. cars fail all the time, from wear and tear, bad driving, bad servicing, and yes faults. but if people didn't tail gate you would be able to break in time in emergencies.

    the 110km-0km stopping in 3seconds is bull****. even if you cut the engine, breaked and pulled the handbreak, no idea how you do that. supercars can't even do that. remember btw, personal testimony is the most unreliable evidence in court.
    Last edited by cappuccino; 03-06-2013 at 12:14 PM.

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
| |