"Tesla Brake Issue" is the domestic news that has received the most attention recently. It has always been hot and updated daily.
However, it has been more than 20 days since the Ms. Che Zong stood on the roof of Tesla at the Shanghai Auto Show Media Day on April 19, and it has been more than 20 days. There is still no end to controversy and no truth about the incident.
After the May 1st holiday, Ms. Che Zhongzheng formally sued Tesla and its global vice president Tao Lin for infringement of reputation.
What are the facts? This article will start by extrapolating from traffic data to get the most thorough and clear insight into the truth of the incident.
【The argument is endless, but the truth is not seen】
After the storm of public opinion on the roof of the car, as the central media and regulatory authorities have voiced one after another, Tesla, which has always been arrogant and refused to provide data, has changed its attitude from "uncompromising" to an apology at the beginning and expressed its willingness to provide vehicle data.
On the morning of April 21, the Zhengdong New Area Market Supervision Bureau in Zhengzhou ordered Tesla to unconditionally provide Ms. Zhang with complete driving data half an hour before the accident.
On the afternoon of April 22, Tesla sent 48 pages of 6697 sets of back-end server data organized into Excel tables to the market supervision department and Ms. Zhang’s e-mail.
At the same time, they provided the China Market Supervision News and the Beijing News with data records of the key 5 seconds before the incident. The two media immediately announced it, and everyone found that this was basically the same as Ms. Zhang's previous retelling.
Many netizens began to discuss the truth and the reaction of the data.
However, late at night, Ms. Zhang’s husband, Mr. Li, made a voice, not to question the authenticity of the data, but to protest against Tesla’s invasion of privacy, demanding that it not be published and immediately apologize…
Many netizens are confused now-isn't this data you are crying and shouting to announce?
And these 5 seconds of data, the female car owner had previously relayed it by herself, so it can no longer be considered private （of course, the frame number in the data record is private information, and Tesla violated this point）。
Since the incident has evolved into a public event that has attracted national attention and aroused public attention and solidarity, of course the public should have a basic right to know the process.
Some netizens pointed out, “If they think it is an invasion of privacy, it means that the data is true. Then there is no reason for not approving the data”。
This has caused many netizens to withdraw their support, and it also shows that Mr. Li’s voice is out of instinct and lacks public relations skills.
On April 25, the main subject, Ms. Zhang, ended the 5-day detention. Late that night, Ms. Zhang once again questioned Tesla on social media.
first published a few data screen shots sent to personal mailboxes （this is very important for this article）， raised some questions, and "thought that this is not the original data of my vehicle."
On the 26th, some public accounts noticed that the short video sent by Ms. Zhang personally showed that it was a domestic competing car that picked her up after arriving in Shanghai, and that the auto show pass was applied by a certain auto parts company, and these videos are all Urgently deleted.
So, many people speculated that domestic electric car companies are supporters of Ms. Zhang's rights defense incident. Naturally, Ms. Zhang resolutely denied it, which aroused even greater controversy.
For more than 20 days, based on preconceived notions and even just guessing, netizens from all sides stand in teams and scold each other as naval forces, which is really boring.
["Professional automobile appraisal agency", this one is really not ready]
People who eat melon are easily influenced by public opinion and emotions. However, the performance of many domestic "car circle big V" and "opinion leaders （KOL）" is also disappointing.
Many rim KOLs can only say inexplicable guesses, or worthless talk about cars.
This once again proves that the so-called "big V" is nothing more than the primary role of vehicle seat space experiencer and tape measurer, struggling with the problem of a few punches and feet in the remaining space of the front and rear rows every day.
The function that can play is nothing more than to learn the size and basic situation of the car in advance for the buyer, but the actual car space has to be experienced and felt by the buyer in the 4S store.
In addition, many professional engineers in the automotive field have expressed professional opinions that are hardly understood by ordinary people.
But after all, there is a specialization in the technical industry. Each professional engineer is only familiar with his own field, focusing on his professional equipment to make technical guesses, and there is a feeling of blindness not seeing Taishan.
Nowadays, even which testing agency to look for has become a matter of constant debate, and it is difficult to reach a conclusion.
Needless to say, Tesla recommends it himself. As the mediator and government department, the Zhengdong New Area Market Supervision Bureau has long recommended the "China Quality Certification Center" with the national name to Ms. Zhang.
But it was also questioned by Ms. Zhang as "this institution is not a professional automobile appraisal institution". This is also true, but what more professional and authoritative inspection, certification, and quality institution should I look for?
There are also media reporters calling a number of automobile testing agencies. These agencies all indicated that they can perform hardware testing for vehicles, but if there is a problem with the software or system, the existing technology of the agency cannot guarantee the detection.
In fact, the control system of the scale and complexity of modern mid-to-high-end sedan is already comparable to fighter jets and civil aviation airliners. Almost only manufacturers are able to conduct rigorous investigations.
For the "Toyota Accelerator Door" in 2009, NHTSA （National Highway Safety Administration）， the professional regulatory agency of the United States, felt that it was not capable enough, so I checked with NASA （National Aeronautics and Space Administration） and went to NASA, which is engaged in aerospace. Is it enough to investigate possible car breakdowns? After three months of tossing, nothing was found.
Later, a family member of the deceased insisted and invited relevant third-party electronics experts to review the design and test documents of Toyota related models in a safe house designated by Toyota in Maryland.
For the sake of confidentiality of commercial technology, review experts cannot bring in or take out, and can only enter empty-handed to review the code provided by Toyota.
After 18 months of research by a third-party expert, they discovered some possible problems, but they were still rejected in the end. Because the cause of the failure under review must be reproducible.
As a human-written program, the control brake system software is inherently the most complicated and the most secretive and difficult to find.
Code review and fault simulation of the brake/power control software system （MCU/VCU/ECU） combined with hardware and software requires a large number of experts （more than 10 people）， time-consuming （six months to two years）， and high cost （10 million） Above yuan），
Ordinary institutions are incapable of carrying out this kind of analysis. Now, what kind of competent institution should I even choose to carry out the review? They are all big issues that are endlessly debated.
Even if a third-party expert team with credibility and competence is selected （such as the Chinese Academy of Sciences, automotive engineering universities, etc.）， the results will be a long time later, and the eager crowd can't wait.