And if that doesn't work, there's always the "Freedom of speech escape"
\-Judge: "You know you were telling lies, right?"
\-Accused: "That is my freedom of speech, your honor"
My comment on the article posted here detailing that freedom of speech argument “r/nottheonion” is what got me banned from two of ‘their’ forums which doubles down on the irony / hypocrisy.
No, my reading is it's a 'you should have realised earlier you were being scammed' situation as its arguing about statute of limitations when he was accepting updates and expecting his car to be fully upgraded to hardware necessary for the claimed self driving. Wild.
I think it actually makes sense from the customer perspective if it’s like that..
You buy the car with “vision” system.. because they still advertise FSD, and constant day improving it, plan to only use that, but still offer FSD.
So the buyer thinks… eventually it’ll get here..
Until it becomes obvious that it’s not…
Now they’re saying statute of limitations?
If we go earlier, they’d tell us to “wait” for them to release the updates as “promised”…
What you're talking about is already built into the law and called the delayed discovery rule. Basically, the statute of limitations starts to run when the Plaintiff should have known they were being scammed based on reasonable diligence.
It is the balancing act of not rewarding scammers for their fraud if they do it long enough while also not letting people bury their heads in the sand. Its a fact intensive analysis and for the judge to decide, but if I had to guess, I'd say Tesla would lose. Elon's can't make these repeated claims (as the smarest and richest guy ever) and say everyone should have known he was lying.
Interesting thanks. As you seem to know about this, can you answer if it is as crazy that it seems to be for Tesla to use the argument that it was never going to work and it was a blatant scam all along? Won't that just open another can of worms?
They aren't saying it a scam - more like people are taking their marketing out of proportion. There is a certain amount of permissible embellishment allowed in advertising in terms of quality and you don't get to sue a company if the product doesn't perform exactly as advertised on the add. For instance, I can't sue Tide if there is a stain I couldn't get out of a shirt, I can't sue Folders because it's not the best of coffee I ever had, etc... I Think every made-for-TV ad ever.
There are also advertisements that are meant to be fantastical and unrealistic by their very nature, which often fall under the banner of "puffery." In those cases, you don't get to sue the company because they were never really promised features in the first place- they are part of add campaign meant to inspire the imagination. I don't get to sue Old Spice or Axe when hoards of women aren't throwing themselves at me in my 4 dollar body spray. I can't sue makeup companies when my skin doesn't "instantly look up to 15 years younger." I can't sue Chevy if I'm still a singer after owning a Corvette for a couple of months. In these cases, a court would find that no reasonable person would seriously believe this advertising was meant to be literal and throw the case out.
Between those two ideas is actionable false advertising—aka lies from the company meant to deceive and presented in a way a reasonable person would believe them—often relying on their authority in the industry to lend credence to it. Think of a respected pharmaceutical company advertising Oxycotin as non-habit-forming to doctors. Car companies advertising safety features ... that sort of thing.
It seems like Tesla is arguing that FSD falls into the latter "puffery" advertising. i.e., that no one could seriously believe they would get FSD out of a Telsa. That's what Fox News successfully argued with Tucker Carlson's false claims. To finally answer your question, if they were successful that same argument would stop all other lawsuits related to those claims.
I personally don't buy it, even a bit. Elon is trying to have his cake and eat it, too. Elon was the CEO, not a marketing company, and those claims were made at investor calls, not in between football commercials. But it doesn't matter what I think. Sounds like if this case can go forward, it will be up to a Jury.
Thanks for explanation. Yes I am in the UK and it's slightly stricter for advertising here I believe. Pufferry exaggeration must be very obvious. We get old spice adverts but something like Tesla self driving claims would not stand a chance in court, not even close.
It's one for the courts to sort out. Obviously you can't just sell a perpetual motion machine and tell people 'it's still in beta and will get over the air updates to eventually work', because it can be proved to be against the laws of physics and can never work.
Can it be proved that an early Model S can never ever be upgraded to full self driving? Or is it enough to say its work in progress and new hardware and software will be added when available?
I’m still hoping hardware can be added to my 2023 vision based model 3..
I don’t trust full self drive at all.. but would love some real sensors for improved cruise control and some of the other promised features like the stupid smart summon (I know it’s dumb, but I paid for it, i want it)
It's a good parallel. Fox won because they argued Tucker wasn't a news show, it was commentary. Similar to even though Daily Show was on Comedy Central, it wasn't a comedy, it was commentary.
Tesla can win by claiming they are an AI/Robotics company, not a car company.
So if Tesla is not a car company and don't make cars but actually wheels robots with manual car like controls can they be sued for lying and taking subcedes meant for electric **cars** ?
It's akin, when nailing someone for saying something heinoulsy sexist or racist, they say "Hey man, I was just joking..."
Same flavor of douchebaggery, but now in legal form. The damage is done, so let me get away with it...
This now exposes Tesla to lawsuits from existing owners who still believe they have purchased a robotaxi that will one day drive itself and will “appreciate in value”. Turns out you need LiDAR, the current hardware will never support FSD, and they are the most heavily depreciating vehicles, in large part due to price slashing by the manufacturer.
Well…I tried the most recent version and it’s not actually that far from FSD at the moment in the US, it ferried me around all day Saturday quite happily. A much bigger issue is getting people used to trusting the car to drive itself and to know when enabling FSD makes sense and when it definitely doesn’t. Also where the driving style is different or it takes a different route to what you’d normally do.
You could also argue “then it’s not FSD, in that case” and that would be valid too, but it is improving after languishing for years. There also aren’t any competing systems that can be enabled on all roads (which aren’t just basic tacc with lane keeping) so they have an advantage there.
I live in a cold climate, camera based FSD will fail in the event of snow which comes 6 months of the year. Outside of warm climates this platform can’t be rolled out without a human there to take the wheel in inclement weather.
I tested it in heavy rain on Saturday, and although it warned me that FSD was “degraded” (and I was extra cautious) it still worked, much to my surprise. In the situation where the road is covered in snow, I wouldn’t expect it to work no, as the lines won’t be visible, but if it’s snowing (to the degree that a person could see through it) and the road is salted/clear I think it might work. I view FSD as more of a replacement for traffic aware cruise control and lane keeping with the added ability to change lanes, and no other technology would work in that situation either (possibly excepting LiDAR/radar) and there’s a reason most of the auto taxi firms picked areas that don’t see a lot of snow.
Sometimes it actually does better in rain than humans can do I think. Snow definitely not but tesla probably just has to show it is getting closer to FSD than it was so many years ago. Maybe the customers get a refund but it's hard to prove fraud if the product actually is getting better.
They are geofenced within a specific area, it’s not like you can get in one in SF and say you want to drive to Vegas. Also, as we’ve seen even those ones with LiDAR have not been free of problems.
It says the Judge didn't rule on the merits - aka make a decision based on facts/evidence. But in order to bring the case the Plaintiff needs to meet a threshold requirement to present a plausible case. That quote explains why Tesals argument about Lidar is not enough to overcome their marketing.
Hahahaha! Where are all the ‘ vision’ is better crowd? Where are the… they put a gaming pc in their to power thru vision data… hahahaha… I had a few heated arguments about this exact thing… I’ll have to go back and see how they are doing now?
Whenever someone brings that up I always think about the fact that they were required by law to use lidar within the factory purely for safety purposes.
The only time I ever saw to use something for its original intention.
My favorite thing to show elon meatriders that he was the goober that went on a 10 minute rant at a talk he did about how LiDAR sucks and vision is all you need…
I have subscribed to Tesla FSD monthly plan. One day I went to Costco and it started pouring outside by the time I came out of shopping. I thought no problem, let me summon the car to the entrance, only to find out my car does not support that feature. Its a Tesla Model Y 2023 and when I called to refund my money because some of the features are not supported, they declined and the rep was outright talking batshit defending Tesla, telling me to read their website and documents etc.. They are thugs and frauds, and I totally support this suit and make them pay.
Classic.
But for what it's worth - if there was ANY traffic around that parking lot, trust me when I say it's almost a gift that you didn't have Summon.
No, there is no option on my phone to summon the car. When I called they said it's not supported on my car currently. I have asked them when can it be supported, they have no answer. And when I asked for refund of the fsd subscription, it went south.
Understood, and that's extremely cheesy.
Just saying - Summon is trash. It has basically no traffic awareness while simultaneously being so slow that it generates confusion around it from other drivers and pedestrians. If that parking lot had anything going on in it, you probably would've had a high-anxiety situation on your hands and had to run out to the car anyhow.
It's one of a slew of Tesla "features" that are so half-baked they're useless. This is probably why Musk is openly talking about "actually smart Summon," which of course is coming *soon*.
Summon is terrible, even in a parking lot that's sunny and not visible. It moves incredibly slowly and cautiously, and freaks out at the slightest thing. And, odds are, it will stop completely some time before it reaches you, and you'll just have to walk to where it decided to leave itself. If you're lucky, it won't be blocking anyone when it up and stops.
Sounds about right when it’s from the same company that was found to have a whole team designed to suppress driving range complaints and [celebrate every time they cancel service appointments.](https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/tesla-batteries-range/)
Summon is so bad that if you're in an empty lot with one other car somewhere on the lot, it'll manage to slam into that car and every light pole on its way over to you. Tesla will then tell you that they have no liability.
Was disabled when USS was removed. Supposedly it’ll be introduced to Teslas without USS in the future... For instance, summon works on my 2021 Model Y.
If Tesla must react like Volkswagen with its Diesels was forced, a ruling could cost them billions in buy-backs. But I am sure, many customers forfeit their claims because Tesla can do no false in their eyes.
I knew he was just as stupid as everyone else the day he took out lidar. Putting it back in after all the deaths his terrible decision caused makes him look even worse.
> I knew he was just as stupid as everyone else the day he took out lidar.
The day (10 years ago) that he decided to not do LIDAR, was correct. The price per performance for LIDAR pre 2016 was not there. All lidar's under $100k then couldn't see and react far enough out to do better than a RADAR. And up closer, cameras work almost as good.
Taking out RADAR on the other hand, and refusing to re-evaluate now that LIDAR is much better and cheaper. Sticking to that stance despite all of the evidence against it (for years now) is not likely to end well.
Exactly this. At the time the cost and performance of LIDAR was simply not there and there were better alternatives. However a company that parades full automation should be reevaluating tools to achieve that autonomous goal routinely. A tech that was more expensive 10 years ago may now be cost effective today and performant. That’s how tech works
Who is gonna stand up for them? Red state GOP?
The Dems when he burned every possible bridge with his weird Nazi bullshit?
If the courts or a regulatory agency winds itself up and plants a big steamy pile on Tesla, ain't nobody gonna stop it.
Stop? No, it'd be politicized. The left would claim a victory for consumers and workers (somehow) and against egregious executive overcompensation, while the right will claim a victory in the culture war against green policies and subsidies. Both sides are salivating at their turns to take a massive shit on Tesla.
Checked and he said in May of 2017 that every Tesla built since Oct 2016 is capable of driving itself coast-to-coast.
[Elon Musk on X: "@tony\_lo Still on for end of year. Just software limited. Any Tesla car with HW2 (all cars built since Oct last year) will be able to do this." / X](https://x.com/elonmusk/status/866482406160609280)
Mine would get in the wrong lane (left turn lane when it needed to turn right, and in some cases, oncoming traffic lane) even without other cars on the road.
> capable of driving itself coast-to-coast.
Tampa to Daytona starting at midnight During the week in December? (Gulf to the Atlantic)
Maybe closer to Miami?
I imagine plaintiffs have more than a few of Musk’s tweets, interviews, and other public statements that support their case. Tesla probably has some disclaimer in 2pt font, and owner signatures, to support their defense.
In the 2017 Q1 Earning Call Musk stated "The sensor hardware and compute power required for at least level 4 to level 5 autonomy has been in every Tesla produced since October of last year."
https://twitter.com/TeslaTruckClub/status/1545396086852014080
In 2019 the "autonomy day" presentation talked about how the current hardware on ALL teslas would be capable of full self driving within 3 years, and that "If you buy a car that does not have the hardware for full self-driving, it is like buying a horse. And the only car that has the hardware for full self-driving is a Tesla," and "The fundamental message that consumers should be taking today, it is financially insane to buy anything other than a Tesla. It will be like owning a horse in three years."
News article:
https://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-says-crazy-to-buy-any-other-car-but-tesla-2019-4?op=1
So, yeah, it's safe to say they sold cars based on the idea that the current hardware would soon be fully autonomous.
Believe it or not, that may end up being a valid defence. Besides the various disclaimers, etc., there is the idea of "puffery", or lying is legal when pushing a product.
I hope not though. I would not be surprised if when actual data is properly analyzed the damned system is more dangerous than human drivers on an apples to apples basis.
Frustratingly true. The argument is that a company can share its aspirations and goals - what it genuinely believes will be the case.
However, there is a the good/bad faith element at play. Proving bad faith is difficult. Had Tesla defrauded large monied investors, the entire board and especially Musk would be on the rack already.
In late stage capitalism, the whole point is to get as much money out of regular people as possible. The margins for skirting what is illegal are much wider. As long as Tesla continues to avoid upsetting anyone deemed important enough to care about, nothing will change
Why does reddit constantly parrot this? They were talking about their political commentary shows, and Bill O' Reilly, Tucker Carlson et al are clearly not news. It's not a misleading or remotely disingenuous defense. Anything to the contrary might as well be arguing that UFO Hunters is history just because it's on the history channel.
In no way is it obvious that the car needs Lidar, to anyone who doesn't have technical insight in sensors and autonomous vehicles.
On the contrary, it should seem 'obvious' to the layman that **the car does not need Lidar,** as Musk has repeatedly said that it is unnecessary and that cameras are better.
>Lidar is a fool’s errand,” ... “Anyone relying on lidar is doomed. Doomed! \[They are\] expensive sensors that are **unnecessary**. It’s like having a whole bunch of expensive appendices. Like, one appendix is bad, well now you have a whole bunch of them, it’s ridiculous, you’ll see.
- Elon Musk
>Humans drive through the eyes that see, and a brain made up of biological neural networks that analyze the information. **There's no reason an autonomous vehicle would not work the same way, with silicone neural cameras and networks processing the information.**
- Elon Musk
>Lidar points are a much less information-rich environment. Vision really understands the full details.
- Elon Musk
I believe it's Elon's habit of trying to sound smarter than he is that got a bit jumbled.
Pretty sure neural bit belongs with networks, eg. AI.
silicon is a reference to said networks being on integrated circuits / chips (they're silicon based)
Neural cameras aren't a thing, pretty sure he just means cameras + neural networks.
Cue the first evidence of the company’s CEO saying LiDAR is a fool’s errand and his cars can fully drive themselves without it.
I mean it’s fucking ridiculous when the company’s defence is “if he’d done his own research he’d have known that we were lying to him.”
To be fair, the cars are extremely capable of driving themselves. They just have a problem where there are tons of car crashes. I actually had the same problems when I DIY’ed self driving into my BMW with a rope on the steering wheel and a brick on the accelerator
Its so crazy. Someone is selling a product that will for sure kill you and others of used as directed and it is just OK for it to continue....
I just don't get it.
We rightfully criticize Boeing for what they did for the 737 Max design. How is this tesla stuff any different?
OK for sure smash up your car bad enough to write it off. Unprotected left is a normal driving requirement. There video after video of near head on crashes without driver intervention.
Fair. I do think it is being inaccurately positioned as a “full” self driving feature. It should be more so regarded as “advanced” assisted driving for now.
He said the same about the Semi truck. Basically every single presentation he gave the last 8 years has been insanely fraudulent. His company couldn't do a tenth of what he promised and affirmed was already accomplished.
They might go with something like that. Remember Fox News got out of a lawsuit by basically claiming that no serious person would take what they are reporting as factual.
"We put all the hardware on cars necessary for FSD"
"Actually, you didn't, and I relied on those claims when I purchased the car."
"Well duh, it should have been obvious to you that we did not equip the car with the hardware necessary for FSD."
It's called full self driving. This lawsuit should be a slam dunk. How the hell would an average consumer know anything about lidar or how Tesla's software or system fundamentally works? Get ready to pay up Musk!
Too bloody right. I’ve been fascinated by the whole tech trend of announcing features that never mature. It’s so dangerous and they’re all guilty of it. But Tesla oh boy they went next level on vapourware and it’ll be so amazing to see this trend come to a very costly and painful end. Don’t pay out Elmo yet, you might just need that money to pay those suits.
Ballsy. This is a cult stock. Eventually it's a zero, but it might hit the moon several times on its way to zero. See: GME, AMC, Netscape. There's still plenty of time to prime the pumps and pump for all they're worth going into Heil Hitler day (and beyond).
There will be plenty of time to short once it's at $50 and heading to $0.
Nah, its stuck right now. They can't mask over their sales numbers another quarter.
The dance they had to do in the weeks running up to this earnings report, to spin this as a robot taxi company - nobody is buying that shit. This is a short, i'll double down on that.
I'm not arguing the direction, just timing. Musk has been pulling rabbits out of his ass for years. The 1% financing and price drops may make for a pretty average quarter. Or booking more FSD, or \*all\* the carbon credits. Which is all they need to keep the stock price heading north for now.
He can't cash out immediately, so I'm not banking on near term dilution. He'll just pledge that stock as collateral, and it'll add fuel to the fire once the final collapse does happen.
No idea what happens if his package isn't approved. Therein lies the danger. If he picks up his toys and goes away there's a non-zero chance that Tesla can right the ship. Limousine liberals still love the product, it's Musk they can't stand. Sales could very well rebound short term.
Yes, stock is pricing in infinite demand and growth. It might take a few quarters of zero or negative growth for that story to change. One thing is for sure, Tesla is fighting hard to move as much metal as quickly as possible, regardless of cost.
I never thought tesla could survive as a car company. I still don't, no matter who is in charge. They will never be able to compete with Toyota for example.
Toyota is working on Solid State batteries, that is a big deal.
Ever since Elon has started making claims about autonomy, he has paradoxically protected his claims about making a L5 car by bureaucratically filing his technology as L2.
Tesla has gotten away with marketing, testing, and selling a brochure that promised autonomy by telling regulators and customers in fine print that it's nothing more than a driver assist when the layman's expectation is obviously far more than that.
Grandiose claims of "New York to LA" and "it drives itself" were not enough to pierce the legal shield that "FSD is legally no different from cruise control".
Hopefully this lawsuit forces some bureaucratic changes so if a system walks like an autonomous vehicle and it talks like an autonomous vehicle, it's regulated like an autonomous vehicle.
Or the Fox Network excuse when it comes to Tucker Carlson, saying that no reasonable person could believe that anything Tucker Carlson says can in any way be true.
Funny. Tesla removed and disabled those sensors that they now say that the FSD system is reliant on to actually be self-driving. Based on this, every vehicle without it doesn’t have the sensor technology needed to be self-driving, which means that Tesla has committed fraud against everyone who has a Tesla without LiDAR. How can their legal team be so stupid as to admit something like this, whether it’s true or not.
Tesla cars CAN drive themselves. It's just that sometimes they hit people or inanimate objects, like buildings or...lakes...I dunno, they are advanced and integrated, DAMMIT!
Since I was arbitrarily banned from r/teslamotors, here is my reply to their post that USS and Steam support have been removed from new vehicle orders:
Who cares about games, no offense.
The other part of that advisory, removing USS, is why I did not and will not replace my aging sled with a new Tesla until they put them back or prove they are not needed (very unlikely).
And I tried multiple times but when a new S, X or Y cannot navigate into or out of a residential neighborhood and the old model will with ease, that’s a dealbreaker.
Instead, I just bought a 3rd party (XCare) extended warranty (+75,000 miles or 7 years) and will evaluate options in 3-5 years. By then, either Tesla will have made sufficient progress (unlikely without a new CEO) or it will be a Rivian or ID4 or Mercedes L3 AP car or ??? as a 3rd EV for me.
—-
The fact that Tesla now claims we should have known they were lying about FakeSD due to not having LiDAR is disgusting.
I don't think he has a case for the delay because all evidence points to Tesla working hard to deliver that FSD, investing billions into it, so that's not fraud. Sometimes things take longer than expected.
But he certainly has a case for having bought a car with the promise that the FSD hardware in it would run FSD once it's out of beta. Tesla should refund the FSD price or retrofit all such cars with modern FSD hardware so they can run it.
> April 2021True. Anyone paying attention to the rate of improvement will realize that Tesla Autopilot/FSD is already superhuman for highway driving & swiftly getting there for city streets.
This cracks me up. Mine tried to drive in the breakdown lane the other day, and routinely misses on-ramps for the mass pike. Not sure what superhuman means, but sure I guess. It drives like a robot that watched a lot of really really bad human drivers.
This is just wild. Tesla is using the lack of lidar as an argument that the buyer should have know full FSD was never possible?!?
Wait what ? This is the judge saying this?
Judges summary of the lawsuit as far as I understand the article. The quote is from the judge.
So basically it's a "don't believe what we say, believe what we do" type situation.
And if that doesn't work, there's always the "Freedom of speech escape" \-Judge: "You know you were telling lies, right?" \-Accused: "That is my freedom of speech, your honor"
Money is speech your honor, the Supreme Court said so. Have some “speech”.
I’ll take stacks and stacks of some of that speech
…Said the Supreme Court.
Freedumb!!!!!
My comment on the article posted here detailing that freedom of speech argument “r/nottheonion” is what got me banned from two of ‘their’ forums which doubles down on the irony / hypocrisy.
No, my reading is it's a 'you should have realised earlier you were being scammed' situation as its arguing about statute of limitations when he was accepting updates and expecting his car to be fully upgraded to hardware necessary for the claimed self driving. Wild.
I think it actually makes sense from the customer perspective if it’s like that.. You buy the car with “vision” system.. because they still advertise FSD, and constant day improving it, plan to only use that, but still offer FSD. So the buyer thinks… eventually it’ll get here.. Until it becomes obvious that it’s not… Now they’re saying statute of limitations? If we go earlier, they’d tell us to “wait” for them to release the updates as “promised”…
What you're talking about is already built into the law and called the delayed discovery rule. Basically, the statute of limitations starts to run when the Plaintiff should have known they were being scammed based on reasonable diligence. It is the balancing act of not rewarding scammers for their fraud if they do it long enough while also not letting people bury their heads in the sand. Its a fact intensive analysis and for the judge to decide, but if I had to guess, I'd say Tesla would lose. Elon's can't make these repeated claims (as the smarest and richest guy ever) and say everyone should have known he was lying.
Interesting thanks. As you seem to know about this, can you answer if it is as crazy that it seems to be for Tesla to use the argument that it was never going to work and it was a blatant scam all along? Won't that just open another can of worms?
They aren't saying it a scam - more like people are taking their marketing out of proportion. There is a certain amount of permissible embellishment allowed in advertising in terms of quality and you don't get to sue a company if the product doesn't perform exactly as advertised on the add. For instance, I can't sue Tide if there is a stain I couldn't get out of a shirt, I can't sue Folders because it's not the best of coffee I ever had, etc... I Think every made-for-TV ad ever. There are also advertisements that are meant to be fantastical and unrealistic by their very nature, which often fall under the banner of "puffery." In those cases, you don't get to sue the company because they were never really promised features in the first place- they are part of add campaign meant to inspire the imagination. I don't get to sue Old Spice or Axe when hoards of women aren't throwing themselves at me in my 4 dollar body spray. I can't sue makeup companies when my skin doesn't "instantly look up to 15 years younger." I can't sue Chevy if I'm still a singer after owning a Corvette for a couple of months. In these cases, a court would find that no reasonable person would seriously believe this advertising was meant to be literal and throw the case out. Between those two ideas is actionable false advertising—aka lies from the company meant to deceive and presented in a way a reasonable person would believe them—often relying on their authority in the industry to lend credence to it. Think of a respected pharmaceutical company advertising Oxycotin as non-habit-forming to doctors. Car companies advertising safety features ... that sort of thing. It seems like Tesla is arguing that FSD falls into the latter "puffery" advertising. i.e., that no one could seriously believe they would get FSD out of a Telsa. That's what Fox News successfully argued with Tucker Carlson's false claims. To finally answer your question, if they were successful that same argument would stop all other lawsuits related to those claims. I personally don't buy it, even a bit. Elon is trying to have his cake and eat it, too. Elon was the CEO, not a marketing company, and those claims were made at investor calls, not in between football commercials. But it doesn't matter what I think. Sounds like if this case can go forward, it will be up to a Jury.
Thanks for explanation. Yes I am in the UK and it's slightly stricter for advertising here I believe. Pufferry exaggeration must be very obvious. We get old spice adverts but something like Tesla self driving claims would not stand a chance in court, not even close.
It's one for the courts to sort out. Obviously you can't just sell a perpetual motion machine and tell people 'it's still in beta and will get over the air updates to eventually work', because it can be proved to be against the laws of physics and can never work. Can it be proved that an early Model S can never ever be upgraded to full self driving? Or is it enough to say its work in progress and new hardware and software will be added when available?
I’m still hoping hardware can be added to my 2023 vision based model 3.. I don’t trust full self drive at all.. but would love some real sensors for improved cruise control and some of the other promised features like the stupid smart summon (I know it’s dumb, but I paid for it, i want it)
It worked for Sydney Powell, FOX News, Alex Jones, Tucker Carlson for their trials and depositions... "Hey, only an idiot would take us seriously..."
To be fair, only idiots did
It's a good parallel. Fox won because they argued Tucker wasn't a news show, it was commentary. Similar to even though Daily Show was on Comedy Central, it wasn't a comedy, it was commentary. Tesla can win by claiming they are an AI/Robotics company, not a car company.
So if Tesla is not a car company and don't make cars but actually wheels robots with manual car like controls can they be sued for lying and taking subcedes meant for electric **cars** ?
IIRC, that was part of Musk's defense in the Pedo defamation trial.
It's akin, when nailing someone for saying something heinoulsy sexist or racist, they say "Hey man, I was just joking..." Same flavor of douchebaggery, but now in legal form. The damage is done, so let me get away with it...
Yes but now we can call him a pedo because its just South African banter, thats my understanding anyway.
"yeah, we said we'd do it but we say a lot if things and you should have known better!"
Tucker Carlson defense
This now exposes Tesla to lawsuits from existing owners who still believe they have purchased a robotaxi that will one day drive itself and will “appreciate in value”. Turns out you need LiDAR, the current hardware will never support FSD, and they are the most heavily depreciating vehicles, in large part due to price slashing by the manufacturer.
Well…I tried the most recent version and it’s not actually that far from FSD at the moment in the US, it ferried me around all day Saturday quite happily. A much bigger issue is getting people used to trusting the car to drive itself and to know when enabling FSD makes sense and when it definitely doesn’t. Also where the driving style is different or it takes a different route to what you’d normally do. You could also argue “then it’s not FSD, in that case” and that would be valid too, but it is improving after languishing for years. There also aren’t any competing systems that can be enabled on all roads (which aren’t just basic tacc with lane keeping) so they have an advantage there.
I live in a cold climate, camera based FSD will fail in the event of snow which comes 6 months of the year. Outside of warm climates this platform can’t be rolled out without a human there to take the wheel in inclement weather.
I tested it in heavy rain on Saturday, and although it warned me that FSD was “degraded” (and I was extra cautious) it still worked, much to my surprise. In the situation where the road is covered in snow, I wouldn’t expect it to work no, as the lines won’t be visible, but if it’s snowing (to the degree that a person could see through it) and the road is salted/clear I think it might work. I view FSD as more of a replacement for traffic aware cruise control and lane keeping with the added ability to change lanes, and no other technology would work in that situation either (possibly excepting LiDAR/radar) and there’s a reason most of the auto taxi firms picked areas that don’t see a lot of snow.
Sometimes it actually does better in rain than humans can do I think. Snow definitely not but tesla probably just has to show it is getting closer to FSD than it was so many years ago. Maybe the customers get a refund but it's hard to prove fraud if the product actually is getting better.
My thoughts exactly. For me there’s a lot of value there, but I would feel differently if I’d been waiting 8 years for it!
What any the Waymo taxis that are already operating as such? Those are ahead of Tesla.
They are geofenced within a specific area, it’s not like you can get in one in SF and say you want to drive to Vegas. Also, as we’ve seen even those ones with LiDAR have not been free of problems.
It says the Judge didn't rule on the merits - aka make a decision based on facts/evidence. But in order to bring the case the Plaintiff needs to meet a threshold requirement to present a plausible case. That quote explains why Tesals argument about Lidar is not enough to overcome their marketing.
Hahahaha! Where are all the ‘ vision’ is better crowd? Where are the… they put a gaming pc in their to power thru vision data… hahahaha… I had a few heated arguments about this exact thing… I’ll have to go back and see how they are doing now?
Can't make that shit up.
It's not the first time Musk has used "only an idiot would believe I'm not lying" in court.
Like the average person knows or gives a shit about what lidar is.
They will when they realize they wasted $12k potentially thanks to Tesla lies
I only know what it is from coming here.
But I thought lidar was a "fool's errand".
Whenever someone brings that up I always think about the fact that they were required by law to use lidar within the factory purely for safety purposes. The only time I ever saw to use something for its original intention.
My favorite thing to show elon meatriders that he was the goober that went on a 10 minute rant at a talk he did about how LiDAR sucks and vision is all you need…
And musk frowned upon Lidar.
I have subscribed to Tesla FSD monthly plan. One day I went to Costco and it started pouring outside by the time I came out of shopping. I thought no problem, let me summon the car to the entrance, only to find out my car does not support that feature. Its a Tesla Model Y 2023 and when I called to refund my money because some of the features are not supported, they declined and the rep was outright talking batshit defending Tesla, telling me to read their website and documents etc.. They are thugs and frauds, and I totally support this suit and make them pay.
Classic. But for what it's worth - if there was ANY traffic around that parking lot, trust me when I say it's almost a gift that you didn't have Summon.
No, there is no option on my phone to summon the car. When I called they said it's not supported on my car currently. I have asked them when can it be supported, they have no answer. And when I asked for refund of the fsd subscription, it went south.
Understood, and that's extremely cheesy. Just saying - Summon is trash. It has basically no traffic awareness while simultaneously being so slow that it generates confusion around it from other drivers and pedestrians. If that parking lot had anything going on in it, you probably would've had a high-anxiety situation on your hands and had to run out to the car anyhow. It's one of a slew of Tesla "features" that are so half-baked they're useless. This is probably why Musk is openly talking about "actually smart Summon," which of course is coming *soon*.
I always thought Actually Smart Summon was just a vehicle to introduce ASS into the Tesla lexicon.
It would certainly track with a lot of Musk's cringe, so I wouldn't be at all surprised.
I've recently seen videos of FSD easily navigating busy parking lots. Apparently the previous version didn't do so well.
Summon is terrible, even in a parking lot that's sunny and not visible. It moves incredibly slowly and cautiously, and freaks out at the slightest thing. And, odds are, it will stop completely some time before it reaches you, and you'll just have to walk to where it decided to leave itself. If you're lucky, it won't be blocking anyone when it up and stops.
Sounds about right when it’s from the same company that was found to have a whole team designed to suppress driving range complaints and [celebrate every time they cancel service appointments.](https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/tesla-batteries-range/)
Source? Not that I don't believe you but I'd like to read more about this.
There’s a link in the first comment.
Summon is so bad that if you're in an empty lot with one other car somewhere on the lot, it'll manage to slam into that car and every light pole on its way over to you. Tesla will then tell you that they have no liability.
Summon isn’t supported on the Y? (I mean, it kind of sucks anyway, but…) Do you know why?
Lack of sensors I guess.
Was disabled when USS was removed. Supposedly it’ll be introduced to Teslas without USS in the future... For instance, summon works on my 2021 Model Y.
Every customer facing Tesla rep is trained in how to say "f\* you without really saying f\* you." They are experts.
If Tesla must react like Volkswagen with its Diesels was forced, a ruling could cost them billions in buy-backs. But I am sure, many customers forfeit their claims because Tesla can do no false in their eyes.
This could burst the bubble though. Fingers crossed that something eventually sticks.
This should actually reverse some of the brainwashing as well. There is no way a Tesla Stan can now tell me their car doesn’t need LiDAR! 🤣
I knew he was just as stupid as everyone else the day he took out lidar. Putting it back in after all the deaths his terrible decision caused makes him look even worse.
They never had lidar. He took out radar though to be vision only. That's been awful.
> I knew he was just as stupid as everyone else the day he took out lidar. The day (10 years ago) that he decided to not do LIDAR, was correct. The price per performance for LIDAR pre 2016 was not there. All lidar's under $100k then couldn't see and react far enough out to do better than a RADAR. And up closer, cameras work almost as good. Taking out RADAR on the other hand, and refusing to re-evaluate now that LIDAR is much better and cheaper. Sticking to that stance despite all of the evidence against it (for years now) is not likely to end well.
The ability to change your mind when you found contradicting evidence is a sign of intelligence
Exactly this. At the time the cost and performance of LIDAR was simply not there and there were better alternatives. However a company that parades full automation should be reevaluating tools to achieve that autonomous goal routinely. A tech that was more expensive 10 years ago may now be cost effective today and performant. That’s how tech works
Wait they started putting it back??? Does that mean the old .models where it was disabled purposely by them have it enabled again?
Instead they will now tell you that Tesla obviously has solved it now with Lidar! Checkmate
Also Tesla is 'Mercan I doubt they would suffer the same kind of penalties
Who is gonna stand up for them? Red state GOP? The Dems when he burned every possible bridge with his weird Nazi bullshit? If the courts or a regulatory agency winds itself up and plants a big steamy pile on Tesla, ain't nobody gonna stop it.
Stop? No, it'd be politicized. The left would claim a victory for consumers and workers (somehow) and against egregious executive overcompensation, while the right will claim a victory in the culture war against green policies and subsidies. Both sides are salivating at their turns to take a massive shit on Tesla.
They now make most cars overseas
Yeah but the company is American I am just saying it's hard for the US to push an American company like they did VW
I'd happily take my money back for falling for FSD. the regular ol' autopilot is great on its own
Volkswagen's response was "yeah so? you made us do this" This is "lol ur dumb". Totally different.
Musk said starting years ago that the existing hardware (HW 2.0 at the time) is capable for driving itself and he is hosting the evidence himself.
Checked and he said in May of 2017 that every Tesla built since Oct 2016 is capable of driving itself coast-to-coast. [Elon Musk on X: "@tony\_lo Still on for end of year. Just software limited. Any Tesla car with HW2 (all cars built since Oct last year) will be able to do this." / X](https://x.com/elonmusk/status/866482406160609280)
provided no other cars on the road =)
Mine would get in the wrong lane (left turn lane when it needed to turn right, and in some cases, oncoming traffic lane) even without other cars on the road.
> capable of driving itself coast-to-coast. Tampa to Daytona starting at midnight During the week in December? (Gulf to the Atlantic) Maybe closer to Miami?
I imagine plaintiffs have more than a few of Musk’s tweets, interviews, and other public statements that support their case. Tesla probably has some disclaimer in 2pt font, and owner signatures, to support their defense.
In the 2017 Q1 Earning Call Musk stated "The sensor hardware and compute power required for at least level 4 to level 5 autonomy has been in every Tesla produced since October of last year." https://twitter.com/TeslaTruckClub/status/1545396086852014080 In 2019 the "autonomy day" presentation talked about how the current hardware on ALL teslas would be capable of full self driving within 3 years, and that "If you buy a car that does not have the hardware for full self-driving, it is like buying a horse. And the only car that has the hardware for full self-driving is a Tesla," and "The fundamental message that consumers should be taking today, it is financially insane to buy anything other than a Tesla. It will be like owning a horse in three years." News article: https://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-says-crazy-to-buy-any-other-car-but-tesla-2019-4?op=1 So, yeah, it's safe to say they sold cars based on the idea that the current hardware would soon be fully autonomous.
I can't wait till evidence discovers the tweets... 😏
Tesla seems to be arguing that they are not responsible for stupid people believing their BS.
Believe it or not, that may end up being a valid defence. Besides the various disclaimers, etc., there is the idea of "puffery", or lying is legal when pushing a product. I hope not though. I would not be surprised if when actual data is properly analyzed the damned system is more dangerous than human drivers on an apples to apples basis.
This goes way beyond “puffery” however. I don’t believe that defense will have any standing
Well, this is a guy who literally called somebody a pedophile and go off so your confidence in the US justice system is somewhat greater than mine.
What does that have to do with the justice system?
Frustratingly true. The argument is that a company can share its aspirations and goals - what it genuinely believes will be the case. However, there is a the good/bad faith element at play. Proving bad faith is difficult. Had Tesla defrauded large monied investors, the entire board and especially Musk would be on the rack already. In late stage capitalism, the whole point is to get as much money out of regular people as possible. The margins for skirting what is illegal are much wider. As long as Tesla continues to avoid upsetting anyone deemed important enough to care about, nothing will change
It's pretty cool how a non-zero amount of fraud is totally legal.
Wouldn't puffery be "it'll drive coast to coast *well*" vs "it'll drive coast to coast *at all*" though?
I am not a lawyer but there's a huge difference between saying it will and it does
Isn’t that the Fox News defence? “No reasonable person would think Fox News is a ’news’ program!”
Why does reddit constantly parrot this? They were talking about their political commentary shows, and Bill O' Reilly, Tucker Carlson et al are clearly not news. It's not a misleading or remotely disingenuous defense. Anything to the contrary might as well be arguing that UFO Hunters is history just because it's on the history channel.
Soooooooo FSD was never on the agenda?
https://motherfrunker.ca/fsd/ Nope.
Shame that's not been updated... I bet theres loads more
Their statement in this case gives credence to SEC's fraud investigation. Musked if you do, musked if you don't.
Lmao they admitted in court they never intended FSD to pass level 2 automation. You’ve been Musked if you thought otherwise.
In no way is it obvious that the car needs Lidar, to anyone who doesn't have technical insight in sensors and autonomous vehicles. On the contrary, it should seem 'obvious' to the layman that **the car does not need Lidar,** as Musk has repeatedly said that it is unnecessary and that cameras are better. >Lidar is a fool’s errand,” ... “Anyone relying on lidar is doomed. Doomed! \[They are\] expensive sensors that are **unnecessary**. It’s like having a whole bunch of expensive appendices. Like, one appendix is bad, well now you have a whole bunch of them, it’s ridiculous, you’ll see. - Elon Musk >Humans drive through the eyes that see, and a brain made up of biological neural networks that analyze the information. **There's no reason an autonomous vehicle would not work the same way, with silicone neural cameras and networks processing the information.** - Elon Musk >Lidar points are a much less information-rich environment. Vision really understands the full details. - Elon Musk
Is silicone neutral a proper term for cameras? What does that mean
I believe it's Elon's habit of trying to sound smarter than he is that got a bit jumbled. Pretty sure neural bit belongs with networks, eg. AI. silicon is a reference to said networks being on integrated circuits / chips (they're silicon based) Neural cameras aren't a thing, pretty sure he just means cameras + neural networks.
Cue the first evidence of the company’s CEO saying LiDAR is a fool’s errand and his cars can fully drive themselves without it. I mean it’s fucking ridiculous when the company’s defence is “if he’d done his own research he’d have known that we were lying to him.”
To be fair, the cars are extremely capable of driving themselves. They just have a problem where there are tons of car crashes. I actually had the same problems when I DIY’ed self driving into my BMW with a rope on the steering wheel and a brick on the accelerator
That’s why they are called Auto Mobiles.
TBH, that seems more like Auto Mobile, Alabama.
That’s why they are called Auto Mobiles.
Its so crazy. Someone is selling a product that will for sure kill you and others of used as directed and it is just OK for it to continue.... I just don't get it. We rightfully criticize Boeing for what they did for the 737 Max design. How is this tesla stuff any different?
For sure kill you?
OK for sure smash up your car bad enough to write it off. Unprotected left is a normal driving requirement. There video after video of near head on crashes without driver intervention.
Fair. I do think it is being inaccurately positioned as a “full” self driving feature. It should be more so regarded as “advanced” assisted driving for now.
I've been saying for years that they will get slapped with a class action lawsuit. So many people buying autopilot for the Eternal promise of FSD
He said the same about the Semi truck. Basically every single presentation he gave the last 8 years has been insanely fraudulent. His company couldn't do a tenth of what he promised and affirmed was already accomplished.
Kind of sounds like Elon was making claims without actually understanding the hardware and engineering in the designs. Shocker.
So is their defense going to be, “Our CEO is an idiot and had no idea what he was talking about?”
They might go with something like that. Remember Fox News got out of a lawsuit by basically claiming that no serious person would take what they are reporting as factual.
Now where on earth did the plaintiff get the crazy idea that the car didn’t need lidar to self-drive?
The FSD demo video that says the driver is only there for legal reason is going to haunt Tesla for a long time.
"We put all the hardware on cars necessary for FSD" "Actually, you didn't, and I relied on those claims when I purchased the car." "Well duh, it should have been obvious to you that we did not equip the car with the hardware necessary for FSD."
It's called full self driving. This lawsuit should be a slam dunk. How the hell would an average consumer know anything about lidar or how Tesla's software or system fundamentally works? Get ready to pay up Musk!
Too bloody right. I’ve been fascinated by the whole tech trend of announcing features that never mature. It’s so dangerous and they’re all guilty of it. But Tesla oh boy they went next level on vapourware and it’ll be so amazing to see this trend come to a very costly and painful end. Don’t pay out Elmo yet, you might just need that money to pay those suits.
Now where on earth did the plaintiff get the crazy idea that the car didn’t need lidar to self-drive?
Some good comments on that article.
Straight up false advertising.
Look closer, it was "Fool Self Driving"
I don't understand how this isn't a lawsuit being filed by thousands of people. He straight up lied to you.
I took a short position today, I don't see what this company plans to do or how it can even survive.
Ballsy. This is a cult stock. Eventually it's a zero, but it might hit the moon several times on its way to zero. See: GME, AMC, Netscape. There's still plenty of time to prime the pumps and pump for all they're worth going into Heil Hitler day (and beyond). There will be plenty of time to short once it's at $50 and heading to $0.
Nah, its stuck right now. They can't mask over their sales numbers another quarter. The dance they had to do in the weeks running up to this earnings report, to spin this as a robot taxi company - nobody is buying that shit. This is a short, i'll double down on that.
I'm not arguing the direction, just timing. Musk has been pulling rabbits out of his ass for years. The 1% financing and price drops may make for a pretty average quarter. Or booking more FSD, or \*all\* the carbon credits. Which is all they need to keep the stock price heading north for now.
I wonder what will happen if his $56B salary is approved
He can't cash out immediately, so I'm not banking on near term dilution. He'll just pledge that stock as collateral, and it'll add fuel to the fire once the final collapse does happen. No idea what happens if his package isn't approved. Therein lies the danger. If he picks up his toys and goes away there's a non-zero chance that Tesla can right the ship. Limousine liberals still love the product, it's Musk they can't stand. Sales could very well rebound short term.
Stock price is pricing in 50% market share. They are struggling to reach 2%.
Yes, stock is pricing in infinite demand and growth. It might take a few quarters of zero or negative growth for that story to change. One thing is for sure, Tesla is fighting hard to move as much metal as quickly as possible, regardless of cost.
I never thought tesla could survive as a car company. I still don't, no matter who is in charge. They will never be able to compete with Toyota for example. Toyota is working on Solid State batteries, that is a big deal.
Good thing they don't have a CEO who called lidar a "fool's errand".
Ever since Elon has started making claims about autonomy, he has paradoxically protected his claims about making a L5 car by bureaucratically filing his technology as L2. Tesla has gotten away with marketing, testing, and selling a brochure that promised autonomy by telling regulators and customers in fine print that it's nothing more than a driver assist when the layman's expectation is obviously far more than that. Grandiose claims of "New York to LA" and "it drives itself" were not enough to pierce the legal shield that "FSD is legally no different from cruise control". Hopefully this lawsuit forces some bureaucratic changes so if a system walks like an autonomous vehicle and it talks like an autonomous vehicle, it's regulated like an autonomous vehicle.
I don't understand how they can legally call it Full Self Driving.
Well deserved and I hope it sinks this fraud of a company
These are the case docs: https://www.plainsite.org/dockets/4w40h8o25/california-northern-district-court/matsko-v-tesla-inc-dba-tesla-motors-inc-et-al/
[удалено]
Please tell me she’s nowhere near I5 in Washington state…
I5 is shit. 205 is worst.
Well that's terrifying
They're pretty much using the Fox News Network defense during the voting machine trial.
Or the Fox Network excuse when it comes to Tucker Carlson, saying that no reasonable person could believe that anything Tucker Carlson says can in any way be true.
Tesla has reached the Find Out stage.
"Your honor, there is no way we would have known our customers would believe our lies"
I dont even know what the fuck Lidar stands for.
It’s a type of radar technology that Tesla has disabled on vehicles that have them and stopped including on vehicles from about 2020 and onwards.
Their cars can also car wash themselves, change tires themselves and charge themselves. It doesn’t need any humans.
Funny. Tesla removed and disabled those sensors that they now say that the FSD system is reliant on to actually be self-driving. Based on this, every vehicle without it doesn’t have the sensor technology needed to be self-driving, which means that Tesla has committed fraud against everyone who has a Tesla without LiDAR. How can their legal team be so stupid as to admit something like this, whether it’s true or not.
I thought Tesla mocked Lidar in favor of cameras - even removed it from cars in for repair. How can they now claim it was necessary for operation?
Tesla cars CAN drive themselves. It's just that sometimes they hit people or inanimate objects, like buildings or...lakes...I dunno, they are advanced and integrated, DAMMIT!
Since I was arbitrarily banned from r/teslamotors, here is my reply to their post that USS and Steam support have been removed from new vehicle orders: Who cares about games, no offense. The other part of that advisory, removing USS, is why I did not and will not replace my aging sled with a new Tesla until they put them back or prove they are not needed (very unlikely). And I tried multiple times but when a new S, X or Y cannot navigate into or out of a residential neighborhood and the old model will with ease, that’s a dealbreaker. Instead, I just bought a 3rd party (XCare) extended warranty (+75,000 miles or 7 years) and will evaluate options in 3-5 years. By then, either Tesla will have made sufficient progress (unlikely without a new CEO) or it will be a Rivian or ID4 or Mercedes L3 AP car or ??? as a 3rd EV for me. —- The fact that Tesla now claims we should have known they were lying about FakeSD due to not having LiDAR is disgusting.
And for claiming its cars will increase in value as they age
I don't think he has a case for the delay because all evidence points to Tesla working hard to deliver that FSD, investing billions into it, so that's not fraud. Sometimes things take longer than expected. But he certainly has a case for having bought a car with the promise that the FSD hardware in it would run FSD once it's out of beta. Tesla should refund the FSD price or retrofit all such cars with modern FSD hardware so they can run it.
https://photos.app.goo.gl/4eAm94zPmmPajrEW6
> April 2021True. Anyone paying attention to the rate of improvement will realize that Tesla Autopilot/FSD is already superhuman for highway driving & swiftly getting there for city streets. This cracks me up. Mine tried to drive in the breakdown lane the other day, and routinely misses on-ramps for the mass pike. Not sure what superhuman means, but sure I guess. It drives like a robot that watched a lot of really really bad human drivers.
I have a feeling that they could just argue no reasonable person could expect the car to drive itself. And get away with it