Search results

I have not, but still may be "par" for the course.

You repeatedly talk about there being "no evidence," but then fall back on speculation or assumption to support your position. For example, "I think Elon would have mentioned this" is speculation. The fact of the matter is that only a privileged few fully "know" everything Tesla is doing with...

There is a very fine line with being ridiculously optimistic and lying. Believing he can build a fleet of robotaxis is ridiculously optimistic. Stating that it's going to happen within a clearly unrealistic time frame (in light of where the project stands at the time the statement is made) is...

I'm an OG and just got it.

I was being kind in my characterization of the comment. Whether someone speaks English or not really isn't relevant to the discussion.

Surely you could have made your point without the stereotypes and inferences.

The operative words being "from the point of contract breach," which isn't necessarily the date the contract is signed.

I understand the challenge. I litigate for a living. Yes, having a written agreement signed by Elon Musk with blah blah blah written in all caps is ideal (no argument there!), but it's not the end all be all and "intent" isn't always a difficult climb. Regardless, I hope its a bridge that none...

That just isn't true - you are hyper focused on the notion that there isn't "legally binding language," but that doesn't mean a party can't be held legally culpable.

It's not "hard" to win a lawsuit without a binding legal agreement - perhaps "harder" but not hard. There are multiple potentially viable causes of action that one can assert without a binding legal agreement. For example, cases based on false and deceptive advertising... As for your take on...

Yes regarding the terminology you site, but that pertains to "opinions," which may or may not apply to what Elon has said in the past. (Personally, I don't believe his statements were an opinion of what he believed could happen but instead an affirmative statement of what will happen.) Putting...

The purpose of those "terms of use" is to disclaim liability for inferences, assumptions, improper conclusions, uses, etc. They are not a license to say your product specifically does X, if it can't. If a company says that it's car can fly, then it's actionable (under multiple causes of action)...

Is it your contention that a company can say whatever it wants to say and then simply separate itself from those statements with "one little asterisk on the web site pointing to a disclaimer"? Also, what is a "casual promise"?

State sovereignty

Same with me. Pain in the .....!!!

I don't believe Tesla makes business decisions based on what the media may think or say. Instead, I suspect that it's biggest concern is whether X can be implemented without increasing safety risks or legal liability. Now whether Tesla takes this step "next month" is anyone's guess, but I'll...

I think your concerns are valid, but not sure how practical with respect to California legislation. That's a very slippery slope that would seemingly make it difficult to pass a law of this nature that only applies to Tesla without impacting other manufacturers.

What's the rumor? And I do agree with the possibility of only cars with cameras will be nag free.

Do you think difficulty in implementing the things you mentioned is a relevant factor? Or do you believe that EVERYTHING that Elon says will happen is a lie? I understand your general pessimism, but this seems as if it is something that Tesla can do with relative ease - from an implementation...

That's what I first thought... Basically until the following software update which may be 2 weeks or 4 weeks or . ...

I understand where you are coming from and I appreciate your response. This is a melting pot of a board with people from different countries, backgrounds, etc. So, you are probably right that we should all try and be mindful of how what we are saying may be interpreted by others. With that...

I know Elon has multiple times on Twitter this year. Also, in Tesla's 3rd quarter earnings call from this year, Elon said "as I said earlier, we're expecting to release the full self-driving software to anyone who orders the package by the end of this year. So, a separate matter as to will it...

I do believe there is some truth to that, but I also have heard/read Tesla/Elon use FSD with respect to its existing software. Regardless, I really do believe (and I obviously could be wrong) that the California state legislature is trying to control what Tesla or other manufacturers may say...

Specifically, which posts of mine in this thread do you believe are speculative? (I concede post #32 was clearly speculation on my part.) I believe this is the 2nd time since I've joined the forum that you've made a similar reference about my posting speculation as facts. Surely, you must...

Maybe I am confused by what you are saying, but I don't understand why you keep referring to Tesla's website with respect to what the new law will require about Tesla's use of FSD. The issue under the law isn't just what Tesla may say on its website, but it also pertains to every place else...

California's DMV referenced this page on Tesla's website. I don't know if the page is still there or how you get to it on the website. I found it in an LA Times article.

A court may decide if the section is challenged, but I don't think there is any ambiguity in what (b) refers to. It states: A manufacturer or dealer shall not name any partial driving automation feature, or describe any partial driving automation feature in marketing materials, using language...

Yes

The law is meant to crack down on the use of FSD and autopilot. In CA, both of those are a no go.

But it does make a difference because even the finished FSD product isn't really FSD...

Section B refers to all uses of the prohibited terms (not just marketing materials).

Tesla knew exactly what it was doing with the name.

I understood where you were coming from, but we are super nerds. Your average person thinks of autopilot as it sounds.... automatic pilot... 😁

I don't think autopilot is a gray area. That would be a violation of California's law.

Do you know where the profiles are on the web portal?

Hopefully, you won't get an STD like my update (deleted my profiles).

I wish! Nope. Zero profiles. Need to set everything up again, including home link.

D*mn update deleted all of my driver profile settings. Everything wiped clean. Uggggghhhhh

I agree that strikes will likely remain for those on the FSD beta test branch, but my point was really based on whether the strike system would remain in place once Tesla disbanded the FSD test branch (whenever that eventuality happens).

To those who down voted, do you really think there will be a strike system when FSD is no longer in beta - one in which X number of strikes will result in a driver completely losing FSD until some future update restores strikes? I don't. I think, upon a strike, FSD will just stop working until...

You get 5 strikes (not 3). Also, you paid for FSD, not FSD beta. Whenever FSD is released and is no longer in beta, there probably won't be strikes.

Don't think it is so much about Elon wiggling free, but more so a case of him not being really challenged yet

Congratulations! So many people complain without doing anything about it (other than post on here)

Those who say it doesn't matter what Elon says or tweets are wrong (in most jurisdictions if not all).

That makes sense. Ultimately, I'm guessing things will be like they now are on the non-beta FSD. If you get a strike, then no more use of FSD on the trip (unless you pullover).

Remove what feature permanently? The steering wheel weight detection feature or some kind of feature tied to resetting strikes?

Did you do it yourself or have it done somewhere? How much did it cost?

I wouldn't hold your breath on a xmas release coming to beta.

Would it be mean of me to hope he/she really did (or does) jack up his/her rims???

So you made the whole thing up for kicks and giggles???