AP2 - Definitely heading in the WRONG direction...

[stopcrazypp]

My guess is Tesla has to give blessings to which social media channels are official ones.

Otherwise, Elon Musk might just speak as an individual and not represent Tesla's official legal position.

Even when a company speaks, they might insert a disclosure like:

"...we may discuss our business outlook and make forward-looking statements. Such statements are predictions based on management's current expectations. Actual results or events could differ materially due to a number of risks and uncertainties, including those mentioned in our most recent 10-K filed with the SEC. Such forward-looking statements represent our views as of today and should not be relied upon after today. We also disclaim any obligation to update these forward-looking statements..."

Notice that a promise can be only good for "today" and it expires after today!

So enjoy a promise while today lasts

SEC issues are different. That covers almost all communication and social media twitter is definitely part of that (I believe there is a part in the law about that). And as you point out, you can (and companies almost always does) add a disclaimer about forward looking statements.

However, we are talking instead about a contract with a vehicle owner (not a stock owner).

 

[stopcrazypp]

Here's an interesting one:

The website flat out said that AEB WILL be on the car in Dec 2016. No fuzzy "expected" language. It's the end of June, and it still is not.

If you rear end a car today, can you successfully sue Tesla because they did not put a feature on your car when they said they would, and thus are liable for damages it would have mitigated? That's not even an AP2 thing because AEB is not part of AP.

Didn't AEB release already near end of April? Not full speed yet, but it's released (meets IIHS requirements at 28mph).
Tesla starts rolling out automatic emergency braking built on its own Autopilot architecture

As for second question, I'm sure that is no. AEB doesn't guarantee preventing every rear end accident in the first place (and Tesla's implementation had always been about reducing the damage, not preventing collision completely).

 

[Tam]

...The website flat out said that AEB WILL be on the car in Dec 2016...

I interpret it as a soft deadline because you didn't continue to read the "and" part after "2016".

It's just like your dessert is definitely free "and" only when you paid for an entree.

So if I don't pay, can the dessert free? It is not a "definitely free" after all because there's an "and" attached to it!

Any how: Your position is: It is a real hard contractual deadline.

So yes, there's a current lawsuit that takes your exact position for missing the deadline which is interpreted as deception, bait-and-switch and fraud...

We've been debating whether Tesla is fraudulent because it has missed the deadline and I don't think we will ever be able to persuade one way or another.

We will have to wait for the court to proceed.

On the other subject: If you got into an accident, "Autopilot" principle that requires an alert licensed driver will apply whether there's a malfunction of the automation system or not. Or, in this case the missing of a functioning or missing of a malfunctioning automation system called AEB.

Remember, the owner's manual says clearly that Tesla AEB is not designed to avoid collision. So if you collided, the system has indeed fulfilled its intended design of allowing a collision.

 

[gearchruncher]

I interpret it as a soft deadline because you didn't continue to read the "and" part after "2016".

As of January 20th, 2017, the Tesla autopilot page said:

These active safety technologies, including collision avoidance and automatic emergency braking, will become available in December 2016 and roll out through over-the-air software updates

That's it. In what way can that be interpreted as possibly happening after December 2016? None of those features showed up until March 2017 and the last still isn't here. It was not available in December 2016.

On the other subject: If you got into an accident, "Autopilot" principle that requires an alert licensed driver will apply whether there's a malfunction of the automation system or not. Or, in this case the missing of a functioning or missing of a malfunctioning automation system called AEB.

Remember, the owner's manual says clearly that Tesla AEB is not designed to avoid collision. So if you collided, the system has indeed fulfilled its intended design of allowing a collision.

First. AEB is not AP, as the Tesla AP pages says. Fine, so because you didn't have AEB, the accident would have been much cheaper with it. Sounds like an insurance company has a claim against Tesla given Tesla had said a car had a technology, which they used to come up with rates, but it didn't.

 

[stopcrazypp]

As of January 20th, 2017, the Tesla autopilot page said:

That's it. In what way can that be interpreted as possibly happening after December 2016? None of those features showed up until March 2017 and the last still isn't here. It was not available in December 2016.

First. AEB is not AP, as the Tesla AP pages says. Fine, so because you didn't have AEB, the accident would have been much cheaper with it. Sounds like an insurance company has a claim against Tesla given Tesla had said a car had a technology, which they used to come up with rates, but it didn't.

Again, didn't AEB come out already in April? It was verified by Consumer Reports.

Also, Tesla didn't say the car had AEB back then, in fact they said it didn't, but that will roll out in a software update (which was later than expected).

 

[alcibiades]

Again, didn't AEB come out already in April? It was verified by Consumer Reports.

Also, Tesla didn't say the car had AEB back then, in fact they said it didn't, but that will roll out in a software update (which was later than expected).

Your complete lack of awareness that every defense you make for Tesla attributes deception and duplicity to Tesla is remarkable. I mean, like, wow.

 

[oktane]

Your opinion certainly is valuable and welcome. One problem, though, is that without experiencing the features you list and the progress you quote, you may not have full appreciation of what that progress really is, what are its pros and cons etc. I am not sure you quite accurately appreciate the expectations AP1 and Tesla's words in late 2016 had set vs. what the reality on the ground has been since late December 2016 for AP2 cars. Those with more experience on Tesla cars may be more reliable sources for that type of feedback.

That said, I'm not sure any of that even matters - even if we assume for a moment Tesla has fulfilled by now all/most of their belated AP2 related features (which they have not). For a false advertisement or breach of contract lawsuit fulfilling the promises late may not be sufficient to avoid remedies, given that there will still remain that period when the customer was not getting what they were expecting or were entitled to, thus diminishing the value of the purchase/lease/whatever for that time.

Not to mention if it it were to turn out Tesla made misleading statements in bad faith regarding AP2 in late 2016. That might be a whole different can of worms in its own right, both ethically and legally, for which belated fullfilment could never be a full remedy, as there would have been that original intent to deceive and profit.

Let's be clear on this – Tesla will lose the AP2 lawsuit. There is really no other conclusion any rational person judge or jury can make, other than that Tesla purposefully mislead customers to induce sales. The auto pilot was not functional, not tested, not ready for any validation, and not delivered even to this date. It would be wise of Tesla to settle.

 

[Tam]

Let's be clear on this – Tesla will lose the AP2 lawsuit....

I don't think so.

Owners bought a beta product and by its nature, it's an imperfect and unfinished product.

Owners can complain about missing deadline but it is still a beta product.

There is definitely no case here to sue a beta product!

 

[buttershrimp]

I am curious to see where things are in a year. I think a bigger threat to Tesla is not its owners becoming impatient with progress, but rather, companies that are too aggressive like Uber putting driverless cars on the street and them causing a few very dangerous or high profile accidents... the resulting push for legislation could greatly impede Tesla leading the push to set a high standard in autonomous driving. I know many people on this thread probably don't feel Tesla has been cautious enough, and I like what someone said on this thread that maybe Tesla should have offered people to purchase a spot as a Beta tester with a promise to ensure these testers are able to potentially have a fully autonomous car...

I predict the model 3 launch and more importantly, the semi launch, will tell us a lot more about the future of autonomous driving.... people will still be skeptical after the model 3 launch... but the semi scenario is a big deal... there are likely going to be safety innovations in that launch that make people realize how important the autonomous movement is.... like the beta automatic amphetamine injection for Tesla truck drivers.. no longer will they have to fumble through their bags to get their fix... they just hit the voice command button and say, "play Zeplin" and then the automatic injection of dexedrine into trucker gluteus maximus... that has to increase range by at least 200 miles

 

[⚡️ELECTROMAN⚡️]

Let's be clear on this – Tesla will lose the AP2 lawsuit. There is really no other conclusion any rational person judge or jury can make, other than that Tesla purposefully mislead customers to induce sales. The auto pilot was not functional, not tested, not ready for any validation, and not delivered even to this date. It would be wise of Tesla to settle.

It's going to be interesting. I would love to hear what Elon would say in his own defense. Was he purposefully being deceptive out of desperation? Did he really think his team would meet his expectations? Was he just trying to push them to do the impossible, as he is famous for doing? To me what he promised was a huge risk, but to him probably just another day at the office. That's how he's taken us this far and how he will continue to deliver the future to our door steps.

 

[Tam]

...aggressive like Uber...

I think Tesla fits the definition of the word "aggressive" because it promotes consumers paying for and using its unfinished products.

It wouldn't be aggressive if it would take on Google's original philosophy to release the products once the technology is perfected and once it no longer needs human driving skills and interventions.

Uber is an extreme because it doesn't seem to want to work with its communities but to compete and beat them at all cost.

One such example is: It didn't want to pay for one-time $150 California Autonomous Vehicle Test Application because it argued that theirs are just like Tesla Autopilot cars that don't require such application.

 

[MarcusMaximus]

Let's be clear on this – Tesla will lose the AP2 lawsuit. There is really no other conclusion any rational person judge or jury can make, other than that Tesla purposefully mislead customers to induce sales. The auto pilot was not functional, not tested, not ready for any validation, and not delivered even to this date. It would be wise of Tesla to settle.

Along these lines, it seems like it should be pretty easy for a lawyer to find whether there's previous case law that covers this. Any situation where a customer paid for software that was then delayed from the original promoted date would apply. Has anybody won a suit of that nature before?

 

[fasteddie7]

Am I the only one who bought vehicles to set an example for friends, neighbors, and family to help accelerate adoption of ev? I see all this hate over a feature! It's cool when it works and when it doesn't I simply take over. I care more about what I'm doing for the future for my kids and I don't mind investing a few extra thousand for features when that investment is for the future of the planet not the future of ap. All these lawsuits and unnecessary spending that could have gone to build a better future... Am I alone?

 

[AnxietyRanger]

Am I the only one who bought vehicles to set an example for friends, neighbors, and family to help accelerate adoption of ev? I see all this hate over a feature! It's cool when it works and when it doesn't I simply take over. I care more about what I'm doing for the future for my kids and I don't mind investing a few extra thousand for features when that investment is for the future of the planet not the future of ap. All these lawsuits and unnecessary spending that could have gone to build a better future... Am I alone?

Obviously you are not the only one, but there certainly are plenty of us who thinks Tesla deserves a lot of criticism for their shenanigans (be it counter gate or EAP over-promises or whatnot).

Tesla chose to take these diversions to performance and autonomous that have backfired on them, because they ended up over-promising. If only they'd too have stuck to the mission and also just promised what they can deliver...

 

[MarcusMaximus]

Obviously you are not the only one, but there certainly are plenty of us who thinks Tesla deserves a lot of criticism for their shenanigans (be it counter gate or EAP over-promises or whatnot).

Tesla chose to take these diversions to performance and autonomous that have backfired on them, because they ended up over-promising. If only they'd too have stuck to the mission and also just promised what they can deliver...

Some parts of that criticism is more deserved than others, of course. Fair enough that they missed their target for EAP by several months(and counting), but there also seems to be a lot of people really angry about them missing a timeline on FSD that they never gave.

 

[fasteddie7]

 

[Bladerskb]

So who knows when the "roll out" process will be done? Tesla could claim it began to "roll out" some unfinished programming codes and the final desirable features might have not reached just yet.

It literally said in the order page "rolled out to to your car via an over-the-air update in december 2016'
You keep mentioning roll out but the roll out is supposed to happen via ONE UPDATE. Singular not plural.

AN update

IN december 2016

This is straight up deception because here we are 9 months later and there are none of the listed EAP features.

@AnxietyRanger

 

[Tam]

...All these lawsuits and unnecessary spending that could have gone to build a better future... Am I alone?

You sound like an idealist which is fine and good but not everyone thinks the same way as you do.

I guess some people prefer a big bold clear harsh disclaimer such as: Timely activation is unknown for a foreseeable future.

They just want to hold Tesla responsible for mentioning the month and year of activation.

"Tesla's Enhanced Autopilot software is expected to complete validation and be rolled out to your car via an over-the-air update in December 2016, subject to regulatory approval."

Additionally, not everyone likes Tesla or EV.

Some might think that they have changed their mind and then bought it.

But they then changed their mind again and regretted it.

Also, some lawyers try to make a living out of finding every ambiguity from Tesla or any complaints from owners.

So, is it about the principle of

1) brute force of clarity to make sure to scare potential owners away
2) upholding truth that has no ambiguity
3) Anti-Tesla: any ambiguity, any dissatisfaction is a cause for lawsuit
4) making a buck?

 

[⚡️ELECTROMAN⚡️]

Am I the only one who bought vehicles to set an example for friends, neighbors, and family to help accelerate adoption of ev? I see all this hate over a feature! It's cool when it works and when it doesn't I simply take over. I care more about what I'm doing for the future for my kids and I don't mind investing a few extra thousand for features when that investment is for the future of the planet not the future of ap. All these lawsuits and unnecessary spending that could have gone to build a better future... Am I alone?

I agree with you on this. I do think Tesla/Musk needs to be kept check and the people complaining and filing lawsuits will only make Tesla a better company. I don't think it will break them. I bought my car for the same reasons you did and I don't care much about AP, but that only makes us biased. I think Tesla owes people an explanation for why AP2 isn't progressing as quickly as they were suggesting it would.

 

[buttershrimp]

Can't we all just get along?