Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register
This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Elon offered an update on FSD during the Q2 earnings call just now:

We are making great progress on FSD. Progress is not easy to see because it is at a foundational software level. It ends up being two steps forward, one step back situation. But over time, if you do two steps forward and one step back, you move forward. So, I am highly confident that the cars will be capable of FSD, with the FSD computer and the cameras. I am confident they will be able to drive themselves with a safety level substantially greater than the average person.
 
Hold your horses on that release candidate. Elon said hopefully by beta 11. He said hopefully. That is basically the equivalent of no way in hell will it be 11 or 12.
Haha. Gotta be careful about taking me seriously...have to take my comments in context.

(Presumably depth map implementation & fusion will take place in version 11 or 12...assuming it is possible with existing compute.)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: qdeathstar
Can someone decode for me what Elon is saying here in the earnings call?

Elon: Any given [FSD subscription] price is going to be wrong. We will adjust it over time as we see the value proposition make sense for people. I am not thinking about this a lot right now. We have to make FSD work in order for it to be a compelling value proposition otherwise people are kind of betting on the future. Like right now, does it make sense for someone to do the FSD subscription? It's debatable. Once we have FSD widely deployed then the value proposition will be clear. At that point, basically everyone will use it or will be a rare individual who doesn't.
 
Last edited:
He's having the debate we've had a thousand times on this forum. Sounds like he wouldn't buy FSD

Yeah. It does not really inspire confidence when the CEO is not sure if he would buy his own product.

I read the quote as saying, paraphrasing: "we made up a price for FSD sub because we don't really know what it is worth yet. Once we actually finish FSD and deploy it wide, then we will know it's true market value and we can adjust the price accordingly. Right now, I don't think FSD subscription is really worth it but I think when we finish FSD, it will be and then everybody will want the FSD sub."
 
Can someone decode for me what Elon is saying here in the earnings call?
Any given [FSD subscription] price is going to be wrong.
Translation: FSD price will need to match with the technology delivered.

We will adjust it over time as we see the value proposition make sense for people.
Translation: FSD price will need to match with the technology delivered.

I am not thinking about this a lot right now.
Translation: I've raised the price too much and few are buying, so I'm done jacking up the price.

We have to make FSD work in order for it to be a compelling value proposition otherwise people are kind of betting on the future.
Translation: FSD isn't worth the money right now, unless you buy a hope and a dream.

Like right now, does it make sense for someone to do the FSD subscription? It's debatable.
Translation: Not too many people buying the subscription right now.

Once we have FSD widely deployed then the value proposition will be clear.
Translation: Few are buying FSD, but many will buy when it is truly full self driving.

At that point, basically everyone will use it or will be a rare individual who doesn't.
Translation: FSD is going to be great.
 
Can someone decode for me what Elon is saying here in the earnings call?
My question is what does FSD mean in this context? Does he mean FSD beta or the FSD where the cars drives itself with a safety level substantially greater than the average person? I'm in full agreement if he means the latter though the value in that seems too obvious to even bother saying.
 
I did not listen the earnings call, but read the following summary about FSD from CNN
While Musk thinks full-self-driving subscriptions will produce significant revenue starting next year, "right now ... does it make sense for somebody to do FSD subscription? I think it's debatable."

The “full-self-driving subscriptions will produce significant revenue starting next year” worries me: should I read this as public FSD beta not coming in 2021?
 
The “full-self-driving subscriptions will produce significant revenue starting next year” worries me: should I read this as public FSD beta not coming in 2021?

Here is the actual transcript:

In terms of FSD subscription, we were able to launch a [Indiscernible] driving subscription last month. And we expect it to build slowly. And then gather a lot of momentum over time. Obviously, we need to have the Full Self-Driving build widely available for it really to take off at high rates, and we're making a lot of progress there. So yes, I think FSD subscription will be a significant factor probably next year.

so yes - it is even worse “probably next year”
 
Colin Rusch
Thanks so much guys. Can you speak to the attach ed rates for FSD so far and where you're targeting in terms of the subscription levels?

Elon Musk
Yeah, it's not worth commenting on right now, it's not meaningful. We really need Full Self-Driving, at least the Beta to be widely available so anyone who wants it can get it. Otherwise, it'll be pointless to read anything into where things are right now.
So it does sounds like they're still planning to make FSD beta available to everyone.
Colin Rusch
And then just the follow-up there is about the kin to the regulatory environment, keeping up with the technology. Are you seeing meaningful evolution in terms of the regulators really understanding the technology and beginning to set some standards here sometime in the near-term?

Elon Musk
At least in the U.S. we don't see regulation as the fundamental limiter. We've obviously got to make it work and then demonstrate that the reliability is significantly in excess of the average human driver for it to be allowed -- use it without paying attention to the road. But I think we have a massive fleet. It will be, I think, straightforward to make the arguments on statistical grounds, just based on the number of interventions, especially in events that would result in a crash. At scale, it will have billions of miles of travel to be able to show that it is the safety of the car with Autopilot on is a 100% or 200% or more safer than the average human driver.
And it sounds like they plan on using disengagement data from customers using FSD beta to prove safety. I wish someone would ask him about the plan to stop people from getting complacent once the system can go thousands of miles without an intervention. Otherwise it seems like a good plan.
 
  • Like
Reactions: diplomat33
So it does sounds like they're still planning to make FSD beta available to everyone.

And it sounds like they plan on using disengagement data from customers using FSD beta to prove safety. I wish someone would ask him about the plan to stop people from getting complacent once the system can go thousands of miles without an intervention. Otherwise it seems like a good plan.
Next time someone brings up regulatory roadblocks, we should all remember this quote:

Elon Musk: "At least in the U.S. we don't see regulation as the fundamental limiter. We've obviously got to make it work..."
 
Elon Musk
At least in the U.S. we don't see regulation as the fundamental limiter. We've obviously got to make it work and then demonstrate that the reliability is significantly in excess of the average human driver for it to be allowed -- use it without paying attention to the road. But I think we have a massive fleet. It will be, I think, straightforward to make the arguments on statistical grounds, just based on the number of interventions, especially in events that would result in a crash. At scale, it will have billions of miles of travel to be able to show that it is the safety of the car with Autopilot on is a 100% or 200% or more safer than the average human driver.

It might be worth mentioning that the "billions of miles of disengagement data that shows safety 100-200% greater than average human" is Elon's personal safety metric. It's a valid metric. But AFAIK, regulators have not settled on a firm AV safety metric yet as AV safety standards are still being written. Certainly, States allow AV deployment now without requiring that companies show billions of miles of data to prove 100-200% safer than average human. Regulators could agree with Elon's metric or they could require higher safety. In fact, that's sort of part of the problem that many feel is hindering wide deployment of AVs in the US. With the lack of uniform regulations and standards, every company is coming up with their own safety metric that they think is good enough for wide deployment.