Elon, Where is the FSD features you promised?

[MarcusMaximus]

I think you are the one doing the misrepresenting here. I don't see anyone expecting FSD to have been ready today/tomorrow. What they expected was Tesla to be true to their word and have FSD only features out by today/tomorrow, as announced by their CEO...

"Elon said six months ago that FSD would be ready in about 3 months, but definitely in 6 months."

^That is the exact statement I was responding to. And that comment was in response to someone talking about the actual full self driving. And, like I said, it's a claim I've seen around here a lot(including by the OP of this thread).

If you're upset about not getting any part of the FSD-specific features by today, then I have no issue with that; it's late(one day late so far, but still late). But people are mixing in expectations of the feature being fully complete by today, which was never stated, promised, or even hinted at.

 

[AnxietyRanger]

"Elon said six months ago that FSD would be ready in about 3 months, but definitely in 6 months."

^That is the exact statement I was responding to. And that comment was in response to someone talking about the actual full self driving. And, like I said, it's a claim I've seen around here a lot(including by the OP of this thread).

If you're upset about not getting any part of the FSD-specific features by today, then I have no issue with that; it's late(one day late so far, but still late). But people are mixing in expectations of the feature being fully complete by today, which was never stated, promised, or even hinted at.

Frankly, I still don't think anyone on this thread is claiming or thinking a full FSD was promised by today. Even if someone said something like that you quoted, IMO the sense I have is that it is just shorthand and taken in the context does not mean what you say it means. I think an overwhelming majority of commenters on this thread did understand full FSD would not ship in six months, to the point that any possible minority thinking otherwise is irrelevant... We can agree to disagree, of course.

Now, as @lunitiks said, on EAP a lot more people expected a lot more due to Tesla's comms on the matter...

As for being upset about FSD being a day late, personally I am not. I checked the FSD box will full understanding that it possibly will never work beyond a glorified Level 3 and that it will take a long time. Mind you, I did not have this understanding because Tesla told me (or us) so, but simply because I consider the sensor suite so limited.

What I am upset about is the constant stream of over-promise, under-deliver from Tesla, as well as the rather questionable maneuvering around many of the issues. I would very much like them to fix that aspect of their business and get back to the under-promise, over-deliver they were perhaps known for sometime back in early 2014. I'd be just fine with delivering what is promised exactly and nothing more too.

 

[Dborn]

While they offer FSD, knowing that it will not be reality for a considerable period of time, they should not be taking money for it. People who order it with their cars should be guaranteed a price for activativation, which should be what they are charging now. Actually taking money for this at present is dishonest. That gets over many of the problems. Those that have already paid should get a refund and the same guarantee. That would be the ethical and honest way out of this mess.
Those that did not order it with their cars would then be charged a higher price for later activation as they have done with other features.

 

[AnxietyRanger]

While they offer FSD, knowing that it will not be reality for a considerable period of time, they should not be taking money for it. People who order it with their cars should be guaranteed a price for activativation, which should be what they are charging now. Actually taking money for this at present is dishonest. That gets over many of the problems. Those that have already paid should get a refund and the same guarantee. That would be the ethical and honest way out of this mess.
Those that did not order it with their cars would then be charged a higher price for later activation as they have done with other features.

Good idea.

 

[Canuck]

I don't see any reason to denigrate people who are disappointed about AP2.

Neither do I. Tesla has a lot to account for. But the posts that criticized the way the OP presented his complaint were fair criticism and therefore he was not "denigrated" -- according to the definition of that term, at least in my view.

 

[J1mbo]

OPs disappointment

This is the bit that I don't get.

OP is "disappointed" that a company they have never bought a product from has made unfulfilled claims about products that the OP will never buy.

Surely there are more important things in life to worry about.

 

[AnxietyRanger]

This is the bit that I don't get.

OP is "disappointed" that a company they have never bought a product from has made unfulfilled claims about products that the OP will never buy.

Surely there are more important things in life to worry about.

OPs buying history is completely irrelevant. The idea that our ability to discuss or critique facts is somehow based on our purchases is ludicrous. If anything, a purchase or investment decisions might make a person more partial than impartial... those without anything in the game are often the most objective.

But you are also missing the real shame about OP. Had Tesla operated differently, I believe there is a big chance OP and others like him would be more open to buying a Tesla in the future than they are now. I think this is hurting Tesla's credibility and that's a shame. There are countless mentiones of people disillusioned by Tesla's continued over-promise, under-deliver. These are people that came to these forums because Tesla was interesting and then things turned sour for them.

Including people who have made the purchase(s).

 

[S4WRXTTCS]

Neither do I. Tesla has a lot to account for. But the posts that criticized the way the OP presented his complaint were fair criticism and therefore he was not "denigrated" -- according to the definition of that term, at least in my view.

The OP is just so incessant. He's like some dude who follows you around to tell you "I told you so, I told you so", and "I've been saying this for months".

It's funny because he shares a lot of my own skepticism of HW2, and the limitations of it. So it's not like he really says much that I don't agree with on a technical side of things.

But, he doesn't understand the crowd he's talking to. Or the marketing element of Tesla, or even how things really are in todays world. That people are more than ever willing to buy into hype. It really sucks, but that's how things are.

I wish he could just be excited by the technology and not poo-poo Tesla all the time. Where he could understand that in this forum, were excited by where all this is going.

The fact that he doesn't have the car speaks volumes about his attitude. For a lot of us here Tesla is still the only game in town. That's it's not just a matter of autonomous driving, but autonomous+electric. It's not even that, but autonomous+electric+superchargers. For some it's autonomous+electric+superchargers+towingmycamper.

He doesn't have the ownership perspective. To see how amazing this car was without all this autonomous driving discussion. The car with YOU the driver without any of this stuff.

Hell I like my Model S a lot even to the degree that it might just be the best car I've owned. But, I have a document on my computer calling it a rattle on wheels. I also think FSD was the second worst lie sold to the public last year. Everyone knows what the first one is.

He also doesn't get that there a lot of UNKNOWNS in this. When it really comes down to it, it doesn't matter if the SW isn't ready. The framework for regulatory doesn't even exist in most areas. So how can Tesla or Audi activate anything beyond L2? The A8 he talks about isn't going to have Level 3 stuff activated at launch because nothing regulatory is set up.

I'm excited by the Audi admittedly because it's Level 3, and it's READY to be turned on. This puts a lot of pressure on governments to figure this stuff out. This opens up the path for Tesla.

Lastly we all need to be a little less obsessed with what Elon says. Hell if you were to take everything as the gossip truth you've to assume you were a simulation. Good luck with your life thinking that.

 

[aWalkingShadow]

A lot of people here seem to think that bladerskb has an agenda against Tesla. However, if you look at his posts on Reddit 8 months ago, you'll see that he was actually very pro Tesla at one point.
Tesla Self Driving Cars blows Uber away, rivals Google's • r/SelfDrivingCars
Tesla Full Self-Driving Demonstration • r/SelfDrivingCars

My guess is that he started to doubt Tesla's self-driving program after seeing the California Disengagement report.
In what area is Tesla far ahead of the competition? And why will Tesla stay ahead? • r/teslamotors

Also, if you read bladerskb's posts, he isn't an Audi shill. He just cares about self-driving cars, and his post history shows that he believes Nissan, GM, Volvo, Google as well as Audi show promise.
Audi To Launch A Fully-Autonomous Vehicle By 2021, Level 3 in 2018 • r/SelfDrivingCars

 

[AnxietyRanger]

The fact that he doesn't have the car speaks volumes about his attitude. For a lot of us here Tesla is still the only game in town. That's it's not just a matter of autonomous driving, but autonomous+electric. It's not even that, but autonomous+electric+superchargers. For some it's autonomous+electric+superchargers+towingmycamper.

He doesn't have the ownership perspective. To see how amazing this car was without all this autonomous driving discussion. The car with YOU the driver without any of this stuff.

I still think the ownership perspective is irrelevant in analyzing differences between companies and products. What matters are the facts. They are not changed by ownership.

The fact that people want autonomous+electric+superchargers and are willing to put up or even defend misleading marketing to get that, would not change the fact of misleading marketing, if such misleading marketing exists. In fact, it would only illustrate a bias against that fact, if ownership causes one to ignore or belittle that fact.

One can discuss and dislike misleading marketing, and its effects, without owning a Tesla. It is even possible one can more easily do that if they don't own a Tesla (or TSLA). If what you say is true, owning a Tesla seems to cause irrelevant concerns to cloud that conversation, as there are irrelevant but conflicting interests at play.

Misleading marketing or over-promise/under-deliver really is a fact-based conversation. Those facts don't change based on whether or not we own a Tesla.

Anyway, I own a Tesla (my second), and I fully share OPs concerns.

 

[lunitiks]

Ordered a hamburger.

Got picture of cow.

 

[FlatSix911]

 

[AnxietyRanger]

Reading Tesla's FSD disclaimer now actually shows it too is rather misleading. It sounds like if only there wasn't a lack regulatory approval and software validation, FSD would be in our cars. Why not just say it is not done yet and they don't know when?

Still, I think with FSD - had Elon not made promises about 6 months on Twitter - Tesla at least had some disclaimers. With EAP and some EAP-related safety features Tesla was, frankly, giving a wholly different picture to us in October-December 2016...

 

[J1mbo]

OPs buying history is completely irrelevant. The idea that our ability to discuss or critique facts is somehow based on our purchases is ludicrous. If anything, a purchase or investment decisions might make a person more partial than impartial... those without anything in the game are often the most objective.

But you are also missing the real shame about OP. Had Tesla operated differently, I believe there is a big chance OP and others like him would be more open to buying a Tesla in the future than they are now. I think this is hurting Tesla's credibility and that's a shame. There are countless mentiones of people disillusioned by Tesla's continued over-promise, under-deliver. These are people that came to these forums because Tesla was interesting and then things turned sour for them.

Including people who have made the purchase(s).

There are plenty of owners on here who have issues with EAP and FSD, and who are very open with their qualified opinions.

But I am still curious as to the nature of the "disappointment"?

 

[AnxietyRanger]

There are plenty of owners on here who have issues with EAP and FSD, and who are very open with their qualified opinions.

But I am still curious as to the nature of the "disappointment"?

You do not need to own EAP/FSD to be qualified to comment on Tesla's marketing and progress of the features. There are other ways in gaining requisite insight to be qualified - and EAP/FSD ownership does not guarantee said insight anyway.

As for the nature of the disappointment, I would assume disappointment in over-promise, under-deliver is rather self-explanatory.

 

[Canuck]

As for the nature of the disappointment, I would assume disappointment in over-promise, under-deliver is rather self-explanatory.

It might be self-explanatory to you, but I think for a lot of us disappointment is a word that applies to subjective complaints -- not objective ones. For instance, I guess you can say that I'm disappointed that no one has been to Mars but that seems an odd use of the word whereas saying "I'm disappointed my flight to Mars was cancelled" makes sense.

Then again, I'm Canadian and I'm disappointed Trump is President -- so perhaps it does apply to objective complaints...

 

[S4WRXTTCS]

I still think the ownership perspective is irrelevant in analyzing differences between companies and products. What matters are the facts. They are not changed by ownership.

The fact that people want autonomous+electric+superchargers and are willing to put up or even defend misleading marketing to get that, would not change the fact of misleading marketing, if such misleading marketing exists. In fact, it would only illustrate a bias against that fact, if ownership causes one to ignore or belittle that fact.

One can discuss and dislike misleading marketing, and its effects, without owning a Tesla. It is even possible one can more easily do that if they don't own a Tesla (or TSLA). If what you say is true, owning a Tesla seems to cause irrelevant concerns to cloud that conversation, as there are irrelevant but conflicting interests at play.

Misleading marketing or over-promise/under-deliver really is a fact-based conversation. Those facts don't change based on whether or not we own a Tesla.

Anyway, I own a Tesla (my second), and I fully share OPs concerns.

Sure in analyzing one specific element such as technologies used for self-driving.

But, it matters a lot when knowing how to speak to an audience mostly consisting of owners. Like you I fully share his concerns, but I find that he often isn't taken seriously.

Now admittedly like you say some of the responses are from a few people on here who are blinded by the marketing side of the car. Where they are fanboi's completely blinded by <insert reason here> that mark a dislike to anything the least bit critical about Tesla. I'm not concerned about their opinion, and I would defend the OP from them.

Owning is important to put things into perspective regardless of being positive or negative. As an owner does something that Elon says on twitter have much meaning to me? A little, but not to the point where I'd consider that post as an official Tesla statement. To me it's just Elon trying to answer someone's question with the information he had at the time.

One has to be following pretty obsessively to even catch that tweet. I kind of felt the OP cherry picked it because it was so easy to make fun of.

I absolutely detest the FSD option. At best it's giving Tesla a zero interest loan, and at worst it's vaporware.

But, even as negative to it that I am I can't see that tweet as being marketing. I'm not going to hold it against Tesla that Elon occasionally talks to the customer. Sure others would say it's all purposefully designed marketing.

 

[AnxietyRanger]

One has to be following pretty obsessively to even catch that tweet. I kind of felt the OP cherry picked it because it was so easy to make fun of.

I absolutely detest the FSD option (that Tesla is selling this unknown), and even I can't see that in any shape that tweet being marketing.

I'm not going to hold it against Tesla that Elon occasionally talks to the customer. Sure others would say it's all purposefully designed marketing.

I guess this here is where we really disagree. I think Elon answering customers is part of Tesla's marketing and subject to the same benefits for Tesla - and thus the same responsibilities - as any marketing.

And, let's be real. If this was the ONLY time Elon got a timeline wrong on Twitter, we would not be talking about this. There is a pattern of timelines that he puts out there that routinely are missed.

 

[⚡️ELECTROMAN⚡️]

I also think FSD was the second worst lie sold to the public last year. Everyone knows what the first one is.

Second only to Donald Trump? That's pretty bad.

 

[S4WRXTTCS]

I guess this here is where we really disagree. I think Elon answering customers is part of Tesla's marketing and subject to the same benefits for Tesla - and thus the same responsibilities - as any marketing.

And, let's be real. If this was the ONLY time Elon got a timeline wrong on Twitter, we would not be talking about this. There is a pattern of timelines that he puts out there that routinely are missed.

I can definitely see why people like yourself would see it as marketing. But, I tend to give a free pass on that one. It never did make sense to me.

I don't really mind missed timelines if it's understandable. The tech world is notorious for missing time lines. In SW development it's often almost impossible to predict. It should be padded, but Elon doesn't seem to pad.

As to EAP I felt like it was a purposefully designed lie because they were between a rock and a hard place. The company survival depended partly on the lie. I don't think people really realize just how quick Tesla is moving. Where any hiccup could cause them to stumble.

The FSD was just unnecessary, and I'll never agree to those that say it was good idea. It was a complete disaster of a epic proportions. We haven't seen the conclusion of it yet, but it's not going to be good.

The FSD option more than anything else is why I have no brand bias for my next electric car.