FSD discussion

[DarthPierce]

Either. Anything that involves voice recognition once we are moving. It works when parked on wifi and the streaming and navigation themselves work on lte. Just the voice part fails 95% of the time. It started in like November.

In case anyone was wondering, it was not related to FSD - This was ultimately resolved by Tesla replacing the "Connectivity Board - Car Computer (HW3)"

 

[hpiv]

I put more faith in a vague reply than poorly documented data. I made a couple of posts about it on the main investor thread, you can see my thoughts on the modeling that likely went into the Yipit data here: Tesla, TSLA & the Investment World: the Perpetual Investors' Roundtable

tl;dr is that all Yipit likely knows is they obtained the credit card data of 3,500 people who had ever made a payment to Tesla, and then after an arbitrary 45 days found that 2% of them had subscribed to FSD. But they have no way of knowing who in that pool actually had the trial. There are also glaring errors in the data, like showing the first conversion on 4/12 when the trial had barely been running for 2 weeks. Who subscribes to a service 2 weeks into a 1 month free trial?

I do agree that their data can't really be used to draw any conclusions, but that doesn't mean Elon's reply is particularly useful, especially considering his past lies or distortions when addressing things like this.

 

[willow_hiller]

that doesn't mean Elon's reply is particularly useful, especially considering his past lies or distortions when addressing things like this

Elon has set ambitious targets that he's failed to meet before (see Solar Roof, numerous autonomy milestones, etc.), but I find that more often it's other people lying about or distorting things Elon has said, rather than the other way around.

Do you have any evidence of Elon saying something he knew was not true at the time he said it?

 

[hpiv]

Elon has set ambitious targets that he's failed to meet before (see Solar Roof, numerous autonomy milestones, etc.), but I find that more often it's other people lying about or distorting things Elon has said, rather than the other way around.

Do you have any evidence of Elon saying something he knew was not true at the time he said it?

"Demand outpaces production" as sales were starting to drop and Tesla prices took a nosedive and it still didn't grow deliveries?

 

[willow_hiller]

"Demand outpaces production" as sales were starting to drop and Tesla prices took a nosedive and it still didn't grow deliveries?

Price is not a function of demand alone. It's a function of both supply and demand, which are sloped curves with respect to price and quantity.

Increasing the supply, like Tesla was doing as Berlin and Austin came online, will always reduce equilibrium price. It's really basic economics:

And by decreasing the price Tesla was able to meet the quantity demanded.

You haven't caught Elon in a lie at all.

 

[alexxs88]

Let's be realistic, it's deceiving. They were adding capacity in the tens of percent compared to existing and a company the size of Tesla has a rough idea of how supply-demand-price curves look like. So when you say "demand outpaces production" as the CEO of a huge company, while on the verge of adding loads of production capacity, you can definitely see enough into the future to add a "BUT" in there as a caveat for the future or, better yet, just don't say anything.

 

[willow_hiller]

Let's be realistic, it's deceiving. They were adding capacity in the tens of percent compared to existing and a company the size of Tesla has a rough idea of how supply-demand-price curves look like.

I don't think it's deceiving at all. Elon has frequently talked about demand being "quasi-infinite" and so we know he's talking about the slope of the demand curve. He knows that as price decreases, quantity demanded will increase far faster than supply can keep up.

The media you consume has told you over and over that Elon is a lier. And they've told that lie long enough it's started to sound like the truth. It's a large reason why I bought the stock and still think TSLA is a great investment. In most cases, the market is efficient and the price of a stock is fair. But enough people are deluded by the lies told about TSLA that the price is lower than it should be, and there's an arbitrage opportunity.

 

[nativewolf]

Elon has set ambitious targets that he's failed to meet before (see Solar Roof, numerous autonomy milestones, etc.), but I find that more often it's other people lying about or distorting things Elon has said, rather than the other way around.

Do you have any evidence of Elon saying something he knew was not true at the time he said it?

So so so many. Anything Semi related in the last 5 years. Anything 4680 in the last 3 years. I am particularily aggreived about batteries and the semi so I pay attention to those.

Since this is the FSD thread...it's rife. He knew they were not close to chasing 9s but was selling license with the explicit promise that they would deliver FSD. It will never happen for those cars. It was a heckuva way to goose profits though. Why are profit margins under pressure? Does anyone buy FSD license anymore?

 

[alexxs88]

I don't think it's deceiving at all. Elon has frequently talked about demand being "quasi-infinite" and so we know he's talking about the slope of the demand curve. He knows that as price decreases, quantity demanded will increase far faster than supply can keep up.

The media you consume has told you over and over that Elon is a lier.

The bolded part is a cheap attack and could be returned in exactly the same manner. No, this is me judging what Elon said and the results.

The first paragraph is not valid, in my opinion. With that logic, any product in the world has a "quasi-infinite" demand, but normally you'd expect the CEO of a company to refer to demand in the context of prices at which the business can still run. So yes, Rolex has "quasi-infinite demand" if they'd reprice everything at 1$, same as Mercedes or virtually any other company in the world. A CEO talking in this context about the demand level of his company is at best incompetent and at worst actively trying to deceive investors.

 

[willow_hiller]

So so so many. Anything Semi related in the last 5 years. Anything 4680 in the last 3 years. I am particularily aggreived about batteries and the semi so I pay attention to those.

Since this is the FSD thread...it's rife. He knew they were not close to chasing 9s but was selling license with the explicit promise that they would deliver FSD. It will never happen for those cars. It was a heckuva way to goose profits though. Why are profit margins under pressure? Does anyone buy FSD license anymore?

You could argue that Elon deludes himself with overly optimistic targets. But you have no evidence that he didn't believe in the forecasts and projections he was making.

You're forgetting that Tesla isn't just one man. He doesn't do all the jobs himself; there would need to be internal comms discussing lies told and what to say publicly about them. If internally, there was evidence that directly contradicted Elon, it would have leaked to the press a million times over.

 

[nativewolf]

You could argue that Elon deludes himself with overly optimistic targets. But you have no evidence that he didn't believe in the forecasts and projections he was making.

You're forgetting that Tesla isn't just one man. He doesn't do all the jobs himself; there would need to be internal comms discussing lies told and what to say publicly about them. If internally, there was evidence that directly contradicted Elon, it would have leaked to the press a million times over.

Would you want anyone as CEO who was so stupid as to delude himself over and over again? That's sort of the definition of insanity. Serious question.

Or you can assume he's not insane. In which case he's lying. Over and over again. When you know that he has only 100 people tasked with 4680 than we KNOW that they will not meet 4680 production goals. CAN NOT HAPPEN= ALL 4680 DISCUSSIONS WERE COMPLETE BS. When they have not purchased a site for a Semi factory and yet says semi production coming within 18 months..YOU KNOW HE IS LYING. Elon constantly lies. Like trump it is so frequent and so egregious that it blends into gross exaggerations. He completely took his eyes off the road 5 years ago to focus on FSD and it's not worked. 2017 we did Hornsdale proving nearly inexhaustible demand for battery. What did Elon do...FSD and it's not worked. With the FSD investment he could have bought 2 miners, built 3 LFP plants in China, added 1000 engineers on 4680 like we should have had, and would have a huge moat on battery/energy storage. I've been writing since I joined that sustainability is about batteries. It's always been and will remain. We have to hold those pesky electrons in place, it is simple first order principle. Batteries not FSD is the key to sustainability and Tesla absolutely dropped the ball, IMO.

As far as income/profits I don't see how someone looks at Uber- losing money hand over fist and not really growing user base and says, yeah just cut drivers and we're golden. It's just a bizarre take on a business model that can't scale. It can't manage daily commuting and if it can't do that you can't really impact car ownership greatly. Sort of chicken and egg issue. Otherwise we are stuck in an Uber+ model but not a societal transformation (which battery storage at scale will be).

 

[alexxs88]

We have to hold those pesky electrons in place, it is simple first order principle. Batteries not FSD is the key to sustainability and Tesla absolutely dropped the ball, IMO.

Totally agreed. AI is another company and shouldn't use the profits from the first with no consideration to the reinvestments required by the car business in order to keep its margins alive.

However, Elon is desperate for attention. So AI is the hottest thing right now and Elon feels the need to be in the middle of it. xAI / Grok are too inconsequential right now and don't have anything special to show, so naturally all the push is being done on FSD. That's why I don't believe it's anywhere close to being ready, it's been pushed forward by car sales dropping and the focus of the world being on AI at the moment.

 

[gforce2002]

Would you want anyone as CEO who was so stupid as to delude himself over and over again? That's sort of the definition of insanity. Serious question.

Or you can assume he's not insane. In which case he's lying. Over and over again. When you know that he has only 100 people tasked with 4680 than we KNOW that they will not meet 4680 production goals. CAN NOT HAPPEN= ALL 4680 DISCUSSIONS WERE COMPLETE BS. When they have not purchased a site for a Semi factory and yet says semi production coming within 18 months..YOU KNOW HE IS LYING. Elon constantly lies. Like trump it is so frequent and so egregious that it blends into gross exaggerations. He completely took his eyes off the road 5 years ago to focus on FSD and it's not worked. 2017 we did Hornsdale proving nearly inexhaustible demand for battery. What did Elon do...FSD and it's not worked. With the FSD investment he could have bought 2 miners, built 3 LFP plants in China, added 1000 engineers on 4680 like we should have had, and would have a huge moat on battery/energy storage. I've been writing since I joined that sustainability is about batteries. It's always been and will remain. We have to hold those pesky electrons in place, it is simple first order principle. Batteries not FSD is the key to sustainability and Tesla absolutely dropped the ball, IMO.

As far as income/profits I don't see how someone looks at Uber- losing money hand over fist and not really growing user base and says, yeah just cut drivers and we're golden. It's just a bizarre take on a business model that can't scale. It can't manage daily commuting and if it can't do that you can't really impact car ownership greatly. Sort of chicken and egg issue. Otherwise we are stuck in an Uber+ model but not a societal transformation (which battery storage at scale will be).

I could not have said this better. Spot on.

 

[willow_hiller]

Would you want anyone as CEO who was so stupid as to delude himself over and over again? That's sort of the definition of insanity. Serious question.

Elon's companies have time and time again done what others have said is downright impossible. The first step to doing something impossible is deciding to try it. Has he had major failures and setbacks? Absolutely. But just because they failed doesn't mean the attempt was deceitful.

 

[nativewolf]

Elon's companies have time and time again done what others have said is downright impossible. The first step to doing something impossible is deciding to try it. Has he had major failures and setbacks? Absolutely. But just because they failed doesn't mean the attempt was deceitful.

It's one thing to try and fail. It's another to lie about trying. They were not trying to build the Semi. They had no facility nor the batteries, he knew that- he knew he was 5 years out at best. They were never serious, and still are not, about the 4680. 100 people is not a serious effort, it is a token effort of the tiniest amount.

That's the difference. The company mission is sustainability of transport/energy. Not AI which has a huge detrimental impact on the environment as we consume rafts of energy to power datacenters that are built on open lands.

 

[willow_hiller]

The company mission is sustainability of transport/energy. Not AI

AI has been a part of achieving the company's mission since 2016. There's an entire section on autonomy in the Master Plan Part 2: https://www.tesla.com/blog/master-plan-part-deux

It's more sustainable to have one shared electric vehicle that can drive 24/7 than it is to have a dozen that sit in parking lots and garages all day.

 

[nativewolf]

AI has been a part of achieving the company's mission since 2016. There's an entire section on autonomy in the Master Plan Part 2: https://www.tesla.com/blog/master-plan-part-deux

It's more sustainable to have one shared electric vehicle that can drive 24/7 than it is to have a dozen that sit in parking lots and garages all day.

There is the assumption...that assumption was built on Uber and TaaS pumped by Tony Seba. It is not built on the reality of transportation- as anyone studying transportation will know. You don't have to study transport patterns to sell EVs other than to make sure the BATTERIES have enough range to give a consumer over 200 miles of range. Thats it, an EV will replace most ICE traffic. Replacing 1 commuter car with an RT/AI will require, in most urban areas 1 RT or maybe make 2 trips so 1 RT per 2 commuting trips. FAR better to build better shared mobility. FSD should make driving much safer, it will be great to read a book as the car drives you home. That's clearly the value. RT will be Uber+. It's a great business for someone that sells extra services so - GOOGLE. Google should love RT, people traveling needing to make decisions on what hotel, what coffee shop, what dinner options; people not wanting to park who can be shown ads for all the other errand options, people going out on the town who may be shown ads for bar specials, dancing, other recreational fun. That's going to be why most people use a RT. That's what Waymo sees. That's pretty clear and they are building to that and that seems spot on for Google. In fact I think that Google could maybe run a RT service at a loss just made up on ads.

 

[gforce2002]

There is the assumption...that assumption was built on Uber and TaaS pumped by Tony Seba. It is not built on the reality of transportation- as anyone studying transportation will know. You don't have to study transport patterns to sell EVs other than to make sure the BATTERIES have enough range to give a consumer over 200 miles of range. Thats it, an EV will replace most ICE traffic. Replacing 1 commuter car with an RT/AI will require, in most urban areas 1 RT or maybe make 2 trips so 1 RT per 2 commuting trips. FAR better to build better shared mobility. FSD should make driving much safer, it will be great to read a book as the car drives you home. That's clearly the value. RT will be Uber+. It's a great business for someone that sells extra services so - GOOGLE. Google should love RT, people traveling needing to make decisions on what hotel, what coffee shop, what dinner options; people not wanting to park who can be shown ads for all the other errand options, people going out on the town who may be shown ads for bar specials, dancing, other recreational fun. That's going to be why most people use a RT. That's what Waymo sees. That's pretty clear and they are building to that and that seems spot on for Google. In fact I think that Google could maybe run a RT service at a loss just made up on ads.

Exactly. The same number of people need to go the same number of places so RT does nothing to change this. In fact, then you would have a bunch of RTs running around empty as they go between rides, so traffic would actually be worse than if people were taking their own cars. Like said above, RTs are just Uber without a driver. Hardly a society-changing innovation.

Anything that does not increase passenger density is not really anything innovative. Now if we were talking about a multi passenger (maybe 8-10) autonomous van-like vehicle that used a flexible AI generated pickup/drop off route to most efficiently move most people around with the least resources, now we’re talking.

 

[replicant]

Now if we were talking about a multi passenger (maybe 8-10) autonomous van-like vehicle that used a flexible AI generated pickup/drop off route to most efficiently move most people around with the least resources, now we’re talking.

Obviously. I'm afraid it's against Elon's vision though, as he's shows he doesn't like the idea of sharing trips with strangers.

Would Tesla be okay with developing a system to build social trust and convince people share a vehicle, without knowing each other? I don't think so, but that would be the most environmental friendly course IMO.

 

[nativewolf]

Exactly. The same number of people need to go the same number of places so RT does nothing to change this. In fact, then you would have a bunch of RTs running around empty as they go between rides, so traffic would actually be worse than if people were taking their own cars. Like said above, RTs are just Uber without a driver. Hardly a society-changing innovation.

Anything that does not increase passenger density is not really anything innovative. Now if we were talking about a multi passenger (maybe 8-10) autonomous van-like vehicle that used a flexible AI generated pickup/drop off route to most efficiently move most people around with the least resources, now we’re talking.

That's it. We can increase safety- especially in regards to drunk driving and walkers in urban areas but we won't impact greenhouse gas emissions without moving the fleet. Agree completely on multi-passenger issue, thats really the issue.