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’s talking about a future product called FSD which is perfectly fine except that Tesla sells a different product that’s also called FSD.

Yep. Elon talks about full-self-driving cars, which he describes as Level 5, or as being able to drive without a driver, or to operate as a robotaxi, and then he offers customers a $10,000 upgrade to "FSD" which the fine print tells you is actually a Level 2 system for use on city streets, and which requires an alert driver at all times, who must be ready to take over without warning and who is fully responsible for anything the car does. And ordinary car buyers who have never even heard of Tesla Motors Club, much less read any of the explanations here, are expected to understand that FSD is not actually full self-driving, but will morph into it if Tesla can ever actually get there. And Elon expects us to believe that they can get from a pretty good Level 2 to full-on level 5 in one year.
 
ordinary car buyers who have never even heard of Tesla Motors Club, much less read any of the explanations here, are expected to understand that FSD is not actually full self-driving


Or anybody who actually reads the description of what they are buying. They'd also be expected to understand that.

Since it explicitly says that.

And while the print that does so is technically smaller, it's barely smaller and pretty clearly shown to the buyer right above the add button.

fsdwarn.png
 
Or anybody who actually reads the description of what they are buying. They'd also be expected to understand that.

Since it explicitly says that.

And while the print that does so is technically smaller, it's barely smaller and pretty clearly shown to the buyer right above the add button.

View attachment 739967

Nobody reads that stuff. They do listen to Elon talking about Level 5.
 
Pretty sure autopark uses a lot less processing power than Navigate on Autopilot for example.... (and it's not like both need to run at the same time)

There are two versions of autopark

One version is ultrasonic based
The other version is vision based.

To my knowledge the vision based autopark only works on FSD HW.

The Vision based one is superior (as long as the owner gets out to clean the rear camera) as it doesn't have the same restrictions as the ultrasonic only one.

This is the first of what I expect to be many cases where FSD HW performances much better at a EAP assigned task than the HW2/HW2.5.

The reason for this is the HW is simply inadequate for the demands of the EAP feature set.

Is EAP feature complete with HW2/HW2.5? Yes, but only if you completely ignore the fact that it performs poorly.
 
  • Funny
Reactions: AlanSubie4Life
Don't forget these two beauties:
March 2015 "It's not something I think is very difficult. To do autonomous driving that is to a degree much safer than a person, is much easier than people think... I almost view it like a solved problem." (Nvidia conference)
April 2021 "[FSD] is definitely one of the -- I think one of the hardest technical problems that exists, that's maybe ever existed."
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bet TSLA
Because people refuse to consider what is happening industrywide and want to paint a picture that only Tesla is being late.

Besides when have you started policing threads ? Go to all the waymo or other threads and tell people not to post about Tesla ;)

The problem with Tesla is they sold FSD to customers as a product.

When you sell a product its a completely different ballgame.

I can't compare Tesla with the delays every other company has had because Tesla is the only one who had the insanity of selling the improbable to customers.

What I find really disturbing is they sold it almost like an investment to the unsuspecting public.

It wasn't a case of "here is this feature and the price is locked into X amount", but instead it was a "here is something that will blow your minds, but order quickly because we most definitely will raise the price soon".
 
The problem with Tesla is they sold FSD to customers as a product.

When you sell a product its a completely different ballgame.

I can't compare Tesla with the delays every other company has had because Tesla is the only one who had the insanity of selling the improbable to customers.

What I find really disturbing is they sold it almost like an investment to the unsuspecting public.

It wasn't a case of "here is this feature and the price is locked into X amount", but instead it was a "here is something that will blow your minds, but order quickly because we most definitely will raise the price soon".

Yep! A classic scam: "Buy it this minute or the price will go up!" That's bad when it's an actual product like a fancy vegetable peeler. It's shameful when it's something that doesn't exist, and worse when it's something that doesn't exist and is being promised on an impossible timeline.
 
Don't forget these two beauties:
March 2015 "It's not something I think is very difficult. To do autonomous driving that is to a degree much safer than a person, is much easier than people think... I almost view it like a solved problem." (Nvidia conference)
April 2021 "[FSD] is definitely one of the -- I think one of the hardest technical problems that exists, that's maybe ever existed."
Oops, forgot source for last quote: Tesla’s Q1 2021 earnings call
 
Happy 4-year Elonversary.

Dec. 8th 2017 1:58 pm PT
Speaking at a conference on artificial intelligence yesterday, Tesla CEO Elon Musk updated his timeline prediction for a fully self-driving car to 2 years. He also predicts that another year after that cars will be significantly better drivers than humans.

Now at the conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NIPS) yesterday, Musk said that they could achieve some level of full self-driving within two years, but that the more important timeline would be 3 years, at which point self-driving capabilities would be significantly better than human drivers.

Fred also highlights Elon's previous promises/predictions...including predicting (in 2015) "autonomous driving would be ready in two years" and that "Tesla was aiming for level 5 autonomy" two years out (from 2017). Additionally, "A demo of this feature (FSD) was supposed to be demonstrated with a coast-to-coast test drive by the end of the year, but it's unclear if that is still in Tesla's plans."

Noted in the article a few times - and it's a constant refrain - is FSD will be released "as soon as regulations allow it." Well...the beta is getting pushed out gradually now. Did I miss regulators allowing it?
 
  • Like
Reactions: daktari
Noted in the article a few times - and it's a constant refrain - is FSD will be released "as soon as regulations allow it." Well...the beta is getting pushed out gradually now. Did I miss regulators allowing it?

The discrepancy is that "FSD" has two very different meanings: 1. It can mean "full self-driving," as in, a driverless car. That's what Elon promises to release as soon as regulators allow, which is misleading, because first they have to create it before they can ask for regulatory approval. It doesn't exist yet. Or: 2. It can mean a package of driver-assist features sold under the (misleading, or at best aspirational) name of "FSD."

What's being pushed out gradually now is a beta of a Level 2 package of features containing some features that are new to the package. But it's still very far from the Level 5 driverless car that Elon is always promising is two years away. AFAIK Level 2 systems have regulatory approval. And the human driver is fully responsible and is required to be ready and able to take over without notice from the car.
 
  • Like
Reactions: edseloh and daktari
Yeah. My old Prius had that. "Partially Zero Emission Vehicle" because occasionally it would shut off the engine and drive on electric. It was SULEV, which should have just been called LEV, but the PZEV was meaningless even then.
PZEV has nothing to do with being hybrid or having engine stop/start capability. It had to do with having an improved fuel system that reduced the leaking of volatile fuel vapors from the tank and fuel lines. For example, Subaru sold PZEV cars that were non-hybrid.

A partial zero emission vehicle, in the United States, is an automobile that has zero evaporative emissions from its fuel system, has a 15-year (or at least 150,000-mile) warranty on its emission-control components, and meets SULEV tailpipe-emission standards.

 
  • Informative
Reactions: scottf200
PZEV has nothing to do with being hybrid or having engine stop/start capability. It had to do with having an improved fuel system that reduced the leaking of volatile fuel vapors from the tank and fuel lines. For example, Subaru sold PZEV cars that were non-hybrid.




Hmmm. Well, I believe you that those are the definitions being used. But I don't think it makes any sense to call reduced emissions "partial zero emissions."

It would be like calling a reduced-sodium tortilla chip a "partially-zero-sodium tortilla chip."