That was Tesla’s plan at the time. As far as I know, there has been no confirmation from Tesla that actually happened. If it did happen, we don’t know the breakdown of employees to non-employees. The initial group was majority employees, and it may still be.So there are at least over 1600 in FSD beta now according to the same document.
Getting paid for not doing a good job of monitoring the car? I doubt it.tangentially related question: I wonder if the employee fsd testers get reimbursed if they get into a fender bender while doing the test.
You are not a good candidate for FSD beta tester. If you don't have confidence you can monitor the car, then you shouldn't be using the tool. If you are tired or otherwise not in best shape then don't enable the tool. I'm not planning on letting FSD do unprotected left turns at busy intersections, but I very rarely come across those....
see, one of the things that would remove my hesitation about being a tester is that I'd want someone to cover the cost of repairs if AND WHEN there is a crash or even scrape.
There are plenty of people who are confident they can monitor the car and take appropriate action if it does the wrong thing. Perhaps the confidence isn't warranted since I've seen people running over curbs. There also people who have had accidents on regular autopilot.part of me actually can't believe there are people taking these risks, right now, with their own $50k+ cars.
I was wondering how the company would support and cover an employee who got his car damaged while on company business.Getting paid for not doing a good job of monitoring the car? I doubt it.
Tesla employees are passionate about the company and understand risks. They will try it out. If it is too flaky they will use it less and wait for a future update. If I were an employee I wouldn't have qualms about testing it and I doubt employees do either. Some employees get company cars for testing.I was wondering how the company would support and cover an employee who got his car damaged while on company business.
that's the gist of it. you can argue its the employee who is opting-in and I dont know the legal subtleties, but it seems that if you are an employee and not a contractor, and are on company time doing company work (research/devel in a very true sense) that they MUST have a special insurance deal. they must. else, who would voluntarily take on such a financial risk?
this is the unanswered question that I'm really curious about.
and that covers just the employees. it says nothing about the volunteers who are not employees and have no special insurance deal. (or do they?)