Let's Speculate - What will happen if FSD isn't possible on cars sold with that option?

[MTOman]

There are numerous threads about whether or not Tesla can deliver on the promise of FSD on cars sold with that option, and while there are occasionally posts about what they might do if they can't deliver I have been unable to find a thread specifically for speculating about that. If there is one please point me to it!

Here are some theories, and responses to said theories, I've seen floated but am curious if they're likely, or even possible. If you have any other theories I'd love to hear them! Again, this isn't to discuss the technical aspects of AP and whether it's possible or what upgrades may be necessary to enable it, there are already threads for that, this is purely to speculate what will happen if they can't deliver FSD to cars already sold with the option.

Theory 1: Tesla will retrofit cars as needed to enable FSD.
Response: Telsa won't be able to retrofit much, maybe replacing the AP computer and radar but that's about it. If adding lidar, additional radars or cameras in the future is needed for FSD that's not something they can afford to do for all cars sold with the FSD option before then.

Theory 2: Tesla will issue refunds on the FSD upgrade option.
Response: Will this be enough? Will customers take them to court because they bought a car expecting the FSD option to be possible in the future?

Theory 3: Tesla will replace entire cars, offer buy-back options or discounts on new cars.
Response: Will Tesla be able to afford this? If they offer buy-back options or discounts what will the values be based on?

Theory 4: Tesla will hide behind their wording that there is no timeline for FSD or that regulations won't allow it.
Response: Is it legal to sell a feature without a committed timeline and then simply never deliver on the feature? What if regulations don't allow it, does Tesla still have to deliver FSD even if it's not legal to use anywhere?

Theory 5: Elon Musk will step down or Tesla will fold if unable to deliver on FSD as promised.
Response: Would Elon stepping down change anything? What are the chances a company like Tesla will fold and where does that leave the customers? Could Tesla be the next AMC (Delorean)?

I want to stress that I'm crossing my fingers and toes that Tesla can and will deliver FSD, I'm definitely rooting for them, so please don't take this post as me being a negative sack. Hopefully none of the theories in this thread come to pass, I just find it interesting to speculate what could happen if they don't deliver.

 

[sandpiper]

Some mix of #2/#4, I would say. I'm sure that they considered this possibility and that there is legalese that limits their liability.

 

[Tiger]

If I wanted FSD, I would buy a Nissan Leaf. However, I want good ground clearance, quick acceleration, long range (preferably 130kWh), and supercharging.

FSD will probably happen, but it's so many years ahead we will most (early adopters) have owned more than one EV car before that happen.

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

#1, #2, #3, #4, #5
Some mixture of those.

 

[Aieukl378]

FSD will happen within a year so no worries. AP1 was already a technological marvel with far less hardware. Yes, there have been untimely setbacks with AP2 but they're back on track and OTA updates are happening. Believe me when I say we'll all be whining about some other promised feature before long: "Elon promised my car would levitate 3' when Hover Mode is engaged and it only levitates 2' "

 

[lunitiks]

I think the important question is: How and when are we supposed to determine that Tesla can't deliver on FSD?

First of all, what the heck is "FSD"? Is it some specific SAE Level? Or is it some made-up concept that Tesla can define by itself?

Secondly: What does "in almost all circumstances" mean? Would 70% of all circumstances fly? Is it even possible to count / define "all" circumstances?

Thirdly: One could argue that Tesla hasn't promised any actual deadline, so how long must we wait to conclude? History shows that there are plenty of surfaced vaporware.

 

[BigD0g]

I see lawsuits lots and lots of class action lawsuits especially with the M3 ramp ups.

 

[lunitiks]

It's like a carrot on a stick

 

[RayW]

I’m still baffled why anyone checked that box when they ordered their car. Tesla has been very clear that FSD is not yet available and the legalities are yet to be determined in each state. So, I don’t know, they checked the box to save $1,000 some time in the future?

 

[nagypite]

FSD is a hoax 3000$ for nothing

 

[MP3Mike]

lots and lots of class action lawsuits

Why "lots and lots"? Isn't the point of a class action lawsuit to lump everyone together into one giant lawsuit to avoid everyone having to sue individually? (And for the class action lawyers to make lots of money.)

 

[MorrisonHiker]

I’m still baffled why anyone checked that box when they ordered their car. Tesla has been very clear that FSD is not yet available and the legalities are yet to be determined in each state. So, I don’t know, they checked the box to save $1,000 some time in the future?

Yes. By paying $3000 in advance, many buyers figured they not only saved the $1000 but also avoided any potential price increases. While the price listed for those who didn't order it before delivery is currently $4000, there's always the possibility the price could be raised even higher.

 

[ZeApelido]

The decision to put in the $3000 is a bet on how much you believe in Tesla Vision and want autonomy. The result could go in many directions. It could be worth nothing. However, say Tesla is able to achieve L4 / L5, they will almost certainly bump up the price quite a bit. How much is L5 worth to an autonomous taxi company? $50000?

$10000 for consumers, easily.

 

[pilotSteve]

I’m still baffled why anyone checked that box when they ordered their car. Tesla has been very clear that FSD is not yet available and the legalities are yet to be determined in each state. So, I don’t know, they checked the box to save $1,000 some time in the future?

... they were much less “clear” in December 2016 when I bought,,,,,

 

[Tiger]

Yes. By paying $3000 in advance, many buyers figured they not only saved the $1000 but also avoided any potential price increases. While the price listed for those who didn't order it before delivery is currently $4000, there's always the possibility the price could be raised even higher.

Anyone can just buy a new Tesla to get the same discount, or buy a FSD from Audi or Nissan in the future. Rising the price will never work for FSD once it becomes mainstream. Paying for FSD in advance is just nuts.

 

[Canuck]

What if the regulators say that Teslas require further hardware/mechanical redundancy, etc. to okay FSD. In reply, Tesla says to AP2.0 owners that it can accomplish AP2.0 with the current hardware but the regulators won't let us do it, and we made AP2.0 FSD subject to regulatory approval, so here's your money back for those of you who paid for FSD. Then Tesla adds the further hardware/redundancy or whatever is required to comply with regulatory approval and all new owners get it.

It seems to me AP2.0 FSD owners are out of luck in this scenario given what was said them to about the caveat of regulatory approval when they bought.

Please correct me where my logic is wrong since it seems to me Tesla has an easy out of this one.

 

[houstonian]

Once FSD is here, be it Tesla/GM/Volvo/VW/etc., I wonder what the model will be for purchasing the software.

Traditional one-time fee with free updates much like the current setup?

Monthly/Annual subscription? For example, $3k annually works out to about $8-and-change daily or if you only use M-F for work, you're looking at about $6 each way for your commute.

Distance based usage - e.g. $0.10 / mile?

I ask as the ongoing revenue stream is attractive to established companies than a one-time upfront payment. Plus FSD development and refinement will go on and on, someone's got to support the costs of the program again making an ongoing revenue stream attractive over a one-time lump sum.

@MTOman - my guess is FSD will mirror the Free, Unlimited Supercharging to an extent. Tesla needed FUSC to drive demand (or ameliorate fears) in the beginning. Now their product is established, they are seeking to pull back in favor of a charge-to-charge model based on distance, eventually halting FUSC for new S/Xs but grandfathering in existing FUSC customers.

My guess is FSD will be similar. Those who were early adopters will (always?) be able to access "Free"-Unlimited-yet-to-be-proven-FSD even if Tesla eventually removes the option in favor of an ongoing subscription to FSD.

So my theory is: once Tesla's FSD is validated by public opinion (hey! the car really can drive itself!) an ongoing subscription model will replace the one-time fee for unlimited FSD, or if a one-time fee for FSD still remains, the cost will materially increase. I also suspect Tesla throwing the early FSD adopters a bone to smooth over bad feelings.

 

[lunitiks]

Tesla has created a paradox.

On the one hand, Tesla's stating that all cars have the hardware necessary. On the other hand, they have the following disclaimer: "Please note that Self-Driving functionality is dependent upon extensive software validation". The Functionality. Is Dependent. On Extensive. Software validation.

In software project management, software testing, and software engineering, verification and validation (V&V) is the process of checking that a software system meets specifications and that it fulfills its intended purpose.

No timeline. No deadline. Read my post on vaporware. Also check this list of surfaced vaporware.

Though nut.

Tesla is also stating that it is "not possible to know exactly when each element of the functionality described above will be available, as this is highly dependent on local regulatory approval".

I can understand the "not possible to know" disclaimer. (How could Tesla know what regulators will do?) But that's actually not the real question. The real question is why this disclaimer?

Would a system that lets the car conduct long and short trips without driver input be illegal anywhere? Why would it be illegal if the driver is responsible at all times? My AP1 level 2 autopilot certainly isn't illegal. I'm responsible. Tesla even reminds me of this less than every minute. What's wrong with implementing a system that is better at autosteering, autoparking etc., as long as I'm responsible?

 

[LosAltosChuck]

What if the regulators say that Teslas require further hardware/mechanical redundancy, etc. to okay FSD. In reply, Tesla says to AP2.0 owners that it can accomplish AP2.0 with the current hardware but the regulators won't let us do it, and we made AP2.0 FSD subject to regulatory approval, so here's your money back for those of you who paid for FSD. Then Tesla adds the further hardware/redundancy or whatever is required to comply with regulatory approval and all new owners get it.

It seems to me AP2.0 FSD owners are out of luck in this scenario given what was said them to about the caveat of regulatory approval when they bought.

Please correct me where my logic is wrong since it seems to me Tesla has an easy out of this one.

It is a misconception that "the regulators" have anything to do with the implementation of an autonomous system. There is no close federal (or state) oversight that requires certain redundancies, etc. Auto manufacturers follow ISO standard safety practices, and decide within that structure what risks they will mitigate in their implementation versus which risks they will just buy insurance to cover. In the end, the real forcing function is the threat of lawsuits that pushes manufacturers to get it right.

Here's my prediction for what will come of "FSD":

1. Tesla will release a door to door L3 (NOT 4 or 5) system that will follow a navigation plan, will require an alert driver (possibly the same hands on wheel required now, unless they retrofit an inward facing camera for driver monitoring.
2. The FSD system will eventually get dynamic lane changing based on traffic, without driver input. Not in version 1.
3. The FSD system will eventually get a to-your-location summon. Not in version 1.
4. The FSD system will require a hardware upgrade for current AP2 vehicles. Tesla will ONLY upgrade those who purchased FSD in advance at no charge. For those owning AP2 vehicles who did not purchase FSD in advance, they will be able to purchase a retrofit at some future point, but NOT in version 1.
5. Once FSD implements (2) and (3) above, it will be more expensive.
6. If FSD achieves L4 it will become a much more expensive option, or will become a subscription service with a pay-by-mile pricing system.
7. If FSD achieves L5 (it won't), it will become even more expensive as an option, and definitely will include per-mile usage fees.

 

[sandpiper]

It is a misconception that "the regulators" have anything to do with the implementation of an autonomous system. There is no close federal (or state) oversight that requires certain redundancies, etc. Auto manufacturers follow ISO standard safety practices, and decide within that structure what risks they will mitigate in their implementation versus which risks they will just buy insurance to cover. In the end, the real forcing function is the threat of lawsuits that pushes manufacturers to get it right.

Here's my prediction for what will come of "FSD":

1. Tesla will release a door to door L3 (NOT 4 or 5) system that will follow a navigation plan, will require an alert driver (possibly the same hands on wheel required now, unless they retrofit an inward facing camera for driver monitoring.
2. The FSD system will eventually get dynamic lane changing based on traffic, without driver input. Not in version 1.
3. The FSD system will eventually get a to-your-location summon. Not in version 1.
4. The FSD system will require a hardware upgrade for current AP2 vehicles. Tesla will ONLY upgrade those who purchased FSD in advance at no charge. For those owning AP2 vehicles who did not purchase FSD in advance, they will be able to purchase a retrofit at some future point, but NOT in version 1.
5. Once FSD implements (2) and (3) above, it will be more expensive.
6. If FSD achieves L4 it will become a much more expensive option, or will become a subscription service with a pay-by-mile pricing system.
7. If FSD achieves L5 (it won't), it will become even more expensive as an option, and definitely will include per-mile usage fees.

It would be nice. But I'm seriously doubting that we'll even see L3 within the next decade. Other than a few staged videos there's not much evidence that they're making a lot of progress.

As of right now, the best system on the market (Tesla) is just a lane follower. And even that has had a number of struggles over the last year. The systems from the other manufacturers are lane followers with a mandatory ping-pong feature. None of these systems make any decisions about how to interact with the traffic or the nav system.

Technology always follows a trajectory. If FSD were in the offing we would be starting to see progressions. Maybe we'd see car initiated lane switching. Or nav triggered off-ramp/on-ramp highway transfers. Or automated stop light/stop sign negotiation. At a minimum there would be rumors of such features being trialed in Tesla's fleet of beta-testers. But nothing. Right now the trajectory for auto-driving tech points to a much longer, slower development process than was expected a couple of years ago.

I'm not particularly upset by that. Technology takes time, and I'm thrilled that Tesla is pushing hard. But I expect that they're going to have to roll back their promises on FSD fairly soon.