EVNow
Well-Known Member
Don't worry. The pdf doesn't have any verbiage. Just what we paid (for me $2k for AP and $3k for FSD).
ps : Funny thing is - the website says I bought AP+FSD on 12-Mar-19. The invoice date is 6/10/19
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Rumor: HW4 can support up to 13 cameras
- Thread starter diplomat33
- Start date
ps : Funny thing is - the website says I bought AP+FSD on 12-Mar-19. The invoice date is 6/10/19
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
What I posted was the pre 3/19 FSD product- which tells you they'll deliver at least L4 with a fairly wide ODD (it's debatable if the language is describing L4 or L5, but it's for sure at least L4).
After 3/19 they were selling an explicitly L2 system, with specific individual features- all of which, other than the last- have already been delivered at this point (though they exaggerate the capabilities of summon somewhat in the example pic as it's range limited so if the lot isn't pretty tiny it won't find you "anywhere" in the lot)
For example:
VanFriscia
Member
Thanks for the info...and wow, there's certainly a world of difference between the two. I checked my records and what's listed in my Tesla account is indeed correct - I purchased it 3/13/19 for $2k after purchasing EAP a few months prior for much more. So, being that that's in the middle of March, did I make the cutoff for all the awesomeness that Tesla advertised in your original post???
I don’t know of any job where you can publicly say bad things about your employer, even factual in the form of an ‘honest review’ and not risk getting canned. Public negativity from an employee carries significantly more weight than when it’s spoken by an outsider.HW3 is proving the L5 that Elon Musk has been wishing for is very far away (summon from across the US coast to coast with Tesla Supercharger robo-snake, not just within a few feet in the proximity of your garage).
Instead of the function for cruising getting better, it's getting worse. Worse in capability: Instead of 90mph, it's 80, Instead of 1 safe distance, it is 2. Instead of more fidelity to the speed control, it's all over the place: false slowdowns. Not just traditional phantom breaks but now with other slowdowns that didn't happen with hw2.
Instead of removing the steering wheel, Tesla just removed FSD beta away from AI Addict when he posted his FSD beta driving despite getting zero strikeout (5 strikeouts for suspension).
Elon Musk tweeted claiming to be "free speech absolutist" but now we know it's at the cost of losing your FSD beta.
Tesla fired an employee after he posted driverless tech reviews on YouTube
John Bernal was a Tesla employee who showed FSD Beta to the world on his YouTube channel, AI Addict. He was fired in February.www.cnbc.com
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
Sadly you did not.
Describes the ton of changes Tesla made last day of Feb 2019, including the shifting around of what "FSD" was to change it to a specific list of features including several that used to be in the no-longer-sold EAP.
That said- you got it for 2k, which is the cheapest it was ever offered, and only so offered that cheap, ever, for those couple of weeks- so you've got that going for you.
You’re probably right about HW3 being inadequate but I think we have to hold final judgement until v11 is released and iterated on. It’s definitely possible, even likely they are approaching the local maxima on HW3.
Terminator857
Active Member
I'm willing to wager that HW4 will be inadequate for fsd within a reasonable time frame. fsd = full self driving, not partial self driving, i.e. level 5.
Tam
Well-Known Member
I am not sure AI Addict described in his YouTube as "bad". He never blamed the FSD beta system.
He claimed his YouTube was cleared by the management until the last incident.
But to defend Tesla's at-will employment, it has management rights for firing at-will just like many non-union work places.
However, his FSD beta removal has to be based on Tesla's release notes: Strikeouts. Or otherwise, Tesla needs to revise its release notes to justify this FSD beta removal with no Strikeouts needed.
It’s far too premature for either of us to speculate on HW4 limits until the details are known. If they treat HW4 as just an upgrade to HW3 it’ll likely be limited once again.
However if they go back to the drawing board and admit mistakes made with HW3 and addd more cameras and / or include new technologies or technologies they previously abandoned like radar or even LiDAR I think it has a better chance of succeeding.
Being the first person to publicly report an accident with FSD beta is a bold and stupid move for any employee.
Access to the beta isn’t a right. They have strikeout rules but since it is a beta they have the right to add / remove anyone they want at anytime and there’s nothing we can do about it.
Tam
Well-Known Member
Note that Tesla has never accused AI Addict of leaking internal information or steal IP.
Tesla has a very good history of exposing anyone who it suspected of doing that. Either employees or non-Tesla people.
Last edited:
Tam
Well-Known Member
No issues there. Tesla has the right to exercise its rights however it pleases.
However, when it publishes its public policy, it needs to follow that policy or it should modify its policy to justify that the actions are in compliance with all new and current posted policy.
VanFriscia
Member
Sigh...well that's all a bit depressing to say the least, but good info nonetheless so thanks for that. I truly didn't know any of that and thought that everyone who purchased FSD was in the same boat. Wow...
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
FWIW, I don't expect there to end up being delivered-feature disparity between the pre/post 3/19 buyers.
What I expect is one of two things:
A) Turns out you can get to L4 either with current HW (highly highly highly unlikely) or with can-be-upgraded-on-current-fleet HW (ie swapping in HW4, and/or some camera retrofits that are not totally impractical for existing cars).
In this case I expect both pre and post 3/19 buyers to get the same stuff delivered to them, even though post 3/19 buyers aren't technically owed that.... because the cost would be minor to Tesla compared to the upside of getting massive increase in take rate from existing fleet.
or
B) Turns out you CAN NOT get to L4 either with current HW or with any reasonable retrofit of current cars. In that case I'd expect pre 3/19 buyers getting a full or near-full refund... and post 3/19 buyers would not.
There's basically only 2 reasons anyone has presented for the language change 3/19 that hold up to any scruitiny, and both are consistent with my thinking above:
1) The change let Tesla recognize a greater % of FSD revenue earlier than otherwise (and 100% of it once they deliver L2 city streets)
2) The change significantly limited Teslas refund liability if it turns out they can't get to L4 with current fleet.
When I bought my 2018 Model 3, it (along with all cars sold with HW 2.0+ I believe) was sold as having "all hardware included necessary for FSD", with no disclaimers. Tesla skated along for quite a while stating HW 3.0 was a "free" upgrade when you purchased the FSD package; that circumvented them having to upgrade all those old HW 2.0+ cars to HW 3.0 as they said the cost was purchasing the software, not the hardware.
Since they added the FSD monthly subscription model, they should be upgrading those HW2.0+ computers to HW3.0 for free. It's ridiculous to argue that purchased FSD and subscribed FSD are different products, or that subscribed FSD wasn't a thing back when HW2.x was standard. Talk about weasel words. There was no footnote or exception to "all hardware included necessary for FSD". And if you argue that there are exceptions, then the same argument can be applied to Tesla owing you anything beyond HW3.0 as FSD hardware evolves down the road. As @kavyboy said above, I'll wish you well when Tesla makes no distinction between FSD owners before or after the 3/19 cutoff with regard to (not) getting HW4.
On a related note, as an HW 2.5/EAP owner, I'm very interested in seeing how things evolve after the long-discussed single stack goes wide. I know it will start only with the FSD beta group, but eventually it will go wide to everyone to establish a single code base. If there are improvements to features common to FSD and EAP, for example, NoAP or Smart Summon, but that require HW 3.0+, shouldn't I expect an upgrade for that as well? After all, if my car was sold as having "all hardware included necessary for FSD", I shouldn't expect to see any differences in performance in features I've already paid for.
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
Nope.
Having the right HW is a pre-requisite for the subscription.
When you bought the car the only method that existed for accessing was purchasing it. You were told your car had the HW to do that.
So if you purchase it, and it turns out you need more HW, you get that HW for free.
But subscriptions didn't exist then, you were never promised you could subscribe, since no such thing existed then. So setting different conditions for a subscription is a perfectly valid choice for Tesla.
That's not weasel words, it's the actual facts of what happened when.
You can still get the free HW upgrade right now same way you could 2 years ago-- buy FSD.
THAT said- if Tesla ever removed the ability to buy FSD entirely- and ONLY offered FSD access via subscription- you'd suddenly have a decent argument you're owed hardware. But that's not the case today (and not likely to be until FSD is much more advanced, to the point take rates would skyrocket and offering free retrofits for the tiny # of HW2.x owners would be easily absorbed)
Nope.
EAP is a finished product.
You got everything you paid for.
Nobody with EAP is getting more than you did.
Single stack will likely improve BASIC AP for the later owners who have basic AP (something that wasn't even sold when you got your car) but that doesn't impact EAP owners either way.
Likewise it's expected to improve highway behavior for FSD owners, but you're not one of those either.
EVNow
Well-Known Member
If your ISP offers much better speeds - if you have a newer modem - they will not freely upgrade your modem - IF you own your modem. If you rent the modem they do. Same thing for DVRs or satellite receivers (remember them ?).
I don't see why they would freely upgrade something that might cost $2k - because you pay $200 a month. That would be equivalent to giving a free year of service.
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
Your ISP never promised you you'd have gigabit capability back when their hardware could only do 100mb though.
As long as Tesla offers an FSD ownership option that includes needed HW for free (purchase) they're good.
Hence the new subscription offering can get away with requiring you to already have upgraded HW-- since the original "all hw needed" promise gets fulfilled at no cost if you buy FSD (which was the only option to acquire it that existed when they promised him that).
But if they ever removed that purchase option, while still offering the subscription, they'd be breaking that promise because it'd then be impossible for him to have FSD without paying more for HW.
Again though I expect the purchase option won't ever go away unless/until FSD reaches >L2.... in which case Tesla would be much better off wrapping HW upgrades into the subscription for the tiny # of HW2.x owners left because
A) the cost of the HW upgrade is a lot less than 2k
and
B) The massive surge in recurring revenue from the greater fleet from ONLY offering a subscription option for something that'll have a very high take rate, would massively outweigh the minor HW cost to upgrade those few HW2.x owners who get onboard.
EVNow
Well-Known Member
Most likely the verbiage when we bought was something like this, though this is from August.
PS : This is what the order page for FSD upgrade showed in Canada in March, 2019. Seems to imply L3/L4 because it talks about “without supervision”. So, the clear cut differentiation of so called L2 and L3 before and after Feb 28, 2019 may not be that clear cut. @Knightshade
Tesla is bringing Autopilot prices 'back to normal', Elon Musk admits mistake
As part of Tesla’s reversal of its sales and pricing strategy, the automaker is also again changing Autopilot prices, which...
electrek.co
Last edited:
If they design it to be an easy retrofit, it will be. That's not to say that they can't make design decisions that would make it a nightmare, of course.
Realistically, any computer that they replace FSD with isn't going to be able to draw a lot more power than the current one, because doing so would adversely affect your driving range. And we don't have to worry about an upgraded computer having dramatically higher thermal output, because that would require drawing considerably more power.
Chances are, new wiring will be required, but we're just talking about running wires from the location of the FSD computer up through the dash and around the front windshield, so that should be relatively easy unless there isn't enough space for extra wiring, and even then, they would have to build updated trim parts with a larger gap for new cars anyway, so it shouldn't be a huge cost to upgrade existing cars.
Also, 4K video currently requires a whopping five pairs per camera plus power, whereas the current cameras require only one, which could make it much less practical to conceal the wiring harness around the edge of the window even for new installations. (Imagine four full Ethernet cables here, with two around each side of the window, and that assumes that they don't use 4k for the interior camera.) So I wouldn't be surprised if they end up multiplexing the signals over optical fiber (likely one fiber per camera), which should easily fit into the space used by the existing wiring harness. And then take optical inputs directly into the HW4 board to avoid any extra conversion steps.
And realistically, they will probably upgrade all of the cameras. The existing cameras are likely to be EOL soon, because they're fossils. So that would necessitate that the hardware support both the old-style cameras (that can't feasibly be upgraded) and the new ones. This might require adding some extra conversion hardware to convert the older cameras's outputs to feed into whatever inputs HW4 uses, but nothing too complex. Or make HW4 have multiple input boards, one of which is all-optical or all-four-lane-MIPI or whatever they end up using for the 4K cameras, and one of which is upgraded for only the main cameras and uses the existing single-pair LVDS connections for the other cameras. Many approaches exist for making upgrades straightforward.
Of course, if we were talking about upgrading every camera (not just the front/center trio) or adding cameras in other places, that would be another matter, but that would also be well outside the scope of what I said would be an easy retrofit.
Similar threads
