Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Tesla, TSLA & the Investment World: the Perpetual Investors' Roundtable

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Uh... what?

L5 doesn't need any approval, from anybody, to put on the road in at least a dozen US states.

Right now.

If you put an L5 car on the road in Nevada next week- which you can do with no government approval at all then it's still an L5 car even if it's not approved in California.

L4 vs L5 is about capability, not legality. CAN it safely drive anywhere a human can? If yes it's L5. Those don't exist today though.

If you want that L5 car to drive into OTHER states (or countries) that do NOT allow them, that's obviously different LEGALLLY-- but that's the same as an L3 car- or an L4 car- both of which could cross state and country borders, and has nothing to do with "L5 needs government approval" and that limit doesn't make it not L5.


There's not even a government agency to approval it federally in the US for example-- NHTSA does not regulate such things at this time- leaving that regulation entirely to US states... which is WHY it's already legal in a number of them without anyone needing to "approve" it.


It's baffling this keeps coming up and keeps needing correcting-- often of and by the same folks.
I hear ya, almost daily now (bullish FSD).

Multiple sources of this FSD resistance:
1. Competition.
2. Robot gonna turn on us!
3. Never cry wolf crowd...
4. But Elon said... It has to work everywhere.

I suspect we have all of these groups represented here. No wonder...
 
Explain to me how I can ride hail a robotaxi from Nevada to California today without regulatory approval?

Explain to me how you keep confusing SAE levels with local laws.

"regulatory approval" has nothing at all to do with a vehicle being L4 vs L5 as you suggested.

A car capable of driving anywhere a human can is L5. Even if not every where a human can legally allows that.

Further- such a car can be put on the road without any "regulatory approval" at all in a bunch of US states right now- and the fact there might be OTHER states it'd break the law to enter does not change the SAE Level of the system.
 
Explain to me how you keep confusing SAE levels with local laws.

"regulatory approval" has nothing at all to do with a vehicle being L4 vs L5 as you suggested.

A car capable of driving anywhere a human can is L5. Even if not every where a human can legally allows that.

Further- such a car can be put on the road without any "regulatory approval" at all in a bunch of US states right now- and the fact there might be OTHER states it'd break the law to enter does not change the SAE Level of the system.
I am not talking about the car capabilities but the robotaxi service that requires regulatory approval. If Elon wants the service to be avaliable with all routes enabled with zero geo fencing, then it requires regularly approval.
 
I am not talking about the car capabilities but the robotaxi service that requires regulatory approval. If Elon wants the service to be avaliable with all routes enabled with zero geo fencing, then it requires regularly approval.


Yes, but Elon has said- repeatedly- he expects RT to start with only some areas, not all. All is an end goal, not how rollout will begin.

And there's already a bunch of such areas they could be on the road TODAY if they had a functional, safe, RT- thus "waiting on the regulators" is not a reason there's no Tesla RTs on the road.

Tesla not having a system they trust as an RT yet is, and "the regulators" is not a barrier to changing that.
 
There's a lot of mixing of Robotaxi and FSD. They are obviously linked, but Robotaxi can obviously come before FSD is solved via a dedicated car that is geofenced. That is outside of the scope of solved FSD will work everywhere and doesn't need geofencing.

I said this in the V12 thread, but people confuse them because they assume Robotaxi will come to consumer vehicles. It's illogical to believe that would occur before Tesla owned Robotaxi vehicles.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Usain
Last edited:
If only a wheel would have fallen off this loss could have been averted. 🤔 😏
Good news.... This is not possible in a Tesla. Door opens, you exit, it's in park automatically (as I recall remember, any 2 of 3 conditions met will put it in park (Door, Seat Belt, Seat Sensor). You couldn't even trick it if you climbed out the window. It's surprising that this wasn't addressed at Toyota, unless it was a malfunction... which is possibly even worse. This is not Poka-Yoke for the consumer side, and is unlike Japan. Maybe they're under pressure.
 
Good news.... This is not possible in a Tesla. Door opens, you exit, it's in park automatically (as I recall remember, any 2 of 3 conditions met will put it in park (Door, Seat Belt, Seat Sensor). You couldn't even trick it if you climbed out the window. It's surprising that this wasn't addressed at Toyota, unless it was a malfunction... which is possibly even worse. This is not Poka-Yoke for the consumer side, and is unlike Japan. Maybe they're under pressure.

That was mentioned in the Teslarati article. Sort of turned it into a Tesla ad. :)

Anywhere else, somebody would have been fired for writing that.
 
Now you´re making stuff up. He always compares his estimates to the real data once it comes out. You can ignore him all you want but please stop the nonsense Troy bashing here it is getting so tiresome.


Do agree though he is sometimes not clear on interpretation vs. facts in his theses, but please don´t mix that up with his numbers.

A estimate made for a quarter in the last day of the quarter is completely useless, since by then we have had the numbers from many regions and factories published, so the estimation is just on the small portion of production and deliveries we don't know, which should multiply the error rate by 10x since you are predicting just a small portion remaining that is unknown
 
Last edited:
That was mentioned in the Teslarati article. Sort of turned it into a Tesla ad. :)

Anywhere else, somebody would have been fired for writing that.
It's not correct (the Teslarati article), but we get the point. I can drive with my door open (Seat belt and weight engaged, just did it). This is handy for getting unstuck or backing up with a better view.
 
Last edited:
Troy's latest X post, He is suggesting Y id demand limited, I wonder what his evidence is for this, given it's the best selling car in the world I find this rather unintuitiuve.


If supply meaningfully exceeds demand, you are demand limited. By meaningful I’d say 10%.
The model Y can be the best selling vehicle in the world and still be demand limited. I suspect most of the best selling vehicles in the world are demand limited from time to time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: scaesare
There's a lot of mixing of Robotaxi and FSD. They are obviously linked, but Robotaxi can obviously come before FSD is solved via a dedicated car that is geofenced. That is outside of the scope of solved FSD will work everywhere and doesn't need geofencing.

I said this in the V12 thread, but people confuse them because they assume Robotaxi will come to consumer vehicles. It's illogical to believe that would occur before Tesla owned Robotaxi vehicles.

The terms we should be using are supervised autonomy and full autonomy. Supervised obviously has a driver in the loop. Non-beta non-geofenced supervised autotomy is obviously a precursor to full autonomy. Until such a time as the SA product is compelling enough to have a significant take rate, talk of FA is pointless.

People just assume Tesla will provide full autonomy in private vehicles because Elon implied so. Elon says a lot of crap. My feeling is that it will be decades before you can go to sleep in the back of a private vehicle or not need to have a licensed driver in the vehicle. Full autonomy will likely only be available in the company owned, geofenced robotaxi fleet for a long time.
 
Last edited:
The terms we should be using are supervised autonomy and full autonomy.

We really shouldn't though.

SAE already covers this in J3016.

If a human is required to drive, it's not autonomy at all because the human is still the driver- it's driver assistance-(one of 3 possible levels, L0, L1, or L2 depending on the level of assistance it gives the human driver)

if a human is not required to drive, it's autonomy- an autonomous driving system- ADS- (one of 3 possible levels, L3, L4, or L5 depending on other things)

Also the discussion either way really belongs here: