For me a big part of the concern is if the new radar module ends up having a very significant impact on system capability and safety. It is frankly fine and even expected if new features beyond what was promised don't get added to HW3 just like with a new phone not getting all the newest things. The difference is like if you buy a phone labeled as having 5G and paid a huge premium for that 5G capability but the manufacturer says you need a driver update and never actually provides that driver (and then you find out that the radio actually never was capable of 5G).
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
There will be NO HW4 upgrade for HW3 owners
- Thread starter macmee
- Start date
For me a big part of the concern is if the new radar module ends up having a very significant impact on system capability and safety. It is frankly fine and even expected if new features beyond what was promised don't get added to HW3 just like with a new phone not getting all the newest things. The difference is like if you buy a phone labeled as having 5G and paid a huge premium for that 5G capability but the manufacturer says you need a driver update and never actually provides that driver (and then you find out that the radio actually never was capable of 5G).
its been years since these claims are made. At some point, we need to wake up.
Exactly we paid for this in advance, expecting the upgrades would come with it. Why else would anyone spend the money?
M109Rider
Active Member
I don’t know, will it. ?
Can you answer that question definitively yet. ?
It’s fine to speculate, discuss, and raise concerns, but when you start a war when there isn’t one yet, it just demonstrates that you want to fight for either the sake of fighting a cause, or you have heavy bias against Tesla.
Either of these accurate ?
Since we don’t know for sure what HW3 will deliver yet, why not continue to discuss, and actually wait to see what is or isn’t delivered before starting a war.
Many on HW3 will likely be legitimately concerned at this point. We will all know very soon if it’s a problem we have to address or not.
Is it your contention that a company can say whatever it wants to say and then simply separate itself from those statements with "one little asterisk on the web site pointing to a disclaimer"?
Also, what is a "casual promise"?
lowtek
Active Member
Yes, all companies, every day all day long. Read one of those "Terms of Use" 50 page legally binding documents you blindly agree to.
The purpose of those "terms of use" is to disclaim liability for inferences, assumptions, improper conclusions, uses, etc. They are not a license to say your product specifically does X, if it can't.
If a company says that it's car can fly, then it's actionable (under multiple causes of action) if the car can't fly at all.
Conversely, as an example of how "terms of use" could get a company off of the hook - if it says it's cars can fly, and then there is an asterisk that says "subject to regulator approval in your state." In such case, the car can actually fly but you may not be able to use that feature if it isn't permitted in your state.
Huge, huge difference.
lowtek
Active Member
I agree with that's the purpose ... but you'll find terminology like "opinions expressed online or anywhere by employees, owners, board members, their children, pets, offspring for all eternity, neighbors, ex or current girlfriends, or AI's should in no way be construed as the opinion of Company, Inc" unless officially document on company.com or its advertising".
They always leave some small thread to hold on to when you finally come after them for false claims.
In the case of Elon, I think he actually thought they could pull this off in a much shorter amount of time. I think he's an eternal optimist.
With that being said, I also think that the price increase to $15,000 for FSD was less about adding value and more about limiting exposure as most won't spend that on what amounts to an unfinished product.
I think we're still 10 years away from it being trustworthy enough to take the steering wheel/yoke out of a robo taxi, but what do I know, just work with machine learning every single day and know an embarrassing amount about its limitations.
I can see Tesla arguing that they thought it was legitimately possible and other autonomous vehicle experts being brought in to say that no, clearly it was not possible at least by the time 2019 rolled around.
But Tesla told the Cali DMV back in 2019-2020, behind closed doors, that FSD would be released to the wider fleet as a Level 2 ADAS. It was Level 2, it will stay Level 2, and anything further will be new iterative processes.
This has been the plan for a long long time.
But Tesla told the Cali DMV back in 2019-2020, behind closed doors, that FSD would be released to the wider fleet as a Level 2 ADAS. It was Level 2, it will stay Level 2, and anything further will be new iterative processes.
This has been the plan for a long long time.
Yes regarding the terminology you site, but that pertains to "opinions," which may or may not apply to what Elon has said in the past. (Personally, I don't believe his statements were an opinion of what he believed could happen but instead an affirmative statement of what will happen.)
Putting aside the validity of any mandatory arbitration provision or any potentially applicable specific state law, etc., the primary legal arguments I suspect would be:
- Can Tesla be held accountable for statements, tweets, etc. made by Elon? (I believe so.)
- At the time in which Elon made the statements at issue, were those statements consistent with what he actually believed was possible when he made those statements? (I have no idea.)
- Should Tesla be held liable for damages incurred by consumers who relied on Elon's statements to their detriment? (Perhaps.)
- If so, to what extent is Tesla liable (i.e., the purchase price of the car, the purchase price of the FSD, etc.)?
I think you mean if needed to fulfill the promises made around FSD. Which applies all the way back to HW2. In fact, advertisements when HW2 was being shipped had more specific and advanced capabilities than HW3. Pre-2019 the description was clearly an L4 system without anyone even in the car. When HW3 was released, those claims became much weaker. Tesla's claims were always about what the car can do, not what specific hardware can do. They often won't even tell you what hardware they are shipping you during transition times as they argue that they are both capable.
DanCar
Active Member
Well said. As soon as Musk admits failure, the sooner they get on the right path. I wouldn't be surprised if this also has to happen with hw4 and move to hw5.
lowtek
Active Member
HW4 cameras, according to the spy pics, will not physically fit in the areas of the 3/Y where they would need to be retrofit ... one shining example of this is the B pillar will have to be wider ... Also, the additional cameras and hd radar have nowhere to go, I guess duck tape them to the hood ... at any rate, if this is the case, Tesla will fight this to the end ...
M109Rider
Active Member
I’m sure you’re an expert in AI, and self driving hardware and software. Sure sounds like you know best. Tesla should consult you, if they know what’s good for them.
However, just in case, should we wait for FSD to be complete, or do you just hope it fails now for some ulterior reason…
EVNow
Well-Known Member
lowtek
Active Member
I'm not sure if you mean this jokingly but you're right, HW3 is more than capable, it's the software that needs to evolve. They've already re-engineered the stack at least 3 times as far as we know.
Daniel in SD
(supervised)
4 years.
Tesla’s internal data always shows that full autonomy is about a year away though.
Similar threads
- Question
