There will be NO HW4 upgrade for HW3 owners

[JulienW]

I strongly disagree about this, the current US order page specifically talks about regulatory approval which, in the US, is ONLY required for L3+ levels of autonomy. Add onto this previous statements from Musk and previous versions of the page (which are probably just secondary sources for what FSD is) and it actually seems pretty concrete to me that Tesla is on the hook for L3+ levels of autonomy for those of us who bought it.....

As I said in another post I agree BUT "on the hook" for WHEN? What is you exact date you believe Tesla is required to deliver L3? Tesla can just keep saying it is coming "soon" and continue working on it. There is NO TIMETABLE so it could be coming soon for 20 years with Tesla still on the hook. But will you still be driving the same car then?

EDIT: I have been kinda optimistic for a L3 system "soon" but my doubts have increased in the last 1½ of driving Beta. While it has and continues to improve I just don't see much of a path for true L3 with the hardware (and software for that matter for probably another decade). Hope I'm wrong but at the rate of improvement we are still looking at several years at best.

 

[BBTX]

Clearly then "when" has to at least be within the warranty period. I'd argue that given all the "coming this/next year" BS and the fact that many owners have driven their cars for several years now (large fraction of warranty/vehicle life) without Tesla delivering on the feature, that FSD refunds (again, maybe just the difference from EAP cost) are already a pretty reasonable ask.

They could go a long way towards making this less infuriating to their customers by allowing no-cost FSD transfers to future Tesla vehicles for the early purchasers, and then offering FSD-EAP refunds for those that ask and have been waiting years, and would rather take that option instead of transferability.

 

[ucmndd]

Clearly then "when" has to at least be within the warranty period.

Clearly you just fabricated this though because you want it to be true. The car's warranty has absolutely nothing to do with delivery of a feature they very clearly said had no timeline.

They could go a long way towards making this less infuriating to their customers by allowing no-cost FSD transfers to future Tesla vehicles for the early purchasers, and then offering FSD-EAP refunds for those that ask and have been waiting years, and would rather take that option instead of transferability.

If you want a refund, sell the car and you'll get the current market value for the feature. That's all you're owed.

 

[BBTX]

I think a reasonable judge would agree with me. It's not ok to charge thousands for an ability that's perpetually "coming soon" and then fail to deliver for a very significant fraction (or all) of the vehicle's reasonable lifetime, which the warranty period is a reasonable benchmark for.

 

[BBTX]

If it were a transferable license (to future Tesla vehicles), that would also change things substantially, but as it stands now, that's not the case.

 

[Mr. Michael]

See Elon musk played by Billy Crudup in Hello Tomorrow

 

[KArnold]

As I said in another post I agree BUT "on the hook" for WHEN? What is you exact date you believe Tesla is required to deliver L3? Tesla can just keep saying it is coming "soon" and continue working on it. There is NO TIMETABLE so it could be coming soon for 20 years with Tesla still on the hook.

Perhaps legally. If true that also implies Elon to be the biggest scheister of modern business as that goes against everything said by Telsa for many years now and to this date in regards to timing. You very well may be right.

Perhaps it's what I want to believe, but I'm hopeful that HW3 will achieve SAE L4 in a year or two. Not that you can believe ANYTHING Elon says but I don't recall him ever saying that's not still the goal. Whether it's technologically possible is another question. Most here say it's impossible but I don't think Tesla has publicly admitted that. Please correct me if that is incorrect.

I don't buy the "pending regulatory approval" argument either - what comes first, a functional FSD system as most people define that term or regulatory approval? The regulators would never approve a self-driving system that has not demonstrated its capabilities and that simply does not exist from Tesla yet. So why would they even ask for regulatory approval unless they want to try to BS them as well?

I'm still selling my Full Self Flying cars for only $15k, but pending regulatory approval of course. But it is coming soon, with the first release to employees in 2 weeks! Any takers?

I honestly feel sorry for the man. He's either a genius that will deliver the impossible or he belongs in jail if he keeps selling a system knowing it's not going to achieve the desired outcome while he makes millions of dollars for his efforts - that sounds like fraud. If AP3 is not going to work, he simply cannot pretend to ignore the last 8 years when he has said otherwise. Those people (fools?) like me who bought into the hype would be owed some level of recourse if AP3 doesn't deliver as promised. And waiting 50 years to deliver doesn't sound like a viable position either.

 

[DarkForest]

Those people (fools?) like me who bought into the hype would be owed some level of recourse if AP3 doesn't deliver as promised. And waiting 50 years to deliver doesn't sound like a viable position either.

It already hasn’t delivered as promised, but for some reason, a lot of us keep thinking “this year will be different” or “the Beta is already amazing as it is.”

I finally finished watching the April 2019 Tesla Autonomy Day, and wow were there some promises:

• Every vehicle made since October 2016 has the hardware necessary for RoboTaxi
• We would have L5 by the end of 2019
• If an accident was caused by RoboTaxi, the responsible party would be “probably Tesla” (making it clear what he meant by L5)

I personally do think the Beta is already amazing, but it’s very different than what Elon promised would be delivered years ago.

 

[ddeflyer]

Perhaps legally. If true that also implies Elon to be the biggest scheister of modern business as that goes against everything said by Telsa for many years now and to this date in regards to timing. You very well may be right.

Perhaps it's what I want to believe, but I'm hopeful that HW3 will achieve SAE L4 in a year or two. Not that you can believe ANYTHING Elon says but I don't recall him ever saying that's not still the goal. Whether it's technologically possible is another question. Most here say it's impossible but I don't think Tesla has publicly admitted that. Please correct me if that is incorrect.

I don't buy the "pending regulatory approval" argument either - what comes first, a functional FSD system as most people define that term or regulatory approval? The regulators would never approve a self-driving system that has not demonstrated its capabilities and that simply does not exist from Tesla yet. So why would they even ask for regulatory approval unless they want to try to BS them as well?

I'm still selling my Full Self Flying cars for only $15k, but pending regulatory approval of course. But it is coming soon, with the first release to employees in 2 weeks! Any takers?

I honestly feel sorry for the man. He's either a genius that will deliver the impossible or he belongs in jail if he keeps selling a system knowing it's not going to achieve the desired outcome while he makes millions of dollars for his efforts - that sounds like fraud. If AP3 is not going to work, he simply cannot pretend to ignore the last 8 years when he has said otherwise. Those people (fools?) like me who bought into the hype would be owed some level of recourse if AP3 doesn't deliver as promised. And waiting 50 years to deliver doesn't sound like a viable position either.

I'm not denying the functional vs regulatory approval order of events. What I am trying to point out is that for the feature to require regulatory approval before release in the US then the feature by definition must be something that requires regulatory approval, IE L3+. Essentially this is a direct inference/consequence or the legalese which is even further bolstered by FSDb (and that that doesn't require any regulatory approval). Yes, the feature being released is dependent upon it being successfully developed, but if it isn't successfully developed then damages will be due (though who knows what/when those damages will be).

 

[stopcrazypp]

There was a class action suit for AP2 that was settled back in 2018. Tesla was potentially liable for that because they said on the EAP page specifically that the features was expected to roll out on December 2016 (and it didn't):

Tesla agrees to partially reimburse people who bought Autopilot 2.0 in $5 million settlement of class action lawsuit

For FSD however, they never put a specific deadline, so Tesla will likely just drag things on. Note it was already proven false that HW2 was capable of FSD features (thus retrofit of HW3).

I'm not denying the functional vs regulatory approval order of events. What I am trying to point out is that for the feature to require regulatory approval before release in the US then the feature by definition must be something that requires regulatory approval, IE L3+. Essentially this is a direct inference/consequence or the legalese which is even further bolstered by FSDb (and that that doesn't require any regulatory approval). Yes, the feature being released is dependent upon it being successfully developed, but if it isn't successfully developed then damages will be due (though who knows what/when those damages will be).

Note as above they put the "regulatory approval" wording for EAP also and that is purely a L2 feature, so I disagree that having that line necessarily means L3+. It's just boilerplate language given there will be some jurisdictions that require regulatory approval even for L2 features. For example in Europe there's a bunch of AP features that are withheld because Tesla wasn't able to get approval:
Tesla Autopilot Europe restrictions explained: How regulations are hindering a Full Self-Driving future
They need that boilerplate language their to cover those possibilities that regulators may deem certain features illegal and changes in the law may be needed for approval of a feature.

 

[ddeflyer]

There was a class action suit for AP2 that was settled back in 2018. Tesla was potentially liable for that because they said on the EAP page specifically that the features was expected to roll out on December 2016 (and it didn't):

Tesla agrees to partially reimburse people who bought Autopilot 2.0 in $5 million settlement of class action lawsuit

For FSD however, they never put a specific deadline, so Tesla will likely just drag things on. Note it was already proven false that HW2 was capable of FSD features (thus retrofit of HW3).


Note as above they put the "regulatory approval" wording for EAP also and that is purely a L2 feature, so I disagree that having that line necessarily means L3+. It's just boilerplate language given there will be some jurisdictions that require regulatory approval even for L2 features. For example in Europe there's a bunch of AP features that are withheld because Tesla wasn't able to get approval:
Tesla Autopilot Europe restrictions explained: How regulations are hindering a Full Self-Driving future
They need that boilerplate language their to cover those possibilities that regulators may deem certain features illegal and changes in the law may be needed for approval of a feature.

You've brought up a really interesting point and I've been pondering what to make of this for a few hours. Essentially it shows a pattern of sloppiness on the part of Tesla regarding their localization of this one very specific item (which is strange because they do ALOT of localization work both on their website and in the vehicles). I would contend that this very specific sloppiness along with very vague definitions on what FSD is shows an intent to deceive and hence the most beneficial (to the consumer) reading should prevail. This would be in conjunction with the statements from Musk and the previous versions on the order page.

And in case it isn't clear, I'm trying to brainstorm a set of arguments to take Tesla to arbitration over regarding the lack of retrofits for HW3. I'm frankly steaming mad about the way things are going at this point (Dec 2022 purchase):

1. Looking like FSD's future with HW3 is going to be L2 only and no hardware upgrades to make it L3+
2. No proximity functionality
3. No self parking/parking assist
4. No smart summons
5. Random automatic emergency braking alarms on bright days
6. B pillar cameras fog up in mildly chilly weather (not even freezing weather)
7. Random bluetooth key functionality not working

Tesla builds an impressive machine but this is all pretty outrageous.

 

[aataskin]

I think a reasonable judge would agree with me. It's not ok to charge thousands for an ability that's perpetually "coming soon" and then fail to deliver for a very significant fraction (or all) of the vehicle's reasonable lifetime, which the warranty period is a reasonable benchmark for.

You've brought up a really interesting point and I've been pondering what to make of this for a few hours. Essentially it shows a pattern of sloppiness on the part of Tesla regarding their localization of this one very specific item (which is strange because they do ALOT of localization work both on their website and in the vehicles). I would contend that this very specific sloppiness along with very vague definitions on what FSD is shows an intent to deceive and hence the most beneficial (to the consumer) reading should prevail. This would be in conjunction with the statements from Musk and the previous versions on the order page.

And in case it isn't clear, I'm trying to brainstorm a set of arguments to take Tesla to arbitration over regarding the lack of retrofits for HW3. I'm frankly steaming mad about the way things are going at this point (Dec 2022 purchase):

1. Looking like FSD's future with HW3 is going to be L2 only and no hardware upgrades to make it L3+
2. No proximity functionality
3. No self parking/parking assist
4. No smart summons
5. Random automatic emergency braking alarms on bright days
6. B pillar cameras fog up in mildly chilly weather (not even freezing weather)
7. Random bluetooth key functionality not working

Tesla builds an impressive machine but this is all pretty outrageous.

Not delivering on a carefully worded promise once is different from not delivering on it for years, this shows that deceiving customers may be part of the company's business strategy. "Fake it until you make it". Cannot imagine a judge who would refuse to consider such a lawsuit.

 

[bobsmy]

It already hasn’t delivered as promised, but for some reason, a lot of us keep thinking “this year will be different” or “the Beta is already amazing as it is.”

I finally finished watching the April 2019 Tesla Autonomy Day, and wow were there some promises:

• Every vehicle made since October 2016 has the hardware necessary for RoboTaxi
• We would have L5 by the end of 2019
• If an accident was caused by RoboTaxi, the responsible party would be “probably Tesla” (making it clear what he meant by L5)

I personally do think the Beta is already amazing, but it’s very different than what Elon promised would be delivered years ago.

 

[bobsmy]

These are the capabilities that many of us purchase the FSD upgrade under.

 

[thewishmaster]

As always the first possible photo of HW4 is not very useful:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1627587255085985794

 

[Zedbox]

What happens if tesla reinstates USS moving forward.
What will happen to our cars?

 

[Dewg]

As always the first possible photo of HW4 is not very useful:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1627587255085985794

Wow, the cybertruck looks so different now.

 

[ucmndd]

What happens if tesla reinstates USS moving forward.
What will happen to our cars?

Nothing other than you’ll eventually get the half-assed camera-based features that they told you you would.

 

[ddeflyer]

Nothing other than you’ll eventually get the half-assed camera-based features that they told you you would.

You could probably argue for diminished value of the features using the USS...

 

[stopcrazypp]

As always the first possible photo of HW4 is not very useful:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1627587255085985794

I find it funny that all these spy shots of the supposed headlight camera always ends up so low resolution. People can't take a close up shot so it's more clear something is there?