9 ms·

Did you forget the next paragraph, where they clearly state that it is not yet available? Firsts words are even in bold: "Please note that Self-Driving function

Did you forget the next paragraph, where they clearly state that it is not yet available? Firsts words are even in bold: "Please note that Self-Driving functionality is dependent upon extensive software validation and regulatory approval, which may vary widely by jurisdiction. 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. Please note also that using a self-driving Tesla for car sharing and ride hailing for friends and family is fine, but doing so for revenue purposes will only be permissible on the Tesla Network, details of which will be released next year."

Negitivefrags 8y ago
> Please note that Self-Driving functionality is dependent upon extensive software validation and regulatory approval, which may vary widely by jurisdiction So the software is ready, it's just those damn regulators that are holding it back. Come on. The way this is phrased makes it sound like the features are just around the corner, not that the software is years from working, if it's even possible at all. I know somebody who was told by a Tesla salesman that "Destination Based Autopilot is only months away". The advertising is absolutely deceptive, and I say this as a Tesla owner and fan of the company.
- cpuguy83 8y ago
  Come on... We all know that sales people will quite literally say anything to make a sale.
  - slfnflctd 8y ago
    This is understood, and we all expect them to carefully phrase things to put their product in the best possible light. Misleading statements are the norm. Outright lying is another matter entirely, and in some cases could even be criminal. If I have you on video telling me I can drive the car I'm buying at 90 mph toward a brick wall and the car will prevent a collision, and I then test that statement and die, the video will be used against you in court by my surviving family members.
    - Animats 8y ago
      This is understood, and we all expect them to carefully phrase things to put their product in the best possible light. Misleading statements are the norm. Only where enforcement is weak. Two years ago, the government of Germany shut down Tesla's "autopilot" advertising for making false claims.
  - mannykannot 8y ago
    And that's no reason for us to accept it without comment. Especially when it encourages people who are not quite as smart as you to do things that put other people (and themselves) at risk.
- jsight 8y ago
  I agree with you. I don't personally have a problem with the claims around Enhanced Auto Pilot, but the FSD option is really bad marketing, IMO. It is nowhere close to being ready to do the things that they talk about and may never achieve some of them. The owners who buy that are really donating a few thousand dollars to Tesla without getting anything in return. Its really strange.
  - Someone1234 8y ago
    Indeed. A lot of people talk about the "Does it have enough sensors for Full Self Drive?" but my question would also be: Does it have the Compute? As vehicles get closer and closer to full self drive the compute requirements have shot up, that's because a lot of the building blocks are just adding more machine learning models, pattern recognizers, and a more complete picture of the world. It is all well and good having a dozen sensors, if you can process their input. A lot of the key cycles cannot be offloaded to The Cloud because of the tolerances (e.g. sub-second query/response for safety). One university project I happen to know of had $20K worth of compute sitting in the trunk. That will obviously come down as it is optimized but a vehicle sold in early 2018 isn't evergreen.
    - davedx 8y ago
      Musk mentioned this in the last IR Q&A. He said that it might indeed not have the compute, but that swapping in hardware with enough compute would be a 'plug and play' operation.
      - shanghaiaway 8y ago
        That's what he said but it won't be.
ckastner 8y ago
> Did you forget the next paragraph, where they clearly state that it is not yet available Where does it clearly say that? "may very widely by jurisdiction", "it is not possible to know" are anything but clear.
rz2k 8y ago
Hand waving statements about the autopilot being safer than human drivers, and blaming passenger-drivers for not taking control earlier whenever there’s wreck is ridiculous, but it sounded more like overconfidence than bad faith. That second paragraph is a far worse thing. Intentionally leading people into believing that government regulators are why a technology doesn’t exist makes it sound like they’re venturing into Theranos territory. The last sentences about selling rides sound like the sort of false concern someone would try to raise in a pitch to misdirect investors away from asking about software problems that they internally worry might be insurmountable.
- aaron-lebo 8y ago
  With his latest "fake news" attack he's starting to sound more and more like Trump: http://money.cnn.com/2018/05/23/technology/elon-musk-media/index.html http://money.cnn.com/2018/05/23/technology/elon-musk-media/i... He liked being the media's golden boy when they were fawning over him for a decade, now things get tough because him and his company exaggerate and he wants to take his ball and go home.
  - saalweachter 8y ago
    Eh, I think at this point Tesla exiting the auto market would have relatively little impact on the future of electric cars. They may have played an important early role in proving the technology is ready and creating demand, but the demand is there now and many manufacturers are trying to meet it. (Whereas, SpaceX exiting the market would probably set back space travel considerably.)
    - greedo 8y ago
      If Tesla fails, then EV are essentially dead for another decade. Hybrids will fill the role for ecologically respectful transportation.
      - tomwilson 8y ago
        Not a chance. Look at what is happening in China.
danso 8y ago
It's a shame that those specific details pertaining to the Full Self Driving feature were accidentally entered on to the Tesla AutoPilot page. The mistake seems to have caused a cascade of errors, because right after the FSD caveat, there's a video, but it's for the full-self-driving demo back in 2016, something that has nothing to do with the Autopilot feature.
StavrosK 8y ago
By the way, this was also very offensive to me: > Please note also that using a self-driving Tesla for car sharing and ride hailing for friends and family is fine, but doing so for revenue purposes will only be permissible on the Tesla Network, details of which will be released next year. Why does Tesla get to tell me what to do with my car?
- Someone1234 8y ago
  I guess Tesla believes while under self-drive it is no longer your car. That's going to be an interesting case for the law/layers in the future.
  - toomuchtodo 8y ago
    Tesla owns their software, not you. Why would they enable other ridesharing companies to profit off of their autopilot work? If you want to drive your car for Uber, you can. If you want Tesla’s software to drive it for Uber for you, that isn’t part of the end user license agreement.
    - ams6110 8y ago
      There will probably be court cases over this. At one time automakers tried to say if you used third party oil filters or other parts, or if anyone other than the dealer did work, then your warranty was void. That didn't hold up. Publishers tried to say that you could not re-sell books and recordings and software media after you purchased them. That didn't hold up. Not sure that this will hold up either.
      - toomuchtodo 8y ago
        You’re referring to physical parts. To my knowledge, no automaker providers their software and related tooling to end users (please correct me if I’m mistake). You’re going to need a copyright law overhaul to change this status quo.

Negitivefrags 8y ago

> Please note that Self-Driving functionality is dependent upon extensive software validation and regulatory approval, which may vary widely by jurisdiction So the software is ready, it's just those damn regulators that are holding it back. Come on. The way this is phrased makes it sound like the features are just around the corner, not that the software is years from working, if it's even possible at all. I know somebody who was told by a Tesla salesman that "Destination Based Autopilot is only months away". The advertising is absolutely deceptive, and I say this as a Tesla owner and fan of the company.

cpuguy83 8y ago
Come on... We all know that sales people will quite literally say anything to make a sale.
- slfnflctd 8y ago
  This is understood, and we all expect them to carefully phrase things to put their product in the best possible light. Misleading statements are the norm. Outright lying is another matter entirely, and in some cases could even be criminal. If I have you on video telling me I can drive the car I'm buying at 90 mph toward a brick wall and the car will prevent a collision, and I then test that statement and die, the video will be used against you in court by my surviving family members.
  - Animats 8y ago
    This is understood, and we all expect them to carefully phrase things to put their product in the best possible light. Misleading statements are the norm. Only where enforcement is weak. Two years ago, the government of Germany shut down Tesla's "autopilot" advertising for making false claims.
- mannykannot 8y ago
  And that's no reason for us to accept it without comment. Especially when it encourages people who are not quite as smart as you to do things that put other people (and themselves) at risk.
jsight 8y ago
I agree with you. I don't personally have a problem with the claims around Enhanced Auto Pilot, but the FSD option is really bad marketing, IMO. It is nowhere close to being ready to do the things that they talk about and may never achieve some of them. The owners who buy that are really donating a few thousand dollars to Tesla without getting anything in return. Its really strange.
- Someone1234 8y ago
  Indeed. A lot of people talk about the "Does it have enough sensors for Full Self Drive?" but my question would also be: Does it have the Compute? As vehicles get closer and closer to full self drive the compute requirements have shot up, that's because a lot of the building blocks are just adding more machine learning models, pattern recognizers, and a more complete picture of the world. It is all well and good having a dozen sensors, if you can process their input. A lot of the key cycles cannot be offloaded to The Cloud because of the tolerances (e.g. sub-second query/response for safety). One university project I happen to know of had $20K worth of compute sitting in the trunk. That will obviously come down as it is optimized but a vehicle sold in early 2018 isn't evergreen.
  - davedx 8y ago
    Musk mentioned this in the last IR Q&A. He said that it might indeed not have the compute, but that swapping in hardware with enough compute would be a 'plug and play' operation.
    - shanghaiaway 8y ago
      That's what he said but it won't be.

ckastner 8y ago

> Did you forget the next paragraph, where they clearly state that it is not yet available Where does it clearly say that? "may very widely by jurisdiction", "it is not possible to know" are anything but clear.

rz2k 8y ago

Hand waving statements about the autopilot being safer than human drivers, and blaming passenger-drivers for not taking control earlier whenever there’s wreck is ridiculous, but it sounded more like overconfidence than bad faith. That second paragraph is a far worse thing. Intentionally leading people into believing that government regulators are why a technology doesn’t exist makes it sound like they’re venturing into Theranos territory. The last sentences about selling rides sound like the sort of false concern someone would try to raise in a pitch to misdirect investors away from asking about software problems that they internally worry might be insurmountable.

aaron-lebo 8y ago
With his latest "fake news" attack he's starting to sound more and more like Trump: http://money.cnn.com/2018/05/23/technology/elon-musk-media/index.html http://money.cnn.com/2018/05/23/technology/elon-musk-media/i... He liked being the media's golden boy when they were fawning over him for a decade, now things get tough because him and his company exaggerate and he wants to take his ball and go home.
- saalweachter 8y ago
  Eh, I think at this point Tesla exiting the auto market would have relatively little impact on the future of electric cars. They may have played an important early role in proving the technology is ready and creating demand, but the demand is there now and many manufacturers are trying to meet it. (Whereas, SpaceX exiting the market would probably set back space travel considerably.)
  - greedo 8y ago
    If Tesla fails, then EV are essentially dead for another decade. Hybrids will fill the role for ecologically respectful transportation.
    - tomwilson 8y ago
      Not a chance. Look at what is happening in China.

danso 8y ago

It's a shame that those specific details pertaining to the Full Self Driving feature were accidentally entered on to the Tesla AutoPilot page. The mistake seems to have caused a cascade of errors, because right after the FSD caveat, there's a video, but it's for the full-self-driving demo back in 2016, something that has nothing to do with the Autopilot feature.

StavrosK 8y ago

By the way, this was also very offensive to me: > Please note also that using a self-driving Tesla for car sharing and ride hailing for friends and family is fine, but doing so for revenue purposes will only be permissible on the Tesla Network, details of which will be released next year. Why does Tesla get to tell me what to do with my car?

Someone1234 8y ago
I guess Tesla believes while under self-drive it is no longer your car. That's going to be an interesting case for the law/layers in the future.
- toomuchtodo 8y ago
  Tesla owns their software, not you. Why would they enable other ridesharing companies to profit off of their autopilot work? If you want to drive your car for Uber, you can. If you want Tesla’s software to drive it for Uber for you, that isn’t part of the end user license agreement.
  - ams6110 8y ago
    There will probably be court cases over this. At one time automakers tried to say if you used third party oil filters or other parts, or if anyone other than the dealer did work, then your warranty was void. That didn't hold up. Publishers tried to say that you could not re-sell books and recordings and software media after you purchased them. That didn't hold up. Not sure that this will hold up either.
    - toomuchtodo 8y ago
      You’re referring to physical parts. To my knowledge, no automaker providers their software and related tooling to end users (please correct me if I’m mistake). You’re going to need a copyright law overhaul to change this status quo.