8 ms·
It's shocking to me that anyone would pay for this. Tesla has been selling fsd since 2014, and nearly a decade later they aren't that much closer. Between the
by washbrain 4y ago
It's shocking to me that anyone would pay for this. Tesla has been selling fsd since 2014, and nearly a decade later they aren't that much closer.
Between the low reliability, low build quality, and scammy practices, Tesla has turned their lead into a vulnerability.
Once other manufacturers catch up to the battery range, Tesla will have their lunch eaten.
And I say this as someone who has owned a Tesla for over 8 years.
- epgui 4y agoIt would seem the market (and more current engineering and design reviews) disagrees with you!
- mlyle 4y agoThere are many people who have bought FSD from Tesla, and have had their car reach end of life without ever getting to enjoy FSD. It's possible after being "less than a year away" for... a decade... that it may be less than a year away now. But it looks like a bit of skepticism has been earned.
- epgui 4y agoI think the skepticism is reasonable, but that’s not really what my comment is about.
- cma 4y agoAre these outside "engineering and design" reviews from a big conflicted youtuber stockholder guy (Sandy Munroe)?
- epgui 4y agoYes, that’s one of them. What evidence do you have that he has a conflict of interest or is a shareholder?
- olsonjeffery 4y agoReasonable skepticism based on the facts presented.
- epgui 4y agoA conflict of interest accusation is pretty serious, and I think if all you had to go by is your skepticism, you probably shouldn't just make that claim as if it were a known fact: that's just very dishonest. Sure, be skeptical, but then maybe say something like "I have no evidence for this, but I believe his manifest enthusiasm can only be explained by the fact that he's trying to manipulate the stock price to his own benefit." Sure, it sounds less rhetorically convenient, but it's more honest.
- mlyle 4y agoIt is my understanding that he had a substantial amount of shares up to 2021-07-29. After criticism about the conflict of interest he claims to have divested his shares.
- cma 4y agoI guess he sold after the conflict of interest criticism. Now his conflict would be in capture to his audience of Tesla megafans.
- zz0rr 4y agoI've watched a lot of Munro (and even bought one of their retail reports for fun) and the thing that most bothered me that looked like tesla bias was when he was doing side-by-side stats comparisons of all of the mid-size crossovers like the id.4, mach-e, and tesla y. he kept on harping about the epa range in the comparison and never once mentioned the methodology of the epa estimate and the fact that manufacturers have a lot of leeway to conduct the test themselves - and either overreport or underreport the epa range. this was really glaring to me because tesla is known to stretch their range estimates (as do other manufacturers), but some manufacturers seem to deliberately underreport (mercedes, porsche, ford with some models of the mach-e for example). given that he's in the business of competitive analysis he HAS to know this, but he never said a word about it, which I think made tesla look a little better than it should have. it's one thing to just present the epa range and leave it at that, but he was using it as the basis for a ton of discussion and derived numbers and basically putting down the non-tesla cars... all without mentioning the limits of the number I think this is the video I'm remembering, but he reused charts like this a lot https://youtu.be/p0kFZ9CVLNg?t=512 https://youtu.be/p0kFZ9CVLNg?t=512 see this for some real-world testing, there's lots like it and the results usually skew a certain way for each car. for example, there's about a 20% delta in epa vs. tested range for the tesla y LR and mach-e standard range in his chart. the tesla artificially looks 20% better! and this delta was well-known at the time of his video https://insideevs.com/reviews/443791/ev-range-test-results/ https://insideevs.com/reviews/443791/ev-range-test-results/ to your question about conflicts of interest, owning a stock is a conflict of interest. nobody needs to show that something is happening inside his head, the circumstances exist and that's it. I think he's usually pretty good and I still watch the videos, and he trades on his reputation and I still regard him as a good source. but I'm still glad to learn that he's sold the stock
- vardump 4y agoI highly doubt Sandy Munroe's opinion can be bought at any price. He speaks his mind.
- ac29 4y agoAre Teslas really end of life after 8 years? Why such a limited lifespan?
- epgui 4y agoI don’t think that’s typical.
- washbrain 4y agoThe people who buy $100k cars will usually refresh them on the regular, passing the car down to another buyer. But also, the older Tesla's do not and cannot have the hardware for FSD so they really are EoL in that respect.
- mlyle 4y agoOriginal owner tends not to own car for 8 years; FSD "disappears" when you sell the car. Plus, there's accidents, etc, that weed out a fair bit of the fleet before 8 years.
- ghostpepper 4y agoIt's shocking to me that people are willing to pay to be beta testers for Tesla's entirely-from-scratch manufacturing process and smartphone-with-wheels style of car experience but it doesn't matter what I think - that's the beauty of capitalism.
- epgui 4y agoExactly. I wouldn’t buy FSD myself (I take the bus), but other people would, and I still find the thing’s development immensely fascinating to follow.
- abc_lisper 4y agoRent it for a few days and you will see
- Fatnino 4y agoRenting a tesla for a few days will cost more than I paid for my current car. Admittedly it's 22 years old, but it still does what I need.
- abc_lisper 4y agoYeah, can’t argue against that. Tesla may not be for everyone, but it’s a damn fine commuter car just because of autopilot.
- Fatnino 4y agoI have driven a friend's model 3 and while yes its nice, I feel like I would get more value for my buck with the driver assist in for example modern Toyotas. But I'm also perfectly happy driving my decades old Honda so what do I know.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- 4y ago
- quantified 4y agoThe market considered NFTs highly valuable too, until it didn't.
- epgui 4y agoNFTs don’t have amazing unit economics with gross profit margins of 30% (or any unit economics at all), and incredible discounted cash flows (actually they don’t have any cash flows at all). It’s like comparing the productivity of a med student on Adderall in a quiet library, and the productivity of a peeled russet potato sitting in the sun.
- bufferoverflow 4y agoWhat are you talking about? I watch FSD progress, and it's clearly getting closer to human level driving. Just go on YouTube and compare FSD from two years ago to the latest. It's night and day. Yes, it still makes mistakes. Humans make mistakes all the time while driving. As for build quality, we haven't had any major problems with our Model 3. It's a great car. Tesla has a media problem, where every little problem gets reported as if it's systemic and unfixable.
- the_mitsuhiko 4y agoMaybe it’s getting closer but a lot of people bought this thing for their own cars, never getting access and some already sold the cars again.
- klyrs 4y agoDoes it work in rain, snow, and/or night? How about country roads and roads without clearly marked lanes or misleading lane lines? It's like hiring a plumber who can only flush toilets, not install them. Self driving in pristine conditions is a party trick. Until it can do the hard part, it's nowhere near human-level.
- cma 4y agoAt autonomy investor day they were saying better than a human in all human drivable conditions by 2020 for the robotaxi network they said they would launch then. They confirmed they meant level 5 autonomy in answer to a direct question. They knew dojo wouldn't be online by then and they didn't even really train on video at that point, just trying to judge the scene image by image instead of taking into account prior frames (like knowing someone walked behind a bush 1p frames ago, so that sliver of emerging leg from behind a bush that might not be detectable confidently enough from a single image should be weighted higher).
- Geee 4y agoFSD handles those situations well, compared to Waymo etc, because FSD doesn't depend on pre-mapping. Waymo depends on pre-generated 3D maps and it fails if there's a discrepancy. That's why Waymo works only on small areas and uses cherry-picked routes. See this example, where the map data is completely wrong: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4gTV9SlutU0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4gTV9SlutU0
- princevegeta89 4y agoScammy practices?
- cma 4y agoSolar shingle presentation? Autonomy investor day?
- darknavi 4y ago> Between the low reliability, low build quality FWIW we have a 2018 Model 3 and a 2022 Model Y and both have had very minor or no manufacturer issues. Both have never needed anything other than minor, at home service from Tesla (mostly tire swaps).
- ohgodplsno 4y agoA single example does not make for a general rule. Aside from the fact that thank fucking god a less than 1 year old car and a less than 4 year old car should not have some manufacturer issues, Tesla still has a dreadful 226PP100 (as in, each Tesla tested had on average 2.6 problems in a single year), even worse than the industry average (which includes some truly terrible constructors).
- spoonjim 4y ago> low reliability, low build quality These are improving at an astonishing rate, like a Web app rather than a car. Yes, this means the first ones were so bad they really shouldn’t have been shipped. But the newer models (of Y especially, X hasn’t been redesigned) are really a different world.
- ghostpepper 4y agoHave they fixed the panel gaps and paint issues?
- ohgodplsno 4y agoHot tip, ship fast and break things doesn't work when you're talking about putting out a 2 ton, gigantic battery out in the world that is expected to last for over 20 years. This is a gigantic waste. Any other company would have been crucified for putting out such a shit car, and the only reason Tesla survived it is because they had funny meme man to do damage control.
- martindbp 4y ago> since 2014, and nearly a decade later they aren't that much closer That is just an absurd statement. AlexNet came out in 2012 and ResNet in 2015 but somehow Tesla had something "close" to the current FSD in 2014? They're heavily using Transformers now which came out in 2017. They have demonstrated leaps in performance since the first version of FSD Beta two years ago.
- rvz 4y ago> That is just an absurd statement. No it isn't. It is also not early days either and we have given FSD enough time to meet the claims of achieving Level 5 with those strong and 'confident' deadlines even set by Musk himself, which he knew he couldn't meet, but the gullible customers and fans rushed in and fell for it anyway. Not only they have all been missed, this year, Tesla finally admitted that it was Level 2 and it still doesn't work in the most dangerous time to drive which is at night. FSD (Fools Self Driving) is no where near close in the nearly ten years it has existed. This is an obvious over-promising of a broken product with the pied-piper selling it to their fans scam.
- Geee 4y agoAdmitted? The difference between L2 and L5 is liability, it is not a metric of how capable the system is.
- rvz 4y ago> Admitted? Yes. Admitted. [0] > The difference between L2 and L5 is liability. Everyone from the regulators to Musk himself have known that for years that it is more than just liability and none of the claims of achieving 'Level 5' FSD and the hype around the robotaxis have ever materialized with many customers falling for the scam lead by the pied piper (Musk) and once again increased prices on a broken product. [0] https://www.news18.com/news/auto/teslas-full-self-driving-claim-admittedly-not-feasible-yet-says-companys-internal-memo-3724682.html https://www.news18.com/news/auto/teslas-full-self-driving-cl...
- 4y ago