4 ms·
> he needs to diversify the business, hence the robotaxis The robotaxis are the biggest risk of all. It's not a "hence" that can be relied on for a win and to
by standardUser 1y ago
> he needs to diversify the business, hence the robotaxis
The robotaxis are the biggest risk of all. It's not a "hence" that can be relied on for a win and to change the conversation. It's a huge embarrassment and a reminder of Musk's repeated false promises.
- sneak 1y ago75% of the trips I take in my Model 3 across a standard US city (admittedly one without snow) are handled by FSD with no interventions on my part. Waymo has of course been operating for some time now. I think autonomous taxis are inevitable for Tesla and others.
- martinpw 1y ago> 75% of the trips I take in my Model 3 across a standard US city (admittedly one without snow) are handled by FSD with no interventions on my part. Is that meant to be making a case for Tesla's robotaxis? Because 25% of trips requiring interventions sounds dismal for a service that is rolling out now.
- tverbeure 1y agoI shortly tried FSD during their May and November freebie month last year. There were times when an intervention wasn't strictly required, just like you can't intervene when your angsty teenager with learning permit is at the wheel, but it was still shockingly bad. I have no doubt that there's a good percentage of FSD users out there who don't intervene to avoid lowering stats even if they rationally know that they should have.
- sneak 1y agoWhy would I care more about “stats” than my own car and my own safety? I am not penalized in any way for disabling FSD when the car does something dumb.
- tverbeure 1y agoMany people, after spending a good chunk of money on something, become part of the tribe and feel the need to justify their purchase. It’s just human nature. Not saying that you’re one of those, but as others have pointed out: 25% of rides with a force intervention is absymal and didn’t have the impressession that you thought so too. 25% puts it in party trick category, not something that should be allowed on the road.
- sneak 1y agoFSD is only $100 per month.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- standardUser 1y agoAutomatous vehicles are absolutely inevitable and Waymo has completely lapped Tesla. It's not impossible for Tesla to catch up, but it's not likely. Their tech is insufficient, their public record is non-existent, and Musk is famously inept at working with the many local governments and bureaucracies he needs to appease if he ever hopes to start pilots in the biggest markets. Meanwhile, Waymo is maybe a year away from becoming the Kleenex brand of driverless taxis, with over 10 million rides sold and a truckload of bureaucratic good will already built up.
- cfloyd 1y agoWaymo has not lapped Tesla. At all.
- standardUser 1y agoNo need for an in depth explanation? Waymo has sold 10 million rides with another 300k being sold every week. How many has Tesla sold, a few hundred by now? In one city, with paid staff in the car, only during certain hours, etc, etc.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- JumpCrisscross 1y ago> autonomous taxis are inevitable for Tesla and others I agree. But I think the autonomously native are going to eat the legacy manufacturers, including Tesla, for lunch. We haven’t even started seeing partisan regulatory backlash against Tesla’s autonomous taxis yet. I’d be shocked if they’re ever permitted in New York or California, for example. I wouldn’t be surprised if they wind up banned in Europe, China and India, too. And that’s before weighing how Trump could dick Tesla around.
- gamblor956 1y agoThats a 25% failure rate. For comparison, that's many times worse than a drunk driver.
- sneak 1y agoTen years ago it wasn’t possible at all. Plot the line.